charonn0

joined 2 years ago
[–] charonn0@startrek.website 2 points 2 years ago

I know. It just seemed funny that the other three directions are represented.

If/when Puerto Rico becomes the 51st state, it should take the name East Puerto Rico, just to be fair.

[–] charonn0@startrek.website 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Who is so many airplanes?

[–] charonn0@startrek.website 15 points 2 years ago (4 children)

Probably went like: There are->There're->They're->They are

[–] charonn0@startrek.website 8 points 2 years ago (9 children)

It just occurred to me that there are no states named East Statename.

[–] charonn0@startrek.website 2 points 2 years ago

If aborted babies automatically go straight to heaven, then what's the problem? Sounds like a neat loophole.

[–] charonn0@startrek.website 2 points 2 years ago

There's no paradox if you look at it as a social contract. If you don't uphold your part of the contract (tolerating others) then you aren't entitled to benefits from the contract (being tolerated by others).

[–] charonn0@startrek.website 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Does Christofascists flipping out over equal treatment really qualify as a 'controversy' anymore?

[–] charonn0@startrek.website 42 points 2 years ago (19 children)

Reminds me of Isaac Asimov's best short story ever.

http://www.thelastquestion.net/

[–] charonn0@startrek.website 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

As long as the thing you promise to do (or refrain from doing) is something that you would otherwise have the legal right to do, it can be an enforceable contract term.

In this case, the buyer promises to refrain from selling their car in the first year--something they otherwise would have a legal right to do.

A contract for murder, on the other hand, would not be enforceable because there is no legal right to commit murder.

[–] charonn0@startrek.website 2 points 2 years ago

This is a civil case, though.

[–] charonn0@startrek.website 6 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Even if true, so what?

Is that really something the judge is meant to consider?

view more: ‹ prev next ›