L-C

I don't think that's an apt analogy. In many games, as a player you experience what the designer has set up for you. It's more like a movie that you can play and pause. Some games give you more choice, and in some instances a lot more. But even then, the consequences of those choices (more appropriately named options) are of the designer's choosing. And being able to portray the consequences of the actor's choices is a powerful thing.

Adultery with permission from the spouse you're cheating on? Well I'd call that a polygamous relationship, I guess. If you want to have a sexual relationship with someone else, there's no excuse for at least breaking up with your partner first. Cheating is ridiculous.

It's definately not the same thing, yeah. But the difference in behavior is still there. What's the cause?

Could it be that female hero-worship is responsible for the fact that it's pretty much always (teenage) girls who scream, cry or even faint at the sight of their idol/popstar/whatever? I mean at concerts and such. Not that every girl does this but the behavior as such seems almost exclusive female. Or is there some psychological trait other than hero-worship, which Rand said was the essence of femininity, at work? Guys don't seem to be capable of nearly the same emotional exaltation no matter who they meet.

The standard bullshit. Doesn't deserve any more attention than "lolol objectivism sucks".

What if the game is completely linear, and what the player experiences (other than strict pacing, but in a way that is comparable to reading a book at one's own pace) is a story entirely created and controlled by the developer?

His wasn't the problem, now was it.

Use flamethrowers and white phosphorus.

And then an innocent is convicted, as always happens. Oops. Whatever benefits the death penalty adds aren't worth it the day an innocent is executed. You shouldn't compare those benefits to a jail sentence in today's prison system, but to a proper one.

The tone of your post suggests torture, Uttles. That I would disagree with, but manual labor (to support their own incarceration) might not be out of the question.

All true. Robin Hood has been "stolen" by modern leftists. Robin Hood did in fact only reclaim goods that were stolen to begin with.

Sure, but that doesn't stop people from watching.

I oppose the death penalty in cases where guilt cannot be 100% proven beyond all (not reasonable) doubt, e.g. your famous dictator of choice. There's really nothing noteworthy to gain from executing someone, but an unacceptable price when an innocent is subjected to it.

Bingo was indeed his name. The perfect receptor for the perfect stimulant.

"Excessive taxation" is not a mere nuisance. Do you have any idea of what we've been robbed of due to taxes? We might've been able to live healthily for 200 years by now. Huge amounts of people don't exist because of it. Entire lineages never came to be.

You know what I mean, nitpicker. But yes, only individuals have rights. A fetus is not an individual.

Wrong, the law protects human individuals.

And if you have permission from the land owner?

" Reminds me of the time when early in middle school, my son worked hard to make the Honor Roll. He was so committed to it that when he missed it by only a slight margin on one grade, that he approached the teacher to discuss the grade that he felt should have been higher. As he approached her desk, she didn't even look up at him. What she did say was, "What did you expect...to make the Honor Roll?"." Any comments, people?

No one can tell him whether his marriage is over, only he can decide that. What we can offer is our own principles and sentiments on the matter. I've offered mine.

But who will be part of the authorized group of people that can be trusted to act justly in matters of retributive force, as an entity outside the government? Because this kind of action won't be restricted to the good guys.

Quote from the OP: "If you were married to an Objectivist and he/she commited adultery what would you do? Is this a deal breaker?" How have I not answered this?

Me? Nope. But if I were, I'd indeed say "it depends", while leaning toward "dump her" as a general sentiment.

It's my view of the matter. You weren't talking about anyone in particular, were you?

I'm leaning toward even that much being too forthcoming toward the religionists. I'd rather go with promt dismissal of the entire argument.