Wow, I like how many people were fast to find out that most of the posts were sarcasm, even Rol's counterarguments were identified as another sort of sarcasm quite fast!

But the highlight of this thread is undoubtely Sqrl's picture, it fits so damn well...

That leads me to the other topic in this thread which I can't let pass by without saying anything.

Fagarcia75, do I understand you right that People only can be free when they don't have the freedom to choose their sexuality? I just want to ask again to be sure cause this messes up my concept of Liberalism quite a bit... Maybe this ideology isn't as smart as I thought before...

This thread brings to mind a saying I think we should all know:

Don't argue with stupid people. They just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience.

Your copies must have been duds.

@Nintendo_fanboy: I think Fargacia75 is promoting a different kind of freedom. I don't think he's talking about freedom to choose a course of actions without legal punishment, but freedom from sin, or the freedom to best live up to one's ideals, such as the image of Christ, in spite of the depravity of man.

If you do not think freedoms of this sort exist, consider a similar one where such a freedom would be a great boon: all the people who have addictions, who want to be something different but for a long time can't. Is their choice to partake in their addictions really an exercise in freedom? Or would they not be more free if they could be rid of their addiction?

I believe freedom from sin refers to a sort of freedom of this type. Many people want to live up to the ideals of their teachings, but constantly falter in some cases due to what in Christianity teaches to be the depravity of man, his bondage to sin. But Christianity also teaches that Jesus, through his words and the Holy Spirit, can help people gain freedom from this bondage.

Does this explanation satisfy your question, Nintendo_fanboy? If not I'd be happy to continue to try to answer any further questions you put forward, but I do not know whether this is the proper forum for such discussion.

The rating of this thread is 2 zombie hamsters out of 5.

I agree it's sortof easy, but I still have died my share of times :P. But all Mario games pretty much have the same difficulty.

very well spoken, thanks.

to not ignore the original post here, I've only had the chance to play the demo at Gamestop so far. I suppose the game's being overhyped would depend upon an individuals expectations for SMG. Some are undoubtedly going to agree while others will desagree.

There certainly was a lot of hype behind the game, and in the eyes of some reviewers and has meet and exceeded expectations.

Zombie hamsters would be creeeepy.

Luckily it would take a lot to make zombie hamsters... cause if a regular zombie bit one... it'd likely just be dead and not enough in one piece to be a zombie.

 Like, a Zombie would have to bite a dog, which would bite a cat, which would bite a hamster. 

You know what wouldn't be that scary.  Zombie Cow.  Well it still would, cause zombie anything is pretty creepy... but zombie cows would just be easier to kill then regular zombies.

Why does homosexuality have to be an addiction?  Aside from the fact that your partner is of the same sex, and it will never result in a pregnancy, how is a homosexual relationship different from a heterosexual one?