1. Game must draw a transcendant conclusion that lies outside any lesser notion conceived by the individual Gamer.

2. Game is much greater than a tool, it
is an environment.

3. Game encompasses two modes of “play,” adaptation and/or meme creation.

4. Game is not destructive.

5. Game is positive action.

6. Game is judged by the masses and manifested in the Gamer.

 7. You know Game when you see it.

8. Game is heterosexual and therefore not inclusive of homosexuality.

9. Game is omnipresent.

10. Game is exclusive.

11. Game is internal and external.

12. Game has been exemplified and therefore it can be understood.

13. Game has already been defined and Gamers necessarily seek to live up to that definition.

14. Game rewards the workhorse.

15. Game is absent in evil.

16. Game is a fully engaged relationship with reality and its Creator.

http://religionnewsblog.blogspot.com/2009/09/who-is-allowed-to-have-nukes-in-mid.html

Hey, Justin, what’s your handle at StormFront?

“For some unknown and unfathomable reason, our media overlords are attempting to villify the largest democracy in the Middle East (Iran) for attempting to assert their rights to capable self-defense and energy independence.”

Look, even if you dislike Jews, it makes no sense to use such Orwellian language in positively describing Iran.

Justin’s a nut. You betcha.

The evidence is pretty clear that past the age of 7, or so, peer environment is far more important than family-environment, so I’m not exactly clear as to what you’re trying to say. One important thing to note is that many young, single mothers never even tell the male inseminator of the pregnancy from the outset. Anecdotally, I see little to no evidence that there are masses of children being hurt by the absence of their father. Heck, there are a lot of fathers that no sane person would let near any child, including their own, and don’t forget that women who get pregnant out of wedlock tend to choose a worse breed of man than do women in marriage.

You are belabored by radical nurturist propaganda.

On the other hand, you are correct and Fifth is wrong about the overall social effect of game on a population, in aggregate. As game becomes more widespread, female sexual selection becomes ever further detached from settling down and starting a family inside of a monogamous relationship. The young men who do settle down will be subsidizing the mating choices of non-married parents.

The problem that neither of you are grasping is that this is solely a political problem, and it can only have a political solution. You can defend the soc-cons all day long, but I see absolutely no evidence that they are engaged in any constructive efforts to address the problems of family formation. Furiously preaching that people “should” get married will not change anything, because the decline in marriage is due to the changes in incentives over the past several decades.

Soc-cons don’t want to address the issues of incentive changes. No, they sanctimoniously puff up their chests and brow beat anyone who doesn’t follow their ideal script.

What is your strategy?