Monday May 28, 2012

SushiSake3's past comments

  • -3

    SushiSake3

    I find it seriously weird that so many people are against this.

    International maritime law grants nations rights within 200 kms of their coasts/borders (the difference is split in cases where countries are closer, ie:,England and France).

    Ishihara is thinking of ensuring Japan has a large internationally recognized area of sovereignty.

    If these islands are 2,000 off the coast, add an extra 200 km to that and Japan's area of ownership is much, much larger than if the Senkakus are NOT recognized as being part of Japan.

    And with internationally recognized borders comes everything - in this case, fishing and energy exploration potential.

    Seems most people above don't understand this.

    Ishihara has made a smart move.

    Very, very smart. 

    If it is recognized internationally

    Posted in: Tokyo raises Y1 bil yen to buy disputed Senkaku isles

  • 0

    SushiSake3

    The/A solution?

    Encourage people to have 1 child and stop there.

    For the sake of the children.

    Alternatively, do what the Chinese government did and provide no or next to no welfare payments to parents for any child beyond the first.

    Posted in: WWF says over-consumption threatens planet

  • 0

    SushiSake3

    Overpopulation and the subsequent depletion of resources is a serious, serious issue.

    We really don't need people making inane comments about the people at the top changing their habits 'first' as if them doing so will somehow trigger all the rest of us to follow.

    We don't have the luxury of time to wait.

    What is obviously needed is for the masses to change their habits and reduce their ecological footprints.

    NeverSubmit - "Regarding one-child policies, they are an outright intrusion on reproductive rights."

    I can guess where this is going...

    "The number of children a couple chooses to have is strictly their own private choice. Government has no right forcing families to limit themselves to one child. By doing so they would deprive all children the possibility of having a brother or sister."

    Let me put this nicely.

    Would you prefer millions of people to suffer the agony of slow starvation because people with attitudes like yours think that the global population should continue to grow exponentially so that no one's rights are "trodden on"?

    Q: if everyone had as many kids as they liked, where is the food going to come from to feed them all?

    Simple question.

    No, population control is the elephant in the china shop in terms of this issue.

    People need to talk about it openly, and religious and human-rights based rights issues have got to be relegated to 2nd place, imo.

    The alternative is a slow, mass starvation epidemic when food supplies gradually run out and the ongoing effects of climate change continue to disrupt regular farming conditions and lead to more crop failures.

    To me, the very high risk that critical resources that sustain life itself will collapse - in our lifetimes - is THE. Most critical issue our species faces.

    Everything else - including the economy - pales in comparison to the urgency of this issue

    Posted in: WWF says over-consumption threatens planet

  • 2

    SushiSake3

    That was great!

    Had a perfect view from west Tokyo.

    Cloud only slightly covered the event once.

    Really, really good.

    Posted in: Millions look skyward as rare eclipse crosses Asia

  • -2

    SushiSake3

    "Crossroads GPS plans to open the effort Thursday with an $8 million TV ad that castigates Obama on the economy, by far the biggest issue this election year.

    Who wrote this article?

    The biggest issue for Conservatives this year, well at least at the moment, is their struggle to shut the door on rights to marriage for gay people.

    Why are conservatives always so anti-everything?

    Oh, sorry, I forgot - if it's a rich donor, conservatives are prostrated at their feet in worship.

    Posted in: Obama raises $44 mil for campaign, Democrats in April

  • 0

    SushiSake3

    Cost overruns are par for the course for any U.S. military development program.

    Contractors go in with a 'cheap' bid to win the contract, and then due to standard incompetence, "design flaws" and other lame excuses milk the taxpayer for as much as they can possibly get.

    The best gigs are the ones where production is spread to as many states as possible to maximize harm should a program ever - God forbid - be cancelled.

    Anyone who is surprised at this latest cost overrun probably needs to pay more attention.

    Posted in: Spiraling F-35 costs have Japan, other potential customers worried

  • -1

    SushiSake3

    Yanee- "Sushi: How exactly does one "Encourage ignorance, class warfare and bigotry by voting against gay marriage"? That's quite a leap there my friend!"

    Voting against gay marriage - without giving time or making the effort to discuss the benefits - encourages ignorance - like slamming a door on the issue.

    Class warfare - simple.  Some people (heteros)?can marry. Others (most gays) can't

    Haves and have nots.  And the haves try to stop the have nots.

    -class warfare.

    Bigotry? Read pretty much any Christian commentary on the issue like I've been doing this week.

    Most of it is simply repelling and point blank bigotry. If it's gay, Christians tend to slam it, using as their rationale a book written 2,000 years ago by people, some of whom were so poorly educated they couldn't even write, and that features talking snakes, goats and trees, zombies rising from the dead, earthquakes that shook the entire planet, the earth stopping, and a 'loving' god who engaged in genocide (Amelekites), infanticide and slaughter of women and the elderly.

    Like many people, I was a Christian until I read the Bible.

    Posted in: Romney courts young evangelicals, promotes values

  • -1

    SushiSake3

    Conservative 'values' are impressive.

    Give more to people who already have too much.

    Vote to cut benefits for your own parents and grandparents 

    Vote to cut food stamps for the poor

    Encourage ignorance, class warfare and bigotry by voting against gay marriage 

    Way to Go Conservatives!

     

    Posted in: Romney courts young evangelicals, promotes values

  • 3

    SushiSake3

    Realist - "II think most people would accept that gay couples should have civil partnerships if they want to legally live and set up home together, the problem is when they want to use the word "marriage" to describe it. Marriage has always meant the union of one man and one woman."

    I've seen this point made before, usually by Christians.

    To me, the debate over labels - 'marriage,' 'civil union,' call it what you will, is a battle over semantics.

    It's simply a word, and meanings change - just look at how meaning of 'gay' has changed.

    No, the key issue imo is over rights. The right to get married.

    I don't like bringing religion into gay marriage debates but unfortunately it almost always crops up.

    The Bible condemns homosexual sex and labels it a sin.   2 questions:

    1/ Does the Bible condemn homosexual relationships? I don't think it does. It seems that just the homosexual sex is considered 'sin.'

    So, that should make a gay couple who live together but who don't have sex A-OK by the Christian community.

    Umm...no, because gay sex is likely >assumed< to be happening - even if it isn't.

    Boom - prejudice.

    2/ At a guess, sex takes up likely 0.05% of the average person's life.

    Q: is it right to prohibit couples in love (in this case, gays) from taking advantage of the benefits of marriage simply due to what they do in 0.05% of their time? Because the rest of their time, gay people work, eat, go out, and basically do much of the same stuff straight folks do.

    I would say 'no way.'

    Christians would say 'of course,' and then claim that their fellow Christians need to "in love, tell them (gays) that they are wrong." (<-- I actually saw this line on a Christian website last night. Amazing.)

    Bam - bigotry, cloaked in feigned 'love.'

    I think the simple solution is to class all marriages as civil unions. Go beyond the semantics of the labels and class all unions between 2 humans as the same. If a religious couple want to get married in a church or synagogue, no problem. If a marriage breaks down - gay or hetero - deal with it as appropriate, through the courts or whatever.

    What irks me most in this debate is the hypocrisy: The divorce rate in the U.S. is somewhere between 40-50%.

    Those are trainwreck stats. Clearly hetero couples can't hold their marriages together.

    And yet the same group is front and center saying gay couples shouldn't be able to get married.

    How about if heteros in general showed that they could actually ....successfully stay married??

    But it's not happening.  

    Posted in: Romney courts young evangelicals, promotes values

  • 3

    SushiSake3

    My scientific modeling carried out amid an atmosphere of historic reflection and future-focused innovation atop a rubbish bin outside my local Lawson konbeni paints an historic future for this nation.

    At 1437 hours on March 12, 2051, the number of robots will surpass the number of full-blooded Japanese.

    Oh, can someone pay me to reach more science- based conclusions like this? I want to buy some cup noodles for lunch...

    Posted in: Japan faces 'extinction' in 1,000 years, researchers say

  • -1

    SushiSake3

    Seems like Romeo is only for 'freedoms' when s/he likes it and is against freedoms when they don't gel with his/her biased religion-based worldview.

    It's a very flakey view of 'freedom' and pretty typical of a conservative.

    Posted in: Obama becomes first U.S. president to back same-sex marriage

  • 1

    SushiSake3

    Once again, liberals are forced to show conservatives that we are, in fact, living in the 21st century.

    So embarrassing that gay marriage is actually still a touchstone issue for the homophobic anti-freedom crowd.

    Posted in: Obama becomes first U.S. president to back same-sex marriage

  • 4

    SushiSake3

    Where does it say in the Bible that gay people should be hated with the level of vehemency as that shown by typical American conservatives?

    The Bible says 'Love thy neighbor.'

    I just don't get it.

    Posted in: Obama becomes first U.S. president to back same-sex marriage

  • -2

    SushiSake3

    Heh, this is probably the final nail in the coffin for the anti-gay America haters. :-)

    Amazing how the same individuals will support invading other countries in the name of "freedom" and yet do everything possible to clamp down on freedoms of their own people.

    Conservatives have been proven wrong yet again.

    Posted in: Obama becomes first U.S. president to back same-sex marriage

  • 2

    SushiSake3

    Let's face it - Christian beliefs about gay marriage should be forced on all Americans, regardless of race and religion, all in the name of "freedom."

    Oh, hang on....

    Posted in: Obama becomes first U.S. president to back same-sex marriage

  • 0

    SushiSake3

    A smart move.

    Advisors are saying public opinon on gay marriage has changed faster than that of any issue in their careers.

    The divorce rate in the U.S. is over 50%. Traditional marriage is not working.

    What makes proponents of traditional marriage think they have the right to deny gay/lesbian couples the right to get married?

    Posted in: Obama becomes first U.S. president to back same-sex marriage

  • 2

    SushiSake3

    You have got to be [EXPLETIVE DELETED] kidding,.

    Posted in: S Korea cracks down on human flesh capsules from China

  • 1

    SushiSake3

    Free jobs?

    They'll be doled out next week. :-)

    Posted in: New Zealand offers contraception to women on welfare

  • 3

    SushiSake3

    Good idea. Go NZ! - first country to give women the right to vote.

    First country to see the light of day (in more ways than one).

    Posted in: New Zealand offers contraception to women on welfare

  • 4

    SushiSake3

    Great news. I really hope this works out for the Imperial Couple.

    It must be a real mission for a couple of their respective ages to travel like this - 12 hours to London.

    They could have sent their son, but they decided to go themselves.

    This will be great. The Imperial Couple represent the oldest dynasty on the planet. I'm sure there will be oodles of mutual respect.

    Great news. :-)

    Posted in: Emperor, empress to visit Britain for Queen Elizabeth's diamond jubilee

Follow us

View all