| This forum is used with the NationStates web-game designed and run by Max Barry. While not officially affiliated, this serves as the regional forum for the regions: Middle East, African Continent, American Continent, Asian Continent, and European Continent. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and can "read only". In order to get the most out of these forums, please become a member and read this guide - http://z3.invisionfree.com/nationstates/index.php?showtopic=3060 If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Vacation Ideas. | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Feb 5 2012, 03:07 AM (425 Views) | |
| Aelius | Feb 5 2012, 03:07 AM Post #1 |
Norman Warlord
|
I'll be up for a paid vacation soon from the new job. I've been at AAA three months and I've somehow already accumulated 54 hours of paid time off. Don't really have a set timeframe I have to take it in (although it will probably have to be in April or later since the window to take time off up until March 31 opened before the start of January, and taking extended periods off will be almost impossible), but I'd need to pick someplace to go and an exact time when I should take it. I'm looking for one of three things: -Anyone that would have some free time in the spring to travel with me. -Anyone that lives outside of OK that would have some free time in the spring and would be willing to let me come hang out there and crash with you, though I could use some recommendations for things to do as well. I demand entertainment! :P -Any ideas about places to go or things to do. Let me know what you guys think. Not sure how much money I'll be able to spend yet, though. I had normally done trips like this with Sed in the past, but his big trip will be at Spring Break, going back to Louisiana with one of our other friends, and all of the paid time off bank has already been consumed for that time period at work, so I won't be able to go with him this time, but as much of a dud as my last vacation was with Walmart (sitting on my ass all week), I'm looking to create some new, grand plan, and I'm not really looking to be by myself. So, yeah, any suggestions, or plans you guys are making up that you'd be okay with me joining you in? |
 |
 
|
| The Authority of the Grand Moff | Feb 5 2012, 03:18 AM Post #2 |
2nd Lieutenant
|
Go to Miami. Do not pass Go. Do not collect $200. Go to Miami. |
|
|
|
| Rhadamanthus | Feb 5 2012, 04:19 AM Post #3 |
Legitimist
|
Go adventuring in Central Asia. |
|
|
|
| Toussaint | Feb 5 2012, 05:14 AM Post #4 |
Major
|
If you find yourself in Tokyo somehow, I'm around. B) |
|
|
|
| New Harumf | Feb 5 2012, 10:28 AM Post #5 |
Bloodthirsty Unicorn
|
With luck I will have new digs North of Houston by then, and you are welcome to stay either for the duration or just as a stopover point on your way to somewhere else! This goes to anyone traveling, by the way. |
|
|
|
| meh | Feb 5 2012, 03:40 PM Post #6 |
1st Lieutenant
|
Like a safehouse? |
|
|
|
| NRE | Feb 5 2012, 03:51 PM Post #7 |
Map Tsar and Southern Gentleman
|
You're moving to Texas, how did I miss this? :huh: As for a vacation, I must agree with Moff is so far as suggesting that you go somewhere sunny. |
|
|
|
| New Harumf | Feb 5 2012, 05:07 PM Post #8 |
|
Bloodthirsty Unicorn
|
It will be well armed, so it will be safe in that respect. NRE, I have not made an official anouncement regarding this yet, but since I will be retiring in a few years getting away from the cold North is one of my goals. We currently have an offer on our house and are waiting for the contingencies to be removed from the contract. Then . . . TO TEXAS! We weighed many locations, including S.C., N.C., FLA and AZ - we like the tax situation in Texas and the housing prices - plus, my company's headquarters is located in downtown Houston, and there is a large J.C. nearby, so I could continue to teach even after I retire! |
|
|
|
| Sedulius | Feb 5 2012, 05:51 PM Post #9 |
Field Marshal
|
Sexy party. Women, wine, AND WAR! Hat. Babes, beer, AND BLOOD! Vest. Maidens, mead, AND MAYHEM! Cummerbund. Go to Rhode Island. Or New Jersey. Or Vietnam. |
|
|
|
| Aelius | Feb 5 2012, 10:30 PM Post #10 |
|
Norman Warlord
|
NH: What about Texas's stance on your marriage? Have they made a real determination yet? Anyway, Texas isn't enough of a jump from where I am for a vacation. I may stop en route sometime if I'm heading to the southeast, though. Sed/Talio: Why Rhode Island or New Jersey? As for Vietnam, as much as I love the smell of napalm in the morning, I'd need to get a passport first. |
|
|
|
| New Harumf | Feb 6 2012, 03:18 PM Post #11 |
|
Bloodthirsty Unicorn
|
Gay marriages as recognized by states are a sham. Anyway, I don't believe the government should have any say in "marriage". The FEDERAL government should make all unions between two people a civil contract and leave marriages to churches where sacraments belong. Without federal changes all marriages are a violation of the seperation clause of the First Amendment. Also, States can do what they wish, but if civil contracts were used then one state could not refuse to recognize a contract made in another. [/rant] |
|
|
|
| Aelius | Feb 6 2012, 07:41 PM Post #12 |
|
Norman Warlord
|
Ok. I'm not an expert on marriage law, just was curious about how it worked. Meant no offense, although I hope that was clear to begin with. |
|
|
|
| Sedulius | Feb 7 2012, 08:20 AM Post #13 |
|
Field Marshal
|
And if that were the case, any two people could enter into a civil contract, even two straight men! :lol: Not that I have a problem with that. Actually kind of makes sense. Two straight men can stick together for life and make raids on towns for women. It's called being a Viking. That said, in this case, could I have as many of this civil contracts as I wanted. I would make several, not to the effect of polygamy, mind you. I'm a one woman man. I do actually want to settle down and marry. But I have several companions. And we shall take on the world! |
|
|
|
| New Harumf | Feb 7 2012, 10:41 AM Post #14 |
|
Bloodthirsty Unicorn
|
I believe having the second contract would likely violate the terms of the first, which would not allow the second contract. The nature of these contracts would, however, be up to each individual state, ergo, if Utah wished to allow multiple contracts, I would have no problem with that. In your particular case, I would think in addition to a civil contract you would also want to enter the Sacrement of Marriage through a church, in which case, you would violate GOD'S LAW, and be damned to eternal Hell fire for violating your oath! Just sayin :D |
|
|
|
| Catholic Europe | Feb 7 2012, 12:25 PM Post #15 |
Spammer
|
If you happen you to find yourself in Recife, Brazil then message me haha! I say, go to Hawaii! |
|
|
|
| New Harumf | Feb 7 2012, 02:25 PM Post #16 |
|
Bloodthirsty Unicorn
|
Random factoid: Recife has 268,160 opposite-sex couples and |
|
|
|
| Catholic Europe | Feb 7 2012, 05:55 PM Post #17 |
|
Spammer
|
Hahaha, yeah that's right! :D |
|
|
|
| Aelius | Feb 7 2012, 10:43 PM Post #18 |
|
Norman Warlord
|
How many single (straight or bisexual) women? ;) :gnarkgnark: |
|
|
|
| New Harumf | Feb 8 2012, 09:40 AM Post #19 |
|
Bloodthirsty Unicorn
|
According to the 2010 data, 53+% female! Those are pretty good odds! |
|
|
|
| Aelius | Feb 8 2012, 12:09 PM Post #20 |
|
Norman Warlord
|
Hmm... not a bad possibility. Just need a passport and airfare... and more money on top of that. heh. |
|
|
|
| Sedulius | Feb 10 2012, 10:26 AM Post #21 |
|
Field Marshal
|
Well, we're talking about civil contracts here, not marriage. When I get married to woman I choose, it will be her and only her, with not a thought towards others. That's just how I work. But with some sort of system of contract, not being strictly bound by the traditional rules of marriage, I would make several contracts not of a sexual nature. After all, this issue all comes down to sex, doesn't it? Adultery is only really adultery because of sex outside of a marriage. Polygamy is looked down on because it is essentially a way to gain and permanently keep multiple sexual partners. Homosexual marriages are disapproved of because of the nature of the sex happening in them, for homosexual is only homosexual because of the sex. Essentially, I've just debased marriage to a sexual contract. Pretty sickening really. It means so much more to me and others, but to many, this is all it truly is. |
|
|
|
| Tristan da Cunha | Feb 10 2012, 04:14 PM Post #22 |
Science and Industry
|
Marriage in its sternest and most traditional sense was a financial contract. This was in the days of dowries and brideprices and shit. Even the sex was a financial matter. This is why marriages of olde were so strictly enforced. Anyone who has had a run in with a loan officer will know how it is with financial contracts. It is a pound of flesh for a pound of flesh, and not one drop short in your dealings. Then when they abolished debtors' prisons, the institution of marriage went to hell.
Edited by Tristan da Cunha, Feb 10 2012, 04:24 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| « Previous Topic · Off-Topic · Next Topic » |
11:34 AM Jul 13