Federal Court Rules that the X-Men are Not Human

The_Merchant

New member
Nov 9, 2011
82
0
0
Oh Yes! Of Course!
People's money goes into debates like these and ''Is pizza a veggie?''
I mean SERIOUSLY!A debate that you could find hundreds and hundreds of forum threads on fansites and the such.
Faith in Humanity lost by another 10 points.

Maybe 2012 is really the worlds end.With news like these my doubts about that fades.
 

SongsOfDragons

New member
Feb 28, 2008
35
0
0
A silly court case over taxes and tariffs... reminds me of the case McVitie's had a while ago over Jaffa Cakes, as they were trying to prove they weren't chocolate covered biscuits, which are subject to VAT. (Name notwithstanding, if you don't know Jaffa Cakes, they're round cookie-sized dense crumb with a disc of orange-flavoured apricot jam and half-covered in chocolate, eaten as biscuit snacks rather than dessert).

They proved Jaffa Cakes were indeed cakes...by proving cakes go hard when stale, and biscuits go soft; Jaffa Cakes go hard.
 

Torrasque

New member
Aug 6, 2010
3,441
0
0
Did anyone ever stop and say to everyone else: "Hey guys, why don't we stop arguing about this shit, leave it to the fanboys online, and do something else? After all, we're arguing about fucking plastic toys."

This is the most useless court case(s) I have ever heard about.
Whats next? Are they going to rule that Equestria is a blatant plagiarism of Austria and Equestrianism?
Maybe they want to have a ruling that pokemon are not monsters since some of them are pretty much copypasta IRL animals.
 

marioandsonic

New member
Nov 28, 2009
657
0
0
If there's ever a conflict between a group of people that can control the weather and grow claws out of their hands and a group of people who insist that everyone should be forced to be as shit as they are, I know which side I'd rather be on.
 

Kataskopo

New member
Dec 18, 2009
121
0
0
amaranth_dru said:
Does this mean all humans with mutations are now non-humans? Or just specific to the X-Men comics. Depending on the wording, if this says "mutants" are not non-human, and not "super-powered meta-humans" aren't human, then there is a problem because I most definitely qualify as a mutant. Blue eyes are a mutation, not a naturally occuring part of the human race.
Well, technically all of those weirdos who can process lactose (the thingy in normal milk) are mutants too, meaning, almost 80% of the world.
I don't have colored eyes and can't process lactose, I'm normal!
 

neonsword13-ops

~ Struck by a Smooth Criminal ~
Mar 28, 2011
2,771
0
0
Only one phrase can express my feelings for the federal court.


I mean, seriously, I was six when I watched X-Men for the first time and even my brain could figure out that gambit, wolverine, cyclops and all of the others were not humans.

This is so silly. I think the courts have more important things on their plates than action figures.
 

Random Fella

New member
Nov 17, 2010
1,167
0
0
amaranth_dru said:
Does this mean all humans with mutations are now non-humans? Or just specific to the X-Men comics. Depending on the wording, if this says "mutants" are not non-human, and not "super-powered meta-humans" aren't human, then there is a problem because I most definitely qualify as a mutant. Blue eyes are a mutation, not a naturally occuring part of the human race.
If a mutation that occurred in your ancestry made you a mutant then we'd all be mutants, mutations are the core foundation of evolution after all.

OT: It's honestly quite silly that they've debated over this for so long and have bowed down to a group that is probably a load of rednecks with their strange imaginations.
 

CulixCupric

New member
Oct 20, 2011
847
0
0
believer258 said:
amaranth_dru said:
Blue eyes are a mutation, not a naturally occuring part of the human race.
Really? So I'm a mutant?

Awesome.

On topic, this seems a little pedantic to me. Just a bit.
I also have blue eyes.

But, think of what this means for sentient species, and genetic engineering.
think of, due to genetic engineering, in the near future, furries were real, with actual animal features, not just relating to animals. would they be able to maintain citizenship, or would civil rights still apply to them? think of the civil debate about rights. everybody has mutations. that's why everyone looks different instead of looking like clones.
 

SidheKnight

New member
Nov 28, 2011
208
0
0
OutrageousEmu said:
I've seen the X-men issues drawn by Liefeld. Nothing that looks like that could ever be considered human.
Nothing drawn by Liefeld could be considered human on any level. PERIOD.

 

ShadowsofHope

Outsider
Nov 1, 2009
2,623
0
0
..Wow, the U.S. courts are really stretching for topics to deliberate upon these days, aren't they?

It's a wonder you have such a perfected nation with a superb legal system that keeps its priorities straight every waking moment for the sake of freedom, liberty and.. Marvel. /sarcasm
 

Moonlight Butterfly

Be the Leaf
Mar 16, 2011
6,157
0
0
I hope I'm not the only one that finds this hilarious given the storyline and message of the comics.

hahahaha.

SidheKnight said:
OutrageousEmu said:
I've seen the X-men issues drawn by Liefeld. Nothing that looks like that could ever be considered human.
Nothing drawn by Liefeld could be considered human on any level. PERIOD.

SNIP
Lol I can draw better than that... this guy gets paid for it? whut.

Now I have a sad.
 

chadachada123

New member
Jan 17, 2011
2,310
0
0
him over there said:
Plurralbles said:
"In the interest of saving money on taxes, these are action figures, not dolls"
You sir have made my day, and I fail to see how the character model classification of a figurine affects the shipping and what not. Shouldn't that be decided by things like how they are made and material or size or something. From what I gather from the article these will be the exact same toys but cheaper because:"dude there mutants, mutants can't be humans even if they look and act identical and are the exact same product." Just sort of messed up. X-men are still cool though so what
Well, it's not the shipping size or cost that means anything, but the demand on them. At least, that's what it seems to be.

We could make tariffs on wood tables but not on wood chairs if there's some justification for it, despite being the same material and weight and such, just to encourage domestic purchasing or to make money on table imports, for example. I imagine something similar was done for "non-human figures" versus "human figures," leading to this whole thing.

Stupid? Well, yeah, just a bunch.
 

Akimoto

New member
Nov 22, 2011
459
0
0
I am officially ashamed to be human. Magneto, I'm sorry for cussing you throughout the movies, cartoons and comics.

Toys? Come on!
 

4RM3D

New member
May 10, 2011
1,738
0
0
thaluikhain said:
Hmmmm...I hate to say "Am I the only one?", but:

Am I the only one who thought of how this applies to Rule 34 stuff?

I mean, now it's beastiality to fancy X Men, but it's no longer pedophilia to fancy X Kids?
The ruling only applies to the toys, not the actual X-men. So it is tricky to apply Rule 34 in the context of nonhumans. But even if you could apply it, then there are still issues.

X-Men are declared not human. That doesn't mean they are automatically beasts. In fact they are mutants. So no, IMO it is not bestiality.

And fancying X-kids would still be pedophilia. Because pedophilia goes further than just children. In fact it includes everything that looks like a child, whether it is or isn't doesn't matter. So, if you have intercourse with a person that looks like a kid and you didn't ask for identification, then if someone reports you, you will be arrested. The interesting thing is that even if that person turns out to be 18+, you can (and probably will) still be persecuted, because you didn't know the person was an adult beforehand. Although this law isn't the same in every country.
 

wammnebu

New member
Sep 25, 2010
628
0
0
China: were gonna charge you extra for your xmen dolls
US Courts: they're not dolls, their action figures! completely different
 

TheNaut131

New member
Jul 6, 2011
1,224
0
0
Torrasque said:
Did anyone ever stop and say to everyone else: "Hey guys, why don't we stop arguing about this shit, leave it to the fanboys online, and do something else? After all, we're arguing about fucking plastic toys."

This is the most useless court case(s) I have ever heard about.
Whats next? Are they going to rule that Equestria is a blatant plagiarism of Austria and Equestrianism?
Maybe they want to have a ruling that pokemon are not monsters since some of them are pretty much copypasta IRL animals.
How about to combat obesity and promote better school lunches, they classify pizza a vegetable?


...you know, if they have to to even CONSIDER working on solving things like this, why not just take some time to-oh I don't know-FIX THE ACTUAL PROBLEMS IN THIS COUNTRY.