Flyingjj

Maze: my former girlfriend and I did something similar to that in the week and a half leading up to when we actually started dating. We were both checking facebook much more often than we normally do, so we could catch each other on facebook chat. Just for example, I wrote a status that was very specific as to when I'd be available that evening to hang out/grab a bite to eat in the cafeteria specifically for her benefit. I think she did something similar, but I also think I'm making that up and the only thing she did was be on facebook chat as much as possible. Ah, good times. Still makes me smile widely just thinking about it. I miss that. Strangely enough, the happiness the memories bring so much fondness of them with them that it overpowers any negative feelings.

If you have a month, I would at least give her some cool down time; not everyone looks to jump right back into dating someone else after a breakup.

I would say it depends on the circumstances surrounding the breakup. Why did he break up with her? If it was for some really negative reason, then you should probably back off for quite some time. If it was more of "we don't really click anymore" sort of thing, I would think less time would be okay. Minimum, I think, however, would be a couple/few weeks.

You might have to start quoting chapter and verse about hell, modern conceptions of hell are not very consistent with the biblical version, the biblical version being much less explicit, often referring to it as simply "a place where there will be much gnashing of teeth." I'm genuinely curious on the point, I don't disagree with you. And I suppose scientific evidence might have been the wrong word; possibly data analysis or an observational study might be better. Seeing as an observational study would be hard to find truth in, data analysis about proportions of pedophiles in the clergy versus the proportion in the general population might be better, though you'd be hard pressed to find accurate statistics in either case. So I suppose it would be difficult, though that doesn't mean we can make claims like that; quite the opposite really. If you do, you end up no better off than the theists you're debating against. Though I guess in your case you neither claimed to be nor defamed them for making such claims. In short, anything COULD cause anything, you're making one thing seem more plausible than others, and that's dangerous in any sort of logical inquiry. I don't take issue with your points about the Catholic church; I do, however, take issue in your connections of celibacy with abuse. There are plenty of celibate people who do not engage in pedophilia.

As true as that statement it, it makes me laugh nonetheless. I wouldn't think it's something else she didn't want you to know. I personally would think to myself that there were three options here. She could have been ready to say: a)Hey, my friend likes you. b)Hey, do you like my friend? or c)Hey, you're a freak, you should stop hanging around my friend! She could have been ready to say any one of these things, or any combination of two of them, or possibly all three. The world may never know. ... Or, she might have been going to say something else her friend didn't want you to know.

Yea, I'm a little surprised that such a scientific man as yourself Qeltar is jumping to such conclusions about celibacy without scientific evidence. Plenty of people are celibate and do not molest children, and plenty who are not celibate do molest children. There is no reason to believe in causation here. Also, I'm not sure I believe all of these stories coming out about child molestation. I'm not saying I disbelieve them either, but I have reason to be cautious. I believe you're old enough to possibly remember when "recovered memories" were a big social phenomenon. One person came out saying that they suddenly remembered that they had been molested by their father, and then another, then another, propagating from one another. These memories ranged from "normal" child abuse, to elaborate satanic cult rituals. And yet, most of these "memories" turned out to be unfounded. I'm not saying that's the case here, but I think that caution is necessary.

We love problems that fix themselves. :razz: That way, we can do absolutely no work and take credit for it anyway. :razz:

That happened with me and my girlfriend. We didn't fight about anything the entire time we were dating (two months, in fact). But then again we are generally agreeable people, and don't get angry at people easily. Now that we aren't dating, a little bit of frustration occurs between us when one of us says something that irritates the other person, but nothing more than temporary discomfort occurs. I'm sure that occurred while we were dating as well, but the relationship between us kind of glossed over it. Look for occasions where you're like, "No, that doesn't bother me at all," with her, but if anyone else were doing it you'd be irritated, if just slightly. I'm sure you'll find something. As for myself, not dating her is actually helping both of us to get to know each other better, or at least more fully, strangely enough. She said she thought it might be that way, that we'd get to know each other better not dating, and it's turned out to be quite true. Only problem is that I admire the things I'm learning about her now, even the negative things. But we'll see where that goes. I'm hanging out in relationship neutral at the moment, there are no women I wish to pursue at the present time, and though part of me wishes there were, I'm happy at the present. Though I could deal with a little more drama, that makes things a little more fun. Maybe I should call out to the cosmos to send me some. Hey, it worked last time. I did it, and a week later I started hanging out with the woman who became the girlfriend I just talked about.

Why yes, they do seem to get the holiday events. Makes sense to me. Gives them a nice introduction to how things work around Jagex and the chance to explore making content. Holiday events aren't permanent, so they don't have to be done perfectly as they'll only be in the game for a short period of time. It also, however, explains why many of the holiday events we experience now aren't up to the standards created before.

Well, technically only the reconciliation package is being sent back. The actual bill has already been signed by President Obama, and is therefore law. The reconciliation package is just technical differences in the House and Senate versions of the bill that must be agreed upon fully by both houses. It will in no way affect whether the bill becomes law.

Find smarter girls. ... Or, alternatively, you can follow the advice that comes after my sarcastic response. Maybe even my own, if I have time to process it a bit and end up replying with something better later.

Yes, I realize documentaries shouldn't be taken at face value. I am in college, ya know. That means I know stuff. Yeah. :-P Now that I think about it, I think it was a CNN special or something, not that that's necessarily any better. As for states suing the government, I'm sad to see South Dakota on the list. Yes, I know we're a fairly heavy Republican stronghold, but two of our three Senators and Representatives are Democrats, so it disappoints me. SD, I love yea, but you're too freaking conservative. As for the actual constitutionality of the bill, an argument can and will be made in support of the bill from the loose interpretation side of things that this law falls under the power of Congress to provide for the "general welfare of the United States." Given current leanings of the Supreme Court, it could likely go either way, but as it is so silly and you don't see anyone challenging social security, for example, it is unlikely that the Supreme Court would rule in favor of the challenge.

We don't even necessarily need to cut military spending, just military waste. If we redirected the money we wasted, we'd have plenty. Ever watch a documentary on how much we waste, especially when we contract jobs? I saw a special once where they trashed an entire heavy duty semi simply because it had a flat tire. And I have people I know in the military who use and abuse all sorts of stuff simply because the government will buy them a new one if they break it. Needless to say, government agencies, military especially, do not operate on a shoestring.

The Union won because Lincoln shredded the Constitution and because the south was less developed (ie less railroads). I hope the bill gets banned by more states, as it does violate our tenth amendment. Hopefully the Supreme Court will look into it, though I doubt that would happen. The point wasn't about how the Union won, it was about the fact that the Union won, meaning that the federal government was going to do whatever the heck it wanted with states' rights, which it has been doing ever since.

The problem with states' rights is that theoretically the states have a right to make a law against federal law, but it has a problem on three parts: 1. They (states) don't often have the resources to enforce such a restriction. 2. The federal government can enforce penalties on those states which do not follow their laws. (i.e., the feds won't give them as much money for other stuff) And, finally, 3. That's what the civil war was fought over, whether federal law could override state law. Guess what? The Union (aka the national government) won. EDIT: At above post and quote: Indeed, the nation was not founded on fear of big government, there were always splits in the view of so-called "big government," shown by the opposing political parties, the Federalists and the Republicans (of no direct relation to the current party, though they do share a few beliefs). These parties were, in fact, started by the two men mentioned above, Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson, respectively.

Well, the Senate passed the majority of the bill in December, so it only has to pass the "reconciliation package," which addresses the differences between the Senate and House versions of the bill. And yes, it will pass with no problem since it only needs a simple majority. Thank goodness for no 2/3 BS on this. Anyway, on the actual subject, all I can say is "Please oh please work, and work well!"

Building from this... I always thought that Christianity was following the teachings of Jesus. Are there any Christian branches that focus just on that? Simple answer: Yes. You won't find a name/denomination like Lutheran, Episcopalian, or Methodist attached to them yet. They tend to exist under the title "non-denominational" if they use any label at all. There are more "radical" branches than even that, which try to live out Jesus as much as possible. I'm currently exploring this as much as possible. Book recommendation on the subject: The Irresistible Revolution by Shane Claiborne

You know, nothing in this topic is really new to this forum. I may regret posting this link, as this topic was once the bane of my existence, but it has plenty of interesting beliefs on the subject: Massive God topic, read at your own risk

A very long one. But it's not on purpose, in case you were wondering. That "message" is't even there, if you listening to it and had no idea what you were listening for, you'd have no idea it was there. If you want to have a bit of fun with those, go to this link: Backmasking

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7F6kiXvq5iU

Well, Dhamarok was a master of magic, just not combat magic. Therefore it seems somewhat logical that he would know all of the spellbooks. And, not all magic is combat magic. Only the Ancient spellbook is solely combat, and lunar contains no combat, unless you count vengeance. So, although I don't think that that will be the reward, it is not unthinkable, because magic is most definitely not the purely combat oriented skill you seem to think it to be.

That can't be legal... 'Tis if he goes to private school. Dress codes and such. Likely has a school uniform too?

Play the religion card. At my sister's school some guy was allowed to grow his beard because he told the Vice Principal it was his religion, and it's a Christian school. Naw, I've been meaning to get it cut for a while now. It's around my shoulders, now, and I spend way too long in front of the mirror each morning swooshing it around to look cool. ._. I'm just a procrastinator. But now I have a reason, and a free day off school. Woo! And soon, a new super happy awesome sparkly haircut! Plus, they'd probably think I was taking the piss if I said that. I haven't turned up to the weekly chapel service in like 4 years. But I'm playing Jesus in our Jesus Easter Crucifixion play on Friday. :3 ITS project down, Math C to go. >_< Well what's he complaining about, you're just getting into character. Everyone knows everyone in the Bible had long hair, it was a rule.

Red chins are about 80k an hour, plus or minus a few k, probably less if you're inexperienced. At current GE mid, that's about 185k an hour. Also, this is for level 80+, when you can run 5 traps at once. Sorry, I know nothing about grenwalls, except that they involve even more clicking.

Pointless, pretty much a money hole. They have you pay like $100 and you get a membership card, and you hear from them every now and then about fancy scholarships and stuff. Anyway, pretty dumb if you ask me. I'd ignore it if I were you. Wish someone had told me that when I got my letter... <_<