Nitramosma

I totally agree with you, but unfortunately it seems the only to get elected in this country is to be affiliated with one party or the other. Good old George Washington had it right when he said that political parties would be the worst thing possible to happen to our country's political system. Realistically its hard to afford the kind of advertising you would need as a third party candidate. Also many people in this country, for good or bad, will register with one party and vote for that party until hell freezes over. I think that since at this point it is almost impossible to break away from the 2 party system in one election, what we need is someone who is neither far right nor far left. But thats the issue. While people would vote for someone who is in that position in the election if they were endorsed by one party or the other, that type of person will never win either party's primary election. As it stands I'm in favor of McCain. The main reason that Obama scares me is that he is too inexperienced and no one knows where he stands because thus far he as avoided the issues and merely been rallying popularity. And we can't even look at his voting record to see where he is because he hasn't even had one full senatorial term.

Oddly enough I think Obama's middle name will be his biggest weakness. I mean Hussein? People will be kinda scarred of that even if it it a stupid reason. I'm hoping either Giuliani or McCain. Also I don't think people here are giving Mitt Romney very good odds but he's quite popular in certain areas. Ultimately I just hope its a Republican, but from the looks of it if I had to honestly pick who I think has the best chance of winning I'd probably say Gore or Obama. No one likes Clinton and people (as sad as I am to say it) are pissed at Republicans.

Let me preface this by saying that I am gay and I don't care what anyone here thinks of that. For everyone attacking the Bible: Yes it is old, but it is also the basis for the most widespread religion in the world. As a matter of fact I am a Catholic. I understand that many parts are taken out of context by fundamentalist Christians and I'm glad that people here seem to recognize this. For everyone quoting Leviticus: That is an old testament book. Modern day Christianity is based almost entirely on the new testament. Furthermore, there are many other laws in the book of Leviticus that are completely ludicrous. For everyone confusing homosexuality with choice: read this http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn3008 In short that is an article which through scientific experimentation found an "abnormality" in the brains of homosexual rams (this experiment has been done on humans with the same results, but those experiments are disputed) in the region of the brain relating to sexual behavior. As far as I'm concerned my attraction to those of the same sex is not a choice I willingly made. I would gladly be normal and not face all the stigma placed on gays in society today, but I have no choice other than to hide it or fake a straight life, neither of which I can do. Ultimately what it comes down to is that on the subject of homosexuality, most people have already made up their mind and no amount of evidence on either side will convince them that their views are incorrect. I probably fall into this trap. If there were conclusive proof that homosexuals are 100% of the time gay by choice and that is was nothing to do with genetics I would probably not believe it, just as if we found 100% proof that homosexuality is a genetic trait, most fundamentalists probably would not believe it. What it comes down to is not acceptance, but rather tolerance. I am perfectly fine with people thinking I'm a horrible sodomite and that I'm an abomination against God. What I'm not alright with is getting the crap kicked out of me in some back alley because some guy hates gays(btw I have been bashed for being gay before). When you get to the heart of the issue of acceptance I think you'll find that most gays, at least most that I've know, don't give a rat's [wagon] if they are called horrible people, we just don't want to have to fear for our lives from the crazy homophobes when we go out as a couple.

People keep saying that with all the other planets out there that there just HAS to be alien life. What people forget is that there are very specific criteria that must be met for life as we know it to develop. I'm not saying that it is impossible that there are other planets with life, but was was a 1 in a million chance that it even developed on Earth.

One more thing I forgot to mention. During the 2004 election President Bush's approval ratings were in the trash. The average five year old could probably have won the election, yet the democratic candidate even with his Botox couldn't win. I think that says something about the intelligence of the alternative to our current president.

I bet you 9 million dollars that bush is smarter than you I WILL TAKE THAT BET. This is the mentality that annoys me as a US citizen. Yes I'm a republican and I do in fact think Bush is far from the worst leader possible, but that aside lets look at this without considering that. Do you really think you can be a moron somehow magically attain a position as the leader of the worlds largest superpower? Get real! Just because someone sucks at speaking in public means that they are stupid. If I called everyone who stuttered [developmentally delayed]ed do you know how fast I'd get the [cabbage] kicked out of me? Drop your stupid ideals that make you think you're better than everyone else.

My only offence is a temp mute for "auto typing / spamming the chat box" What happened was I was in world two merchanting half keys / crystal keys and there was a p mod there doing it too. Well I was buying for more than him and typing faster than him so what does he do? Temp mutes me. When Jagex sees it they think I was auto typing so the mute is upheld. I appealed it and explained the situation, but I just got some stupid form response. Lame. At least I know that they really don't look at their reports closely.

My dad is the computer science teacher at my high school, yet oddly enough I know more than him most of the time. My mom can check her e-mail and thats pretty much it.

just a quick btw. I'm not a she, I'm a he.

anime: Bleach, Spiral, and InuYasha (only the older episodes) cartoon: Futurama, Family Guy, and oddly enough I still like Pokemon (no I don't consider it anime)

I didn't say anything sooner because I went to bed, sorry. But I am glad that we realized that we have a difference in opinion on free will rather than omniscience. Anyway what I am trying to say is that I don't know for certain that God is omniscient because the only proof I have is a 2000 year old book that tells me so, which I have begun to lose faith in ever since I came out and then read 1 Corinthians 6:9. But any how what I really want to get across is that I also may be wrong. I guess we may never know until the final judgment, that is of course if there is one. I was great to have an intellectual discussion about this without it becoming a flame war. And furthermore I think you have some very deep and wonderful views on the God and faith and I hope you don't lose them.

Well I wanted to stop :( , but I guess that I will continue until this does degenerate into a screaming match (I hope this is the first time it doesn't). I don't have a huge wealth of knowledge on this subject as I am only a high school senior (the twelve years of Catholic school might help explain why I have this view), but I am going to borrow from this page that I found. I'll leave the link at the end so you can check it out yourself if you wish. I'll paraphrase here, your argument goes like this 1. A being with free will, given two options A and B, can freely choose between A and B. 2. God is omniscient (all-knowing). 3. God knows I will choose A. 4. God cannot be wrong, since an omniscient being cannot have false knowledge. 5. From 3 and 4, I will choose A and cannot choose B. 6. From 1 and 5, omniscience and free will cannot co-exist. I won't dispute 1 (as we both agree on this), 2 (as this is the main sticking point in the argument), 3 is necessary is 2 is true, and 4 is necessary of an omniscient being. 5 is where I will dispute you. I can't state it very eloquently so I will use this article's exact wording. "...point number 5 is where the logic falters. Those who argue in this manner make the mistake of thinking that because God possesses knowledge about a specific matter, then he has influenced it. That does not follow at all. Just because God can foresee which choice you will make, it does not mean you couldn't still freely choose the other option." I liked his example very much so I will also post that. "I have a five year old son. If I were to leave a chocolate chip cookie on the table about a hour before dinner time and my son was to walk by and see it, I know that he would pick up the cookie and eat it. I did not force him to make that decision. In fact, I don't even have to be in the room at all. I think I know my son well enough, though, to tell you that if I come back into the kitchen the cookie will be gone. His act was made completely free of my influence, but I knew what his actions would be." the link to this page is http://www.comereason.org/phil_qstn/phi038.asp I know that this is a Christian web page and this is likely to agree with the Christian viewpoint, but that does not mean that it is incorrect.

And your the one talking about contradictions... The definition of free will is being able to make a choice of one's own accord. You say that the choice was predestined (which I don't believe it was) and even if it was that doesn't mean that you didn't choose it. By making a choice you are proving free will. I think the problem we have here is that you are saying something is predestined and therefore we don't have free will. I am saying that no choice is predestined, but rather it is known by God based upon our personality and circumstances what choice we will make. I have had this discussion with many people in the past and generally it just degenerates from a genuine intellectual conversation to "No it isn't!" "Yes it is!" so in this instance I will make the choice to believe that our best course of action is to agree to have our differing viewpoints.

attraction: Hair. I'm not sure why but if a guy has good hair I can't seem to resist. revulsion: Toes.....eww.

I can't know whether we have free will or not only God would know. However my experiences points towards free will. Your beliefs are contradictory. That means at least one part of your beliefs (God is omniscient or free will exists) is wrong. Stop asserting that you don't know what God knows. No one does. That has nothing to do with the discussion. I think your position is actually the wrong one. God IS omniscient and humans DO have free will. Just because God knows everything that ever is/was/will be doesn't mean that we didn't choose these things. Look at it this way. When you wake up in the morning you choose to either get out of bed or sleep for another five minutes. That is most definitely your choice. This proves human free will. However God knew weather you would get out of bed or sleep some more. Does this mean he decided for you? No! It merely means he had prior knowledge of which CHOICE you would make. I can't prove God's omniscience by any means other than things like Jesus' prior knowledge of his death, but this even more proves human free will. Seeing as Jesus was both 100% human and 100% divine he is the only example to prove both human free will and God's omniscience. He choose to be crucified for our sins. That was his humanness, but he also knew that Simon Peter would deny him 3 times which is proof enough of his omniscience and hence his divinity.

You are mostly right. Homosexual males who have had intercourse with another man ever are not allowed (at least in the US) to give blood. It is partially due to HIV, but there are other things they are concerned about. For starters all donated blood is screened for HIV and other infections, so if you give blood and you have HIV/AIDS then your blood will not be used in a donation, but they are also afraid of other as of yet undetected infections and diseases. HIV/AIDS was moving silently throughout the homosexual community long before it was ever diagnosed, possibly up to ten years. They are afraid that there are other viruses doing this same thing now and if that is the case someone could get infected blood, but not know until years later. The only reason I know this is because as a homosexual male I always said I would continue giving blood, but now that I know the justification behind their position, I plan to honor it.

I love giving blood. I've done it 5-6 times, but the problem is that I have a reaction to the needles. Namely I pass out. I've begun to inform the nurses of this and some of them are nice enough, upon my request, to just leave the needle in and let me continue giving while I'm out. The first few times it scarred me pretty badly because I wasn't expecting to pass out, but now I'm used to it and sometimes I even enjoy the feeling of having no idea where I am and how I got there after waking up. Lol

One of my most fun chemistry moments was this year in AP Chem. The group working next to mine was working with a beaker of about 50 mL of .5M Sb3Cl in 6M HCl and one of the group members moved his arm across the table without thinking and spilled it all over his right arm and leg. He was so worried about the stuff on his arm (understandable as 6 Molar hydrochloric acid is pretty strong) that he neglected the stuff on his pants. Long story short he has about 4 - 1 inch holes on his pants by the end of the day.