sees_all1

This should be in graveyard. Anyhow, you realize you're risking 3K gop tokens, right? Thats 3K rune/pure essence, or 60 water talisman. 135k GP in ess, or 396k in pure, or 439k in water talisman for a no arm? No thanks.

making a planner in as3... Wish I had a different project, same old crap is boring. Need to find a "fun" project in as3 that I can do, similar to the tripping balls.

Its only crazy if you like Chairman Mao and Mother Teresa. Oh wait....

I always trained on Moss Giants before dungeoneering, loved the prayer xp. Hill Giants might be good too, haven't trained strength exclusively in forever.

So, remind me again, what do you play with in rugby?

9

Read this as - Introducing more members only content for dungeoneering, making the pitiful F2P xp even worse through members only challenges. :angry:

Melee isn't overpowered in the popular style of fighting - no armor.

EDIT: [hide=That was easy.] [/hide]

I think a 15 second bind is what mage needs, not 10. Jagex could have fixed mage a long time ago with the release of FoG - make the robes bind people for an extra amount of time instead of messing with the probability of binding them. Blastbox gives mage a KO-ability, you just need to hide it until they get relaxed in eating. Haven't had much time to play runescape this week, so I haven't worked much on my guide. There's a ton left to do :blink:

After I read cry moar, I thought you were trying to be a dbag. Then I read the second part, and I have to laugh at myself for assuming the worst.

No, it doesn't. Tunnels are costly to make, and once found are easy to fill. And the current situation in Arizona is oppressing American citizens near the borders - you know, the ones that have to fear for their lives because of gang violence from Mexico? I don't have a problem with legal immigration, but I think reforming immigration policies is a waste of time when it is too easy to just walk across the desert with nothing to stop you. The first thing we need to do to solving our problems with illegal immigrants is to stop the act of illegal immigration - physically stop people from crossing the border. The second step is to deal with those that are already here illegally. If that means granting amnesty, fine. If that means going on a witch hunt, whatever. The third step is reforming the immigration process. Probably another step is to help Mexico get their crap together, but I doubt that will happen in the near future. I don't believe that jailing illegal immigrants should be involved in that process at all. Either let them stay, or ship them home. Making it difficult for people to get in the United States illegally, in my opinion, is a good goal.

I give you mad props for being this strong. And a well deserved *hug* Let us know if theres any other way we can help.

Keeping the borders closed to drug smugglers and REAL criminals is a good reason to build a wall. Otherwise, they'd just cross freely when they wanted to and commit crimes, like beheading someone. And going to a government agency, filling out paperwork is a real drag. Why do that when you can just walk across the desert? Streamlining immigration is a good goal, but it doesn't matter much if we don't protect our borders. Also, building a wall falls under national defense, which is the type of limited government we're wanting.

Its hard to be against abortion but for birth control. Or its hard to be for masturbation but against pre-marital sex. Or for pre-marital sex but against gay marriage. Most of these arguments can be made on the basis of logic and reasoning, but from a morality standpoint defending all of them at once is easier than defending one individually, or excluding others. The article posted was just showing how birth control is adversely affecting fish populations, and I know how important the environment is to liberals.

If entering legally means filling out any paperwork, it will always be easier to enter illegally (unless there's a wall).

Here's a dilemma for you magekillr: http://www.findingdulcinea.com/news/environment/Feb-08/Sex-Altering-Pollutants-Could-Devastate-Fish.html (emphasis mine) Yes, I am against birth control. In case you didn't know these issues on life, sexuality, relationships, marriage, and morality in general are all linked. You can't just pick and chose positions from each without contradicting yourself, or weakening your argument.

The point of a wall is to force people to enter and exit the country at specific locations, not to stop them from entering or exiting altogether. I'm not against immigration in general, but I am against illegal immigration. Putting a wall up on all borders isn't racist, illegal isn't a race. The problem isn't just Mexico right now, we have a huge border with Canadia too. Both allow for illegals to enter and stay in the country, which includes people that don't like us very much (how easy is it for a terrorist to move from one country to another by taking a short hike). The current issue at hand would become easier and cheaper to solve once the movement of non-citizens is controlled. It isn't, and that's causing major problems.

Berlin Wall really was meant for keeping people in East Berlin, not out. The problem is immigrants, not emigrants.

We need to build a huge wall about 50 feet in from the border, and a second wall behind that. The walls should be high, and deep too. Adding guards on the second wall every few miles, along with a camera system should keep the whole thing in check. Open borders are a security issue, and make it very easy for anyone to cross the border (from Mexico or Canadia) If you want to come to the US, do it legally. There's a process for immigration and becoming a naturalized citizen, and everyone needs to play by the rules. As a benefit to keeping illegals out, we'll know that everyone in the US is legal, and the only people we need to worry about are those that came in by airport and overstayed their visa. People that are here illegally should be shipped back to their native country, but only after we've built that wall. There's no point or purpose detaining them for more than a month, prisoners waste tax dollars, especially with jail overcrowding as it is.

Its a study, and its subject to biases like everything else. I listened to Joel Brind himself speak about it, and the slides he showed about breast development made sense. Statistically speaking, the only way to "prove" anything is with an experiment, you know, with a control group and randomization to lessen any biases. Since pro-life people believe abortion is immoral, and since pro-choice people have nothing to gain from doing the experiment (and should also think that forcing pregnancy and abortion on individuals is immoral), it'll never be done with humans. Another facet of this debate is birth control. You know, taking hormones every month to trick your body into believing its permanently pregnant. Because elevated estrogen levels don't cause cancer...

Induced abortion increases the risk of future births being premature, and increases the risk of breast cancer. Also, after so many abortions, the amount of scar tissue inside a woman gets to the point where they're sterile. It might be her call, but its not a good solution for her long term.

You know what's appalling? The number of abortionists that are convicted felons. http://abortionviolence.com/INDEX.HTM You know is sad?A 2009 study showed that 64% of woman feel pressure to have an abortion. You say that pro-lifers hate women, but we're the ones that are running extensive networks to help crisis pregnancies. Half of being a sidewalk counselor is knowing where to take women after they change their minds. The other half usually involves praying in front of an abortion facility. But really, under all that prayer and support for total strangers, we really do hate women.