mmmcannibalism

Yeah it works without charges, but the bracelet does stop informing without charges. The main thing is that the boosts and stats stay regardless of charge; the only difference with the cb brace is the slayer update ability.

you get boosts even with an empty black mask.

Unfortunately, god is an invisible pink unicorn so you can not see his picture. Its more helpful to see god in everyday life; but that is something you must do on your own.

Yeah, they upped it to approximately 5 minutes.

Almost any rum/alcohol has some harmful effect

Indeed, all these homosexuals are just rebels! I'll just joke along, because you weren't serious either... amirite? No joking Cause marrying a random women is better than marrying someone you love, amirite? You're A'ight

[hide=] I still don't think it is right to be gay. But I think your post has awaken me to what I had actually said in my post. I think that I will treat people with more respect and not be so much of a hypocrite. I'm sorry for any feelings I have hurt and will hurt. I've realized that I have committed as much, if not more, blasphemy than the ones of which I've accused. Again, I am sorry. There is in no way, however, that you can challenge my belief and devotion to God. I have faith in him, and I have faith in the bible. People have the right to be treated equal, and from this point onward I will follow that given right. My decisions were far to rash. They were based on the fact that you need to be perfect to receive God's love. I don't know where I got that idea. Since I was saved, I've always believed that God loves everyone equally. I still believe that, but I think it was from thinking that America was becoming a godless nation and wanting to try to fix it. Ultimately, I did more harm than good, and I apologize. I still think America is becoming godless. And we don't trust in God. And that we should fix it. I've learned the way to fixing it isn't through outright calling it out, but rather in being an example of what it should be in yourself. I want all of you to consider something: what if I'm right? as much as I'm consider what happens if I'm wrong. [/hide] Faith is good, and I am not going to go after you for any legitimate faith; my attacks on religion happen when we get some bad things being justified by religion. The problem is not with America becoming godless, its in the general cultural decline and the fact people are acting more foolishly. You dont need god to be a good person, you just need a good philosophical backing. If your right, so be it, Ill take my chances; we could go into some logical flaws with various religious texts but that is entirely a different argument.

Explanation required. On a side note, I find your signature slightly ironic. Eh, it's a coincidence, irony involves things being related on a topic, this is irrelevant. Dammit double post lag. Well, more to the point of "differing from hollow lies" and his religion/reasons against homosexuality. It all depends on how you interpret what the hollow lies are. They start in genesis; the first in a series of books which form a pillar upon which your stupidity has chosen to build itself a nest of bigotry and insubstantiality. You could choose to stop going against your lord and start treating people equally and with respect. Or you could wake up and realize your hollow lord isnt real and start treating people equally out of a sense of common deceny and respect for your fellow man. Or, you could continue to be an idiot, in which case you will see an actual verbal thrashing of your arguments.

I wouldnt consider that scary; its very weird but nothing about it is scary.

Yeah bulls are the first carrier you should use; sorry but I dont know about the cockatrices.

Dont make spirit kalphites, it would be better to save your blue charms for a higher level. Void spinners are also a waste, but if you dont intend on getting a better summoning their healing is worthwhile. For golds, granite crabs are your best bet, Im not sure on the other charms.

Now I haven't read up on this in more than a while, but if I remember correctly; The US was founded on no state funded church, because they didn't want the government to fund a church like UK funded the Church of England. Along down the road, after then US was founded, someone decided the throw in separation of church and state. So technically , under the constitution wouldn't one be able to base their political decisions off their preferable religion, weather it be Christianity or Buddhism as long as their decision was not to give money or government hand-outs to the religion? I'm down with people being homosexual and what not, but I think there are certain rights (like tax benefits and the shift of veteran's pay to the spouse) that a married man and woman have that should be for a married man and woman, not 2 married men or 2 married women. The line where seperation of church and state came from reads to the effect "the United States Government shall not endorse a specific religion". While seperation of church and state is very important, we often see it strawmanned to try and derail religion. Why would you want to legalize gay marriage but withhold those specific rights?

I was speaking about the governor's clear moral fiber for voting for human rights even if he had a personal disagreement; I very strongly support gay marriage. Oh HE opposes gay marriage. I get you now haha thought you meant you personally, my bad #-o No problem, the wording isn't exactly wonderful.

I was speaking about the governor's clear moral fiber for voting for human rights even if he had a personal disagreement; I very strongly support gay marriage.

I have to commend the governor on this one. For personally opposing gay marriage, I give him some serious credit for still signing the bill after the necessary compromises he got put in.

I managed to catch pnemunia requiring to miss this entire last week. Going in sometime next week to make up the 3 or so exams I am required to(Ap classes you took the Ap test in are excused).

I think they are using that to hide the child's name. After all, the article said they were only giving the mother's first name for privacy reasons; it wouldnt be a surprise if they abbreviated the babies.

From that article, I dont see how they found her mentally incopetant. While the actual concept of protecting a child if there parents were too dumb(I mean just above mentally [developmentally delayed]ed); it sure seems that they overstepped there bounds here. Someone should be getting a letter telling them to resign or being fired after her appeal.

Hill and Moss giants are good for gold charm hunting. For other charms I cant really think of much, kalphites drop a lot of blues but you dont want to use those at low levels.

Have we discussed the effectiveness of a meteor hammer as a mid range silent weapon? While it would take some time to train with, they wouldnt be extremely hard to make and they could see some real usefulness as a scout's secondary weapon. Finally, the 10ft or so lethal range allows for at least a second stationary attack.

Of course, individual stations can go further with their censorship if they choose, it's up to them because they're broadcasting the material and therefore liable for penalties if they break the rules. Essentially I agree with you though, adults should have almost no restriction on what they view (unless it infringes on other peoples rights) and that censorship should be there to limit the access that children have to certain content until they're at an age where most people are deemed responsible enough to view it Agreed, the main point is that there should be as little physical censorship as possible and a focus on things like the v chip that give parents control over what children see.

Yeah, or the fact that if they chose GTA to play instead of Pokemon then they were probably already more geared towards violence in the first place. Actually, its a given that anyone passing up pokemon is a clinical psycho On topic, while some censorship is necessary and good; the focus should be on limiting access to adult material by children while allowing parents to see what they want. Of course, television stations have the individual right to censor as much as they wish.

[hide=] This is a one-sided argument. If they are information sponges then that would mean it would be easy to feed them the information that violence is bad too, which means there's no need for censors. Children are impressionable to violence, but not impressionable to peace...? I'm also pretty sure most children realize the difference between real life and video games. And if they don't, since they are sponges, all you have to do is demonstrate that there is a difference and they should listen to you. If it doesn't work then I guess they aren't as impressionable as they were thought to be, which means there is another major factor besides impressionability that leads to children doing violent things. I cry on the inside every time I see the gateway argument. You go ahead and say "gateway", but I'll say "alternative". [/hide] I would also add that such studies ignore other factors. For instance, if a child is playing gta at the age of 8 it's logical to assume its because their parents use the television as a babysitter.

[hide=] [/hide] a. that should read neither male nore female; and since the thread doesnt say does abraham's god exist its not binding b. Because the existing religions were all made by humans and not directly by any possible gods c. Thats a specific religious belief, has no bearing on the existence of god. d. This has quite a few logical flaws. First, your simultaneously assuming that every religion's god sends non believers to hell, every religion's god exists, and only one religion's god will actually pass judgement. Finally, its again making the assumption that the "correct" religion exists and is a monotheistic judgemental god e. While I could go down a list of scenarios that show why god might have done that; your again assuming a specific religious belief. Secondly, people still believe in quite a few ridiculous things. f. To the first part it's possible, to the second part unfortuneatly true. g. Indeed

You dont get indited for perjury if you defend yourself and are found guilty. Im not familiar with the exact laws, but perjury takes more then saying Im not guilty at a trial.