forsaken

I hate people who badger me to tell them secrets that other people have told me. They are secrets for a reason. Merely because you think 'you're not going to tell anyone' but invariably will tell someone else who says 'they won't tell anyone' is not going to persuade me. I hate people who defend a friend or their actions when I have clearly delineated the reasons and clear logicality that leads to the fact that they are at fault. I hate this because it is usually done blindly and with ignorance as a pioneering pillar in their argument.

Similar predicament. Minus the fandom, minis the general life purpose, minus the friendship issues. A week to go. Eurgh.

How many days has it been? 2 or 3? Has it even been that long? 33 pages?! Crazy. Interesting to know what everyone looks like. :-k

28/30, 26/30

Well he's not the one on the defensive, nor does he has to be. Emily is the one who has problems with acknowledging how she feels, Ash has put his heart out on his sleeve already. Thus, Emily has no bounds within which she can complain, because by her own indecision and earlier 'rejection' of Ash, she would be rendering herself a hypocrit. All in all, I think this is quite the satisfying outcome.

Classic case of trying to set an example. Definitely a silly punishment, in light of her circumstances.

This is now my favourite strip of all time. Yeah that was a solid call. 'Cause as we - and Em - all know, the attraction you feel towards a female in direct proportion to the size of their [bleep].

That was one of the most boring world cups I've ever watched. Not even a try.

A scholarship gives money, not school acceptance. They are complaining that money is being given to one specific race. I am well-aware of what they are complaining about: they, however, do not share the same awareness as to the processes involved regarding how scholarships are given, or the basic precepts behind the allocation of money towards these ends. The process is pretty simple and I don't see any evidence that people are misunderstanding the situation. It appears we are reading two different threads.

A scholarship gives money, not school acceptance. They are complaining that money is being given to one specific race. I am well-aware of what they are complaining about: they, however, do not share the same awareness as to the processes involved regarding how scholarships are given, or the basic precepts behind the allocation of money towards these ends.

As many have mentioned, it is positive discrimination, affirmative action - whatever you want to call it. The point of the matter is, it exists to alleviate and balance the starkingly different socio-economical status of 'black people' as a whole as compared to the 'whites'. For those of you complaining that a black person will get into a school with lower grades than you ... Do you even understand what a scholarship is? I wager that you don't, and I suggest you learn just exactly how it operates, because until then, I don't think your worthy of discussing an issue with if you make baseless assumptions like that.

And yet we cannot control mud-hut dwelling insurgents in Iraq, we can't fund our troops properly, etc... Clearly your budget has little to do with your success. I'm not saying America will ever be attacked...I'm fairly sure it will not be, but until then, we'd like to keep our guns just in case. There are many safe-guards to keep people from having guns, and *gasp* they work. Also, how many of the 11,000 are due to people getting guns when they weren't supposed to have them? Probably most. And do you know what? That'd happen ever if guns were illegal. By 2002/03, Australia's rate of 0.27 firearm-related homicides per 100,000 population had dropped to one-fifteenth that of the United States. Country with no firearms, compared to country with firearms. I'm aware that this is a selective statistic, but it's a telling one nonetheless. Also, I find your argument of a few posts ago ... barely worth mentioning. You mention the forefather's, and somehow you - and not everyone else - were given an all-encompassing ability to know the ins and outs of their minds. Also, you ascribed to them almost omniscient qualities. I have trouble taking you seriously. Your comment on how the government never wins against the people. All I can say is: The government ARE the people.

My nickname was first picked up from the Queen of the Damned, specifically, the song named "Forsaken" that - you guessed it - used the word forsaken alot. I thought it was an awesome [and still do] word, so the rest is history, as they say. :)

Why the right to bear arms is still constitutionalised in America, I'll never know. In the modern day and age, that effectively translates to providing a means for people to shoot or kill other people.

I'm studying for my HSC. Evidently, not very effectively.

"Try."

Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 7:43 pm

I don't really like to invite friends over, so you're not alone in that. For me, it's something to do with them having a glimpse of my family life/interaction - something that I feel is private and that I don't want people be privy to. I do however, invite my girlfriend over on a regular basis, because I'm comfortable with her knowing the private going-ons in my family. Thankfully, my parents are fairly easy and pretty modern in their outlook on life; they don't ask awkward questions and they adore my girlfriend. Even so, I rarely discuss my social life in any detail to them. It's just too awkward. As with many other people, I tell them the bare necessities, and that's about it. :P

I think England deserved to win the game on the basis that their forward pack dominated and etc. However, I find their games exceedingly boring cause all they do is KICK. Imo, that's not the spirit of rugby union. It's legitimate, for sure, but ... it's so damn boring.

I was also under the impression that grading essays and feedback were what your teachers were there for. :P

Hahaha, it's almost a motivational speech for YOURSELF! OT: The most daunting experience that comes to mind for me would meeting the parents. Y'all know what I mean. :)

The question is not whether humans are inherently evil or whether they make a choice to be 'evil', but rather if a quintessential, inalienable and unquestionable element of the human condition exists which bonds humans together in a shared conceptualisation of what is indeed moral, or immoral. So it becomes a question of, for lack of better term, divine or universal morality. Does every human share a fundamental 'moral compass'? That is what you should be asking.

You are treating time as if it's a constant - it isn't. Time is a relative concept, in current physics there is only one constant, and that is the speed of light. Theoretically, as an object reaches the speed of light, time dilation occurs for the object and only the object. This means that 'time' would run normally - or as normally as it can - in other frames of reference.

The girl said "I've wanted to meet you since..." therefore it's probably some girl who has heard of Ash's king [or queen] of the mountain status and basically is in awe of her/him.