100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
|
Topic:
Would you defend them?
|
|
I've argued with my father in public for making racist and homophobic comments on several occasions.
It's very low. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tongue. I'm not innocent enough to melt over a peck.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Look in the MIRROR
|
|
I was a bully throughout grade and high school. After that I mellowed out quite a bit. I'm sure that Karma is rolling around sooner or later.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Tear it up!
|
|
In that case, I will disagree with you on purpose!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Tear it up!
|
|
I'll take a raincheck, then. You know I like it rough!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
LDR advice please
|
|
Do you have his phone number? If you don't, ask him for it. If he is married or in a relationship, he won't give it to you. If he isn't involved with someone else, then more than likely he is not ready. You never know, maybe he just got out of an ugly relationship and is not ready to start a commitment. There is nothing wrong with waiting a little longer, as long as you know the truth about him. Words of wisdom. No need to go jumping to conclusions if you have something good going on, but at some point you got to take a @#$% or get off the pot. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Tear it up!
|
|
Thanks, kitten. I'll get right on that.
Honestly I was expecting a little more fire from you! You must have a soft spot for Quentin Tarantino impersonators. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Tear it up!
|
|
No takers? I guess that's that, then. I'm perfect.. ha!
C'mon. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's the kind of think people should worry less about saying and more about feeling.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
The last time....You
|
|
I'll keep as much of it as long as I can. Why pitch it? It might be handy to refer later.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Tear it up!
|
|
Alright y'all. I need to get this profile whipped in shape, so I expect you to be as judgmental, harsh and critical as you can possibly be.
Don't worry about hurting my feelings. I already have a massive ego. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Hot or Nice
|
|
I avoid women who are ridiculously hot because it goes to their heads really, REALLY bad.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Body type:
|
|
I don't know what average is. It is kind of pointless, in the end you just go by pictures and bounce that off of what they list to get an idea of what their self-image is like.
I'm pretty muscular but not ripped-out lean bodybuilder so I go with Stocky. In the next year or two I would like to get to where I want to be, wouldn't be that hard to do. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well the point is that the question is so general that there is no room for specific instance. Sure, some guys are 100% about looks. No doubts there. Some guys are 88%, some guys are 43% and some are born deaf, dumb and blind. If I had to rate myself, I'd say looks are about 40% of the equation, and that's being as honest as I can possibly be. You look like Quentin Tarantino honestly. 
I'm actually pretty lucky in that my personality and intelligence are far more interesting than my looks. I consider myself to be kind of mediocre in the looks department, but I have silver tongue when the occasion strikes me to use it. Also, I'm lucky that those are qualities which mature with time instead of fading. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well the point is that the question is so general that there is no room for specific instance.
Sure, some guys are 100% about looks. No doubts there. Some guys are 88%, some guys are 43% and some are born deaf, dumb and blind. If I had to rate myself, I'd say looks are about 40% of the equation, and that's being as honest as I can possibly be. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Are women enslaved to physical attraction? Some are, some aren't everyone is different, you know? That's like me saying that heterosexual women are 50/50 enslaved to money and large penises. It's a factor in the equation, but it's not the entire equation. I dont care about penis size. Its your mouth that is important to me. I dont need Mr. Ed. Blah. Ok, I'll revise it then. That's like me saying that heterosexual women are 50/50 enslaved to money and oral sex technique. it's a factor in the equation, but it's not the entire equation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
sparksley
on
Sun 12/14/08 03:37 PM
|
|
Are women enslaved to physical attraction? Some are, some aren't everyone is different, you know? That's like me saying that heterosexual women are 50/50 enslaved to money and large penises. It's a factor in the equation, but it's not the entire equation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Bush the lame duck
|
|
It would have been so sweet if those connected.. they were right on target, too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What's to teach?
Well, to put my own bias on the block, I think it's great practice for identifying pseudoscience and Christian political agendas. 
Greatest Possible Being is a much more compelling teleology. ID is just more in the spotlight because of the controversy. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The only thing that needs to be taught in schools is how to find information and understand it with a critical eye. Any religious or philosophical bias should be tossed out of public education. Krimsa wrote: I agree sir and a ways back, before this conversation spun off into a torrential disagreement concerning Adolph Hitler's religious beliefs,  I had actually mentioned that.
Even if we did allow for an ID course study as elective, what instructor would teach that exactly? Yeah, I try to avoid arguments about Hitler. Good luck sorting all of that out. As for teaching Intelligent Design, I had a pretty awesome philosophy professor in college who went over multiple creation theories and arguments and discussed the logic behind them quite thoroughly. He himself was an Agnostic, but had enough class to avoid injecting his own opinions into the subject matter. That's the important thing. Oh just ignore the Hitler thing. Its pretty much done unless some choose to continue with it. There is another thread where it is being addressed. College would be different and in that environment, I could see a class on philosophy, woman's studies or religion or ID being taught with no objection. That is not a problem. In high school where funding is limited, I think it becomes more of an issue. If a philosopher could teach the course without interjecting his own opinions on the subject matter, than it might be possible to conduct a fair evaluation of some theories. It would need to be pointed out that the class would address these specific religious concepts and there are others but this is what this class in particular will be focusing on. Im saying if you have to interject religion at all and it might be hard not to in the course outline. Oh I think it's entirely possible to conduct a fair evaluation of any theory with an objective lens. Most of the issues stem from the fact that people already have a religious or philosophical bias they would prefer being taught with the material to their children. That's also perfectly fine, but it belongs in religious schools, not public ones. The way I would teach that in a public school would be to find the most objective text possible, make them read it, make them discuss it, make them learn it inside and out and decide for themselves what it means or if it is worth believing. The most important lesson that I learned in school was how not to believe everything that was put in front of my face. You're very well-spoken and intelligent. That's hot! 
|
|
|
|
|
Previous
