DisRuptive1

It's probably cheaper to join a gym.

It is easier to have people dead. It's too expensive to keep them locked up in jails or to have our tax dollars go towards keeping someone alive who will no longer contribute in any way to the human race. Actually the members of her family might go back to contributing as usual if they kill her, and let her parents grieve and mourn. After she's dead they won't devote so much time towards her which can better be used to helping the human race as a whole.

If you ask 10 goths what it means to be goth, you'll get 10 different answers. Although they all seem to shop at hot topic and other like stores so maybe that's what it means to be goth

We've seen that she really can't do anything but the basic functions (breathing, etc.). If she had any thought processes going on in her head, do you really think that she would want to continue living? Even patients who are bed ridden who have to stay in hospitals for all kinds of tests and such can't last that long. Even though they know the medicine is helping them stay alive, sometimes they choose not to. They choose to leave the hospital and at least "live" their life until it is finally time for them to go (such as when the cancer overwhelms them). Certainly they could have lived for another 5 or 10 years but they would have to do it in a hospital, always taking medicine that made their stomach hurt and what not. But imagine what Terri has been thinking (assuming she COULD think). She's been sitting there for 15 years with the same expression on her face, drooling like crazy, and she can't say anything or show any physical sign that something is going on up there. She's probably bored with life, and is willing to let her husband finally put her to sleep. Now I don't agree she should be starved to death. That's torture (imagine if she had the ability to feel and recognize the pain). But if the political people decide that she's going to die, at least do it in a humane way. We don't starve animals, we put them down. Starving Terri makes us believe she is less than an animal.

I've seen some Ex-Mormons for Jesus boards too.

Yeah me too. Luckily I can't see mine. It seems my great mane is on my butt and not my chin.

It's hard for men to shave "back there." It is the duty of the woman, if she finds it offensive, to do it for him. Most men don't care about the hair, it's the women that care. So help your man out!

Her spirit would know. Her body wouldn't, since it has the veil pulled over the atrophied mind. My personal opinion is this. I don't think she should be starved to death. I think that this is just mainly a battle over whether she lives or she dies. If they choose to let her die, don't torter her. Do it humanly and pump her full of poison like they do with guys on death row. Or at least electrocute her to death. Something quick.

I think he has a girl sing for some of his songs I think. Could be another band but not sure. I thought she was cute.

I got spanked for beating up my friend with a wooden practice sword. Crazy ain't it. Getting spanked in order to learn not to hit.

Johhny Dep for the voice?

You're nasty snow. This is Bale.

I thought the movie sucked. And why is guy nudity ok, but girls in bikinis not?

Oh that's right, you said it. I didn't think Christian Bale, I was thinking of the man behind Batman And, not to be rude or anything, but shouldn't we be picking an actor who will portray Joseph Smith as he really was rather than go for a good looking, high priced, actor who looks a bit like JS? I'd be able to accept someone who doesn't look very much like Joseph Smith if they were able to copy my perception of his mood and demeanor and such. Sort of like the guy from the Passion. Even though he didn't look EXACTLY like the pictures we have of Christ, we accepted for the movie, that Christ looked like that since he portrayed the demeanor that we believe Christ to have.

Has anyone said Christian Bale? Plus he'll be known by people. He's the new Batman.

His voice is too wrong, his voice itself totally destroys any chance of us believing that the character he plays is charismatic.

Too bad he's going into the airforce. If he was going into the Marines, he'd be able to kick your butt for that remark.

Brad Pit?

Oh I get it now. As in people who go all the way are more likely to repent than those that only got to 3rd base, right?

Pd, I don't think you are being clear enough. When you talk about sex between two people of the same sex I'm thinking of the opposite sexes doing it the same way. There's obviously a difference when a man's and a woman's frontsides collide versus when the man's frontside collides with the woman's backside. How is this any different than when a man collides with another man's backside? Or is that your question? Is the man-woman situation mroe immoral than the man-man situation? I'm unsure about woman-woman situations

As I said, it probably did. She probably became humbled and learn to do what she did before but using less. She'll be more thankful for her shovel when she spent so much time trying to dig a hole out of prison with a spoon.

No I'm just kidding. I'm TOO smart, and my vision is too good and it would be a waste of all my skills to NOT go into the Marines. But whoever said it earlier they were right, the Airforce is for wussies. The Marines are soooo awesome that they have an extra month of bootcamp because they have to learn all kinds more of different ways of kicking your butt. That's why women like Marines more than anybody else. It's the outfit, not the courage. They love the eagle, globe and anchor.

It was just in response to something you said. You implied that same sex is more dangerous than other forms of sex. Can't opposite sex also be just as dangerous if it isn't "normal" (aka missionary) sex? And (a little off topic here) you're comparing two different things (2 forms of sex) in the same area (both being outside marriage). So you're basically asking which is the greater sin, "normal sex" (basically heterosexual activities) or "abnormal sex" (homosexual activities). Marriage really has no place in your arguement unless one exists within a marriage and one exists outside of it.

There's no such thing as same sex relationships within marriages (as we don't allow gay marriages), so how can those who do it really commit the sin of fornication like with "ordinary sex" as you call it? And what is so bad about fornication? Is it the act of "feeling good" outside of marriage that makes it bad, or is it the fact that you are "baby making" without the intent to make or support babies (as a marriage would help out)? I don't really think you can consider sex a sin in anyway until you first find out why it's being engaged in. And if same sex relationships are bad and the things they do in them "abomidable" then can't you say the same for anything within a normal relationship that doesn't involved the missionary position?

You got to have really, really good eye sight to go into the airforce. I think you have to be smart too. Personally, I'm not smart and my eyesight ain't too good, so I'm heading into the Marines myself.