:no:
lemmefixthatrealquick.
A state of empowerment would be for the individual woman to achieve.
Certainly, it is not up to someone else to achieve it for her.
However, it is up to anyone to proclaim whether she is or is not; people don't necessarily have sound judgement of...
surprise pogo! :D
jeYDozdlhE0
Toy Dolls Idle gossip - YouTube
SnOmT70JAto
The Toy Dolls - My wife is a psychopath - YouTube
izixOwbtXF0
Toy dolls - blue suede shoes - YouTube
That's actually bad news though. Prior to it, nobody would have even entertained the thought of some people burning forever in hell for having been misguided into not knowing the password.
This is like calling a 50% price reduction on a piece of bread that used to cost 50000$ an opportunity to...
But it's only terrorism if the others are doing it, duh! :cover:
It is forbidden to kill; therefore all murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets. -- Voltaire
^ It's scary how timeless that quote is. But now that I read it again, it's also the reason...
Clearly. It's only abuse or rape as long as someone notices it as such. So for, if someone has sex with a baby from day one, that's a perfectly innocent situation, since the baby doesn't know it could be any other way, until some meanie introduces the evil eye into it.
Exactly.. I mean, I feel that way about feminist issues even as a man.. I don't know what "is good for women", but I have a rough idea of what I think is good for humans, what they're capable and worthy of, and of some ways in which they can get bent without facing up to it. It's much harder for...
"Dont collect data. If you know everything about yourself, you know everything. There is no use burdening yourself with a lot of data. Once you understand yourself, you understand human nature and then the rest follows."
Kurt Gödel
When talking about random bombings, how much sense does it make to bring up the fact that statistically, terrorism is bound to save people occasionally from having to commit suicide which they were about to do, or from becoming a murderer themselves, etc.? Sure it's technically true, but who...
TED? Bleh! If anyone has a good idea, why would they present with these self-important whimps? Even @google talks are a better medium ffs.
^ That's such lame posturing and brownnosing over mere 18 minutes that were clearly too good for those *******, that it actually wraps around from...
That's an outrage! I demand more men to pay for other men to get exploited sexually. Also, what's with the ageism, can we start exploiting the elderly already? It's not fair that 12 year olds make more money for their pimps than 20 year olds. That's just no way to run an economy.
If a reply doesn't make sense, and you, without mentioning that, respond with something else which *also* doesn't make sense, which also is rhetoric, you give that first reply more credit than it deserves... if you know what I mean?
I didn't pay close enough attention to the discussion...
Counting the days until the mic pre-amp arrives.. until then I'll pretend :D
aCxVVjR9FOc
Mr Green - Big Loud (instrumental) - YouTube
nl1yqzgeemc
Rascalz - Dreaded Fist (Instrumental) - YouTube
HsUjBw_auZw
Non Phixion - Refuse to Lose Instrumental - YouTube
That's not how it works. You can dismantle rhetoric with intellectual honesty and solid arguments, not by piling on MORE sophistry.
If someone says the moon is made of cheese, in your mind it's perfectly reasonable to respond with "that's wrong, because it's actually made out of two parts...
I wasn't answering to the poll either way, I was responding to something I found more important.
So in other words, because you didn't understand my objection to what you just said, you'll just say it again. [insert my above post here], haha.
No. A symbol is not the thing. But then again you said "True" and not "true", maybe you didn't mean to say it's actually true...
* How we confuse symbols and things
Ralph Waldo Emerson, "Blight":
*sigh*
We don't even have poets worth **** anymore.