its frowned upon because some people have a lot of money. They think it adds to their self worth, thats why they constantly try to knock others down about things, theyre constantly trying to make that tactic actually pay off.
[QUOTE="Acemaster27"][QUOTE="Atheists_Pwn"]if the world was perfectly balanced, we wouldhave a hole to breathe out of and a hole to eat. if it was perfectly balanced, then why is our reproduction area basically a human sewage plant as well? no engineer would make things that way. if god made us this way, god is stupid And what about the beautiful elegance of DNA or the mysteries of the brain and the soul? And God who can create that is a pretty sweet God. DNA and the Brain have scientific explainations, and the mysterious that still exist are unexplainable because of human ignorance, not divine creation. Soul? Are you serious?
I always knew it, but needed confirmation. Illegals have more rights in the USA than citizens (except in Arizona yeehaw) and then complain?!??!?! Woah.
Snipes_2
I know right? Have you read the laws if you're caught in Mexico? Even if you are a LEGAL Immigrant in Mexico you don't get nearly half the stuff Illegals get in America. So? What does this have to do with anything? You know the Mexicans coming here are trying to get out of that country right?
the test its self is irrelevant. you may forget something the day of the test that you might otherwise always know, theres too many factors at play. so im okay with someone "cheating" thought out morality comes from logic, which is not subjective, and if anyone tells you it is, they dont know what logic is. however, a lot of our moral beliefs seemingly come from a top down approach as a means of control, often disguised as tradition or culture.
if the world was perfectly balanced, we wouldhave a hole to breathe out of and a hole to eat. if it was perfectly balanced, then why is our reproduction area basically a human sewage plant as well? no engineer would make things that way. if god made us this way, god is stupid
I'm not in an AP class but I am a Java programmer. Java itself is easy but understanding object oriented programming is the real difficulty.
You'll want to brush up on constructors and objects. Don't worry about the petty stuff...
btw
while(YouAreTakingTheTest(){
System.out.println("Good luck!");
}
Wasdie
Anyone can understand that joke Does anyone go nuts when they see { on the same line as anything else? I know I do while(stuff) { } thats how it should be :P I found Object Orient stuff to be easy to understand. But I get it why some might not. If I was a Java teacher I would make people do things without it at first, so that they start thinking of things like "wow it would be great to not have to constantly rewrite this all the time" I think the NEED makes it easier to understand.
Physical attraction isn't even the same as sexual attraction. Let's say I go on a date with a guy: we go to the movies, go out to dinner, make out, and all the while I'm having a great time....and then we go to bed, lie down, and go to sleep. There are many people in these types of relationships, and they're not sexual obviously, because they're not having sex; they're having all sorts of romantic physical contact, but not sex. So you're going to tell me that that guy who is deeply inclined to go out with guys, make out with guys, whatever, but doesn't have sex with him...he isn't gay?
jalexbrown
Not having the sexual part of a relationship does not mean there is no sexual attraction. Physical attraction is sexual attraction. Acting on the attraction is an entirely DIFFERENT scenario. So if I want to make out with somebody, I automatically want to screw them too? That doesn't make much sense to me. I would classify that as sexual attraction.
[QUOTE="Atheists_Pwn"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] Context is key. He was separating sexual from romantic. Not talking about attraction to colors. Context FTW....
LJS9502_basic
Maybe he was. you can still have romantic attraction to someone and have no desire for sexual exploration with them This happens all the time to married couples all the time. You can argue that romance doesnt really work out very well without sexual attraction, which I would agree with, however its not really relevant.Romantic attraction is just a polite way to say sexual attraction you know. Wonderful proof you have provided, good sir. I now accept your view point.
[QUOTE="Atheists_Pwn"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] Well when that individual is talking about sexuality.....then stepping in about colors is incorrect.;)LJS9502_basic
He originally said not all attraction is sexual. Correct? You said it was. ;) Context is key. He was separating sexual from romantic. Not talking about attraction to colors. Context FTW.... Maybe he was. you can still have romantic attraction to someone and have no desire for sexual exploration with them This happens all the time to married couples all the time. You can argue that romance doesnt really work out very well without sexual attraction, which I would agree with, however its not really relevant.
Log in to comment