|
|
Post by perhapsormaybe on Mar 24, 2009 8:39:02 GMT -5
New Jersey, eh? Maybe. Problem is, she's in the army....that makes it a lot harder to get to her.
So long as your paperwork is getting done, I don't think it matters too much.
|
|
|
|
Post by perhapsormaybe on Mar 25, 2009 12:51:38 GMT -5
Can someone please get "This is the Day the Lord Hath Made" out of my head? It's driving me crazy....
|
|
|
|
Post by Lady Lasa on Mar 25, 2009 12:54:22 GMT -5
Just go stare at the Kevin reveal for a while. That should clear your mine.
Or just go see what I've been listening to in the Music section and youtube some of them.
|
|
|
|
Post by perhapsormaybe on Mar 25, 2009 13:07:03 GMT -5
I think I'll do the second option....hmm...I have my cd player in the livingroom....and for whatever reason, I'm a dorky Phil Collins lover...I should just play that. *sings "Easy Lover" to herself*
|
|
|
|
Post by fierysue on Apr 21, 2009 22:41:44 GMT -5
Seeing as we've got off topic, I'll make it my personal mission to get us back on topic (heh, irony, because I'm the most likely person to go off-topic - and I'm doing it again. OK, back to the topic -)
Why are superstar celebrities so grossly overpaid? Some of them don't give back (of course, giving-back celebs like Angelina Jolie, Sandra Bullock, Leonardo DiCaprio, etc. excluded), and just destroy themselves with booze and lay up on the criminal records. What about those people who DO give back to society? Who actually change the world? Like scientists or intellectuals, some authors (after all, reading books DOES change and influence the way and how you think)?
Err, too many questions there...
|
|
|
|
Post by Lady Lasa on Apr 22, 2009 7:25:05 GMT -5
I'll sum all of those questions up with one easy answer: People are stupid.
On that topic...
Why do people think they have the right to decree how others should live their personal lives as long as no one is getting hurt?
|
|
|
|
Post by perhapsormaybe on Apr 22, 2009 12:32:50 GMT -5
A sense of personal entitlement, usually. Or believing that they know better.
How can it be constitutional to ban gay marriage? Everyone I know who is against it is because of religious reasons, but we're supposed to have separation of church and state, and the right to pursue happiness, so how can the government have that right?
|
|
|
|
Post by Lady Lasa on Apr 22, 2009 12:48:45 GMT -5
That's such an issue with me... I'm a firm supporter of gay rights and that just makes me furious.
|
|
|
|
Post by fierysue on Apr 22, 2009 21:22:56 GMT -5
What annoys me is intolerance. I mean, you don't have to agree with everyone, but you can be accepting. Nor can you dictate how a person should act, talk, think, behave or live their life (unless you're their parent or relative, and then only up to 21 years of age). Things may not be a cup of tea for you, but unless you can give valid arguments for your point of view - well, sorry, without that you don't really have a point do you?
I suppose it's different for US, but in many countries (especially Muslim countries), religion and state are usually unified so that religious laws are placed in effect. For Iran, this is something that the whole country has voted for with an overwhelming majority, although the problem is that religion can be interpreted many ways. For example, wearing the veil or what Iranians call chador can be interpreted as Islamic although this tradition actually stems from a pre-Islamic era in Arabia, and the Qur'an does not specifically state to cover your whole body - only to cover up your breasts and hide your ornaments (this isn't a word for word quote, so be wary, if you guys are interested in the exact translation I can look it up somewhere). It's only the hadiths (sayings of the prophet which may or may not be true as time tends to change everything and only the Qur'an is protected by God - according to Islamic belief) that says everywhere except hands and face, and even then some extremists expect women to cover up completely. So even though I don't mind the union of religion and state, I do wish that they could give lax in how the religion is interpreted (although, I must say compared to what I read in Azar Nafisi's Reading Lolita in Tehran, the Fashion Police - I do not kid you. They have that there, although I have not encountered them, because when I dress, I dress pretty conservative anyway, and I never let a strand of hair out of place, because what's the point of wearing a scarf if you don't wear it well. However, if you look at the way some Iranians dress, they wear REALLY REALLY tight fitting coats, with skinny jeans and 5" heels, and have visible spray-tan and a scarf that barely covers the head, allowing all their bleached-blonde hair - Nickelback reference! - teased up under to show - and they don't get into trouble. I guess they can make fashion statements as long as they 'appear' to cover up. Seriously, they looked like they were living in California - although that may be a bit far. I've seen Iranians in California, and they don't dress half as - well, they wear loose T-shirts, no scarves, jeans, you know the type, but they're certainly not as primped as the girls in Iran).
Wait, I am seriously off-topic here.
What annoys me to no end is how other countries dictate what other countries should be doing, or double standards. The HRW raises a hue and cry whenever Iran commits what they consider a human rights violation, but what about other countries? I'm disappointed in the US (partly because of my dual citizenship, I hold a US passport and it annoys me when I can't help but to criticise both my countries), because what about their human rights violations, especially concerning the infamous Guantanamo Bay and other torture methods of interrogating by the CIA (and they actually seem to condone it, although to be fair, Pres. Obama is trying to tone it down, although from what I've heard, it still isn't working)? Or Israel's infamous bombardment of Gaza. How can they justify it? Approximately 1350 Palestinians died then, compared to less than 20 (mostly soldiers, I say mostly because I'm not sure whether it's all soldiers or not, I think it was 13 actually who died) for Israel. And they saw it wasn't excessive force? OK, fine, but did one-third of them have to be CHILDREN? Mind you, we're not including the women and senior citizens not part of Hamas, and if we did, we'd get a higher number of civilians killed. There is also strong evidence that they ALSO used white Phosphorus, which is extremely harmful and should not be used on densely populated areas. Add that to the blockade - Israel did not allow aid to reach Gaza throughout the siege, resulting lack of food, water and medical care to reach Gazans. And this isn't the first or last.
Note that I do NOT on ANY account, condone these human rights violations. I oppose anything that hurts other people. In my book, they're all wrong, and ALL need to admit it and change it for the better, not pointing fingers at another country's HR violations when yours is just as tarnished.
I'm sorry if I offended anyone yet again. It's just - when I remember seeing the wounded bodies and corpses of those poor children, you'll know what I'm talking about. I'll try not to describe it further - I'm getting too emotional.
Point is, why do countries dictate what other countries can or cannot do? After all, if you are allowed to do it, why can't I? What makes you more special than I am.
(Another example is US, Israel, and pretty much all of Europe and Australia against Iran nuclear power. Let us note that the IAEA has not found any evidence of Iran producing nuclear weapons. I'm still not sure why US & co. are against it, especially when US is the first and only country to use the atomic bomb (TWICE!) and both US and Israel have nuclear weapons. Seriously. But let's not get into it - already this is too long a post and may push some buttons.)
|
|
|
|
Post by perhapsormaybe on Apr 23, 2009 10:53:53 GMT -5
Again, nothing offensive in what you're saying, fierysue.
Soooo....why did they choose to make Barney purple? My neice has been having nightmares that she claims are about pink dinosaurs, and I think it's Barney's fault.
|
|
|
|
Post by fierysue on Apr 23, 2009 12:46:08 GMT -5
Awww, I loved Barney! I think they chose purple because no dinosaur they knew was purple with green spots and he's so freakin' cute. My Barney plushie, I mean. Because I'm a pack-rat, I might have it around somewhere, but no, I don't play with it any more - I'm proud to say that I haven't regressed so far back to that level...  |
|
takashirika
Plumber in Training
I do not know what to do for my future career! @@
Posts: 81
|
Post by takashirika on May 8, 2009 22:11:13 GMT -5
Didn't Barney get cancled? I heard it was because during a live show and then he accidently tripped and swore...And yes, WHY IS Barney purple? I don't think in real life, dinosaurs are purple, green maybe, yellow, possible, but they do NOT have spots...Why did they even make Barney?(would this be asking too much?)
|
|
|
|
Post by perhapsormaybe on May 29, 2009 16:17:03 GMT -5
I don't know...why did my 1st grade teacher give me a bad grade on a dragon coloring for making it pink? She told me dragons aren't pink, but seeing as they don't even really exist, that's pretty stupid...I'm still annoyed about that, even after all these years. ....I need to let things go.
|
|
jennlevin
Plumber
Mr. Smoothie's makes everything....worse.
Posts: 119
|
Post by jennlevin on Aug 12, 2009 19:41:01 GMT -5
Well, according to research, the colour of any dinosaur has NOT been determined, so even if you coloured a Parasauralophus magenta, with green stripes, yellow spots and cyan speckles, it'll still be correct. For now. XD
Going ontopic, where did that high-pitched scream you always hear in cartoons originate from? (y'know, the one like when the boy goes into the wrong bathroom or something....that's why I call it a 'girl toilet scream')
|
|
