Reegar

Aww. Too cute! Thanks for sharing. :)

Much appreciated, Warbler. And I am sorry for your loss.

I placed his unsnapped collar at the base of a decorative oil burner. It reminds me to practice humility.

I once criticized people for being close to their pets. I saw them projecting human emotions and thoughts into animals, and reminded them that dogs and cats are incapable of our higher cognition.

And then someone dumped a puppy on me earlier this year. I tried to live by my own words. I taught him his name and trained him to potty outdoors and treat others gently. I played with him often, cared for him, but all while trying to stay distant. I thought I had. After several months, the dog began to suffer from a digestive ailment. It was a slow death. However long he had left when I chose euthanasia was too long.

I felt numb until later that night when I left my bedroom to make some coffee. I looked at the couch, his favorite sleeping area. He should have rushed over to me as usual, but he was gone. A few minutes later I was weeping like a child.

I was ashamed that his death had more an effect on me than some people that have died in my life. I had fallen into the same trap that I'd been disgusted with others for falling in.

He lived less than a year. He was a dog. But he taught me some profound lessons about myself.

Anyhow, do you have a pet?

I also think it has to do with the waiting period for Episode VII. It happens in threads following the production of superhero films on SHH. When there's nothing left to talk about, people grow restless and start going for throats.

That image warrants a psychological health warning sign before viewing. Oowww.

What does the prevalence of futanari say about heterosexual males?

You know what I'd like to know? What is the general consensus of the 'New Jedi Order' series on this forum? Were the Yuuzhan Vong an original and bold move, or misguided?

^ The council wants you to keep them informed on all of darklordoftech's dealings.

Tobar said:

luckydube56 said:

Into Darkness, on the other hand, lacks the charm of the first film.  It seems half finished. 

 Lindelof didn't do any of the writing for the first film. We also have him to thank for Cumberbatch being Kahn.

 I'm going to call him "Cucumber" and be done with it.

This 07jonesj has impeccable preferences in video games and asari.

darklordoftech said:

I like the Plagueis novel. It provides much-needed info about Palpatine and Sofo-Dyas.

Darklordoftech likes something in the EU?! I finally have my job-winning article for the Daily Planet!

Thank you for the responses, Darth Ender.

Jaitea said:

darth_ender said:

The man essentially said the church doesn't have priestesses because women are too busy with the important job of mother. His wife was the "home manager".

 That's his view.  The real reason is, well, to put it frinkly, because God said so :P

 Now I don't want you to think this is me on my high horse again,......but this type of answer was what I found on the LDS site & the reason why I annoyed you earlier,.....it's the 'don't ask' or 'just because' reasoning.

I have 2 kids, if my son asks me for £10 and I ask him what he wants it for and he answers,...'just' or 'because',..... those aren't proper reasons,.....I'll press him until I find out what it's for, then I'll make a decision whether I give it to him or not.

I hear parents giving reasons to kids why they aren't allowed to do things or have things with, 'because I said so!'....this isn't an answer, it's a don't bother me response....It's better to give a reason why you think that what they want is too expensive or what they want to do is too dangerous etc.

The explanaton why women can't be priests in the Catholic Church has an explanation, which you can reason with, you can question that reason because of the changes in society today,.....but the explanations in the LDS to coffee drinking, women priests etc as 'The Lord says so'......to me......personally......sound half baked.

I have known you and respectected you for a few years _ender, and I know you are a wise and intelligent guy, but what harm would it do if you question.

In the Protestant Church I remember that the Lord encourages people to question, not just to follow.

Again, I'm trying not to push too much, just for you to take a step backwards to look at it from my perspective, I know you love your faith

J

 To be fair, Mormons do question and speculate. Even structured classes could turn into theory fests at the drop of a hat, especially where it concerned the universe's distant past or the afterlife (terrestrial, telestial, celestial kingdoms, the process of exaltation, etc.) You are allowed to ask off-the-wall questions, but there won't always be solid answers.

Protestant churches generally discourage that, because most are too wrapped up in ostentatious worship.

The area where I could see questioning being met with rebuke or the cold shoulder would be skepticism of the BoM, PoGP, or D&C. If you're already baptized, that is. Because to be a Mormon is to have a testimony of their validity.

(And yes, to be as balanced as possible: I did notice a tendency to be harsher with Genesis-Revelations than any other scriptures. I suspect you could probably get away with being dismissive of a few prophets or books there, but I don't know for sure.)

SilverWook said:

Reegar said:

SilverWook said:

I saw ACC figurines in a gift shop last night. Nothing enhances your holiday decor like a figure of Christmas Present showing off the little friends who live under his robe. ;)

That scene really creeped me out in the George C. Scott version. Do any other filmed versions include it?

 The ghost of Christmas Present is freakier than Christmas Future because of that scene. It was very random and unsettling.

"You're a jolly, fun chap! We should hang out more! Huh, what was that? You're. . . you're hiding starved children. Under your robe. Oh. OK, well. . . I'll call you sometime. Yeeeeah."

 Scrooged's Ghost of Christmas Future does give him a run for the money though. ;)

 Oh my. I'll watch that!

My magic tears can make dolphins talk, SilverWook. I'll ask them to save us from the criminal sharks and find your DVD.

DuracellEnergizer said:

That depends on how you define "ambivalent". Properly defined, "ambivalent" means to have mixed feelings, but many use it as a synonym for "indifferent".

 Reminds me of the word "bemused". Means "confused", but the common usage is becoming "mildly amused". And to be honest that new definition makes sense.

I asked two women and one man. One woman was my missionary/teacher, the other was a mother whose family drove me every Sunday morning. The missionary (her hand-written lesson notes are stored safely in a box for sentimental reasons) gave a vague, somewhat robotic (if I may) answer about God-appointed authority. The mother did the same, but afterward in privacy elaborated on her answer by saying that once I enter the Temple, I'll see that there's more to it. 

The man essentially said the church doesn't have priestesses because women are too busy with the important job of mother. His wife was the "home manager".

The major church leadership is the Prophet/President, then the Quorum of Twelve, and then the Something of Seventy-Something. All men.

Women often teach Sunday School with males as students, and there's the Relief Society (was never sure what the RS did). But that's more on a ward-basis.

Your post did make me scratch my head. :)

SilverWook said:

I saw ACC figurines in a gift shop last night. Nothing enhances your holiday decor like a figure of Christmas Present showing off the little friends who live under his robe. ;)

That scene really creeped me out in the George C. Scott version. Do any other filmed versions include it?

 The ghost of Christmas Present is freakier than Christmas Future because of that scene. It was very random and unsettling.

"You're a jolly, fun chap! We should hang out more! Huh, what was that? You're. . . you're hiding starved children. Under your robe. Oh. OK, well. . . I'll call you sometime. Yeeeeah."

I stopped watching Mythbusters after the Batmobile episode. I thought some detail in the experiment was blatantly flawed. Don't remember what it was, I'll go back and watch it again sometime.

I can't tell you how many times I've had to look up the specifics of lay/lie. I know laid is for setting down objects, then lie is for your body, but lay is past tense of lie, which makes me think of dishonesty.

It's like Mr. Plinkett trying to figure out Qui-Gon and Watto's deal in TPM.

You would really walk around saying "I saw an possum"?

I'm sorry, but that does not even deserve to be a question. Even if it were technically incorrect, I would still say "a possum". 'O' taken away for phonetics.

If I were typing it, "an opposum", because again, the opposite looks awkward.

You are welcome to begin sentences with conjunctions.

Could be wrong, correct me if I am, but aren't recent studies finding male and female brains far more similar than previously thought?

Even if that were the case, the issue is only peripherally related.