Albert Flasher

[QUOTE=Retribution][size=1]Alright, metaphor wasn't the correct term. I guess I mean that the authors said that it occured in seven 'God days' which represents something much greater than we can fathom. Imagine being some poor old peasant who has trouble counting the number of rows you've plowed in a day, and now you're being told that some higher power created everything in this vast, immeasurable span of time. I'm just saying there might be a reason why the word 'day' was picked.[/size][/QUOTE] [COLOR=Sienna] Hmm... I understand where you're coming from, but wouldn't that mean that more or less everything in the bible is the same way? That everything was altered, eiter exaggerated or what-have-you? Wouldn't that mean that the very integrity of the religious text is suspect and therefore unreliable? That's what it seems like to me. [/COLOR]

[QUOTE=Retribution][size=1]What's preventing a sophisticated society from articulating something in the form of a metaphor? Jesus spoke in parables to let peasants understand his revolutionary message, could this not be the same? And, inevitably, the other half of this is [i][b]faith[/b][/i]. There is no conclusive evidence for the existance of a God, however, Christians find comfort in the Bible. While it isn't a loudspeaker straight from God to us humans, it is as close as humans will ever get.[/size][/QUOTE][COLOR=Sienna] I don't see how it was a metaphore. If it WAS a metaphore, I don't understand why it would be a metaphore - Why would one of the many authors say something occured in 6 days (i.e six cycles of the sun.) when it in fact occured in 6 billion years? I mean, that just plain doesn't make sense. Faith is something I could never understand, and most likely never will. I guess that's just me. I understand that the absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence, but I don't see absence of evidence as conclusive evidence of existence either. Edit: The Bible isn't ALL 'Love thy neighbour' etc., especially in the OT. I mean, come on, that was basically one genoicide after another. When god wasn't trying to drown all life on earth, he was throwing people into firey pits for using incense. And there are quite a few little quotes that aren't exactly neighbour-friendly... specifically "If a stranger comes at night, he shall be put to death." I'm not saying it's all "fire and brimstone," but it's not all lovey-dovey either.[/COLOR]

[QUOTE=Retribution][size=1] I suppose that it's easy to trivialize the accomplishments of the Middle Eastern peoples. While Europe was just a mass of dirt, the Middle East was progressing in the fields of math, science, medicine, architecture, etc. In addition, the Bible is rather eloquent. My point is: do you think that such a collection of books could be written by some primitive savage? Do you think that such eloquence would belong to such a person? No. And if the answer is no, do you think that such an eloquent author (or group of them) would be able to comprehend the concept of "time"? Of course. And if they can comprehend the concept of time, it isn't too huge an assumption to say that they could fathom manipulations of it, just as we're doing now. I grow weary of all the attempts to refute the Bible. If you see it as a dusty book that should belong in the fiction aisle, that's great. All debates of religious nature dead-end due to the fact that one side is rooted in the unseeable and the other side demands physical proof (and they don't buy the whole Jesus bit).[/size][/QUOTE] [COLOR=Sienna] I meant primative as in 'less technologically advanced.' I'm well aware that the Mid East was the birthplace of civilization, but they didn't think of time the way we do... it was just "One day ends, another day begins." They didn't comprehend that "6 Days" could mean anything more than "Six cycles of the sun." Much like the Illiad or other such epics, the original story was not so eloquent. The original story was taken by another storyteller who added his own perspective and his own touches. It was also translated many times into many different langauges, and altered by many different civilizations (Most notably the Romans.) so that the modern Bible is significantly different than the ancient one. And BTW... [i]yes[/i] a group of people could comprehend the finer points of language without having a concept of time like we do. They're unrelated in terms of a civilizations development. I probably didn't make myself clear enough when I said "no concept of time."[/COLOR]

[QUOTE=BKstyles]I'd post my opinion but i can't help but feel it won't help the fact that this thread has turned into a "whos opinion is stupider then everyone elses" thread. I've usually stayed away from threads like this but it bugs me wheh these threads are created and people still fall into the trap of engaging in debates with strong potential to become arguments that have lost intellegible meaning. I'll just simply say that this was bound to be contraversial from the beggining since the topic is religion based, and it is almost always going to induce the opinions of ignorant people, defensive people, and passionate people. I for one believe in god, am a catholic, and it does bug me when people simply state there is no god without even having as much as a simple theory for their own beliefs, however rather then joining in i'll just suggest that the thread be closed...but that's just my [I]opinion[/I].[/QUOTE] [COLOR=Sienna] Did it ever occure to you that endless circuler arguements can be fun? At least, I find them fun. Why do you assume that just because we don't present it, we don't have a theory? I don't feel like posting an essay (Because no one wants to read a 10-paragraph theory on why their belief is wrong.), unless of course I'm ASKED to write an essay.[/COLOR]

[QUOTE=The Boss][color=navy][size=1] And Transtic, that is correct. YOUR opinion, however crude it may be in the eyes of others, you should respect the fact that it may insult others by saying such things. Maybe one should consider this thread isn't meant to piss other's off, but simply discuss things in manner by speaking your opinion while having the respect to not insult other's spiritual beliefs, which I feel has been done, however unapperent it may be to you or those who have done so. [/color][/size][/QUOTE][COLOR=Sienna] The way I see it, if my opinion offends others than so be it. I won't censor my opinion just so that I don't offend other people. No matter how offensive my opinion may be to someone, it's my opinion and I'll express it. I feel that's how the world should work. There's to much political correctness and to little self-expression these days.[/COLOR]

[QUOTE=White][color=#555555][FONT=Tahoma]What is it with you and things being laughable? I think you're view on things is laughable. [/FONT][/COLOR][/QUOTE] [COLOR=Sienna] 'Laughable' is a word I'm quite fond of... I also find it helps me describe things I often laugh at. Unless I'm mistaken that is the definition of the word 'laughable.' Also, I don't care if you think my opinion is laughable. Boo, I wasn't referring to 'they' as individuals, I was referring to 'they' as in the Church itself. And I don't buy into the "God has a different sense of time." theory either. Why? Because when the book was writtnr there was no concept of being any other time - the primitive peoples of the Mid East who wrote (And often plagerised) the scriptures which would later be assembled by the Romans into the Bible had no concept of other kinds of time. They didn't have time zones or the same AM-PM system we do, they judged time by where the Sun was in the sky, and it would have never occured to them that there was any other way of telling time. And I know I'll probably be assaulted for my opinion, called ignorant and closed minded for my inability to accept anything even remotly relgious as fact, but the thruth is - I don't care what you think of my opinion. It's my opinion and I won't change it just so I don't offend people - don't bother replying if all you're going to do is call me ignorant and intolerent. [/COLOR]

[quote name='Boo][size=1']It's a matter of interpretation as a lot in the bible is. Not an excuse. [/size][/quote] [COLOR=Sienna] No, it's not. It's easy to pass it off as interpretation, but the truth of it that the Seven Era's theory is just an excuse from Christianity to try and make itself seem even slightly plausable when held up againts evidence. They go along for thousands of years believing one thing, and than all of a sudden their theory is completely and totally obliterated, and they change their beliefs completely? That isn't interpretation, that's called 'dodging.' [/COLOR]

[COLOR=Sienna]Explaining the 7-days theory with the 7-eras theory is just a pathetic retcon by Christianity to try and explain something that is quite clearly ludicrous and insane. The 'theory,' if you can even call it that, has been so terribly destroyed by every possible form of evidence and common sense, it's not even worth debating anymore - it's laughable. [/COLOR]

[COLOR=Sienna]Interesting point... very ineteresting. But it all depends on how you define "tolerance." To me, Tolerance is not neccessarily liking something, but understanding that other people do and you have no right to tell them what to do. To quote Mr. Garisson "Just because you tolerate a bad cold doesn't mean you have to like it." I do agree with you that politic correctness IS wrong. It's gotten to the point where we won't speak our minds for fear of being branded intolerent and racists etc. Tolerance and PC are often confused, but I don't think they're the same thing - like I said, tolerance doesn't necessarily mean liking something. And I don't think it's about things that 'matter' and 'don't matter,' it's more like things either don't effect us, effect us positivly, or effect us negativly. Obviously we're more inclined to tolerate the first two rather than the ladde.[/COLOR]

[QUOTE=Grace][SIZE=1]Erm, no it's not. It's one of the most important events in Christian history (my opinion). And the religion is not funny at all, I don't start laughing at Catholics because their leaders are old, wear big hats, and sit in a room discussing who will be the next "Pope". I don't. I really don't know what your religion is, so I'm not going to go more in-depth into this comment.[/SIZE] [SIZE=1]Have you seen the commercial of two young women sitting in some sort of eating area? One woman (the Mormon) hands the other one a Bible. And tells her that it's good to read, and that she should check it out. Then at the end it says something about this being a message from the Mormons. See? She didn't just barge in there and tell the woman to go baptize herself as a new Mormon now did she? That's how I feel we should feel portrayed. [/SIZE][/QUOTE][COLOR=Sienna] Yea... yea it is. Imagine you were walking around one day, and some guy comes running up to you, long hair astray, nasty smell, crazy look in his eyes, and he starts shouting "Hey dudez! I just talked to Jaybus! I swear man, I was just walking along and than BAM! Jaybus! He told me some crazy things, told me to start my own church! Want to join?!" I mean, would you say "Here's a dollar..." and continue walking, or bow down and start worshiping with him? It [i]really[/i] is funny. And on the other thing... that's called an 'advertisment.' Perhaps you've heard of them? They are designed to paint whatever their advertising in the best light possible? Ever see a McDonalds commercial? They got the holy-grail halo and the beautifully done burgers, they look absolutely awesome - but in reality their grey, droopy, thin peices of tastless garbage. [/COLOR]

[COLOR=Sienna]Interesting points... maybe I'll tone down the anti-hero-ness and make the characters more likeable, especially Robin himself... maybe a "Good guy, bad crowd" kind of scenario. My basic idea was to take one of the original ballads, and take away all the heroic and overblown aspects, but I'll try not to make it [i]too[/i] anti-heroic. I had an idea that, at the end of each 'chapter' (Or perhaps at the beginning of each one.) I'd have Friar Tuck telling the story from the original ballads, all heroed-up and majestic, partly to increase word count, and partly to add to the effect of the story... what do you guys think? [/COLOR]

[COLOR=Sienna]Why do people make fun of Mormons? Because it's so [i]damn easy[/i]. The religion is just hilarious, especially how it was founded. It's tremendously easy to make fun of it - I mean, some guy generically named Joe Smith comes running out of the woods claiming he talked to god at [i]52 friggin people believed him[/i]. That alone is hilarious, but there are a lot of other tidbits that make it the most make-funnable religion on earth (Save the Amish), that's why. I mean... he read some gibberish on gold plated because of 'seer stones' and than told some people about it, and they all believed him. It sounds like a D&D novel or something.[/COLOR]

[QUOTE=Jokopoko][color=teal][size=1][i] and I don't have a weakness like Magneto against Plastic.[/size][/color][/QUOTE] [COLOR=Sienna]Ever hear of Agent Orange? Super powers... well, someone already took a quote from Wonderboy, so that's out (I was going after the power... to move you.)... I'll go with the power to find misplaced items. Things that just disapear without explanation, I'd like to be able to find them. Lost CDs, lost movies, lost keys, whatever. It's really annoying. I just thought of this power because this thread made me thing of Tenacious D, and I can't find my CD anywhere...[/COLOR]

[COLOR=Sienna]I need some help with a story I'm working on... it's an idea I had while watching one of the History Network's many specials on Robin Hood. Basically, I wanted to do a story on the [i]real[/i] Robin Hood. Not the valient bandit with the perfect smile who gave to the poor, the guy behind the legend. The idea is still in the development stages, but thus far, I have the Merry Men, often described as being over 140 men, as a band of 8-9 middle aged bandits living in the stinking cesspit of Sherwood forest. I've essentially decided to do away completely with the perfection complex. Robin himself is a leacherous drunkard (A term you'll hear often in anything I write...) with the aim of a mule and the ego of a king. Friar Tuck is a morbidly obese, poxsmarked man with a rasping voice, who doubles as the gangs bard. Maid Marian is only considred 'relativly beautiful,' as she is only missing a few teeth, and has most of her hair. The Sheriff of Nottingham is a vile, contemptuos catamite who spends a bit [i]too[/i] much time in the council of King Edward I. That theme is fairly reoccuring throughout my idea. I've always felt that the perfection complex takes away from a story, and felt that Robin Hood would be more interesting if it were given a realism make-over, just for fun. I've begun work on a rough draft, but I might need a little help. Basically, any feedback on my idea would be nice, and I'll post my progress as I go along. Thanks in advance...[/COLOR]

[COLOR=Sienna]Jeez, why do I even bother posting... hahaha. [B]Rush[/B] - They've been my favourite band for about 2 years, when they superceded The Tragically Hip (Still number 2!) as my favourite band. I love nothing more than sitting down and analyzing every riff, every drum beat, every cord, every lyric of Rush songs. The sheer musical prowess is enough to draw me to the power-trio. I love all of their work, from their earlier, more mainstream and rowdier works pre-Neil Peart (Specifically Working Man, that song rocks!), to their epic space-operas (2112 and Cygnus X-1 Book II especially), I love it all! Alex Lifeson is god on guitars! And since I want to try something new, I'll talk about my old favourite. [B]The Tragically Hip[/B] - No, they're not some hip-hop group of thugs, as the name would imply. They are an introspective Canadian rock band, fronted by the incredibly charismatic Gord Downie, and highlighted by said front man's incredibly vocal and lyrical talents. It's really a mystery to me why they never became popular outside the US. I mean, it's not like we kept them hidden or something - we put them all out there, and they took a the Barenaked Ladies and Avril Lavign and left the Hip to us. Well, I'm fine with that - this way, their lyrics stay more geared towards Canadians, which is what I love about them. Seriously, they are worth checking out - they may not have the instrumental talents of Rush, but they're just more fun to listen to in general.[/COLOR]

[COLOR=Sienna]This sounds interesting. Although, as I recall, by the time the Roman empire collapsed, Rome was already conquered by barbarians, and the last capital of the empire was Byzantium... but eh, whatever sounds cool :animesmil :animesmil Name: Thomas Earl Codename: Tacitus Age: 21 Origin: Rome Weapons: Ever the traditionalist, Tom uses a simple gladius. Designed for close combat, the gladius is meant to be used with agility and prowess, rather than brute strength. It's hilt is wrapped in blood-red cord, both for looks and extra grip. Armour: Tom hates to be confined by bulky armour-plating, and hates to have his vision impared by a traditional gladiator helmet. As such, he only keeps a shield, much like that of the traditional Roman legionnaires. Past that, he has little in the way of armour - he relies on a simple leather tunic and his agility to protect him from most opponents. Victories: Tom has not faught in as many battles as some other gladiators, only 3 thus far, and he has come out the victor in 2 of them. The other was a rather dull draw that was booed by everyone in the stadium. Defeats: No defeats thus far, unless a draw counts as a defeat. Appearance: *I have a site that I want to get the picture from, but it's having database trouble... give me some time on this one* Personality: Tom is considered by himself and those who know him as a bit of a cynic and a defeatist; he has a habit of pointing out the problems with peoples ideas or plans, or just he people in general. He's also a bit dark, he keeps to himself most of the time, and likes to be amongst his own thoughts. Biography: [Snippet or full bio] *I'll finish this when I have the time, and all the details I need.* [/COLOR]

[COLOR=Sienna]Your description is vague... what kind of bully is he? Is he the kind of person who could seriously end up assaulting you, or the generic insecure type who just throws insults at you? I've delt with both, and know how it is. The severe type - the real losers - are best to avoid. I tried fighting back, and it doesn't help, even if you do kick their ***. Try the age-old practice of 'telling an adult.' Adults generally know how to deal with these problems, and hopefully you can work something out. Now the other kind... the little slugs who constantly throw names your way, who identify the one part of you they don't consider normal and relentlessly assault it. Don't let em' get to you. I don't know, maybe I'm unique like this, but whenever someone said something to me that they intended as an insult, I just laughed it off... because no matter what they say, they're only covering up their won insecurities. You say he lifts weights; why do you think he does this? Either because he has an exceptionally small penis, or because he's completely insecure about his image and the way he looks to other people. He's the pathetic one, not you - as long as you think of it that way, you'll be fine. But like I said, in the rare case the person means buisness, consult your local adult.[/COLOR]

[COLOR=Sienna][B]"Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?"[/B] - Douglas Adams This pretty much sums up my view on religion, and doesn't need a whole lot of explanation. Just because the world is beautiful and improbable does not indicate divine intervention.[/COLOR]

[COLOR=Sienna]The first one that comes to mind is, of course, [B]The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy[/B]. It's simply hilarious. It's a trilogy in 5 parts, and every one of them is gold. I loved the Restaurant at the End of the Universe the most. I've read it over and over and it never gets old. Just the general way Doug Adams describes the universe, and the way the characters act, is hilarious and ingenius. My favourite qoutes... "The knack to flying is learning how to throw yourself at the ground, and miss." "The hung there, much the way bricks don't." And the best quote of all.... "If human beings don't keep exercising their lips, he thought, their mouths probably seize up. After a few months' consideration and observation he abandonded this theory in favor of a new one. If they don't keep on exercising their lips, he thought, their brains start working. "[/COLOR]

[COLOR=Sienna]Name: Elric the Lucky Age: 26 Gender: Male Personality: Elric is a person who is difficult to fluster. Known as a quiet, unflappable, calm individual in serious situations, he is always thinking about his next move. He doesn't like to take orders and usually puts himself in a position to command, but he normally likes to hunt alone. Not necessarily a cold person, when he loosens up or is around his friends, he can be very talkative, especially with some ale in him. Appearance:[URL=http://hyung-taekim.org/displayimage.php?album=18&pos=1]Elric the Lucky[/URL] Style: Elric likes to do things quietly. Generally speaking, he doesn't like to create a huge mess, he doesn't even like to kill people. He prefers to disable the victim and bring them to his employer, since they usually pay more for that anyways. Weapons: Elric carries a large bastard-sword. He prefers to use the spine of the sword to incapacitate, but the blade is more than sharp enough to decapiate or maim. Other abilities: As his name implys, Elric is extrodinarily lucky. I'm not sure if this counts as a power, but it seems as if everything always goes in Elric's favour. This also makes him a very good gambler. Bio or character snippet: *Will finish later*[/COLOR]

[QUOTE=Ayokano]Bukkake isn't that bad. Compared to lolicon/ shotacon or guro/ vore, Bukkake is just icing on the cake. The pun was indented... >.>[/QUOTE] [COLOR=Sienna] No, the pun was friggin nasty! And I know bukkake isn't the worst, that's why I used it as the starting point. I know that if I'm bored or looking for something funny, I go to [[COLOR=Indigo]Link Removed[/COLOR]] and look in the Horrors of Porn section. They take really, really horrific porn and review it, with hilarious results... check some of them out. [[COLOR=Indigo]Link Removed[/COLOR]][/COLOR] [COLOR=Indigo][SIZE=1][INDENT]Cygnus X-1 Although the site you linked to was funny...direct or indirect links to phonographic material is prohibited. ~indifference[/INDENT][/SIZE][/COLOR]

[COLOR=Sienna][B]Andrew Coyne, National Post Published: Wednesday, June 21, 2006 With the just-completed hockey playoffs coinciding this year with the World Cup of soccer, as well as the overlapping basketball and baseball seasons -- also Canadian football, the U.S. Open of golf and, later this week, Wimbledon -- we are afforded a rare, eclipse-like opportunity to compare the major spectator sports at close range. Compare, and declare: There is one game that stands out as objectively, scientifically, mathematically superior to the rest. I am of course talking about "the best game you can name," le sport des glorieux, the gentlemanly sport of hockey. Let's break it down by category. The game. There is more action in five minutes of hockey than in your average 90-minute game of soccer, whose fans live for the moment when, by some mischance, the ball strays within 50 yards of the net. Basketball suffers from the opposite affliction: As the comedian David Brenner argues, they should start both teams at 100 and make the games two minutes long, since that's what every basketball game comes down to. Only hockey combines frequency of scoring chances with difficulty of actually scoring: Fans, especially at playoff time, are kept in a state of near-permanent hysteria, the prospect of a game-altering goal ever present. Hockey is fluid, where baseball and football are static. It has been calculated that a 60-minute football game, though it takes nearly three hours to complete, adds up to no more than about 10 minutes of actual playing time. The rest is huddles, signal-calling, etc. Baseball players spend half of every game sitting around on the bench, chewing tobacco. The rest is spent standing around in the field, chewing tobacco. But oh, the geometry. "The beautiful game?" I'll tell you what's beautiful: a perfectly timed hip check at mid-ice, sending the other player cartwheeling onto his head. It's ice dancing, only with more bruises and fewer sequins. The championship. There is no greater test of endurance in sports than the Stanley Cup playoffs -- four consecutive best-of-seven series, as many as 28 games, each one an all-out war. To be crowned NFL champion, you have to win at most four games, total: about 20 minutes work for the average team member, offensive or defensive, less for those assigned to the risible "specialty teams." Baseball players go through a similar process to reach the top, but, well, it's baseball -- how hard can it be? Basketball? I don't see any playoff beards on those pampered egomaniacs. The only thing I can think of that comes close is the Tour de France -- if there were hip checks. There's also the matter of the cup itself. The Stanley Cup, I have observed, is the object of some considerable fascination, even reverence, among Americans. You can see why: It's the oldest of the major sports trophies, and the classiest. It's not the Burger King Stanley Cup, after all. You're looking for a trophy for your major-league sporting event? Ask yourself these questions. Can you remember its name? (I don't even know what they give the NBA winners.) Can you drink champagne out of it? Does it have engraved upon it the names of every team and every player to ever win it? The culture. One of the oddities of soccer is how light the penalties are. You trip a guy as he's about to kick the ball, and ... he gets to kick it again. If it's a particularly flagrant foul, the referee might show you a yellow card. You trip a guy in hockey, and you lose 20% of your skating manpower for two minutes or more. But then it hit me: It's a matter of incentives. Soccer has a serious problem as it is with players taking dives in hopes of being awarded a free kick. Imagine the operas of agony they would perform if the penalties were more severe. Diving is not unknown in hockey, and may be getting worse, but it's still frowned upon. It's not -- yet -- part of the culture of the game, the way it is in soccer. There's still an honest, workaday quality to hockey, even as played by millionaires. Of course, what I really mean is: It's Canadian. Everyone's moaning about American teams winning the Stanley Cup, Americans taking over our game. I prefer to think of it as an example of reverse cultural colonialism, a little piece of Canadian culture that has conquered the hearts of millions of Americans. Mind you, there is one area where hockey falls short: colourful nicknames. There is no hockey equivalent to baseball's "Oil Can" Boyd or "Catfish" Hunter. Hockey nicknames are formed in one of two ways: by dropping the last syllable of the player's name, or by adding -er or -ie (sometimes by a combination of the two). There's a simple reason for this: exhaustion. It's all a hockey player can do to gasp out "go Wayner" or "attaboy, Mess" between shifts. Baseball players, on the other hand, have all the time in the world. [/B] And there you have it, mathematical proof that hockey is indeed the greatest game on earth.[/COLOR]

[COLOR=Sienna]Hahahaha... this thread has 126 views within 24 hours, a number most thought-provoking and intellegent threads rarley ever reach. Hahahahaha. Just goes to show what a title can do! Anyways, I've seen that fetish, and let me tell you something... it's much worse in live-action porn. Japanese porn is some of the most ****** up stuff you're likely to ever find. EVER. From bukkake (Although I guess that's more Chinese...) to enemas, it's all pretty gross. And I'm into gross, nasty things, and I find that distrubingly sick. [/COLOR]

[COLOR=Sienna]The bar was crowded, smokey, and dimly lit. A band - J'ziz E'bib, as their banner stated - played horribly out of tune music from a stage in the back. Conversations in countless different langauges blended together with the music to produce a very curious, opressive sound that could be found in most bars in the days after the Jedi Civil War. Jeth was sitting at the bar with a glass of juma juice in hand, enjoying the atmosphere, and enduring the stares he always got for his controversial choice of armour. Even before the Mandalorian Wars, people didn't like doing buisness with Mandalorians. Still, Jeth was not going to hide who he was, and wore his armour with pride. He had come to this wallowing cesspit with a delivery of spice from a Hutt on Nar Shadda. The delivery was destined for another Hutt, and Jeth was supposed to meet one of his lackies here. As usual with these sorts of deliveries, the man was late. Jeth hated waiting. [B] "Jeth Ordo?"[/B] A femal voice distinguished itself from the rest of the crowd, coming from the stool to his left. Jeth took a long swig from his glass of juma juice before responding. [B]"You're late." [/B]Jeth said. She was a young human woman, who seemed like a well distinguished individual of much higher stature than the scum who frequented this place. She also didn't look like the kind of person who was usually employed by a Hutt. [B]"My master does not work on your time table, Mandalorian."[/B] She said the final word with a certain distaste Jeth had come to expect from people, and with the arrogance of a noble, or at least someone working for one. [B] "Look, I just want to get this deal over with. The spice is back in my ship, ready to be delivered upon payment."[/B] Jeth said with another swig of juma juice, letting out a satisfied sigh. [B] "That won't be necessary. The spice delivery was just a ruse." [/B] [B] "You lured me here? Why? Do I owe your master some credits? Was there a bounty placed on my head when I wasn't paying attention?" [/B] [B] "Nothing so crude." [/B]She said, as if the suggestions had genuinley offended her. [B]"My master is in need of your... services."[/B] Jeth was genuinley interested; he detested mercenary work, but it was far better than work as a delivery boy for some overweight Hutt. [B] "What kind of payment are we talking about?"[/B] Jeth inquired. [B] "Credits, and any plunder you find while under the employment of my master. And the chance to work for a respected war veteran, not a Hutt or some crime boss." [/B] [B] "You've got a deal, than. Who's my new employer?" [/B][B] "You'll see soon enough."[/B][/COLOR]

[QUOTE=outlawstar69]When I was in my Human Sexuality class, I did a group report on Cohabitation. In short... the way society is evolving, people are more comfortable with this than they used to be. Be forewarned though, people who live together before marriage are more likely to split up than married couples who didn't... I send you the presentation we made, but I doubt you care enough. We did get a 92 on it though. :)[/QUOTE] [COLOR=Sienna]Yea, that makes sense. If they 'shack up' for a long period of time they grow to resent each other. Familliarity breeds contempt, as the saying goes, which is why a lot of married people divorce these days, they just marry as soon as they meet without really knowing each other and than grow to hate each other. When couples last past the 'shacking up' stage than it's safe to assume they're ready to get married.[/COLOR]