wrist cutter

[QUOTE=Juuthena]Well, you can't do well at a job you don't enjoy. And if you're not enthusiastic, I don't think it's very likely you'll get promotions too often. But that's just my opinion.[/QUOTE] not entirely true. It's more important I have a job that brings in money, because without money you can't be happy.

Wow, this thread is nearly two years old.

Sounds like an overheating problem, especially if it's mostly happening during games. Either move your computer into the refrigerator or buy a couple more fans for your processor.

I'm not worried about leaving any sort of "legacy". What does it matter if I work as a clerk or I'm some manager in an office? As long as it pays the bills I'm not entirely concerned with the "image" my job puts forth. Most people won't view it as "success" but how successful are most of the jobs people have anyway? Nobody's going to remember you 10 years after you're dead most likely anyway. So I'm not concerned at all with following the path to success, and I expect to amount to nothing.

Many of you are out of high school so you can post on your experiences since then and what you thought you'd be doing back when you were still in high school. For those of you not out of high school yet, where do you see yourselves going, and what do you see yourselves doing after it? What colleges are you looking at, if any? Is it near your house or will you be moving? Are you paying for college or are you going to mooch off your parents? And, once in college, what are you thinking you'll study? Presumably your major will be related to the career you're planning on pursuing. If you're out of high school already, like I said above, talk about what you thought you'd be doing, and then what you actually are doing or have done. This isn't a "what do you want to be" thread, because I'm trying to be realistic. No "moving to Japan to become a famous manga author" or other such nonsensical dreams, please.

Interesting topic. [b]Lone toddler crying in a shopping mall.[/b] I can't imagine being caught in this situation where I am the only one able to help the child. But in the event I was, I probably wouldn't pick up the child or approach him or anything. Because I'm a male I'd be arrested on the spot for predatory behavior. But I might contact a nearby store clerk if no one else is doing anything. [b]First person at the scene of a car accident.[/b] I take it you mean a single car accident (not a collision)? If it's late at night and it's possible for me to safely stop I might. If they're clearly in need of help (waving their arms, or stuck underneath an overturned car or something) I'll definitely try to help, though there's probably not much I could do. At the very least I could get to the nearest phone and call for an ambulance. [b]Person drowning.[/b] As with the toddler example, I can't imagine where I'd be the only one available to help a drowning victim. I'd probably let someone more capable take care of the situation. [b]Obviously upset person running down the street.[/b] Not my problem, unless they run right out in front of my car. [b]Injured animal.[/b] Who cares. I'd let 'em die, or stay injured, or whatever. I can't imagine a rabbit ever doing anything for me if [i]I[/i] were injured.

I just found out Arnold Schwarzenegger supported abortion. I was totally depressed. I totally supported this guy until I found this out. What happened to the badass who killed Predator? Any guy who is badass enough to do that surely wouldn't support abortion. Yeah, so I changed my avatar accordingly. I'm disillusioned.

[quote name='Eternal Snow']I've noticed nowadays that teenagers tend to listen to their friends than their parents[/quote] I've noticed nowadays that teenagers tend to be retards, too.

[quote name='_Yume_']I'm a Catholic. I'm not that into my religion. I don't obey all of our beliefs[/quote] Then you aren't a Catholic.

I actually agree with much of what you're saying James. I get your perspective. I wasn't really trying to debate here, but my point was just that God, if He is as Christianity says He is, will never be proven. Never; because in doing so would also be to tear down a lot of the core beliefs of Christianity at the same time. Either God doesn't exist, or He does and He can't be proven. That's how I see it, and I can't see how it could work that he ever could be proven. Not because it's too "difficult" to prove Him, but because of the repercussions of proving Him. Again, I'm not speaking for all religions with this statement. I can see how you'd think this is just a "scapegoat" philosophy - it's only a way for people to convince themselves of what they believe in. I'm not really going to be able to change that here, but I'm just saying people aren't trying to prove God because those who believe in Him also believe He's not something that can be proven on a universal basis.

[quote name='James]The thing is, you can't have it both ways. You have told me in the past that God exists as a matter of fact. If that is the [i]truth[/i'], then it would be great if it were proveable, so that there is no more need for debate.[/quote] Good point. Perhaps it is a matter of language that is my problem. But does something have to be proveable in order to be true? I'll give you a story I gave Mitch once, maybe it will be effective. Jesus shows up at your door tomorrow. You're a little astounded because He's not exactly a regular visitor. He tells you who He is, performs a few miracles to prove it, and by the end of His visit you're fully convinced He is who He says He is. Now unfortunately you didn't capture this encounter on video and no one else was around to see it. If Jesus left without a trace, your encounter with him is entirely unproveable. So I guess this means it isn't true? Now, we could go into "if there were no other witnesses, maybe it was just a figment of your imagination". But assuming you're a fairly stable person and we're not going to get into an imagination vs. reality debate, then it was indeed a true encounter. It just can't be proven. [quote name='James']By saying that God needs no proof at all, you are essentially having your cake and eating it too. You can continue to say that he exists as a matter of fact, but still feel that you don't need to prove it in any way.[/quote] I can see how someone would feel that way. But put yourself back in the person up above's shoes. No one's going to believe him, of course. However, he's 100% sure it happened - he saw the whole thing with his own eyes. How is he supposed to prove it? If God didn't step in and send down some proof of the encounter at some point, the guy is never going to be able to. So even though he says He exists, he can't prove it in anyway. [quote name='James]So, while I do not deny that God may exist, I don't [i]know[/i'] as a matter of fact. As a result, I'm not willing to say that he does or doesn't exist. I simply don't know. And I'm okay with not knowing. If I find out one day, great. If not, great. Either revelation would be a massive discovery in my life.[/quote] Precisely. If you don't know whether or not He exists yourself, then don't make a decision either way until you're sure of either one. [quote name='James']But the oness is definitely on those should prove God, rather than those who should disprove him.[/quote] That's where I disagree (which is what started my first post). If God doesn't want Himself proven (and He doesn't, or He would've done so by now methinks), then we aren't going to prove Him. It's up to every individual - it's free choice. According to the Bible (which, again, is up to you to decide whether or not to believe), He will make Himself known to everyone at some point or another. It is then up to them to decide from there what to believe. [quote name='James']If you say that one has to believe in God for it to become truth or however you would choose to phrase that, then you are essentially saying that God is either a creation of the human mind...or that objective truth is only what each of us chooses to accept or ignore.[/quote] What I'm saying is what I said above, not necessarily either. I'm saying God will not make Himself known in a universal basis; that is, He's never going to step down and present Himself. [quote name='James']So yeah. I can't speak for everyone, obviously. I mean, vast vast numbers of people believe in God with no proof whatsoever.[/quote] Right. And if anyone had proof, it wouldn't be a choice anymore. Again, it's like saying "I don't really wanna believe 2+2=4 today." But if 2+2=4 couldn't be proven, it would be up to the individual to believe. Why would they believe it in the first place? Somehow, 2+2=4 has gotta reveal itself to the individual. [quote name='James']I'm just saying that in my personal case, I simply don't know if God exists. My only feeling is that "religion" (the organization of religion as opposed to "God"), is a man-made establishment. On that basis I don't disregard it, but I don't take it to be the "truth". Not by a long shot.[/quote] And nowhere am I saying that that is unacceptable. My point was just that proof of God isn't ever going to be published in Scientific American (or Australian as the case may be).

[quote name='James']However, I think that the pressure is on people to prove him rather than disprove him. [/quote] I can't speak for all religions, of course, but as far as Christianity goes, it's never going to be possible to "prove" God. That would take away free choice. After all, if it could be proven He exists, then you would believe in Him no matter what, just as we believe 2+2=4. It would then no longer be free choice, just as believing 2+2=4 isn't really a choice.

[quote name='Chabichou']Honestly, just GET OUT![/quote] As much as I'd like to, everyone would criticize America for pulling out if we did that. They'd sneer at how we start a conflict and then just leave without resolving it. It's a lose-lose situation for us because people are always going find fault in anything we do. Though you're not telling us the whole story. I can't believe 44% of Americans would say they want to restrict Muslims' rights. Did your friend tell you this or something? Was it the result of surveying the anti-Muslim cult or something?

[size=1][color=purple]It's worth noting that anything [i]approaching[/i] personal attack in this thread (even against oneself ;)) will be deleted. I'm looking for honest input here. Thanks. -Lore[/color][/size]

[quote name='ice-kitsune']lol, well actually i dout there is a single person in the world who would not find Gackt attractive. it's just in his nature and all that. he was born with a gift and a talent. [/quote] He looks like he's made out of plastic. Sings like it too.

I wear plain jeans/shorts depending on the weather and plain shirts. Classify away.

[QUOTE=Kitsune-Bito]I'm not one to be fooled, Mr. Samedi, and can do quite a few good impressions. Try not to get yourself netted in by one :smirk:[/QUOTE] And don't count your chickens before they hatch. And don't cry over spilt milk.

My first suggestion is that you use less smilies. Your friend might better cope with the situation then.

My dream job would be getting paid to do nothing.

Way to present a very one-sided story. What concert was it? Who were these friends? How old are they? What kind of kids are they? How late would it be?

I think the only time I've seen one used is by SUGIZO during "LOVELESS". Other than that they're just too unwieldy to use most of the time.

My three picks, in no particular order: 1. Christmas Vacation - best holiday film ever. 2. MST3k: Santa Claus Conquers the Martians - not sure if this counts, but hilarious anyway. 3. Uh... Three Amigos. I can't think of any other Christmas films I like.

omg like i hate lables they're sooooo anoying i hate preps :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :D :D :D :love: :flaming: :flaming: :flaming:

[quote name='sinna]This seems to pertain a lot to my family. [b]They're all overtly cristian so needles to say they are quite racist, sexist (towards homosexuals and the like)[/b'], and they don't like anyone to have any religion but theirs. I think that if the person saying the joke means it not to be a slam towards the race then it's fine, but if they fill it with scorn then they are just really LAME.[/quote] Yeah. People really shouldn't stereotype. That's just really LAME.

Generally I'm the one making jokes. People usually laugh or gasp in horror, depending on how cool they are.