Moonlight Graham

This was inevitable. Now it gets interesting.

That girl is obviously amazing, but she's a robot. A trained monkey who is very technically proficient at playing somebody else's work. Like Shwa said, let's see her when she's older see if she can write. Hendrix isn't my #1 all-time fav guitar player, but the man can rake the axe like a God. I respected him even more when i started playing. There are guitarists who can play much faster or are have surpassed him in technical skill, but he is easily one of the most creative & artistic guitar players i've ever heard. The electric guitar is an extension of his body, and every note drips soul. Listening to a song like Voodoo Child, he's just raking with that insanely high gain & distortion it sounds like lightning striking a scrap-metal yard. I would say classical is more technical, but in a way they are different instruments with different sounds and playing techniques. But you can't say who is "the best" guitar player, it's all subjective. There are so many amazing guitar players who are nobody's that never got on the radio. My opinion is that great guitar players aren't the most technical, it's all in how they make you feel when they play. Yngwie Malmsteen may play at the lighting speed and be a technical god, but i think most of his performing/songs are self-indulgent crap. The Edge is one of my favorite guitarists, and he is nothing special technically at all, but few play with as much emotion and the man never wastes a note. I have other favorites like Tony Iommi (the God of riffs!), Kirk Hammett, Neil Young (a mad-man on the electric), Jimmy Page etc. all different reasons.

That's because... ...it hasn't even been written yet! WHAT?!??!?!?

That's the dumbest video i've ever seen! Almost all those songs were covers that Zeppelin did. Yes its true, bands sometimes do covers. As for The Who, i love all things rock and classic rock, but The Who and Pink Floyd were 2 of the big classic rock bands i just never really got into much. They are ok, and have some decent songs, but just don't do a ton for me.

Words of wisdom: "Religion is like a penis. It's fine to have one, it's fine to be proud of it. Just please don't wave it around in public or try to force it down children's throats."

What a crock. What is "your country"? Current borders? 1967 borders? 1948 borders? 1882 borders? 2000 years ago "borders"? People with your mindset are why this conflict persists. Selfish, inward-looking people not seeing the legitimacy in the other side's claims.

Agreed.

What i don't understand is that if God is all-powerful, why doesn't he just stick Satan in a jail-cell in heaven? Why does he let Satan walk around and cause all this "evil".

I don't understand this. Marriage is a legal contract. Doesn't the state need to be involved?

I never suggested such. What i said pretty clear, which is that if a man and a woman choose to engage in vaginal sex, they should be weary of the consequences/responsibilities and be willing to accept them. I guess what i'm saying is: Having sex for pleasure is fine, but if someone gets pregnant then "cowboy up" and take responsibility. ie: don't kill the baby. If you can't handle the risk of a having baby (whether raising it or giving it up for adoption), then don't fuck. Or have one of the partners sterilized. As an aside: The original biological purpose of sex was to produce babies. Evolution/natural selection made so that sex is very pleasurable for both sexes in order to ensure the creation of many offspring among humans so that the species will survive/thrive. For most of human existence, sex often meant getting pregnant. Humans in western society socially adapted to this fact by establishing the social norm of "not having sex before marriage" in order to avoid unwanted pregnancies. Thanks to the wonders of modern technology, modern forms of contraception have been introduced, which has meant that people can have sex simply for pleasure without much worry about getting pregnant. Also thanks to modern technology, safer abortions can now be performed. At some point in the last half-century, people have gotten used to having pleasurable sex without pregnancy, to the point where pre-marital sex is the new social norm. Now many people feel such is their right to have sex simply for pleasure, and that if there is an "accident" they are morally justified in killing the offspring early in the pregnancy. We all have different opinions on the issue, and mine is that killing a fetus/embryo is morally wrong, except where there is risk to the mother and possibly in cases of rape and incest. Except when the woman doesn't want the child and she chooses to kill it before it is born? No, more like sex for pleasure, but with small risk of procreation. I disagree. Except in cases of rape/incest/risk of mother's health, the choice to abort is usually a cop-out. It is the most convenient choice for the mother/parents, and the most inconvenient choice for the child. If she wants a 100% guarantee of not having a baby, yes. Either that, or get sterilized or have her partner sterilized. What about the child? What is right for the human life created? Getting pregnant when you don't want to sucks big-time, that's for sure. What sucks more is being killed. I'm not forcing my opinion on anyone, just expressing it. I'm not taking away any choices from anyone. We both live in a democracy, 1 person 1 vote. I have 1 vote, so does anybody else.

I completely agree. This is the only way i see a national childcare program working. I think that is a bit much. I would definitely cut back on the years of such a plan. By the age of 6, kids are already in school all day anyways. This would still be so expensive, i don't know how we would fund it.

Can you prove thus? The 1995 referendum says you're wrong.

Very interesting indeed. I have always been of the belief that we will discover intelligent alien life in other solar systems using telescopes on earth or around earth's orbit, rather than what you see in Hollywood movies with us being visited by alien lifeforms or having radio signals bounced back at us etc.. It may even be in my lifetime that we have a telescope powerful enough to detect suitable planets and actually witness other alien species and/or civilizations on the surface! I don't really have any huge fascination with humans colonizing other planets, though it would be nice to have a backup. I'm more interesting in the scientific discoveries, and the possibility of visiting these planets. I'd be content though by simply watching these planets from afar and learning so much.

There's more than one Constitution Act. And the U.S. Bill of Rights was greatly influenced by the English Bill of Rights 1689 as well as the Magna Carta, not to mention the U.S. Declaration of Independence and Constitution greatly borrowing from European liberal/natural rights writers/philosophers etc.

Yes, this is an unfortunate risk of sex for pleasure. They do, but it is still a choice. People are "human", meaning humans make mistakes, but if you make a mistake by your own conscious choice then there is a price to pay. I have no sympathy for people who use this excuse. If someone doesn't want a baby, yet is stupid enough to be involved in a penis going into a vagina without proper protection, they should pay the price, not the new life. True. But a woman still has a choice to allow the penis to enter her vagina or not. If not, that is considered rape, which is a whole other ballgame. No. A woman should know the risks and responsibilities that comes with a penis entering the vagina. The man should also. As i've stated, having sex comes with the known risk that the woman can get pregnant. This is a choice. One that is not considered seriously enough by many people. Well, i will say that i know having an abortion is not easy. But for those that have an abortion it is a lot easier than having a baby, otherwise women wouldn't make that decision. This is just my opinion, others like yourself of course will disagree. Hot button issue!

Nobody "forces" women to do that. That is their choice. It is also their choice, except in cases of rape, to allow a man to insert his penis inside her vagina, and without proper protection on both sides. The whole "pro-choice" thing is contradictory to me, because it seems women have the power to make several choices that decides whether a baby being conceived or not. Women just do not want to accept the responsibility of their choices.

The difference is that traditionally women stayed home to raise the kids while men provided income or worked to provide goods/services. Now both men and women work, leaving the kids to be raised by daycare centers. The rising cost of living has certainly compounded this problem, but at the same time the rising cost of living is due in part to the extra income afforded by dual-income families. The cycle helps feed itself. The rising "cost of living", compared to say 60 years ago, is also due to everybody wanting material things that are deemed "essential" now, whereas 60 years ago people got along just fine without them. ie: televisions & cable in multiple rooms, microwaves (along with tons of other electric kitchen appliances), VCR's/DVD/Blu-Ray players, video games systems, cellphones, ipods etc.

Nationalized daycare is a disgusting slippery slope. There should be some social/economic help for poor parents, especially single mothers, but for a family with 2 parents, one of them should stay at home. Parents should raise their own damn kids, or at least have the grandparents or other family member help out, not hand them over to strangers and/or the State and have them raise our kids. It SICKENS me. Along with this prospect that both parents wish to work in order to afford whatever material goods they feel they need or to maintain/pursue their careers. F*** careers, f*** "material wants". The #1 priority for parents should be their children, and the best thing for children (unless there is abuse/dangerous neglect) is for them to be raised by their parents, at least in the first few essential years of life until they are old enough for kindergarten. If a family has go without cable TV, a nice car, summer vacation out of country, cigarettes, or the latest Blu-Ray release etc. in order to stay home with their kids for their first few years of life, then that seems like a very reasonable sacrifice. I'm very glad that women have more rights and opportunities now because of the modern women's movement, but this same movement is also responsible for helping to corrode the family unit. Women now want full careers and a family. They want to have their cake and eat it too. As long as one parent (mother or father) is home with a young child, that's 100% fine with me. But let's face it, a child needs its mother. If people think that's sexist, that's because it is. Kids don't come out of a man's vagina or suck on their father's boobs for a reason. But a father staying home is still 100% preferable to handing the kid over to a stranger/the state for the majority of their day. That's sick, it's not natural, it's not socially/developmentally healthy. I like the stance that the CPC has taken on the childcare issue. Letting them have a choice is good. But parents may need more money from the tax benefit. That is a separate issue. If a child is being abused and/or neglected, then that is an issue for the authorities such as CAS or whomever. The solution is NOT to simply shovel children off to be raised by strangers in daycare because some people are "bad parents". You're essentially calling for part-time foster care. These parents who have not learned how to properly care for a child should then have access to government programs where they can learn these skills while still being able to raise their children at home. There should also be adequate economic assistance and any other social assistance they need. I think many of your solutions to problems on this matter are ass-backwards. Daycare should be a measure of last resort for parents, and parents raising their children should be priority #1. Unfortunately many do not think like this anymore. This whole topic just sickens me.

edit; double post

Colleges/universities are businesses. They want more money, they want more profit.

Ya, i trust her...for now. But 5 billion for a building is INSANE!! You could raze and rebuild the entire building for much less i'm certain. In comparison, a modern 1st-class major league baseball stadium costs about $500-600 million to build (US money). Maybe the price of copper has gone up to $50 an ounce?

Awesome. 1 punch = 1 month & a fractured face. My link

Facebook is not a scholarly source.

We receive some of our morality from our parents, but certainly not all of it. Society itself plays a huge role as well. Friends, educational institutions, the media etc. play a tremendous role, especially as youth begin to naturally rebel from the shackles of their parent's iron fist in their teenage years. Change/progress in society depends on people disagreeing on the morals/ethics or their parents. The fact that the young Ms. Barbara Bush has taken an opposite stance on gay marriage as her moronic father is wonderful sign in her development as a human being. The more she disagrees with her jackass of a father, the better off she'll be. Every decision i make in my life begins with the question: "what would George W. Bush do?". After i have the answer, i then do the exact opposite. It's the secret to happiness & success.

I think you take the fact that you can read, write, and do basic math too much for granted.