27 Apr 2008, 1:38 pm
sinsboldly
Veteran
Joined: 21 Nov 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,488
Location: Bandon-by-the-Sea, Oregon
27 Apr 2008, 1:38 pm
27 Apr 2008, 1:45 pm
27 Apr 2008, 1:48 pm
sinsboldly
Veteran
Joined: 21 Nov 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,488
Location: Bandon-by-the-Sea, Oregon
27 Apr 2008, 1:56 pm
Odin wrote:
Mikomi wrote:
Tim_Tex wrote:
Social_Fantom wrote:
I wouldn't expect sex but I would just let it happen if it ever does. 
I meant as opposed to waiting 5 years for marriage, when she doesn't believe in premarital sex--like my second girlfriend.
Come to think of it, I think she may have been an extreme Christian.
I think sex is a critical part of a relationship. I don't think that should wait until marriage. I mean, I have no issue with people who do - that's super if it's for you. However, I don't want any law forcing it...and I swear in the state of Ohio you're gonna get ID'd to buy a freakin cucumber pretty soon.
IMO the "No sex before marriage" thing is a relic from when most marriages were arranged and women were married off at 16. I think a much more appropriate rule for modern society and one that I follow is "no sex until you are in a steady relationship," that is, no one-night stands and promiscuity.
It was all about inheritance and ownership. Back when birth control was controlled by ignorance and a 'sin', and a woman proved her virginity by staining the sheets of the marriage bed with her hymeneal blood, no man that was a man would take a girl that could be pregnant by another, or might even 'compare' techniques and wee-wees.
All this hyper vigilance against sex-toys and 'permissiveness' and (gasp!) same sex relationships is backlash from the 1960's free love revolution. It's a pendulum that swings ( no pun intended) back and forth over the ages in whatever societal culture is involved.
Merle
Mikomi
Veteran
Joined: 24 Jan 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Female
Posts: 753
Location: On top of your TV, lookin' at you funny.
27 Apr 2008, 3:34 pm
27 Apr 2008, 3:35 pm
Mikomi
Veteran
Joined: 24 Jan 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Female
Posts: 753
Location: On top of your TV, lookin' at you funny.
27 Apr 2008, 4:00 pm
27 Apr 2008, 4:30 pm
Tim_Tex wrote:
I base conservative vs. liberal on whether someone watches South Park.
To be honest with you Tim, I didn't think that many people watched that show anymore. I used to watch it but I'm more into Family Guy now. Does that make me conservative?
27 Apr 2008, 4:34 pm
pat666rick wrote:
Tim_Tex wrote:
I base conservative vs. liberal on whether someone watches South Park.
To be honest with you Tim, I didn't think that many people watched that show anymore. I used to watch it but I'm more into Family Guy now. Does that make me conservative?
gasp. Fascist.
27 Apr 2008, 9:35 pm
Xelebes wrote:
Xelebes wrote:
twoshots wrote:
Quote:
Just how are these infinite number of rooms numbered? Are we supposed to rely on transfinites for expressing that?
There is a room 1. For each room n there exists a room n+1 next door down the hall.
If a is next door down the hall from room n , and a is next door down the hall from room m also, then room m is actually room n.
Room 1 is up the hall from all other rooms.
If the person in room n coming out to party in the hallway causes the person in room n+1 to come out and party with them, and the person in room 1 comes out to throw a party in the hallway: then everyone comes out into the hallway to party.
Those rooms are not numbered! You can't label a room with a nebulous 'n' or 'm' and expect it to be numbered as any numbered item must have a label that is a real number not included in the transfinites. Any item that is numbered is finite, basically. Economics, my friend.
Let me explain this further. A catalogue is written of all the rooms - a catalogue must exist for any inventory of items for those who sell, elsewise it is untenable for God and St. Paul to manage. If the rooms are not numbered, there is no problem. But the rooms are numbered, meaning that the items are labeled and are part of the catalogue. If there is an infinite number, how is the infinite size of the room able to accommodate the infinite size of the label and the person within it?
If the hall exists, the label of the infinite room is z. The size of the body, k itself must be fit into it. The size of the room must be z + k, but it was assumed that the infinite room z has the highest number, but the size of z + k is greater than it, unless we swing back down to negative infinites. We must also assume that the label has real size, that each number is meant to be legible. If the label is not legible, the room is not numbered.
...Who knew Hilbert possesses powers even God doesn't
04 May 2008, 3:21 pm
iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius
04 May 2008, 4:27 pm
04 May 2008, 4:35 pm
iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius
04 May 2008, 4:36 pm
Reodor_Felgen wrote:
I think extreme christians take The Bible to literally, even though extreme atheists are far more annoying.
Yeah, they take Dawkins too literally...
Mikomi
Veteran
Joined: 24 Jan 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Female
Posts: 753
Location: On top of your TV, lookin' at you funny.
04 May 2008, 5:23 pm
