Seriously. 48 hours? I stayed up more than two days OFTEN in HS and College. My record was probably somewhere between 96 and 120 hours. A buddy's parents were out of town, and it was Summer Vacation after our Junior year in HS. We lived in a rural (read: all farmland) area, and we used to entertain ourselves by driving around backroads, trying to get lost, and then finding our way home. We did this for the entire 4-5 day stretch, stopping only to re-fuel at his farm, grab food to eat as we drove, and use the bathroom. When we finally got back the last time, we crashed and slept for somewhere around 36 hours.

No kidding! Those windows are almost impossible to get open when you need to take a leak. Come on, NorthWest, haven't you ever heard of WD-40?!

I'll do you one better: I have a button on my keyboard (above F3) that launches Windows calc. I've found it an invaluable timesaver!

FUD? Are you kidding? 1 in 4 females are STILL being abused sexually at some point in the developmental years, and the number of males being sexually abused is growing. I worked for a Children's Home at one point as a House Parent, and ALL of the residents were sexually abused at some point, boys and girls both.

And if you don't think children of all ages are still being kidnapped, you pay NO attention to news sources, missing children bulletins, or the depravity of the world in general. Maybe next time you can look past your preconceived misconceptions and conspiracies to actually find out the facts for what you're so vehemently arguing against.

Fixed that for you.

That comment is so wrong, on so many levels.

No, no; I think he meant the professional videos, too, not just the amateur stuff.

Obligatory Userfriendly: http://www.userfriendly.org/cartoons/archives/99oct/uf001156.gif

You're obviously not familiar with the current state of mass media or of public education, if you consider those statements anything but contradictory!

You must have been a lonely, lonely man...

You had me at "fish community."

I love you.

Um, how about right HERE:

See, this is where you were talking about the poor, ignorant masses that are all too fatalistic to either:

a)not have children

b)abort those unwanted children

or c)take care of those children they DO have.

Right there would be where you were setting up implied equality in the situation, by listing all the alternatives in a grammatical structure of balance.

I'll use an example you should relate to easier: Now that Obama is in office, we'll have less taxes, more money, and a better economy!*

See, that sentence created a progressive equality, just as yours did. With mine it was: Less taxes leads to more money which leads to a better economy! Yours was that if those poor folk had any sense they'd: prevent pregnancy, abort the ones that DO happen, and take care of the select few that they decided were "keepers."

* The above statement is not representative of FishAdmin, his associates, or any sane person. It is merely used as an example, along the lines of "If frogs had wings, they wouldn't bump their butts every time they hopped."

Ah, marked Flamebait, due to having an unpopular opinion; and here I thought the servers resided in a free Country! Disagreeing with me is NOT a reason to mark me Flamebait; I used no language more inflammatory than any OTHER opinionated poster, but since I am pro-life, it gets me modded down. If you think you have a REAL argument FOR abortion, I'd love to discuss it here; otherwise, ignore me because I'm simply uninformed, right?

The fact that you can use the phrase "not doing abortions" beside the phrase "not taking care of their children" makes me sick. So, KILLING a child that hasn't been born yet and has had NO INPUT into it's circumstances is a way to TAKE CARE of the children? That is the kind of "care" that ends with a baby in a dumpster, or a mother drowning her kids in a bathtub. Your mentality is so wrong it's almost painful.