I like Gamblers best. They're not very strong, they don't attack you very much, and you can get a crapload of munny from them :p
I think I may play it more, but that may be just because it's something new lol. It has a nice change of pace as far as the battling system goes and it's a very good tie to KH and KH2. I wouldn't say it's necessarily better... just different.
I enjoyed fighting KH Sephiroth more, but KH2 Sephiroth was easier... I dunno. Probably KH2, because he was easier to beat for that stupid Journal Completion :p
No... you're supposed to wait several years BEFORE getting married. Ya know, get to know your partner. That's how marriage works. You don't get married because you like sleeping with someone or think they're really good in bed. You marry them because you love them for who they are AND because you're a good match. Sex DOES NOT determine whether you are compatible. And I'm sure you are too. A real expert, judging by your opinions on the subject. You are going out on a limb by assuming something like that when you know nothing about me. My idea of sex is nothing like that, and I would greatly appreciate it if you would NOT put words into my mouth that I didn't say or thoughts into my head that I didn't think. And I must ask, what does being a girl have to do with anything? My pleasure. http://www.citizenlink.org/FOSI/marriage/cohabitation/A000000888.cfm http://www.ampartnership.org/abstinence_resources/news/AbstinenceandMarriageAClearLink.asp http://www.mycpc.org/sex_faqs.html Would you like me to find more for you? I'd be happy to, if that's what you wish. And religions (as a whole) do not teach you to be delusional and faithful to your partner in unhappiness. There are some extremities, and always will be, but there are also plenty of extremities that stem from a lack of religion. I have heard/read more Christian songs, church newsletters, preachings etc. than I can count that encourage the exact opposite of what you say. Many people will not lie about their relationship just because it fits their lifestyle. Some will, but not everyone.
KH2 Hollow Bastion looked a lot nicer, and it was definitely a good change of pace from the castle. But I think I did enjoy the castle a little more. All those puzzles and contraptions to figure out made it very interesting, and I was fascinated by the Rising Falls (I stared at them for something like 10 minutes before moving on with the game XD)
Well, I kind of miss the Behemoths. Those were fun to fight. And Stealth Sneak. That was a great Heartless. Other than those two, I don't think there's really any I would like to be in KH2.
Final Form is definitely better than any of the other forms. The only annoying thing about it is that it takes away so much drive. I also really like Limit Form from KH2: Final Mix. Very cool-looking and great abilities.
Yes, sex is a way to grow with your partner. But what if it turns out the couple isn't compatible (which happens *quite* often). A better way to "move your relationship forward" would be to get married. As long as you're of legal age, of course. If not, then surely if you truly love that person, you can wait a few years for them? And sex being a way to "find out" if you're compatible is BS. Couples who save sex for marriage experience more joy in increasing their love for each other than they would if they'd already done it lots of times. And, similar to cohabitation, quite a few scientific studies have shown that sex before marriage means less overall joy in the relationship and higher divorce rates.
I haven't been to Disneyland, but I have been to Disneyworld. And I can say it was probably one of the funnest things I've ever done :D
If money didn't exist, than many problems would be gotten rid of yes. And just as many would be created. And I think banning it does have some effect. It's not completely useless, or I don't think lawmakers would even bother with them. Obviously they do something; they just don't eleminate the problem completely. Yes, but just be because it's taken doesn't mean it's okay. Just because a choice is available doesn't mean you should take it. And just because someone does take it doesn't mean it automatically becomes okay, even if they think it is. Having a reason that you feel justifies your behavior doesn't work either. I have also explained this. There are many possible ways to survive. Some are okay, some are great, and some are just really bad. But none of those possibilities, whether they be good, bad, or in between, are forced. That's like saying something you did isn't your fault because "conditions" made it possible for you to do whatever you did. No, law would still be needed. Things like murder, rape, and theft would still occur, and not caring about money wouldn't fix that. Some people are just horrible and like killing or raping for absolutely no reason (definitely not too many, but there are a few). If the system was "perfected" (which would be mighty difficult to do) then murder, rape, prostitution etc wouldn't just disappear. Of course choices are right and wrong. Suppose someone chooses to start using illegal drugs. That choice isn't exactly effective, ineffective, true, or false, is it? It's a bad choice. Likewise, refusing illegal drugs when some friends offer them to you is a good choice. I think I see what you're saying now. Prostitutes think what they're doing is okay because to them it's just another way to earn money in a world where money is necessary for survival? I still think that the source has nothing to do with the problem. Yes, society may have made it possible for there to be prostitution, but that doesn't mean they're forcing it on or even recommending it to people. I have to disagree. An act is either good, bad, or in between. It's not the product of anything. If a kid's been abused his whole life and doesn't know anything other than violence, then he might very well think that violence is perfectly fine. But that doesn't make it so. It's just that it's the only thing he knows. If someone commits a murder, is that okay simply because the murderer didn't see a problem with it? Should the murderer be let off? Likewise, is it alright for someone to get raped because the rapist thought it was fine? That can be true, yes. But many of the schools I attended (and I went to a lot, believe me. All that moving I had to do >_<), at some point in time, sat everyone down and discussed the meaning of the Pledge of Allegiance, one word at a time. And yes, a lot of women do becomes prostitutes because they feel they have no other options. But except on extremely, extremely rare occasions, they do have other options. Society has not "taught" them to do anything, and prostitution isn't necessary for survival.
Who are you talking to? Ah well, I'll go ahead and answer. I never said (and don't believe anyone else did either) that sex is not a "proper" way to show love for someone. I said it is not the only way. Sex is extraordinarily important to the love factor in a relationship. And it will definitely take a relationship to the "next level". But does a teenage couple really need to take their relationship to the "next level" because they really feel "in love"? Sex is sacred, and for that reason should not be used because a couple 16-year-olds think they're "ready".
I second this. Sex is not necessary to show that you love your GF/BF, and should only be done with two people who truly love each other and are committed to one another (in other words, sex should be reserved for married couples). I also think that yes, you are quite childish if you think the only way to express love for someone is by sex, or that it makes you more mature. There are a bucketful of ways to express love for someone (like kissing, for instance) other than sex, and sex certainly does not make you more mature. If anything, it just shows how immature you really are for believing that myth.
Yes, but just because prostitution is a possibility doesn't mean one should take it. Those who become prostitutes because they feel they "have to" almost always have options other than the ones they chose. Again, society is not "forcing" them people to do anything. Nature and natural law forces you. If a group of people live out in the wilderness, then they have two options: hunt for food or starve. It's just nature. And if society does anything, it makes that natural system more complex. Again, just because prostitution is a possibility for a job doesn't mean you have to do it. People choose to be prostitutes; they are not forced to be. Now, that's not saying that you're not forced to get a job if you want to amount to anything or even survive. Just that you're not forced into doing a certain job. And society is not doing the forcing. I've already addressed this above. How exactly did the system create prostitution? Don't all laws do that? If any law is created that says you can't do something, are the lawmakers really not that interested in trying to prevent the act? How exactly are prostitutes "mislead by the society"? So... are you saying that the problem isn't prostitution itself, but the method or reason for it? Sorry, just trying to understand... Ah... I have to disagree. Religion promotes more thought, not less. Sure, there are always going to be the crazies who believe what they've been taught without any thought, and who try to force their opinion on others. But there are crazies like that who aren't taught to be religious, or are taught not to be religious (not saying that's you, just giving an example). There are people like that for everything, not just religion. I am not one of those people who just goes "Uh, okay!" to whatever they're told, and I know many people who also aren't like that. Even though I'm a strong Christian now, I once doubted the existence of God. But, before deciding whether to believe in Him or not, I researched. I looked at all the evidence I could find that supported the existence of God, and the evidence that supported otherwise. And afterwards, I decided that I did believe in Him. But I certainly did not just decide "Okay, sounds cool. Guess I'll be a Christian." They differ... to a point. However, I think we can all agree that things such as murder and rape are evil, and something such as donating $100 to a charity is good. Although I see your point, I think there is always some difference between good and evil. Even though people do have their own moral codes, but surely they can't differ that much? After all, there are points in both directions where you just can't argue. I mean, there's no difference between being friendly to and befriending a new kid at school, and shoving him down and calling him names? Everybody has different moral codes, but they can only be so different, you know what I mean? Okey-dokey. "Excuse me? So because I have morals, I must not think about them too hard and I just follow them blindly because that's what I've been taught? Do you think I haven't thought through why things are moral and immoral? Don't you think I've reasoned through things like lying? The person you lie to is hurt that you didn't tell the truth, and it breaks down the trust you have with that person. Don't you think that at some point in my life, as a young child, I didn't understand why taking something that belonged to something else was bad? Once I though through it and reasoned it out, I realized that stealing someone else's property was wrong because it wasn't rightfully mine, I didn't pay for it, and the person I steal from becomes very hurt by my theft. I am not a person who believes whatever they're told without giving it some serious thought. And you would be very wise not to accuse me as someone who does." Note that the stern tone is not directed at you; this is, after all, a copy and paste :-) Okayz :)
An office man is not "confined" to labor, he chooses to be there. He may not love his job, but that's just part of life. And if it gets to the point where he doesn't enjoy it at all, then he can quite and find a new one. There's nothing forced about it. And it's quite reasonable that people should have to work to get money. If we all just sat around on our butts and got money whenever we wanted it... I'd hate to think of what kind of a place the world would be. Prostitution is also not forced. It is something people choose to do. But unlike working in a cubicle all day, prostitution is immoral and harmful to the community. I have already explained this in detail; perhaps you should read some of my other posts. If you already have, then reread them. Please do. I'm earnestly trying and failing to understand your logic. Perhaps a more detailed explanation will help. So it's society's fault prostitutes are prostitutes because we made them choose that path? No, it doesn't. It shows a group of people who are either just plain sick, or good people who have simply had miserable lives and don't think they have any other options (I suppose it could be both...). What do you mean it didn't need to be added? Are you saying the issue of family isn't important enough to be considered? I'm not sure I understand your point... Sex can be very emotionally healthy, when it's used properly. When it's done without any thought other than "Ooh! I'm gonna get paid!" it is *extremely* unhealthy. Yes, previous entities warrant it bad. But for a reason! It's not as if lawmakers got together and said "Heh! Let's ban prostitution! We'll make a lot of people mad that way!" They had good reasons: The physical and emotional health of both partners, and the effect prostitution has on surrounding communities. Reality has shown prostitution to be bad, not someone (not even God) saying so. Oh, I think prostitution is the issue. And what do you mean by "only because the conditions say so."? Are you reluctant to believe that it is bad? (not judging, just asking). I don't remember saying there was any moral difference between a prostitute and just some person who sleeps with multiple people. There is none. And you still haven't told me when I said people who slept with more than one person are not fine, smart and religious. Just saying. I'm not contradicting myself. Compare these two statements: A. Prostitution is bad. No reason, it just is. B. Prostitution is bad. Some reasons for this are *insert anything that I've brought up*. I think the difference is pretty clear. And I think the statement I used in my argument is also pretty clear, as long as you read carefully (I can see how what I said might be confusing if it's NOT read thoroughly, though). I'm still not quite sure I understand exactly what you're saying, but I'll give it a shot anyway. Yes, religion can ingrain certain beliefs, and some people choose to believe those teachings without any thought (I am not one of them). But so can a lack of religion. Just a note: I deliberately used "can" instead of "does" in both sentences. Uh... So there's no difference between good and evil? Moral and immoral? No way to define either the words or the differences between them? I have already addressed this issue quite well and in great detail in another post (not one directed towards you). If you still have that opinion after reading my views, however, please let me know. I will be glad to restate my thoughts on that subject. Okay. Then perhaps to avoid further misunderstanding, you shouldn't be quite so mocking when talking about God being one of my reasons. But, no hard feelings on that.
I believe all of them had been addressed by the end of your last post. They had not been at the time of my post, however, which is why I said something about it. But now... I think you've got it all covered. That's not to say you're right, simply that you've mentioned everything I have. Ah, but even if they are used properly (which they often are not) they break all the time. And that's assuming they've used properly in the first place. My point is that neither condoms nor birth control are not foolproof ways to prevent pregnancy, and lots of women still get pregnant even if both are used. Oh I have plenty of faith in men. However, I do not have faith in ANYONE who chooses to be a prostitute, male or female. Yes there are plenty of men who do stay to help take care of the child. Plenty of others decide they can't be bothered and take off. I think the risk outweighs the benefit in this situation (risk being that the guy leaves you, benefit being that he stays) Alright. I'm not sure if this is as obvious as I thought it was, but I am female. And I will say it again: Women are weaker than men. This is not an opinion or an insult, it is pure fact. Women don't produce testosterone like men do. Women do not build muscle as easily as men. It's a simple fact of life, and any feminist who chooses to believe otherwise or is offended is an ignorant fool. One more time: Women are weaker than men. Yes, there are certain women who are stronger than certain men, but if you take the strongest woman in the world and put her up against the strongest man in the world, the guy will win. Yes, women can have more willpower than men, but I don't think it's really possible to get out of being abused just by willpower. I don't see how a higher pain tolerance helps with that, either. I'm certainly not discarding women as weaklings who are helpless and unable to throw off a man's advances. I myself take karate, and know several other women who do. Any guy who tries to mess with them will get more than they bargained for, believe me. But not every woman takes karate or lifts weights. And those who do are still not invincible. I also don't think men always push sex or act violent towards women when they don't get their way. However, some do, and a prostitute environment will promote that sort of behavior. Yes, legalization would certainly help with the spreading. But again, people did not make prostitution illegal just because. They outlawed it for a reason, and making it legal just to slow the spreading would be pointless. STDs are a natural consequence of prostitution, and for that reason help should not be provided. You also cannot pick and choose the bad points if you are to make a point against the Bible. And yes, I do follow God's word quite well. I just don't give as much of my attention to things such as how to clean mold off of clothing, fabrics etc. We have chemicals and such for that now. But things such as "Thou shall not lie." are just as important today as they were 5000 years ago, no? If you're saying I should take it completely literally, then that's also incorrect. The Bible, when taken literally, contradicts itself quite often. Rather, the Bible should be seen for its entirety, not one or two details. And I don't believe that just because you don't follow one or two things in the Bible, you aren't Christian or don't follow God's word.
Condoms are extremely unreliable. And birth control pills do not work 100% of the time, even when used properly. They never do. You think women who are on birth control never get pregnant? The only completely effective way to prevent pregnancy is abstinence, which obviously prostitutes do not practice. I am well aware there are male prostitutes, thank you. But don't you think there is more of a problem of men abusing women than vice versa? Women are weaker than men. That is a fact of life. Therefore, men are much more able to resist a woman trying to force him into sex than a woman trying to resist a man. And I'm not talking just about prostitutes. I'm talking about women in general, although prostitutes are included. Again, what about pregnancy? How many men do you think stick around to help take care of a child they helped created with prostitutes? I feel like I'm going in circles... So if society accepted prostitution then STDs wouldn't spread? Oh, you wouldn't? That's kind of you. I seem to be having just as much trouble conveying the message of my argument to you. I wonder why that is? We are equally convinced that our own arguments are valid. Understanding more has nothing to do with it. And what on earth makes you think that people have a better perspective and insight now than we did 5000 years ago? Yes, we do have a better perspective at times, depending on what the subject is. You can't just make a sweeping statement like that. Also, I did not quite say that it was only valid 5000 years ago. I said it may be ridiculous now. For instance, there are specific parts of the Old Testament that refer to cleanliness that deal with things such as preventing the spread of disease, when often one's cleanliness could be a matter of life or death. Nowadays getting an infection will often not be deadly. And there are a few other things that are not applicable or don't make as much sense now. That's fine. Should you just dismiss the entire Old Testament because of a few things that don't make sense? Are going to ignore all the good stuff and pick out the bad? I have also rebuked your arguments with my own reasons, and you have also ignored these reasons. How many of my points have you actually addressed? I see you sticking to only a few.
So there's only a fine line separating us from, maybe... a goldfish? Generally when you don't get very far with an argument, it's because it's flawed. You haven't been contradicting anything I've been saying; you've simply been rewording what you're trying to say so that it will actually make sense. Yes...? No, they decided it was wrong because they saw evidence of it. They saw what it was doing to the communities where these prostitutes were, and made it illegal. So, if prostitution was legal, female prostitutes wouldn't be treated like garbage by men? If it were legal, STDs wouldn't spread? Babies wouldn't be born into dangerous and unstable environments? No, it's not. I don't believe that's what I'm doing. I gave other reasons, you have just chosen to ignore them. I will also say that basing your argument (even part of it) on the assumption of a being's non-existence isn't very sturdy either. That doesn't even make sense. Why is it so ridiculous? Yes, it may be ridiculous now, but was it ridiculous 5000 years ago? Context, my friend, context. Yes, you're correct. Telling a lie can be evil, depending on what it is. If a murderer says "No, I didn't kill that person." when he did, then that's definitely evil. If a fifth-grader says "Of course I did my homework, Mom!" when he didn't, that's not evil. However it is immoral, which brings me back to my point of immoral and evil not being interchangeable. Excuse me? So because I have morals, I must not think about them too hard and I just follow them blindly because that's what I've been taught? Do you think I haven't thought through why things are moral and immoral? Don't you think I've reasoned through things like lying? The person you lie to is hurt that you didn't tell the truth, and it breaks down the trust you have with that person. Don't you think that at some point in my life, as a young child, I didn't understand why taking something that belonged to something else was bad? Once I though through it and reasoned it out, I realized that stealing someone else's property was wrong because it wasn't rightfully mine, I didn't pay for it, and the person I steal from becomes very hurt by my theft. I am not a person who believes whatever they're told without giving it some serious thought. And you would be very wise not to accuse me as someone who does. Now, since you said you were going to drop it, I will leave it at this and "drop it", unless you wish to continue. One last note: A lack of religion also has a way of ingraining its own "such ways" into societies. It's not only religion that can do that.
I'm pretty sure Castle Oblivion will be brought up once or twice. However, I don't think it's very likely you'll be able to actually visit it. But it will almost certainly be at least mentioned, since the game does start before CoM. When Xion was being introduced, every Organization member was there, so it's not possible for that scene to be after or even during CoM.
It depends on what ages you're talking about. If one partner is 22 and the other is 30, then I don't think it really matters that much. But if a 35 year old man is with a 13 year old girl, then that's a serious problem. I also think that maybe you shouldn't go with something who's, say, 40 years older than you. For instance, maybe a 20 year old with a 60 year old. That would be a little weird. But it really does depend on the couple and the exact age difference.
