Sand

I wouldn't mind living forever. What's the alternative? Death?

4e looks and feels uberfied. I prefer a dark gritty, low magic fantasy when I run the game. It looks like the new DnD can't do that without some heavy modifications.

but not, apparently, a spellchecker. it's = contraction of 'it is' its = possessive form of 'it' This is an internet forum, not an English term paper.

Just because you are poor does not give you the right to steal. Plain and simple.

How is stealing for the greater good? Don't see the logic there. If it is legitimate then its not piracy, if it is piracy then its not legitimate.

My take is... Old Doctor Who>New Doctor Who New Doctor Who>Terminator Terminator>BSG BSG>Atlantis Atlantis>Bionic Woman Bionic Woman>SG1 SG1>Flash Gordon Flash Gordon>Knight Rider Anyhoot, my favorite episode is "Sateda." Back when they return to Ronon's home planet. I just like it how Shepherd refers Ronon as Chewie.

Back in the days of yore, when the Commodore 64 reigned supreme and the original Pool of Radiance was the most kickarse game on the market I pirated. I not just pirated games, I pirated applications, operating systems, anything I got my grubby little digit on. It wasn't til I grew up some that I realize that everything that I pirated was the work of others. Work that people put their own sweat, tears, joys, and frustrations into. I wondered to my self how would I feel if my hard work was so under appreaciated that no one would pay for it. That was when I stopped pirating. Pirating games and apps is basically an insult to those who created the work you are using.

Drake's Fortune is this week and we finally know what the bugger looks like! http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/v...Drake-s-Fortune

Intelligent Design is not science so it shouldn't be taught in a science class, however it is an extension of creationist view which several religions share so it should, if taught, be taught in social studies class. I don't mind ID being taught, just not taught as science.

Aren't you a moderator, Walsh?

Faith, as it applies to belief, does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. If there is logical proof or material evidence, then faith and belief are not necesary or used.

No, its not.

Acutally I have. When I was in college I had to write up technical specifications and tutorial use of an electron microscope for a technical writing course. In order to write the piece I needed to learn of its use and functionality so the lab techs let me take a look at various substances, including a tissue sample.

So, it is a combat spell.

If something acutally exists then you don't need to "believe" it exists.

I had enough of the Navy when I was in the Navy.

It can be, indirectly, Newc. I have used nystul's magic aura as such.

I never said it was infallible but for 35 years of my life it has worked for me. I go by the evidence at hand. There is no evidence of God's existence. Plain and simple. And when it comes to laws and policies set forth by a government it needs to be secular in order to be fair and equal to all. You apply Catholic standards to the law books and suddenly Divorce becomes illegal. You apply strict Christian beliefs and homosexuals would become even more discriminated against than they are now. If you force everyone to follow Hindu tenets on the law books, say good bye to the Beef industry. Religion is all fine and good for the private citizen. If one has faith in Christianity, good for him or her. Keep it private. Keep it out of the law books. Not everyone under the rulership of a government is going to have the same beliefs therefore it is wrong to pick one belief and formalize it in governmental policies and laws.

Sorry, Tigger, but I disagree. Most religions, particularly the Abrahamic religions, is often composed of "make believe" aspects such as the supernatural. Angels, devils, and an all powerful invisible God that punishes the naughty. There is no quantifiable aspect of God. You cannot see God. You cannot touch God. You cannot hear God. You cannot smell God. You cannout taste God. So, how can you say something exists if you cannot see, touch, hear, smell, and/or taste (or combination thereof) it? The reasonable answer is that it simply does not exist. While those who are unreasonable have faith and believe that it does. Now, I am not saying that people cannot have their beliefs, but we shouldn't be basing our laws and government policies on those beliefs.

Besides, Newc, I have used that spell in a combat situation. Well, more of a pre-combat situation.

To have faith is to have a belief that has no empirical data justify such belief, therefore by its very nature faith is unreasonable. Having faith in a religion is an act of being unreasonable.

Of course. No one here is denying that. Go to your church, your mosque, or whatever. Just when it comes to government policies and the laws in which everyone has to obey that it is fair and equal for every single citizen regardless they are a believer or not in the dominant religion. Women are treated equally as men, homosexuals are treated equally as heterosexuals, bhuddists is treated equally as muslims, and so on.

This is exactly why we need to keep religion out of government. Church and State, gotta keep them separated.

I am a proud member of PETA. Peaple Eating Tasty Animals