Yes, it would suck for people with 'problems' born in the wrong part of the country, but with 50 states you would have an option to move to likeminded area.
*cough* Dredd Scott
*cough* Fugitive Slave Act
This being said, the South seceded BEFORE any of the state's rights were infringed, and they attacked Fort Sumter where, objectively, there were plenty diplomatic solutions available before firing a single cannonball. And anyway, it was not intended at that stage to abolish slavery; this only came as a way to wage total war two years later.
No you don't get it.
It's WiFi, which means it's both electronic and electromagnetic. It'll only become safe after first class and business have been milked long enough.
If I drop a rock 1000 times and it falls to the ground. The only thing I can say for certain is that the last 1000 times I dropped the rock, it fell to the ground.
It requires faith on my part to believe that the 1001st time I drop the rock it will also drop to the ground.
Faith is not incompatible with science. The difference is that a scientist will change his beliefs to accomodate new facts, a religious nut will deny new facts to uphold his beliefs.
What I'd like to know is: "are there islands", i.e. groups of people completely unrelated to other groups? And if there is no such island, what is the max distance between any two people?
As far as I know - you can't run water twice as hard. Either pressure or pipe diameter must increase. There's some physics involved..... and they don't pressurize reservoirs. The path through the turbines is fixed and once at capacity - you can't make more water run through without increasing something.
Heck most think that parenting is the school's job.
"Parent" is not a verb. Stupid Americans.
"Parent" comes, via the French language, from the Latin "parens". Itself coming from the verb "parere".
I am not enough of an Latin etymologist to tell if it comes from
*parere/pareo : to be obedient to, obey
*parere/paro : prepare, raise, furnish/supply/provide or
*parere/pario : bear, give birth to, beget
(each makes sense)
But clearly, it comes from the verb "parere", which would be something like "to pare" if it had propagated to Modern English.
Putting a -ens generally is a way to make up a substantive from a verb which will specifically refer to the performer of the action.
Examples:
ferere (to bear) --> ferens (bearer). Ex. Christopher = Christos Ferens = the one who bears Christ
exponere --> exponens
Anyway, it is plain ridiculous to take a verb, make a substantive out of it, and make another verb out of it that means the same thing as the original verb. Someone who fishes fishes is called a fisherman or a fisher, yet his job is not called "fishermanning" nor "fishering". Someone who farms is a farmer yet you don't call his job farmering. Someone who insures people is an insurer, yet he is not in the "insurering" business.
The only way "to parent" would be an acceptable verb is if it was not about raising children (performing the action) but about making one a parent (making the object a performer of the action).
Fuck you, language rapists. What's next ? Should we call people who perform the action of "parenting", "parenters" ?
And I have not even begun about the intrinsic ridicule of this pop-psycho-babble world outside of its linguistic mediocrity.
Just because you Yankees pronounce (hint: this means "prononce" in your bastard excuse for a language) all vowels as "uh" does not mean you can substitute every vowel with an a.
2. No cold war. We are not currently afraid of another countries technological abilities, so we have no need to showboat ours. This was a big issue with both Congress and the public in the 60's.
The Boogeyman changed. Hey! I hear their is a terrorist training base on the moon !
Wil has been sharing anecdotes about his adventures in parenting
"Parent" is not a verb. Stupid Americans.
"Parent" comes, via the French language, from the Latin "parens". Itself coming from the verb "parere".
I am not enough of an Latin etymologist to tell if it comes from
*parere/pareo : to be obedient to, obey
*parere/paro : prepare, raise, furnish/supply/provide or
*parere/pario : bear, give birth to, beget
(each makes sense)
But clearly, it comes from the verb "parere", which would be something like "to pare" if it had propagated to Modern English.
Putting a -ens generally is a way to make up a substantive from a verb which will specifically refer to the performer of the action.
Examples:
ferere (to bear) --> ferens (bearer). Ex. Christopher = Christos Ferens = the one who bears Christ
exponere --> exponens
Anyway, it is plain ridiculous to take a verb, make a substantive out of it, and make another verb out of it that means the same thing as the original verb. Someone who fishes fishes is called a fisherman or a fisher, yet his job is not called "fishermanning" nor "fishering". Someone who farms is a farmer yet you don't call his job farmering. Someone who insures people is an insurer, yet he is not in the "insurering" business.
The only way "to parent" would be an acceptable verb is if it was not about raising children (performing the action) but about making one a parent (making the object a performer of the action).
Fuck you, language rapists. What's next ? are should we call people, who perform the action of "parenting", "parenters" ?
"Parent" comes, via the French language, from the Latin "parens". Itself coming from the verb "parere".
I am not enough of an Latin etymologist to tell if it comes from
*parere/pareo : to be obedient to, obey *parere/paro : prepare, raise, furnish/supply/provide or *parere/pario : bear, give birth to, beget
But clearly, it comes from the verb "parere", which would be something like "to pare" if it had propagated to Modern English.
Putting a -ens generally is a way to make up a substantive from a verb which will specifically refer to the performer of the action.
Examples: ferere (to bear) --> ferens (bearer). Ex. Christopher = Christos Ferens = the one who bears Christ exponere --> exponens
Anyway, it is plain ridiculous to take a verb, make a substantive out of it, and make another verb out of it that means the same thing as the original verb. Someone who fishes fishes is called a fisherman or a fisher, yet his job is not called "fishermanning" nor "fishering". Someone who farms is a farmer yet you don't call his job farmering. Someone who insures people is an insurer, yet he is not in the "insurering" business.
The only way "to parent" would be an acceptable verb is if it was not about raising children (performing the action) but about making one a parent (making the object a performer of the action).
Fuck you, language rapists. What's next ? are should we call people, who perform the action of "parenting", "parenters" ?
Slashdot Mirror
You see, the Wireless is a series of tubes.
*cough* Dredd Scott
*cough* Fugitive Slave Act
This being said, the South seceded BEFORE any of the state's rights were infringed, and they attacked Fort Sumter where, objectively, there were plenty diplomatic solutions available before firing a single cannonball. And anyway, it was not intended at that stage to abolish slavery; this only came as a way to wage total war two years later.
I bet you're not speaking of thisBartlet(t)
Read this lecture, especially section IV
you could replace verbs too
It's irrelevant to boast the best spam filters when you hard code spam into people's outgoing mail below their signature.
No you don't get it. It's WiFi, which means it's both electronic and electromagnetic. It'll only become safe after first class and business have been milked long enough.
spy sats have predictible orbits. SR-71s were outlived by U2s (to be retired soon) and comparable drones
if it's not accelerating to the ground, of course it is generating lift
4 inches is what I'm not showing to you
If I drop a rock 1000 times and it falls to the ground. The only thing I can say for certain is that the last 1000 times I dropped the rock, it fell to the ground. It requires faith on my part to believe that the 1001st time I drop the rock it will also drop to the ground.
Faith is not incompatible with science. The difference is that a scientist will change his beliefs to accomodate new facts, a religious nut will deny new facts to uphold his beliefs.
then the only patents will come from the industry, and no small guys would ever file one
What I'd like to know is: "are there islands", i.e. groups of people completely unrelated to other groups? And if there is no such island, what is the max distance between any two people?
What's a gay hardon ?
You know what ? That would be a fantastic plot for a sci-fi novel!
Repeat after me: Pu-NI-tive.
Just because you Yankees pronounce (hint: this means "prononce" in your bastard excuse for a language) all vowels as "uh" does not mean you can substitute every vowel with an a.
"Parent" comes, via the French language, from the Latin "parens". Itself coming from the verb "parere".
I am not enough of an Latin etymologist to tell if it comes from
*parere/pareo : to be obedient to, obey
*parere/paro : prepare, raise, furnish/supply/provide or
*parere/pario : bear, give birth to, beget
(each makes sense)
But clearly, it comes from the verb "parere", which would be something like "to pare" if it had propagated to Modern English.
Putting a -ens generally is a way to make up a substantive from a verb which will specifically refer to the performer of the action.
Examples:
ferere (to bear) --> ferens (bearer). Ex. Christopher = Christos Ferens = the one who bears Christ
exponere --> exponens
Anyway, it is plain ridiculous to take a verb, make a substantive out of it, and make another verb out of it that means the same thing as the original verb. Someone who fishes fishes is called a fisherman or a fisher, yet his job is not called "fishermanning" nor "fishering". Someone who farms is a farmer yet you don't call his job farmering. Someone who insures people is an insurer, yet he is not in the "insurering" business.
The only way "to parent" would be an acceptable verb is if it was not about raising children (performing the action) but about making one a parent (making the object a performer of the action).
Fuck you, language rapists. What's next ? are should we call people, who perform the action of "parenting", "parenters" ?
Oops. I should take care of proofreading (more effort) before posting. I meant "Caring less NEVER EVER takes more effort than caring more."
Stupidest ever excuse for not being able to learn english. Caring less NEVER EVER takes less effort than caring more.
"Parent" is not a verb. Stupid Americans.
"Parent" comes, via the French language, from the Latin "parens". Itself coming from the verb "parere".
I am not enough of an Latin etymologist to tell if it comes from
*parere/pareo : to be obedient to, obey
*parere/paro : prepare, raise, furnish/supply/provide or
*parere/pario : bear, give birth to, beget
But clearly, it comes from the verb "parere", which would be something like "to pare" if it had propagated to Modern English.
Putting a -ens generally is a way to make up a substantive from a verb which will specifically refer to the performer of the action.
Examples:
ferere (to bear) --> ferens (bearer). Ex. Christopher = Christos Ferens = the one who bears Christ
exponere --> exponens
Anyway, it is plain ridiculous to take a verb, make a substantive out of it, and make another verb out of it that means the same thing as the original verb. Someone who fishes fishes is called a fisherman or a fisher, yet his job is not called "fishermanning" nor "fishering". Someone who farms is a farmer yet you don't call his job farmering. Someone who insures people is an insurer, yet he is not in the "insurering" business.
The only way "to parent" would be an acceptable verb is if it was not about raising children (performing the action) but about making one a parent (making the object a performer of the action).
Fuck you, language rapists. What's next ? are should we call people, who perform the action of "parenting", "parenters" ?
one, from Afghanistan.
Did I say snow ? It was in fact the ashes of our less lucky siblings. But it was snow to us.