Nightingale

hehe. gator is good! you're missing out.

Well, if you are interested in dance classes like swing or ballroom, you could call a school in your area and tell them you're interested but don't have a partner. Chances are, they get a TON of girls calling saying the same thing, because lots more girls are interested in dance than guys are, so there is always a shortage of guys. oh... Grilled chicken is probably good for you, provided you don't use a fattening or calorie rich maranade. However, a healthy diet has variety, so explore other foods too. Lean steak, fish, sushi, alligator

Chicken can actually be more fattening than a lean steak, depending on preparation. Talk to your doctor and ask him/her to refer you to a dietician/nutritionist. You need to learn how to eat right, and store labels can be really decieving. Next, find an athletic activity you enjoy. Local Ys generally have adult athletic teams, if you like baseball, football, basketball, or soccer. Or, try taking karate lessons. That way, you get in shape and learn how to defend yourself at the same time. Or, find a female friend or girlfriend and take swing dancing lessons. Just find an activity where you have to be at a certain place, certain time, certain day. That way, you work your schedule around your exercise, rather than trying to squeeze exercise into an already busy schedule. A group activity makes you accountable to other people, which is more motivation than doing it on your own, because people will know if you don't go. Ultimately, the only secret to losing weight is "eat less, exercise more." Personally, if I get the exercise, the eating just falls into place, because I end up craving fruit and healthy food rather than junk, because I'm active and my body knows that junk food won't provide the proper fuel, so sweets don't even look appetizing. Take the opportunity to try new foods. Sushi is very nutritious and low fat. Indian food is another interesting type of food to explore. Variety helps you stay healthy. If you eat the same thing every day, you'll miss out on nutrients that are in other foods. Oh...go somewhere like GNC and get a really good multi-vitamin. I've had good luck with their "untra-mega" line. Just pick one that looks as complete as possible and includes minerals too. If you start getting enough vitamins and minerals, you'll start to feel better and have more energy. When you have more energy, you're more likely to exercise, and when you exercise, you burn calories and start wanting to eat healthy. Or, you could just do what I did and go to law school. I've gone from a size 14 to a size 6 without even trying. I'm just too busy to snack and I have to walk all over campus.

Rig. Not having a rig is costing you money, because you have to rent gear every time you jump. So, get the rig, and put the money you don't spend on rental away to spend on a vacation later.

I'm so sorry about your furry friend. ((((((((((((HUGS))))))))))) When my cat died about six years ago, my mom bought one of those blank diary books, and the whole family wrote our favorite kitty memories down in the book. The act of writing made us remember the good times and how much love he'd brought into our lives, and reading everyone else's memories helped us to smile. It's also nice to have a special keepsake so you remember everything that you'd end up forgetting years later.

Well, seems like you should have a lock anyway, although I don't like the idea of making it mandatory. I bought a lock with my shotgun. I wasn't thinking about it at the time, and when the salesguy told me I had to get one, I was kinda thankful for the reminder, because it saved me a trip back to the store when I realized I'd forgotten it. It wasn't expensive at all, and wouldn't have affected my decision to purchase a gun.

Who brought the absinthe?

I used to take Amtrak home from work all the time. It was really nice.

Those canopies are really pretty, but from what I've seen, canopies like that can be a lot harder to spot, unless the sun is shining straight through them to light up the colors.

I don't know if this will work on a skydiving jumpsuit; I'm not a jumpsuit maker or rigger, but I've used this trick for altering dance recital costumes, which are usually made out of cheap nylon and spandex. If I had to let out a seam and noticed that the seam had damaged the fabric, I'd get some matching ribbon or binding tape and stitch it properly over the seam line damage. That way, the damaged portion of the fabric can't expand or have stress put on it, because the stress will go on the new seams on the edges of the ribbon. You can use the same color ribbon to hide the repair, or a different colored ribbon for contrast. Like the other posters said, though, if it was sewn with the proper needle for the job, you shouldn't have a problem. If you can't tell, get a magnifying glass and look at the holes left by the needle. you should be able to see whether the fabric is torn or if the fibers had just been pushed aside to let the thread through.

Well, if you keep them on a leash and harness when they're outside, you should be able to keep them out of most mischief.

The news had a lawyer who's worked with setting up the new constitution over there. He put forth some interesting theories: The US has pushed for Saddam to be tried under Iraqi law because international law doesn't have the death penalty. However, Iraqi law at the time made it impossible for the ruler to commit any crime, basically the king/president was always right. So, while his actions may be a crime under international law and treaties, he isn't being tried under those, and at the time he committed the crimes they were perfectly legal under Iraqi law. Illegal under the new constitution, but legal before. So, you run into the problem of punishing someone for acting before something was made illegal. A simple example: You're driving 65 on the freeway and a cop tags you on radar. At the time, 65 is the speed limit, so you don't get a ticket. Two weeks later, the speed limit is lowered to 60, and the government issues you a ticket, even though your actions were legal at the time you were driving. His lawyer's going to have some good arguments. Personally, I think they should've just let the international court of justice try Hussein, because it would be a lot easier to make a case under the genocide convention and maybe under geneva, depending on the status of the people he killed and the surrounding circumstances. It's going to be an interesting case to watch. According to several of the lawyers involved, the US is taking a lot of care to make sure that he gets a fair trial, because it would be really, really bad for foreign policy if it turns into a kangaroo court.

No, under the current court rulings, they can't do that, because pregnancy and family planning fall under the right to privacy. Limiting government services because someone is exercising a constitutional right would probably be shot down really fast by a court. However, I don't think welfare should exist in the first place. Private charities manage to assist people much more efficiently. It'd be nice to see a cut in taxes, and some good tax breaks for charitable contributions to encourage giving.

I don't think the ACLU will get involved in this one. It would be an interesting court case, though. I don't recall whether something similar has been litigated before. I don't think so, but I'm too tired to look right now.

A lot of NGO workers are from outside the country, and come in with a lot more financial resources, especially given the exchange rate. Cambodia is still recovering from the Khmer Rouge and the events before and after, so they haven't really had a chance to build up their economy yet. Now, with the removal of quotas from the US garment industry, they're anticipating the economy may become even more stable, because the US will probably be buying more from larger countries like China.

This summer, there's a good chance I'm going to be working for an NGO in Cambodia, either assisting with the preparation for the prosecution of the Khmer Rouge for war crimes or helping with the prosecution of antiquities smugglers. Either way, it sounds really interesting and I'm looking forward to it. In the meantime, I've been doing extensive research on Cambodia so I know what I'm getting into, and I stumbled across the Cambodian bells.

You can order the Cambodian bells from Church World Service. It's the only spot I've found where you can get them online. However, articles indicate that they are often sold to tourists by Cambodian children. https://secure.churchworldservice.org/catalog/display.php?product_id=36

That is a really good analogy.

The court decided Roe v. Wade based on the 9th and 14th amendments. 14: No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States This is pretty vague, and it's the job of the court to interpret which privileges or immunities are protected here. They ruled that a right to privacy, inlcuding making decisions about one's reproductive status, falls under that clause. They also looked at the 9th amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people. They've already ruled under amendment 14 that the right to privacy is something guaranteed to the people by the 14th amendment, and therefore, laws that infringe on that right are unconstitutional. The constitution doesn't have to say "yes, you have this right." Unless the constitution specifically says "no, you don't have this right." or "the government can regulate this." then the court usually will hold that you do have that right. The federal government manages to regulate stuff like drugs using the commerce clause, which gives the federal government the ability to regulate commerce between states or things that affect it. The powers of congress are spelled out in Article 1, section 8 of the constitution, and it doesn't look like abortion falls under any of those. If congress can't regulate it, then we have to look to the states, who can't restrict it overly under the 14th amendment, so, finally, the right falls to the people, because there's nothing in the constitution that allows the feds to regulate it, and a clause that seems to prohibit the states from banning it. So, it looks like if you want to ban abortion you need to amend the constitution. That's what the amendment process is for. Every power that the courts and congress and the president have is dictated by the constitution. If you want the government to have a power, amend the constitution to give it to them. The courts are required to follow the constitution, and would therefore have to permit the government to regulate abortion.

"life, liberty and pursuit of happiness" Um... Zen? "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" is in the Declaration of Independence, not the constitution. The Declaration of Independence is not mandatory authority for courts.

I was just trying to explain the difference between pro-choice and pro-abortion. Personally, I don't know when life begins, but I don't think it really matters, because I think that the decisions of the mother over her body trump any rights a fetus may have because the fetus is living inside the mother. I'm sure a fetus is "alive" in the sense that it's composed of living cells, so I don't think there's really a place to draw a line. I do think late term abortion after a fetus could survive outside the mother is pretty stupid, because at that point, why not just have the kid and give it for adoption, but again, it isn't my choice.

Doesn't the ACLU do pretty much everything pro-bono? They're a non-profit. The ACLU often takes on extreme cases, because extreme cases help clarify law. They don't take a case because they feel sorry for a single person or want to help one person. They take on cases that they feel will enable the courts to set a legal precedent. A case of a nobody-high-school-student wanting to stand on the corner with a rude sign has nowhere near the impact of a case about NAMBLA. NAMBLA's speech is disgusting to most people, but, under the first amendment, they have a right to their opinions and ideas, provided they don't act on them. The problem with stopping groups like NAMBLA and the KKK is that by doing that, we're saying that it's okay to sensor speech and ideas we disagree with. Then, it becomes a question of where to draw the line, and once that line starts moving from "incites violence" further in to "morally reprehensible" to "disgusting" to "I don't like that." we have a problem. By protecting the free speech of the KKK and MANBLA, the ACLU is also protecting your right to stand up and say you disagree with their speech. It goes both ways. If you want to be able to speak freely, you have to allow others to do the same, no matter how much you may disagree.

I am pro choice. I am not pro-abortion. Personally, I will never have an abortion. That's my choice. However, I will never tell anyone else what to do with their bodies and their fertility. How many kids someone else wants to have is their business, and I should have no say whatsoever in that. That's what pro-choice is all about. i've made my choice, but I will not presume to choose for somebody else.

In a functional large family, you not only get attention from your parents, but from your siblings as well. Looks like the kids in that family have 17 other people that love them and care about them.

Most of the numbers I've seen haven't really included private donations for Katrina, except from one or two countries. Anyone got any numbers on this?