NotYourAverageAquarius
@NotYourAverageAquarius
13 Years5,000+ PostsAquarius
Comments: 22 · Posts: 6178 · Topics: 30
Survivor 2 Finale (Page 2)
You are on page out of 3 | Reverse Order
Posted by feby16aqua
The Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany holds the principle of human dignity paramount, even above the right to life. (wiki)
This is interesting coming from a place that does not recognize the right to free speech or the right to educate your own children. Would an essential component of human dignity not be the freedom to speak whatever is on your mind? Would an essential component of human dignity not be to be free to choose the education received by your own child?
Posted by StoicGoatPosted by NotYourAverageAquariusPosted by feby16aqua
We have the right to our 5 senses: to see, to feel, to hear, to taste and to touch. Some even believe in a 6th sense and even more than just 6 to be exact, proprioception is one of them.
Most of us attain and acquire knowledge due to our 5 senses. It is our way to collect data about our surroundings in order to process it and make decisions. With just any one of them missing we struggle, any loss is a handicap.
Technically if they couldn't be taken away I'd agree but definitely three of them can most certainly be ruined on purpose by tyrant government if they were to detain and choose to do so. The three main ones I'm thinking of that could easily be eviscerated from your body would be:
Sight - All one would have to do is simple gouge them at and presto no sight that you supposedly have an inalienable right to.
taste - Another easy one to get rid of just cut out someone ones tongue not only ripping from their body the source by which the taste but you also take away their ability to speak!
Hearing - This I'm guessing would be a little harder but I'm sure if playing really loud sound at high intensities did not do the job on your eardrum... they could always poke your ear with a nice point object till the dead was done
Scent - is possibly not easy to get rid of I'm not entirely sure if you care to argue that it never can be.... I'll be glad to look up away that it could ^.^
Honestly, the only sense I think you could honestly say everyone has an inalienable right to would be the sense of touch BUT even then if you wanna get extreme, an oppressive government that likes to torture individuals could intentionally break your neck without killing you so that you essentially loss all feeling below the neck...I would presume that feeling is still present above the neck if you are still alive lol.... SOOOOOO the sense of feeling above the neck I suppose you could get away with being inalienable until death true..THAT BEING THE ONLY ONE THOUGH and only being contingent because if it were taken you would be dead.
Don't you have a right to not have your senses taken from you?click to expand
Says who?
That's for you to defend whichever way you choose. I'm just asking. 🙂
Posted by NotYourAverageAquarius
Says who?click to expand
And furthermore isn't this debate about Human Rights that do or do not transcend Government regulation? I mean I guess since I view that their are Human Rights that do transcend regulation... and from I understand so does Feb essentially the debate has sorta transformed into what Human Rights actually do transcend regulation and which ones don't.
^^That was for NYAA.
OMG I give up jesus stupid html I keep forgetting the "/" to close the blockquote command lol 🙂
Posted by feby16aqua
If it's governed, then it's not a human right, it becomes a privileged right by the government, and vice versa.
Human rights would have to designate any and all rights that are not regulated. They belong to you.
Is it possible that some things that are regulated should not be? Do I have a right to purchase food that has not been corrupted by Monsanto's genetic tomfoolery and meat that's not swimming in antibiotics and growth hormones?
Posted by NotYourAverageAquarius
And furthermore isn't this debate about Human Rights that do or do not transcend Government regulation? I mean I guess since I view that their are Human Rights that do transcend regulation... and from I understand so does Feb essentially the debate has sorta transformed into what Human Rights actually do transcend regulation and which ones don't.
I don't see where this is a problem.
But genetically modified crops effectively corrupt the entirety of similar food stocks. For all intents and purposes, there is no amount of money I can part with that will enable me to acquire corn, wheat, etc. that has not been genetically altered. Do I not have a right to purchase and consume food that has not been genetically modified to include resistance to Round-Up?
Posted by feby16aquaPosted by StoicGoat
But genetically modified crops effectively corrupt the entirety of similar food stocks. For all intents and purposes, there is no amount of money I can part with that will enable me to acquire corn, wheat, etc. that has not been genetically altered. Do I not have a right to purchase and consume food that has not been genetically modified to include resistance to Round-Up?
Yes, you have the right to grow your own food and live off the land, don't you?
click to expand
LMAO yeah I was about to say the same thing till I say you already said it!
Posted by feby16aqua
ckquote>
Yes, you have the right to grow your own food and live off the land, don't you?
You tell me 🙂
Or, what you really should do, is prove it to NYAA. I'm just making sure the two of you don't go too easy on each other. :p
Posted by StoicGoatPosted by NotYourAverageAquarius
And furthermore isn't this debate about Human Rights that do or do not transcend Government regulation? I mean I guess since I view that their are Human Rights that do transcend regulation... and from I understand so does Feb essentially the debate has sorta transformed into what Human Rights actually do transcend regulation and which ones don't.
I don't see where this is a problem.
click to expand
WELL.....if you insist. I'll post what you said before that prompted my previous post.
But, say, I want to live off the land by hunting for deer or rabbit or turkey. Most countries regulate what you can hunt, when, and by what means, so even if this qualifies as a human right, I certainly don't see where I am free to exercise it.
this post of mine
Posted by StoicGoatPosted by NotYourAverageAquariusPosted by feby16aqua
We have the right to our 5 senses: to see, to feel, to hear, to taste and to touch. Some even believe in a 6th sense and even more than just 6 to be exact, proprioception is one of them.
Most of us attain and acquire knowledge due to our 5 senses. It is our way to collect data about our surroundings in order to process it and make decisions. With just any one of them missing we struggle, any loss is a handicap.
Technically if they couldn't be taken away I'd agree but definitely three of them can most certainly be ruined on purpose by tyrant government if they were to detain and choose to do so. The three main ones I'm thinking of that could easily be eviscerated from your body would be:
Sight - All one would have to do is simple gouge them at and presto no sight that you supposedly have an inalienable right to.
taste - Another easy one to get rid of just cut out someone ones tongue not only ripping from their body the source by which the taste but you also take away their ability to speak!
Hearing - This I'm guessing would be a little harder but I'm sure if playing really loud sound at high intensities did not do the job on your eardrum... they could always poke your ear with a nice point object till the dead was done.
Scent - is possibly not easy to get rid of I'm not entirely sure if you care to argue that it never can be.... I'll be glad to look up away that it could ^.^
Honestly, the only sense I think you could honestly say everyone has an inalienable right to would be the sense of touch BUT even then if you wanna get extreme, an oppressive government that likes to torture individuals could intentionally break your neck without killing you so that you essentially loss all feeling below the neck...I would presume that feeling is still present above the neck if you are still alive lol.... SOOOOOO the sense of feeling above the neck I suppose you could get away with being inalienable until death true..THAT BEING THE ONLY ONE THOUGH and only being contingent because if it were taken you would be dead.click to expand
Don't you have a right to not have your senses taken from you?
Posted by StoicGoat
That's for you to defend whichever way you choose. I'm just asking. 🙂
And well.....
I think I did.
If I'm going to stand here and say that "Yes, there are Human Rights that transcend regulation and are inalienable" then in that same vain I must accept the opposite end of that argument in that there are Human Rights violations that transcend regulation as well... mainly because of the absolute futility of trying to control the actions of any sovereign nation. Sure, if found out grated you, THEN the REGULATIONS stated in the 30 articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights could be applied considering their are over a 100 registered member nations... however, the amount of nations that have an army that could have an impact and would get involved would probably diminish the number nations to reprimand the violating nation... still though a good portion of the world meaning it will be stopped. However, you have seen how long it took to get other people out of power that were doing such things int he past. I mean they do say history repeats itself. Anyways, my point is... until the nation has been recognized as doing this and forced to stop(however long that will take?)... MY POINT IS how could Human Rights that are supposedly guaranteed by this document ever by taken away? There is no way to truly control initial action by any nation, sect, group of people, or individual unless we as people develop the ability of telepathy and can read each others minds.
Posted by StoicGoat
But, say, I want to live off the land by hunting for deer or rabbit or turkey. Most countries regulate what you can hunt, when, and by what means, so even if this qualifies as a human right, I certainly don't see where I am free to exercise it.
Hey man all I'm asking is "Who's stopping you from breaking the LAW" If I wanted to I could break any regulation I saw fit right now.
NYAA, I didn't say, I asked.
What about education? I recall one of your posts quoting the UN something or other mentioning education as a right. Is it? Why/why not?
What about education? I recall one of your posts quoting the UN something or other mentioning education as a right. Is it? Why/why not?
Posted by NotYourAverageAquarius
Hey man all I'm asking is "Who's stopping you from breaking the LAW" If I wanted to I could break any regulation I saw fit right now.
Challenge accepted!
I present to you: The Law of Gravity :p
Posted by StoicGoatPosted by NotYourAverageAquarius
Hey man all I'm asking is "Who's stopping you from breaking the LAW" If I wanted to I could break any regulation I saw fit right now.
Challenge accepted!
I present to you: The Law of Gravity :p
click to expand
hahaha... ^.^
hrrmmmphh hmm Laws of Man... not nature smart ass
😛
Posted by StoicGoat
NYAA, I didn't say, I asked.
What about education? I recall one of your posts quoting the UN something or other mentioning education as a right. Is it? Why/why not?
I'll repost here what I believe it is that you are talking about.
Posted by NotYourAverageAquarius
Article 26.
(1) Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.
(3) Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.
I only bold the part of (1) which does 'absolutely' apply to truly being inalienable. I don't mention section (2) becuase it falls under the area of regulations but I mention (3) becuase you can ultimately be teaching your kids w/e you want at home... no government is going to be able to stop you from doing that unless they take you and put you in jail or take your kids away from you. And what they don't know can't and won't hurt them... (well could maybe hurt them depending on what your teaching I suppose).
And referring back to your originally query you posted me in the first quote of this post "What about education? I recall one of your posts quoting the UN something or other mentioning education as a right. Is it? Why/why not?"
And with and to that I quote myself saying..
Posted by NotYourAverageAquarius
Do we really think this nation was created by a bunch of people who had no 'control', no free will, no inherent inalienable rights that no one can give you.... you just have no matter what the constitution or the UN defines them as?click to expand
The only articles I posted in part or in whole of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights were the ones I felt could honestly transcend regulation... that their is no way to control the action of the individual to exercise this inalienable right. That there is no way to stop them from performing their human rights by any government with out having to utilize incarceration. That there is essentially nothing that can be done to absolutely enforce the regulation... the ultimate power lies with you to choose what you see fit, what you think is right, that no government can control or take away from outside of ending your life. Sitting in a jail cell only confines your unrelenting, non-submissive mind, IT DOES NOT control your mind or make you choose anything... no law can do that.
But education can't be free. Whether parents pay out of pocket or the funds are confiscated from tax payers, someone has to pay for it. Does a tax payer not have the right to not be compelled to pay for someone else's education?
Posted by StoicGoat
But education can't be free. Whether parents pay out of pocket or the funds are confiscated from tax payers, someone has to pay for it. Does a tax payer not have the right to not be compelled to pay for someone else's education?
Who said I couldn't home school?
Posted by feby16aqua
Self-education though, is a human right. No one can stop you from learning in even the smallest capacity.
I suppose to my purpose for mention that article on education Stoic was this reason ....but also that if you kid is at home and your the teacher, then you are the one who has the greatest control of what it is your kid learns.
Posted by NotYourAverageAquarius
I suppose to my purpose for mention that article on education Stoic was this reason ....but also that if you kid is at home and your the teacher, then you are the one who has the greatest control of what it is your kid learns.
I like this, but it has nothing to do with whether education is a human right. 😛
Posted by StoicGoat
But education can't be free. Whether parents pay out of pocket or the funds are confiscated from tax payers, someone has to pay for it. Does a tax payer not have the right to not be compelled to pay for someone else's education?
There is nothing certain in life except your death and taxes
Posted by StoicGoatPosted by NotYourAverageAquarius
I suppose to my purpose for mention that article on education Stoic was this reason ....but also that if you kid is at home and your the teacher, then you are the one who has the greatest control of what it is your kid learns.
I like this, but it has nothing to do with whether education is a human right. 😛
click to expand
I suppose I could see how IF there was a regulation abolishing home-schooling. But I mean still, unless they are like keeping accurate records of attendance for who does and does not attend school, whose gonna stop you from keeping your kid home and homeschooling them... especially if you don't live in a big city?
Posted by NotYourAverageAquarius
I suppose I could see how IF there was a regulation abolishing home-schooling. But I mean still, unless they are like keeping accurate records of attendance for who does and does not attend school, whose gonna stop you from keeping your kid home and homeschooling them... especially if you don't live in a big city?
FYI: you are not permitted to home school in Germany.
Posted by feby16aqua
A human right is entirely yours in its capacity. No one can tell you how to use it or regulate it for you.
But a law or regulation can be made about anything, though.
b... all articles of human rights I posted where those that required you to make a choice. Implying that the one who actually has the power is you, not the regulator. They just try to keep your power in check.
Any other article mentioned that did not involve you making a decision to submit or rebel is then honestly an absolute human right that cannot even be remotely restrained. Not even incarceration can restrain your exercising of the right such as the following:
Posted by NotYourAverageAquarius
Article 15.
(1) Everyone has the right to a nationality.
(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.
I don't know why but this just seems stupid to me... like you can actually tell me where I did and did not come from as if it never happened or something.
Only you can can accept someone's decision to tell you that you are not from where you are originally from... they don't have the power to do that. They cannot control your brain.
Posted by NotYourAverageAquarius
Article 18.
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.
Thanks United Nations I had no Idea I could keep my thoughts from you and everyone else in this world. -_-click to expand
I mean obviously this all resides in the mind of the of the oppressed, you and you alone can control your mind and what it is you want to think.
Posted by NotYourAverageAquarius
Article 19.
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
The idea that a government could opress you with laws and regulations about what you can and cannot have opinions about is ludicrious. Even if you hypothetically followed there laws as in.... you never at least expressed your opinion, there is no way for them to rob you of that opinion. That opinion is and will always exist and it will always be yours till the day you die. Your opinion is created by your brain that no one but you have control over. Logically speaking, it is your right as a human to have the control of your own brain till you are killed or seriosuly subjected to trauma of the skull that rendors you a vegetable.... but are you even a human anymore at that point? In a vegetable state does anyone actually have intelligent thoughts? I mean technically speaking almost all MD's consider that to be brain dead is as good as dead. If you have to kill something to have control of it how can you say you ever had control of it? Furthermore any government thinking they can control society to not express their opinions is just retarded.....expressing an opinion is an action that cannot be controlled without incarcarating the entire population which inturn trumps that governments power because, all of their so called 'power' is incarcarated. LOL think about it jeez
Yes, there is one part of this article that does require you to make a choice that could result in the government incarcerating you, in an attempt to control your freedom of expression. But as far as.... can they go into the inner workings of your mind and take the privilege of your own opinion away from you... come on are you serious ^.^?
Also I never quite got a confirmation from you Feb on whether you thought the 'right to life' was a Human Right that transcended Government regulation and is inalienable.....
JUST IN CASE YOU DID think that about the 'right to life'
When you actually have not been aborted.... miscarried.... or any other atrocity that could befall you robbing/depriving you of your right. What is to stop a government from coming in, killing you the second child, taking away your 'unregulated' right to live all because you are overpopulating an already overpopulated country? I mean really already is sorta regulated Feb, China for instance has strict policies on population growth and has a one-child-per-family Policy. If the One-Child Policy is violated either by accident due to birth control failure or intentional the poor mothers and their families pay dearly. If found out about before conceiving the child the government will give the poor mother a forced abortion and in a lot of situations maybe all they are also given a hefty ass fine... something like the equivalent of 40,000 U.S. dollars when the average Chinese workers income is so low that they could barely make a quarter in a year of what the average minimum wage worker here in America--IF THAT--considering they probably work close to twice the amount of hours your typical U.S. worker does in a week:
"2004 WorldSalaries.org calculated the average gross annual income for an average Chinese worker as 4,397 U.S. dollars — less than an eighth of the maximum possible fine."
Read more: http://www.care2.com/causes/chinese-woman-forced-to-have-abortion-at-8-months.html#ixzz2RK4uXtph<BR>
The poor mothers could even be forced to get sterilized.... which makes having a forced abortion seem much more attractive...
Just think if somehow they were to accomplish have the child without anyone or the government finding out... IF they didn't kill the kid the first time this ever happened IF IT HAS EVER HAPPENED... I'm sure you can deduce that once they saw a trend it would seem obvious that the Chinese government would and could 'absolutely enforce the invocation of their One-Child Policy' by killing either the newborn child to follow suite with the regulation and protect against overpopulation by regulating the amount of people being allowed to live in the country and in one family. And if not the child then I guess one of the parents.
When you actually have not been aborted.... miscarried.... or any other atrocity that could befall you robbing/depriving you of your right. What is to stop a government from coming in, killing you the second child, taking away your 'unregulated' right to live all because you are overpopulating an already overpopulated country? I mean really already is sorta regulated Feb, China for instance has strict policies on population growth and has a one-child-per-family Policy. If the One-Child Policy is violated either by accident due to birth control failure or intentional the poor mothers and their families pay dearly. If found out about before conceiving the child the government will give the poor mother a forced abortion and in a lot of situations maybe all they are also given a hefty ass fine... something like the equivalent of 40,000 U.S. dollars when the average Chinese workers income is so low that they could barely make a quarter in a year of what the average minimum wage worker here in America--IF THAT--considering they probably work close to twice the amount of hours your typical U.S. worker does in a week:
"2004 WorldSalaries.org calculated the average gross annual income for an average Chinese worker as 4,397 U.S. dollars — less than an eighth of the maximum possible fine."
Read more: http://www.care2.com/causes/chinese-woman-forced-to-have-abortion-at-8-months.html#ixzz2RK4uXtph<BR>
The poor mothers could even be forced to get sterilized.... which makes having a forced abortion seem much more attractive...
Just think if somehow they were to accomplish have the child without anyone or the government finding out... IF they didn't kill the kid the first time this ever happened IF IT HAS EVER HAPPENED... I'm sure you can deduce that once they saw a trend it would seem obvious that the Chinese government would and could 'absolutely enforce the invocation of their One-Child Policy' by killing either the newborn child to follow suite with the regulation and protect against overpopulation by regulating the amount of people being allowed to live in the country and in one family. And if not the child then I guess one of the parents.
Posted by feby16aquaPosted by StoicGoatPosted by feby16aqua
A human right is entirely yours in its capacity. No one can tell you how to use it or regulate it for you.
But a law or regulation can be made about anything, though.
yes, and as long as it is not regulated by law, it is a human right within this discussion, no?click to expand
I'll let you and NYAA settle that. I'm just providing a little friendly instigation. 🙂
Posted by feby16aquaPosted by NotYourAverageAquarius
Also I never quite got a confirmation from you Feb on whether you thought the 'right to life' was a Human Right that transcended Government regulation and is inalienable.....
I do think it is a human right. But at the same time, shouldn't it be regulated to ensure sanctity of the right?
click to expand
If it is necessary to enforce the right because you cannot assert it on your own then it is not a Human Right that transcends government regulation no?
Funny if you consider what the criteria for an Anarchist to consider you or themselves to be human:
The more enlightened man will become, the less he will employ compulsion and coercion. The really civilized man will divest himself of all fear and authority. He will rise from the dust and stand erect: he will bow to no tsar either in heaven or on earth. He will become fully human when he will scorn to rule and refuse to be ruled. He will be truly free only when there shall be no more masters.
Interesting.
The more enlightened man will become, the less he will employ compulsion and coercion. The really civilized man will divest himself of all fear and authority. He will rise from the dust and stand erect: he will bow to no tsar either in heaven or on earth. He will become fully human when he will scorn to rule and refuse to be ruled. He will be truly free only when there shall be no more masters.
Interesting.
Posted by feby16aqua
But Stoic, please tell me, why do guys ignore the girls they like?
I should have made one of the debate topics something to do with dating!
That is a difficult question. They could be afraid the girl doesn't reciprocate their attraction or afraid of general ridicule for liking a particular girl their peers hold in disdain. It is possible they are idiots and don't realise that communication is one of the more successful means be which boys have historically established relationships with girls they fancy. It's possible that the girl being ignored by the guy she thinks likes her has entirely fabricated his attraction to her. Or any of a nearly limitless number of possibilities that are lost in the discussion between love and reason.
Inexplicably, I have noticed that a boy who ignores a girl generally appears to have a significantly greater chance of engendering her interest in him than he would have had he openly pursued her. Now I'm going to turn the table on you: why is this the case?
Posted by StoicGoatPosted by feby16aqua
But Stoic, please tell me, why do guys ignore the girls they like?
I should have made one of the debate topics something to do with dating!
That is a difficult question. They could be afraid the girl doesn't reciprocate their attraction or afraid of general ridicule for liking a particular girl their peers hold in disdain. It is possible they are idiots and don't realise that communication is one of the more successful means be which boys have historically established relationships with girls they fancy. It's possible that the girl being ignored by the guy she thinks likes her has entirely fabricated his attraction to her. Or any of a nearly limitless number of possibilities that are lost in the discussion between love and reason.
Inexplicably, I have noticed that a boy who ignores a girl generally appears to have a significantly greater chance of engendering her interest in him than he would have had he openly pursued her. Now I'm going to turn the table on you: why is this the case?click to expand
Because, people are stupid?
Posted by NotYourAverageAquarius
Funny if you consider what the criteria for an Anarchist to consider you or themselves to be human:
The more enlightened man will become, the less he will employ compulsion and coercion. The really civilized man will divest himself of all fear and authority. He will rise from the dust and stand erect: he will bow to no tsar either in heaven or on earth. He will become fully human when he will scorn to rule and refuse to be ruled. He will be truly free only when there shall be no more masters.
Interesting.
This is interesting. I wonder if it could be woven into a discussion on human rights...
Oh yeah man I was planning on putting a lot of stuff by them up in this but I see now it's like 8:15 or w/e or let me see when did you start this thing?
Anyways yeah I found it interesting.
Posted by feby16aquaPosted by StoicGoatPosted by feby16aqua
But Stoic, please tell me, why do guys ignore the girls they like?
I should have made one of the debate topics something to do with dating!
That is a difficult question. They could be afraid the girl doesn't reciprocate their attraction or afraid of general ridicule for liking a particular girl their peers hold in disdain. It is possible they are idiots and don't realise that communication is one of the more successful means be which boys have historically established relationships with girls they fancy. It's possible that the girl being ignored by the guy she thinks likes her has entirely fabricated his attraction to her. Or any of a nearly limitless number of possibilities that are lost in the discussion between love and reason.
Inexplicably, I have noticed that a boy who ignores a girl generally appears to have a significantly greater chance of engendering her interest in him than he would have had he openly pursued her. Now I'm going to turn the table on you: why is this the case?
I can tell you how it goes with me.
If I like someone and they give me a little, but mostly ignore me it drives me crazy, but it's not an instant cray, just gradual until I explode or get what I am looking for: it's always attention (and I think I can speak for women here, but they may not admit it).
If he doesn't pay me as much mind as I'd like him to I'm wondering: "why is he doing this?" "how can he not like me?" "wtf f yo life I hate you but why don't you pay attention to me?" The more intrigue a man has about him, the more women will be curious about him, about unlocking that vault of manly secrets.click to expand
So why doesn't this work against an Aquarius male?
Posted by NotYourAverageAquarius
Oh yeah man I was planning on putting a lot of stuff by them up in this but I see now it's like 8:15 or w/e or let me see when did you start this thing?
This one runs for 48 hours, so there's still an entire day to go! Get on it!
LOOOOOL holy shit I wish I had realized that hahahaha
Sounds like you got some skillz
No winner yet, wizard. Check back tomorrow.
Stop being so Aqua and loving and start the deathmatch 😛
I WANNA SEE SOME BLOOOOOOOD!
Join the Conversation. Explore Yourself. Connect with Others.
Discover insights, swap stories, and find people. dxpnet is where experiences turn into understanding.
Create Your Free Account →Related Topics
Over the past year and a half on this site, I have seen many Aquas state that they don't share their feelings for someon
the males always wrongly assume things about me, or are aloof.... the females are to open,and provocative or damaged an
Aquasnoz, the votes are in and you have been voted out. Remaining players: From specifying the general subject ma
Can anyone tell me..does aqua guys take long to approach someone they like? i am a bit curious. I have known these three
If my SUNS house of love is also my ASC house of losses, what does that mean? i am aquarius sun and cancer rising....
For this debate, the players are divided into two teams comprised of aquasnoz and NotYourAverageAquarius in this corner
Can anyone give me any insite into how forgiving Aquarius' are? I acted inappropriately when out with him and his friend
My aqua ex has a tendency to talk and suddenly after being into the convo for about a minute he suddenly stops replying
Some peeps know my story.. but just a quick recap.. been with gem(aqua moon) for 4 years. We've had a pretty good relati
You guys (we) get the gold medal in patience!!!! Lol!!!
about a week ago i was reading through astrology sign descriptions and i found this one for aquarius. Aquarius Yo
Are aqua males famous for leaving their businesses, relationships hanging in mid air? what i mean by this is do they jus
...and a tragedy to those who feel. Smile, world. The Aquarians are laughing at YOU! Hello everyone, I've been a
Are there any other aquarians that would consider themselves intense here? It just seems the older I get, the more...I d
Hello aquas...:)could you help me understand? im confused i have two good aqua male friends...both are interested in a
i get the number but thats where it allways end ....i thought we where soulmates!!!!!!
Some peeps know my story.. but just a quick recap.. been with gem(aqua moon) for 4 years. We've had a pretty good relati
do people always accuse air signs of hypocrisy or being twofaced? Aquarians get the hypocrite title a lot, Librans ar
Hey everyone. First I want to say I really appreciate all the feedback from the multiple posts I made about how to get m
I might be wrong and I know you guys probably dont like admitting flaws in your character, but every time I notice more
Okay so then....... you don't think that the 'right to life' is a human right that 'transcends' government regulation?
^.^?