Rather looks as if she had her face too close when she used a paper fastener
[Gosh I hope it's not a necessary medical device]
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts
Facial adornment is a thing. I’m pretty sure it has been for thousands of years, even. Over in Africa it’s an even bigger thing - I’m a little surprised you’re surprised by it. Angelina is big on Africa, she adopted a kid from Ethiopia who grew up to launch her own jewelry collection.
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
~ Carl Sagan
Not surprised. Some people like ugly. I just wonder why?
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts
And to add one additional thing--if you don't like it, don't look at it. It's easy enough to not click on images, and avert one''s eyes when seeing something in real life.
So is ugly, BigRR. Another straw man - where do you get them all?
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts
What straw man is that Meade, not clicking on or looking at something you do not care to see? I just don't get it; do you just have to respond, whether it makes sense or not?
I can't even stand a hair on my face let alone some hunk of metal. The lengths women go to attract attention or simply do what they think is beautiful. At least it's not tattoos.
What straw man is that Meade, not clicking on or looking at something you do not care to see? I just don't get it; do you just have to respond, whether it makes sense or not?
Yes. Where did I complain about having to look at anything? Or not clicking on something? All I asked is if anyone else supposed she thought it was a good look. Do you? Why invent a "how-liberal-am-I" response?
(And by the way, the lady's ironmongery image appeared when I opened AOL to check mail. They have a newsfeed that's not optional. Not much choice in what pops up and I wasn't scared or horrified either )
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts
It’s not my preference but I don’t think it’s a bad look. She looks striking and the visual is the medium. Everyone expects quirkiness from Jolie, she famously wore a vial of Billy Bob Thornton’s blood around her neck when they were married. So she’s into weird.
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
~ Carl Sagan
she famously wore a vial of Billy Bob Thornton’s blood around her neck when they were married. So she’s into weird.
I'd agree, just because she was with Billy Bob. He's (just a bit) weird too.
That looks like an instant speech impediment to me.
One of my college friends, in fact the only one I still regularly associate with, has a son who is part of Billy Bob's band, The Boxmasters. They've been to Kansas a couple of times. That friend is the one who found my 1937 MGTA in the trees near a neighbor's farm house. A week, and some dollars, later it was in my garage.
“If you trust in yourself, and believe in your dreams, and follow your star. . . you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things and weren't so lazy.”
So now defending someone's right to look the way they choose to is "liberal"? As opposed to wat?
And, FWIW, all said is that you don't have to look at anything you don't want to. How that is a strawman, or liberal for that matter, is beyond me.
I didn't attack anyone's "right" to look the way they choose. And you did not defend anyone's "right" to look the way they choose. You're just making things up now (again)
What you did was to pretend that I had made some complaint about having to look at something I didn't want to see. You made that up too so you could wag your liberal self-righteous finger at me over something I never said, wrote or did.
All I asked was did you (or anyone) believe she thought it was a good look. Do you?
(I know self-righteous when I see it - expert me )
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts