Retribution

[size=1]I'd just like to mention that the maximum dimensions for an avatar on OB is 150x80 pixels. It's fine if the request is for livejournal or something, but if you intend on using it for OB, you might want to consider amending your request.[/size]

[size=1][B]Name:[/B] Uzumaki Naruto [B]Age:[/B] 16 [B]Appearance:[/B] [url=http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/12/Naruto_pt.2.png][link][/url] [B]Rank:[/B] Genin [B]Village:[/B] Hidden Leaf Village [B]Jutsus/Abilties:[/B] [I]Odama Rasengan:[/I] A larger and more powerful version of the Rasengan (super-concentrated orb of destructive chakra), but as the chakra is more unstable, he needs a clone to form and control the energy. [I]Kage Bunshin no Jutsu:[/I] Unlike the normal Bunshin no Jutsu (Art of the Doppelganger), this jutsu does not create illusions, but real bodies of the user. The user's chakra is evenly distributed among every clone. This could be very dangerous if the user is low on chakra or makes too many clones, making this technique forbidden. However, this is something that Naruto himself doesn't have to worry about, since his chakra supply is almost unlimited in regards to the Nine Tails Fox Demon within him. [I]Uzumaki Naruto Nisen Rendan:[/I] Naruto uses his Kage Bunshin (Art of the Shadow Doppleganger) to make up for his lack of speed. First, Naruto uses one of his clones to punch the opponent backwards a little bit into the air. As they are about to hit the ground, three or four clones (depending on the situation) slide under them, kicking them up into the air. The real Naruto kicks off the clone who punched the enemy into the air above the opponent and smash him into the ground with a kick to the head. The punch and kicks from the clones coincide with the syllables of Naruto's last name: "U!" "Zu!" "Ma!" "Ki!". The real Naruto himself shouts "Naruto Rendan!" as he finishes the technique with the kick. This, however, is done with 2,000 dopplegangers who more simultaneously. [B]Weapons/Tools:[/B] Item Scroll[/size]

[size=1][B]@ Charles:[/B] Love your new avatar. Hahaha... In any event, I think it tactless to toss out names and call them incompetent in a public forum. While my name wasn't really included in the bunch, and I appreciate you thinking I do my job well, this really should've been dealt with via PM for obvious reasons. That aside, I admittely cannot forsee a drastic change, even if we were to do a moderator-shuffle to fill in the cracks and strengthen our ranks. Most of the power is with the member-base. It is you who makes intelligent threads, interesting RPGs, or beautiful works. All [i]we[/i] do is lock up the threads.[/size]

[QUOTE=sakurasuka][size=1]Understand, an argument on a message board only causes confrontation. If someone were to actually do something about it, that's great. But what's argued about on OB isn't going to change anything. I was just saying that this sort of topic always go bad once some radical Christian or some offended person gets involved. The thread then gets closed. So why even bring it up again? It's been argued to death and niether side EVER EVER EVER budges.[/size][/quote] [size=1]Yes, you're right. But it's the general principle of submission in the face of conflict. I know that debating on OB really does nothing, but it's the principle of standing up for your beliefs when they're under fire. [quote][size=1]Why is everyone so obsessed with some sort of radical [i]change[/i]? You say you have to challenge the system to initiate change. Well, why can't you be civil about it? Or passive? Why must you be aggressive and obnoxious? Why does everyone want to change everyone else? I urge tolerance and acceptance, yes. I have come to realize that there will always be discrimination, but that's something I as a person can't change. I can't change someone else. I can only set an example. So that's what I do. Being 'in-your-face' isn't neccesary. Conflict is rarely neccesary. Just live your own life the best you can, and stop trying to make others see things how you do. You can't. People will always have opinions different than yours.[/size][/quote] I certainly am being civil in this debate. Radical change is also rarely necessary. Being passive can rarely inspire change. I relate passivity to water; it takes the path of least resistance, and in order to change things, one must face the rocks above to inspire change, not flow through the cracks. Being aggressive and obnoxious is unintended, and I'm very sorry if I come off as such. Unfortunately, we do not live in an ideal world where we can all completely accept one another's points of view. We always see our point of view as more enlightened than the next man's. This is one of those holes in human nature. You can never completely eliminate discrimination, but you can speak out against it. You can stand up and be counted and fight for justice rather than just being an "example" in a small isolated box. I can be an example for non-discrimination by not discriminating, but that is not good enough. In addition to just not discriminating, one must also fight for justice and attempt to sway others points of view. This is where the "why must we try to change others?" comes in. Without an alterance in point of view, well, I'd still be drinking from a "Colored" fountain. No, being "in-your-face" isn't necessary, but it is certainly necessary to bring the issues to the table. Conflict occurs every day without you knowing it, and it isn't really unpleasant. You seem to be stretching debate and civil talks out of proportion and labeling it all uncivil, rude, or in-your-face. People having different opinions than yours makes the world move forward. With a continuously agreeable society, you have mindlessness, you have complete and point-blank face-value acceptance, you have 1984. Progress is made only through conflict and struggle... this doesn't need to be violent or physical or hateful, either. [quote][size=1]Look, I'm bisexual, and quite honestly, I wouldn't care if I couldn't get married to the man/woman. If the government told me 'Y'know, you're not allowed to marry your girlfriend/boyfriend/fiance. Deal with it.' I'd probably just keep living with the person, keep loving them. Buy rings maybe. Have my own celebration, hell, even call it a 'wedding' if I wanted. I don't need anyone to tell me how to live me life. I don't need to have the church/state issue me a marriage licence to love and commit myself to someone, and I pity the people who do. Also, we all live, and we all die. Who the hell cares if you can't legally wed someone of your same sex and take on thier name? Once you're dead, you're dead. Yeah, we all deserve equal rights, but the system isn't perfect. We all get screwed over eventually. Either live with it, or go start a petition or something.[/size][/QUOTE] Tell me that once you realize you're being shorted out of all the marital benefits that straight couples are getting. Tell me that once you realize that you're both human and deserve the same rights. Tax benefits, hospitality visits, the list goes on. You're seriously belittling the difference in rights between a straight couple and a gay couple. In retrospect, why did you bother to reply to my post if there's no point? Why worry about what I think? You can't change my mind, and all it does is create unnecessary, unproductive tension.[/size]

[size=1][quote name='sakurasuka][size=1']Why would anyone want to bring up this subject again? Honestly. All it does is cause confrontation, up until the point someone says something out of line and it gets closed.[/size][/quote] If you never have conflict, if you always shy away from the disturbing or confrontational, nothing gets done. You live in a small box where everyone agrees and nothing changes.[quote][size=1]And it'd be nice if everyone would stop bashing Gavin simply because he believes something different than you. He wasn't trying to force his beliefs on you, he was just saying that his beliefs do not condone homosexuality. That is [u]fine[/u].[/size][/quote]No one was really bashing Gavin, and while he wasn't trying to force his beliefs on [i]us[/i], he was basically going to be forcing his Catholic morals on others, which is the same as forcing beliefs on you. It's unfortunately shades of gray, not black and white.[quote][size=1]People will always look down on other people for what they think/believe/don't believe. People will always get obnoxious and out of line and bash homosexuals, or bomb abortion clinics. That's how it will always be.[/size][/quote]So let's not try to change it by urging tolerance and acceptance. It's just how it's going to be.[/size]

[size=1]I'm really excited about this game, but I have a few concerns that end up true for these sort of fighting games (*coughbudokaicough*). Will it get repetitive? The cut scenes looked nothing short of amazing, but if you do a three-hit combo every time you hit X-X-X, it would be ridiculously dull after ten minutes. Will it be more of a command-punching game? Budokai felt cumbersome and slow - it was only a contest to see who could punch in the most combos. Will there be a heavy tactical element to it? If not, it's just not staying true to the story of Naruto. [spoiler]Without having to seriously strategize around Shikamaru's shadow attack thing, or have to do trap someone to do the Chidori or Rasengan on them, it would be dull at best.[/spoiler] Basically, I'm just worried that the game won't maintain story fidelity -- the fluidity of combat, the intense and strategically involved nature of these banners, etc. Many games end up being interesting for a couple minutes, but go flat from repitition. And as an interesting sidenote, I sort of wish it were something like a Super Smash Bros. fighting game. I think that way, you could move with more freedom, set up traps, etc.[/size]

[size=1]I must say that Eegad is pretty awesome. I saw it on the Slackers in Slacks MySpace, and I just cracked up for five minutes. Keep 'em coming, [strike]monkey slave[/strike] DW.[/size]

[size=1]Well, I'm voting for [b]sakurasuka[/b]. When I saw your piece last night, I was in shock. This is by far your best piece, and you've outdone most people on OB with this (myself included). The soft pinks and oranges were an unorthodox yet harmonious way to go, and your stock is just stunning. Your two vectoriing works are also amazing, and my jaw dropped when I read you made them with watercolors and a scanner. The text is just outright sexy... there's no real other way to describe it. You were ingenuitive and effective in your execution, and it seriously, seriously shows. Ezekiel, your piece was actually pretty good. However, your composition was severly weakened by your text (the quote) and the stock's awkward placement. I sort of felt like it should be showing a bit more. I really do like your background though - loud can be just as much of a compliment as soft. You two are stunning.[/size]

[size=1]The letter shook with the minute involuntary twitches of Alexander?s hand, which trembled with fear. A gripping panic enveloped his mind, sending his thought processes into shock. The thought of his family dead, the notion of his nation erased, the mere idea of the world being wiped out was too much to fathom at once. He fought to deny it, choosing not to accept the sick twist that fate had dealt him. The reality was disquieting. He was in his business suit that he had been wearing when he walked back into his house, and from glancing out the window, he could see a dark, silent Paris 2. Perhaps the British government ordered an evacuation of the entire population, and it required the sedating of all citizens. Yes, that was certainly it, he frantically reasoned; Julia and Sarah would be in a similar room, and it would only be a matter of time before being reunited. And then the humans would defeat the Second Fac?. A quiet rapping was heard upon the door. He stared at it for several seconds, then directly back at the letter he was given. He gave no answer. ?Sir, may I enter?? The voice was official and stale. There was silence. ?Sir? I?m coming in.? The door creaked with her entrance as Alex glanced up to meet her gaze. ?Very sorry, ma?am. I?m just? I?,? he fumbled mid-sentence, and sighed in defeat. He averted his eyes from the woman, who was in an uninviting grey dress with an equally stiff headdress. ?Quite alright. I can?t imagine how shocked you are to be waking up in a completely different country with no idea how you got here.? ?It?s fine,? he lied, ?but will there be someone to answer our questions? some sort of formal debriefing?? ?I have no idea, to be honest. However, my duty is only to tell those awakening from the coma that there is a ball that the Supreme Chancellor is holding tonight to welcome you.? Alex choked at the words [I]coma[/I] and [I]Supreme Chancellor[/I]. [I]Hitler was the Chancellor of the Third Reich[/I], he bitterly thought. ?Is there a time I?m expected, and what do I wear?? the most he could do was feign interest and attempt to mask his confusion. He wanted more than anything for this woman to leave him alone, for her to tell her it was all a horrible joke and he could return to his life. There was no such relief, only a continuance of the nightmare. ?Oh, you can pick something out of the closet here, and be there by eight. When you?re ready, please touch that white panel,? she gestured towards the door ?to indicate you?re ready. Be ready in an hour. Thank you for your patience,? she weakly smiled at him with pale interest and strolled out of the door once more. He gave no further attempt interact with the woman, and lay back down on the bed. His hand massaged his eyes. Perhaps they were broken, or he was hallucinating, or he was just dreaming. There was no such relief, only a continuance of the nightmare. Reluctantly, he examined the contents of the closet and settled upon what resembled a traditional suit, which granted him some small degree of comfort. He set it on the bed, and let his eyes probe the dark cityscape. [I]So this is Paris 2.[/I][/size]

[size=1]I just wanted to say thanks for the shoutout. The subtle ones are always best. The piece looks much more aesthetically pleasing than the one I invisioned while writing that line, though. Good luck to the both of you.[/size]

[size=1]No dryer, you say? That's strange. Usually colleges will have communal washers and dryers. In any event, fading is one of those inevitable things that happens eventually, but in day to day washing you shouldn't be experiencing drastic fading. You can somewhat stall the fading process by washing with cold water. If you wash with hot, to put it frankly, you're screwed. The only way I know of to dry clothes without a dryer would be to hanging them out to dry, so if that's not working, you may be out of luck. I do my laundry with both a washer and dryer, and it seems to be alright. I wash white clothes in hot water and colored clothes in cold and I've only had one shirt that's faded. By the way, how many loads do you have to do to wash all your laundry?[/size]

[size=1][b]Note:[/b] ftw is an abbreviation for "for the win," commonly used in gaming alongside such words as pwn/own and noob. You really won't understand the piece if you don't know what it means. Heh. Good luck, Whitey. Hope you don't mind I made you a girl. ;)[/size] [IMG]http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y170/retri_trib/graphicafinal.jpg[/IMG]

[quote name='Gavin][SIZE=1']Alright, semantics aside, I've already said that if it's purely legal, let them off, let them get married and have the fifty percent divorce rate heterosexual couples in the U.S. enjoy. Let them have the nasty bitter divorces through the courts, let them have all the misery that comes afterwards. Just because they're allowed get married like anyone else does not mean it's going to be all sun and roses. I mean if people want to be really, really realistic here, gay couples are going to have the same one in two chance of splitting up as straight couples, it's not as if they're somehow going to all have perfect marriages just because they're now allowed get married legally. To lift a phrase from the liberal camp, gay or straight, people are still people.[/size][/quote] [size=1]I'm completely certain that gays would be ecstatic if everyone had this mindset. If everyone said "Fine, but you'll have a 50% divorce rate like everyone else!" the battle for them would be won. Of course they're not going to have perfect marriages, and yes, you're probably right in that they'll have a 50% divorce rate as well. However, they will have had the right to choose to marry another of the same gender, and that is the most important part. However, this is somewhat off topic...[/size] [QUOTE][SIZE=1]I think Retri what you're referring to would be the Reformation, when acts like Simony, Nepotism and other major corruptions were cast out from the Church is favour of a more pious life. Unfortunately your "hundred year" timeline if off by a few centuries. I'll admit freely that the Church was corrupt for a long time, now however, and we're dealing with the now, it's not, which is impressive for an organisation that has 1,100,000,000, that's 1.1 billion, followers and manages gargantuan sums of money each year. I can't think of a single country/organisation with similar size and income that does as well. And I really don't care for the liberal left in a similar fashion. But as I've said twice already, as long as they're not looking for the blessing of the Catholic Church or it's members, or mind the fact that we won't ever consider their marriages morally official then let them marry in their millions for all I care. Of course the real issue here to the religious, is that gay people by breaking the will of God, who incidentally most gay people don't believe exists, are putting their mortal souls in danger. Now seeing as they don't believe in God that doesn't really matter, but for those of us that do believe in God there is that slight little niggling worry we're allowing countless people to condemn themselves to an eternity in Hell by accepting that homosexual behaviour is appropriate. I'm not persecuting anyone intentionally by denying them the right to get married, what I am trying to do is prevent them from an eternity of pain for not following the laws of God. If anyone thinks I'm being disingenuous with this statement, well there's nothing I can do to prove I'm sincere, but I should hope my reputation for being honest will convince some others.[/SIZE][/QUOTE] [size=1]As someone else pointed out, I was indeed pointing towards the Counter-Reformation. In addition, it's not like that was the only time during which corruption plagued the Church. I believe I was taught that the Church had been selling indulgences for quite a while, owning property, etc. before, during, and after the Counter-Reformation. I was unaware of creating a "hundred year" timeline... I thought I said one thousand, but I might be wrong. It's great that the Church has shaped up now. However, I'm willing to wager that the Papacy hasn't fumbled because of the 1.1 billion followers who would be outraged to hear of corruption. The loss would simply be too great to even risk corruption - I thought I already said that these people were the check and balance to Papal authority. In any event, the Pope still walks around with his silver-and-gold staff with the crucifix attached to the end in his billowing robes and celebrates Mass in a huge Cathedral that [probably] took millions to build while there are billions suffering. It's not like they're off the hook, yet I digress from the debate. Really, that's all I want -- for you to let gays have their supposed "eternity of suffering" and make their own choice by the millions. As far as I know, no gay person is asking for the Pope's blessing; they are content with living their life with their partner. It's really great that you don't want them to go to hell. I seriously believe you're genuine in your statement. Unfortunately, a vast slice of the population does not share your faith, and as a result, should not be bound by the tenants of Catholicism. God gave man free-will, and all gays are asking for is their continued free-will. The most [and best] you can do is to voice your opinion to others, and let them take it as they list. Christ never shoved his message down anyone's throat. He presented it in a rational, non-confrontational manner and let others make their own decision.[/size]

[QUOTE=Chabichou][COLOR=#004a6f]Now some of you already know my stance about homosexual acts. They are wrong and they are forbidden by God, and technically speaking, from a non-religious point of view, homosexuality is unnatural, and therefore should not be promoted and encouraged. Gay marriage encourages homosexuality. It condones it, and gives the message that it is okay when clearly it is not. Now, I'm not going to sit here talking about the "moral reasons" why its wrong, just the technical ones. The first technical reasons is because males and females are designed to mate with the other gender.[/COLOR][/QUOTE] [size=1]Now, I'm not going to bother rebutting the rest of your post, but this part got me. :p You talk about homosexuality as if it were something that could possibly be discouraged through the forbidding of civil unions. You can't 'convert' a gay person, and any measures taken to do so would end in futility. Allowing civil unions wouldn't be promoting or [B]en[/B]couraging people to become homosexual, nor would denying gays the right to a civil union [B]dis[/B]courage them from being gay. Sure, you can pull out the "It ain't normal!" card, but [i]who cares[/i] if it's not normal? I thought that we had transcended the 1800s style of thinking where if it's unnatural, it must be wrong. So two men aren't [i]supposed to[/i] live together because they can't reproduce. As previously mentioned, there are plenty of sterile, straight couples, and no one has a problem with them. And couldn't you say that humans flying around or making tons of steel float on water is unnatural? It's just such a subjective term, and it's a pretty flimsy defense to hide behind.[/size]

[size=1]Since this is more of a web design operation, I'll move it to the [B]Web Site Workshop[/B]. I was thinking about moving it to the Manga Workshop, but it's more of a website thing.[/size] [size=1]You can try searching for tutorials - I find that they actually explain it well. My favorite tutorial site is [url=http://www.pixel2life.com][b]Pixel2Life[/b][/url]. In addition, don't be afraid to hit the F1 key for tips from Adobe.[/size] [color=#4B0082]Combined posts 'cause of the thread merge. - [i]Desbreko[/i][/color]

[quote name='The13thMan][FONT=Century Gothic] [COLOR=DarkOrange]There is no absolute way to determine whether homosexuality is alright or not. That is why there is such a big argument over it all. That is why I can?t stand on one side of the fence with a 100% of my self. I can see how religious people disapprove of homosexuality and can agree with it, but I can also see how other people are fine with it. The thing is, marriage is just marriage, no big deal nowadays. I think it should be fine for homosexuals to get married, and I think the government should have no say in the matter. But whether I believe homosexuality is alright or not is not determined by my stance in the matter of gay marriage and neither is it up for debate in this topic. ^L^[/COLOR'][/FONT][/quote] [size=1]The only choice that matters as far as it being 'absolute' is yours, and I believe that it is possible for one to believe it an absolute truth that homosexuality is wrong/right. 'Absolute,' in this context, is a completely internal thing. For me, it is an absolute truth that homosexuals are equal to me and deserve equal rights. For me, we are both entitled to human dignity, and the denying of civil unions for homosexuals is denying them of their dignity as humans. I also think you nailed it perfectly on the head in the second half of your paragraph. What is important is not what you believe personally, but what you believe the law governing everyone should be. I, for instance, may be opposed to the idea of two men being partnered, but if I can push aside my personal views and realize that it is only my religion standing between me and acceptance, I can be pro-gay marriage. If that made any sense whatsoever. In retrospect, this was a long-winded, roundabout, and relatively pointless post. Very sorry.[/size]

[quote name='Gavin][SIZE=1]Which leads me to raise the example of Vatican City, a city which I have visited and [B]is[/B] a theocracy and [B]works[/B']. Is it a tyrant's nation ? No. Theocracies do not work when corrupt, immoral men take charge.[/SIZE][/quote] [size=1]Oh, right, except for the small fact that the Catholic Church has indeed been relatively corrupt up until the last hundred years or so. The selling of indulgences, the Church owning property, the vast amounts of wealth, all of these scream of corruption. Sure, the Church has been pretty good as of late, but for the last thousand years or so, it's been a corrupt entity that commanded more than just religious authority throughout Europe. Theocracies are corrupt unless there is another body keeping them in check; in modern times, I would assume that globally concerned people are that body. In any event, I'm a staunch liberal who doesn't care much for those on the right wing (Please note I speak only of their beliefs, not their self-worth). I wholeheartedly support all efforts for gay marriage/civil unions, and I hope it's only a matter of time before our nation moves past this 1950s conservative mindset. PS: Very sorry for rehashing anyone's points. I [admittedly] only scanned the thread, however the first page was indeed scary for me. ;)[/size]

[size=1]I'm in the same boat as sakurasuka. Blah. By the way, there are borders on all edges save the top one because that's how the original banner is as well. [url=http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y170/retri_trib/hbbanner.jpg][b]Click here.[/b][/url][/size]

[size=1]I was thinking about doing the evil twisty mustache, but I was too lazy.[/size] [IMG]http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y170/retri_trib/graphica2.jpg[/IMG]

[size=1]I believe this thread has some potential, but it needs to fine-tuning first. If everyone just posts images, the thread will be completely pointless. If, however, the first person (you) were to post some sketches, and the next person would critique them and post their own, I think things would work out fine. We already have a few successful 'chain' threads, and I can't see why this one won't succeed. So long as everyone [size=2][b]reads this post[/b][/size], I'll let this stay open.[/size]

[size=1]Good luck to all.[/size] [IMG]http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y170/retri_trib/graphica1.jpg[/IMG]

[size=1]I was under the assumption that James' "new" system of this "dynamic story" really has existed for quite a while under different names. I know that I independently created freeflowing chapters, where the creator of the RPG sets an objective for the characters to reach before the chapter closes, so that the story has cohesiveness. I still highly doubt that chapters will become the new way any time soon. OB has many more new RPers who gravitate towards the traditional ways, and I think the entire internet is the same way. I certainly prefer chapters, but different styles work for different RPs -- one isn't necessarily better than the other. Sorry if I only rehashed other people's posts. To be honest, I didn't really read them.[/size]

[size=1]You know, the day (6/6/06) really has zero significance because of the fact that the Romans changed the calendar back in the day. Thanks to July and August (Julius and Augustus Caeser), the months have been off by two every year after the time they changed the calendar. This is also why [B]Sept[/B]ember (7), [B]Oct[/B]ober (8), [B]Nove[/B]mber (9), and [B]Dec[/B]ember (10) are offset by two.[/size]

[quote name='Sara][size=1][color=#b0000b]In defense of the guy, it isn't necessarily that he ripped off LeGuin. The idea of your "true name" granting power over you is an old one, and a "true language" is a natural extension with that (and honestly something I've toyed with in the past, having not yet read any of the EarthSea books.) But that being said, I don't know how close the usage of the language is to EarthSea. But yeah, it's not a completely new idea. (My main contact with a magical "true language" was in the [i]So You Want To Be A Wizard[/i] series, incidently.)[/color'][/size][/quote] [size=1]It's not the idea of a "true name," it's the idea of an ancient language that has command over magic (and you can't lie in, I believe) is straight from the mouth of Le Guin. Sure, the idea might be nothing new, but my point is that no matter [i]where[/i] he got it from, he stole it like all the other elements of his book. Honestly, the kid has only a certain degree of skill. How much does it take to copy a movie into a book and make it in a different time?[/size]

[size=1][quote name='Legible Rants']I'm a white male - early thirties.[/quote] Then you're obviously not connecting with Gun Preacher when he says he's an African American teenager who's been discriminated against because of race. What you're experiencing isn't distaste, it's apathy, it's indifference. I'm going to say that indifference is better than a dislike. [QUOTE]Why are people still shaken by the fact that there are rude, inconsiderate or even down-right disrespecting people out there? Why does it matter so much to most people what others think of them?[/QUOTE] Because it is part of the societal contract you 'sign' by living here that you'll abide by certain unwritten laws. These unwritten laws are called courtesy, and we expect it. When it's not given to us, we're surprised because we usually recieve it. If you were to be mistreated all your life, you wouldn't be surprised if someone gave you the finger on the street - it'd be 'one of those things'. It matters what people think of them because we are social creatures. In fact, a minute ago, you were lamenting over the fact that no one knew you. It's just natural instinct that we want to be loved and cared for. [QUOTE]Really - "Gun Preacher" - it doesn't matter. People really only have a few things to worry about in life - and it is not what others think of us or do to us.[/QUOTE] I hear you to a certain extent. People who hate you shouldn't be important, however, it can be hard to deal with it, and that's something you should acknowledge. [QUOTE]Fight back??? The best advice I would have for you is to go to school, study hard and make something of yourself - knowing that no matter who you are - you can lead a nation - regardless of color, gender or religion.[/QUOTE] No, you cannot lead a nation 100% of the time. You cannot always be whatever you want to be. What if a woman wanted to be the head of Saudi Arabia? Not happening, no matter how hard she tries. Your idealism is nice and inspiring on the small scale, things like grades, perhaps colleges, but not on the grand scale. Socioeconomic factors are just as strong as your will. [QUOTE]You're a teen - you don't get respect from people just because. You're a man - you don't get respect from people just because. You're a human - you don't get respect from people just because.[/QUOTE] And this is sad. You [i]should[/i] be respected for the sole fact that you're human. Every human has dignity, and people should acknowledge that. I respect strangers by holding the door open for them, and from time to time they do the same for me. [QUOTE]You CAN acheive anything you set your mind to. If you fail along the way.. get up and do it again.. and again.. and again..[/QUOTE] I agreed with you up until this point. If you set your mind to running through a firm, brick wall, you will end up dead. You can get up and try again as many times as you'd like, but you will die from brain damage before you get to the other side. Such is the world at times. There are things that you can do if you try your hardest, and there are things that are impossible due to other factors outside your control. Gun Preacher's being black does indeed contribute to this. As a middle-aged white male, I'm almost completely sure you have zero idea that if a white and black man, both with equal credentials were to apply to a job, the white man would be hired. Heck, when employers look at your resume and you have a 'black' name (Hope, Dante, etc), 8/10 they won't call you up if there's a 'white' name in the pile. Long story short, racism is still prevalent in today's society. It affects people, and sometimes, the system favors whites, which might be why working your hardest will still end in a failure.[/size]