>>9588957

the restriction against the need for some kind of sexual aspect to the methods of approaching The Holy should be clear to you and what the reason is: to prevent exploitation as well as it shows that the sexuality is more desired that it should be, takes over people's lives.

it's not a requirement to do 'acts' of 'sacrifice' like a sex act . . . in order to be a holy person.

and putting that into the same context , like you did, with the other topic, if basically mocking SomeOne.

Who, Who, anon, are you mocking. Maybe He some day will say 'why didn't you read that guys post and understand , why did you go on with it.'

and they we'll all laugh and Praise the Lord!

>>9588987

what is the question? fill in the blank:

"you are a priest for ever in the order of . . . ."

>>9589003

>>9589011

; )

>>9589024

and why is a day the same length . . . every day

rather a dumb question 'why is there regularity in a celestial object'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chazz_Palminteri

this guys was a regular on that show about police . . . I wonder if all that will get deleted from history too.

EVery show that ever had any character that was a law enforcement officer, and anyone who ever stared in those shows too, and all the shows that any of them every starred in as, well, and everyone on those shows too, and so on, should all be deleted from the Internet?

from IMDB?

this is how insane the left makes people behave: the bastardize their own history, their own records, and their own libraries.

these corporations should have the government eminent domain their properties if they refuse to show them, when peole want to watch the, and participants in the productions were living off of the income.

This is a case when eminent domain: of copyrights, is good politics.

this is what we can bring to them: using the tools of how they would do to us.

to refuse to show works as these marxists are doing is basically saying 'oh, this is forbidden and we shall not allow you to copy it' but that isn't what it should be. It should be that peole have a right to a copy, you need to give them a fair price.

that is the only fair way to resolve this so that arbitrary dictatorships of neglect by governance results in valuble income being denied to people who are depending on it.

Those people should thus get the copy right themselves, if the corporate stewards won't do the jobs that the charters of their corporations suggest, and whihc they outline in FEC filings to justify offering public stock . .. the violate the covenants of the filings . . . and they should loose thus, the benefits of the copyright.

>>9589108

SEC not FEC

>>9589100

it wouldn't work

>>9589200

someone needs to watch and see that there aren't problems, someone needs to coordinate the timing of the paste or two breads run simultaniously. Someone needs to collect notes (that is the part that shouldn't be there, I never understood why the bakers let themselves get saddled with that task, when it's usually all corporate copypaste and bot spam).

so whatever you wanted me to ask you about, just act as if I did

>>9589238

you understand the network architeture well enough and the load conditions and all of the profiling requirements, and how to do all the callbacks for the code, and maybe how to do Ajax?

it's not a 'single server' , it's a world wide destributed product, with multiple servers world wide proxying as one. which is fine.

and they have to chat between each other.

so you're just ready to go.

you thnk you can understand what they do well enough to just 'oh it's easy.'

and with millions viewing from all over the world? all the problems of spoofing and scripts that conflict, and the fact that inline can whack stuff . . .

set up a site, and give us a URL and I'm sure that people will run it for a test drive.

the number one rule of code boast: don't.

if you can 'make the perfect page that is better than this' then where is it?

if you say you will do it, you probably never will (It's wierd, the boast deflates the effort).

so all you 'I can do it better' just give us a URL.

that's it.

>>9589298

that is the correct way to do these kinds of effort: parts that are reliable that other can use.

build valuable shared legacy!

>>9589350

anjel is just putting the same stuff up over and over? that's not even a bit talented.

I know it's not him.