Raf

All true, and JK does have a habit of making Snape look like a villain until the last moment, when we find he was a hero all along. But this is the first time she's allowed Snape to remain a villain through the end of a book. Which proves nothing, of course. :)-->

Overall, very well done. I am of the belief that both Dumbledore and Sirius are actually dead, and won't be back. In fact, I'll be a bit disappointed if they do come back. Snape's betrayal seems entirely within character, and I hope it's not changed in book 7. There's something in writing called "emotional investment," and I don't want to see such a powerful tool squandered. Sirius was killed. Dumbledore was killed. Bringing them back as flesh and blood could all too easily cheapen their sacrifice. The gravity of what Harry's gone through in the last two books has been established. Taking that away would be cheap. Not saying it can't be done. I mean, Gandalf, Spock, even Kenobi, to an extent. But that's just the point: bringing them back would be a cliche, one that is best avoided. Oh, and marry Ginny, for goodness' sake.

Interestingly enough, in his effort to be more diplomatic, I suspect that White Dove's posts (well-intentioned and, seriously, no insult intended) backfired. Johnny Lingo's did not, even though their views are probably identical. Another valid response to Long Gone's excellent question. White Dove, I apologize for carrying on as long as I did. I'm content to disagree with you on this (and with Johnny too).

Actually it looks like a demented pumpkin.

Actually, rascal, if you want to play fair, it goes like this: "I won't speak for what you allow in your life, but I refuse to compromise my stand on the integrity of God's Word by allowing deceptive rubbish like Studies in Abundant Living into my home. I won't speak for you, but I refuse to be swept away by such spiritual darkness. I'm not saying anything about you, mind you, but I'm standing for God by taking this position. No insult intended. :)-->"

Umm, I've never been in a real tornado (thank GOD).

Cool beans. I disagree with you. And life...marches...on...

Yup.

Length of a thread is not an indicator of the importance we place on a subject. It's usually a sign that there's an "argument" going on, and nothing more. Threads that are "important" to us often have a short shelf life, if only because "important" doesn't necessarily translate into "I have a lot to say about this." If everyone agrees on a certain subject, a thread on the subject usually dies pretty quickly. Then you talk about blowing bubbles in water and WHAM! 25 pages. Is that because the subject is so dang fascinating? Nah. Show me a long thread, and I'll show you an argument. Except for THE. Which, we all agree, just...won't...die....

What if I send it in and they don't like it? What if they say I'm no good? What if they say "Get out of here, kid. You got no future"? I mean, I just don't think I can take that kind of rejection. Jesus, I'm starting to sound like my old man!

Good question. How about this: I can see where honest Christians would disagree with me, but from my perspective, these books cross the line when it comes to what I consider acceptable entertainment. I've heard the arguments on the other side of this, and while some people find them persuasive, I don't. If I were to read these books, I think I would be violating my Biblical principles. Other Christians feel differently, and I can accept that, but this is the stand I choose to take. This is actually what he said (in far fewer words) on p. 3, which prompted me to drop out of the conversation... To which I responded most eloquently: I can easily see why some Christians feel the way Dove does. I just don't agree with it. Oh no! Now the sky's going to fall because two Christians are not 100% likeminded on something! :)--> I think you're mistaken.

I have a list of things to worry about. Whether I got insulted in a conversation about Harry Potter is not on the list. A little perspective here, right? :)-->

Lonesome Dove is definitely fair game.

I did ask. I was more insulted by your clarification than by your original comment. And that's okay. There's no rule that says you have to make me happy, and I don't think any less of you for our disagreement. I don't think you're upholding a Biblical standard, but you think you are. Now that that's out of the way, I kind of dropped out of the discussion several pages ago.

Only if they're really, really well known. I'm talking about things we all remember. If it played on Lifetime once in the mid-90s, it doesn't count. But Roots would count.

Sure you do. Everyone does. I cannot know what you mean, because I am not you. I can only tell you what you say. That's why we clarify things all the time; people misunderstand what we mean because what we say doesn't necessarily come out the way we intend.

Look at this: does that look like a skull or what? (This won't make sense in a couple of hours, but those who see it soon after I post will understand).

The Whole Nine Yards Bruce Willis In Country I'll wait to get slapped on this one before changing it.

"I assume then that all your other bodily functions are... normal?" "Sorry, beg your pardon?" "Well, putting it delicately, do you... eat?" "Yes. Yes I do. When I'm hungry." Superman

Should I wait until the ink is dry on your clue before posting the answer? By the way, your clue is off by a few words.

No, I'm standing up for Jonny on this. It is a fad, and I am happily caught up in it, and enjoying the ride. Some things I don't get into; some things I do. Ooh, look! A cliff! Gotta run!

We don't need to see your precipitation. These aren't the shores you're looking for. Move along...

Like this one: "What's yellow and writes?" "A ballpoint banana." "Exactly!" The above is not a new clue. It's hiway's turn.

You could, but then we'd need to poke your eyes so that you can't get a good look at what makes Texas such a great state.