Wolfie

Fairly Oddparents Timmy Turner's babysitter, Vicky, needs a good pounding and fast. It obvious by the way she has resorted to taking out her frustrations by torturing kids. Then, her younger sister, Tootie, needs some attention too. After that, Timmy needs to score with his dream girl Trixie. Of course, in fairness, Chester and A.J. could take on Vicky and Tootie, just they'd have to decide who is going to be the sacrifice for Vicky. Jimmy Neutron Jimmy and Cindy need to do it. Enough said. Family Guy Brian needs some, simple as that. Meg's obviously sexually active. Figure it out. Futurama Leela needs to just give into Fry. Not only get her own jollies, but put a permanent smile onto his Fry's face. While at it, we need to see more skin on Amy. Grim Adventures of Billy and Mandy Grim needs to do Mandy. Since he has some mystical powers, I'm sure he can use them for bring her some insane amounts of pleasure. She needs to get her rocks off something major. Danny Phantom Ok it's rather obvious that Danny and Sam have a thing for each other. They need to just fess up to each other and get it out of their systems. Codename: Kids Next Door One word. Megaorgy. Tiny Toons Buster Bunny and Babs Bunny have no relation to each other, as they will tell you. They need to take advantage of not being related to each other. Powerpuff Girls Here's where 'daddy' can either keep each of the 3 happy, one at a time, or sit back and watch as they learn how to put their superpowers to other practical 'uses'. Beavis & Butthead Let's face it, a corpse in a morgue has a better chance of getting laid than they 2 doofuses ever will no matter where they are. So they may as well just do each other. Thundercats Wilykat and Wilykit, need to get that energy out of their systems so they'll be a little more mellow instead of revved up and ready to go get into more trouble. Of course, could bring about a different kind of trouble for Wilykit, if ya get my drift. Lion-O and Snarf.. Let's face it, they're just like a married couple, and Snarf needs the release something bad. Chipmunks Ok so with the introduction of the Chimpettes, each one of the Chipmunks now has a counterpart that they can hook up with. Alvin needs to enjoy the new hobby instead of getting into trouble all the time. Simon needs to 'further his knowledge' and Theodore needs a boost to his 'confidence'. Smurfs I think this one is a bit obvious. Smurfette needs to just accept that she's the only female Smurf there is (even if you count the Smurflings, there's only the little redheaded smurf, and I get the feeling that deep down, she swings the other way). So being the only female, she needs to be ready to take on at least 4 or 5 Smurfs a day in order to keep up a good rotation so that it's not too far between days of a single smurf 'gettin it'. Of course, their buddy Gargamel could always make several more female Smurfs, which would lessen the load for Smurfette and provide a better rotation for the guys. Either way, they all need to get Smurfed real bad. Voltron Lion Force: Princess Alura needs to 'properly rewards' the Voltron crew for saving her planet. Coran and the Nanny can tend to each other. Vehicle Force: At the risk of it being overused.. Megaorgy! Jetsons When was the last time Jane gave it up to George? He's uptight a lot, so I'd say it's been awhile. Flintstones Fred and Barney spend an awful lot of time together. I'm sure they do more than going to the Moose lounge and getting into other forms of trouble. The Incredibles I'm gonna get right to it. What guy in their right mind would NOT mind getting it on with a girl who can turn invisible? Just think, after getting our jollies, she can go invisible and let us see it inside of her. Not only that, but hey, if we're near being done, then if someone tries to interrupt us, she can put up a force field. Talk about making sure there's no stopping until done! There's more but let's dwell on these for now.

This is definitely worth seeing... URL: http://www.youtube.com/v/wn3-O17f4tg

She's just like that. I don't see what the big deal is. Many people would get offended by that being in easy view of kids, so the simple solution is to not put it on the cover, or to hide it enough that little kids can't see it. Those who wouldn't be offended can look at it and no problem. Those who feel that their kids shouldn't be exposed to it can keep it from them. Everyone wins.

Well then using your argument, porn magazines, cigarettes and even guns should be available at the checkout counters, because after all, they're not jumping out at the kids...

Look at how you're responding. Your opinion is the only one that matters then? The idea is that it should be up to the parent to decide if and when they want to allow their child(ren) to be taught about profanity, and not the magazines sitting at the checkout lines. If the parent decides earlier rather than later, then that is their choice. But to force it onto the parent is disrespectful to them. My opinion is respectful to the rights of the parent. Your opinion is that of "screw the parent's rights".

I'm not missing your point. You're missing the point that not everyone agrees with you nor your ways, and that in this given situation, the magazine should have gone with "better safe than sorry". It's rather disturbing to me that the concept of respecting others rights is being highly forgotten by some on here. Just because some don't see a problem with it, doesn't mean that those who do are in the wrong. That narrow minded way of thinking is the flaw of many forms of government, and also the reason for their failure.

Notice that it forbids Congress from doing it. However, it doesn't forbid state and local governments from limiting it. Also, it doesn't say that you may infringe on other peoples rights. The basic concept is that you should be able to speak out against the government without being punished for it, to believe what you want to believe and to be who you are. Not to give you permission to go out and offend people. It's common sense that there are going to be some things that you should not say, nor are allowed to say, depending on circumstances. If an FBI agent were to go onto the news and divulge secrets that put our nation at risk, are they protected by the 1st amendment? No. They could be put on trial for treason. All too often, people yell out that they are free to say what they want, yet they say it for selfish reasons, rather than respecting it's purpose. "I can say anything I want because it says so" and then start acting obnoxious, rather than being like, "This is a great country because everyone, including me, is free to express themselves." Keep in mind that your rights end where my rights begin, and vice-versa.

Your way of thinking is why there is a decline in proper customer care in the world today. Also, by your argument, they should just put porn magazines at the checkout counter, uncovered, where anyone can see them. Freedom you know. Besides, even if someone has a gun to your head, you can still say what you want. Just your life may come to a quick end if you're not careful. So your point really isn't valid. Something being illegal doesn't stop it from happening.

You should just keep a log of all the homework for a week, how long it takes you and such, then sit down with them, one at a time, and explain to them that you understand homework is important for your education, but the amount of it is destroying the other part of your growing development, which is your socialization and character development. How can you learn to get along with peers, learn to interact, etc, if all of your time away from school is spent on doing school work? They'll obviously try to say that you need to better organize your time, at which point you need to tell them that if it takes that long to do the homework, it's going to take that long no matter how you arrange it. An hour is still an hour, and if you have to spend 4 or 5 hours a night doing homework, then it's still 4 or 5 hours. There should be a maximum load limit on homework that teachers can assign per night and per week, so that students have the chance to grow naturally while still learning.

There are laws in many, if not all states, that make it illegal to use obscene or other colorful language in public. It's one of those where the victim would need to pursue the matter though. That said, the "Freedom of speech" argument isn't as valid as you would think. Your freedom of speech has some limitations. For example, if you go into a crowded restaurant and yell "FIRE!", you could be held responsible for anything that happens. Including being charged with criminal activity. The point isn't to say that children shouldn't be allowed to see it (that's another debate in and of itself). The point is that by putting it in such a place that kids are subjected to it, without parents having any say in it, then that is an offensive act. Think of it like this. A parent who doesn't mind it, there is no issue. A parent who DOES mind it, they are not given the choice. You don't have the right to say that the parent is wrong to want to filter that from their children. If that parent isn't given the choice, then that's the same as telling them how they must raise their kid, on something that should be their decision. If you think you were raised just fine, with profanity being a part of your life, then that's your choice. But it doesn't mean that everyone agrees with that, nor does it mean that it makes it acceptable to plaster magazine covers with profanities.

Dec 4th - Dec 12th, 2007 Merry Chanukah/Hanukah/Hanukkah Dec 25th, 2007 Happy Christmas Dec 26th, 2007 - Jan 1st, 2008 Merry Kwanzaa

communication

If you allowed her to be subject to it, that's your decision. However, those parents who wish to keep their kids from learning about such words, at least until an older age, don't have a choice if the words are plastered on the outside of magazines at checkout lanes. At home, parents have the option to monitor what shows and movies their kids watch. It's all about respecting the parents choice on when their children will learn those words. You mentioned about not including porn in what you allowed her to be witness to. Why not? What if porn were shown at checkout stands? "Well, they're going to learn about sex anyway, may as well be now, right along side those curse words..." Let's remove kids from the situation for a moment. There are lots of people who get offended by such language, and shouldn't be forced to be offended just for shopping for food to eat. It may be against some peoples beliefs or religions (yes, I'll agree that they need to find a new religion at that point), or what have you. The point is that it's something considered offensive, and the magazine company should have shown better judgment when publishing the cover. Aside from WHERE it was placed, that is, overlooking how poor of a decision it was, I personally find the statement itself to be funny. But it's out of respect for others that it bothers me overall.

Source: http://cbs2chicago.com/westsuburbanbureau/...n.2.593184.html http://www.n-raged.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif http://www.n-raged.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif Yes, I feel sorry for that woman, because $1,500 is a lot of bread. But at the same time, she was stupid enough to believe the guy, so it's her own damn fault.

Don't make pigs of yourselves. Simple prayer before you eat: Pass the beans, Pass the meat. Thank you Lord, Now let's eat.

Update. Your opinion of my titled topic is not of my concern. After a small investigation, it is apparent that your site and mine differ greatly, with the only commonality being the closeness in names, which was unintentional. That in itself is not illegal. Your site structure, purpose and content are drastically different, making it a moot point. Have a good day. My 'opinions' being duly noted.. What a joke. It's not an opinion, it's a fact. I hope that this person is smart enough to realize that if they pursue this, that they'll be fighting an uphill battle. I have another site, and after making it, I've found other sites with the same names that pop up. However, nothing like mine, so it's no big deal. Some people worry about moot stuff.

I wouldn't worry too much about it. If it becomes a concern, I'm sure you'll be hearing more about it on the news. At this point, it looks like the concern is in finding the disks, but want to make it publicly known as nothing more than a precaution.

Why should I close my site? I'm not breaking any laws. Similarity in name is about as much as there is. I didn't pick the name because of that site, I picked it because I thought of it and it was a popular choice among the other names that I had thought of. Other than the name, there is no similarity. The name alone isn't enough to justify the attempt to scare me into closing my site. I made a overly generous offer of adding a disclaimer if asked for. My site is legit and the other site would have a hard time proving otherwise, considering all the differences.

Oh my gosh. I just took a closer look at their website, and from the looks of it, it's not aimed at venting frustrations or the like. Their claim is based solely on the name similarity and the fact that there's a forum. Sheesh. Look at the attached picture. How can there be a claim of similarity when the topics don't match? "Road Rage" isn't about what we refer to as road rage (wreckless driving while angry). I can't believe that this person would even waste their own time to try to email me on something so pointless.

I just noticed a misplaced word. I went back to include the fact of the software license, and oops, put it after "to prove" and not before. It should read:

Where did you learn about this?

Ok so those who already know me know that I had a concept for this website, and that I tried to come up with a really good name for it. A few probably also got really annoyed with me coming up with more and more names until I thought of one that stood out, thus how n-raged was born. Today I received this email (it was sent yesterday, Nov 20th). Talk about snobbish. How is that a 'friendly' reminder? I haven't read anything before notifying me of there being a possible issue, nor was I ever just asked if I would put up a disclaimer. Friendly reminders don't include legal threats in them. Here is my reply:

In that case, happiness wouldn't exist. Can't have one without the other. IAPW, only those who deserve it would suffer misery.

intentions

Well, that way you could socialize with your friends.