Someone sent this to me. I typically hate these sorts of things, but since I wasn't given one of those silly ultimatums like "send this to 10 people or a kitten will die on Tuesday" and I wasn't told to send it to anyone else (which I'm not going to do), I will answer it.
I much prefer being "asked" to answer these questions, than "told" that I've been "tagged" to do so, (lest I incur some mystical penalty).
With that having been said, here are my answers:
It depends on what feelings are being expressed. Assuming the feelings are honest and true, it would ideally not be difficult to do either.
No one, of course. What sort of silly question is that?
No one. Who would want to receive a call and being told that the caller is about to die? Plus, you're not supposed to use your phone on a plane and those airplane phones charge way too much. I don't want my last gift to my family to be a ridiculously high phone bill.
A. Just those that I have long-term responsibilities with so that they can plan accordingly (work, family, etc.) For anyone else, it wouldn't be of any help to them.
B. Give as much of myself to the world around me as possible while I'm still able.
C. No.
Yes. It was the best birthday present I could have ever received.
There are many jobs, but very few opportunities to save lives.
Between the two, I have a greater fear of not being the sort of person who would save the dog, than I do of being the sort of person who would put a higher priority on my job.
I also wouldn't stay at a job where the boss gives those sorts of ultimatums.
Moot point. I'm not about to do that to anyone and I don't have a spouse/significant other.
If they were my "best" friend, they would already understand that romantic love isn't "true" love. True love is unconditionally giving. Romantic love is conditional receiving. If you truly love someone then you give that love to them regardless of the reciprocation. If you romantically love someone, then you are emotionally invested in getting that love back from them.
You can have romance be an expression of true love, but if you truly love someone, then you would know if that is the appropriate expression of that love or not. On the other side, you can have romance without true love, which is more about emotional gratification and selfishness than anything else.
Also, one of the requirements for being my "best" friend is being able to communicate. If you're so guarded with your feelings that you have to "confess" them to me, then that means we haven't been communicating in the first place, which means you probably aren't my best friend.
Lack of communication is, IMO, triggered by a fear of how the other person will respond. But if you're my "best" friend, then you already know that I will love you regardless of what you say and, even if I don't agree with it, that doesn't mean anything will change with our friendship. So, since there is no fear of my response to what you might say (since you know I accept you regardless) then there is no lack of communication due to fear. And if there is no lack of communication, then we would have discussed these issues long before any need to "confess" them came about.
Even if it cost me nothing, I wouldn't do it. People die when they die for a reason. it is not my place to pass judgment no the natural order of things.
One would hope.
No more than "sad = cry" or "hate = yell".
The second is an expression/manifestation of the first -- not the cause of it.
Impossible to know without understanding the specifics of the industry and work. But ASSUMING that our jobs are identical in responsibility and that our jobs are our only sources of income, then I would most likely leave, but not for the reasons you might think.
Truth be told, it would be doing him a disservice to leave him in that situation; reliant on other people for the welfare of his family and without any means to support himself should he be fired. Especially if the company is experiencing such poor mismanagement as to be laying people off.
It would be better for him to leave and learn to find better opportunities for his family's future -- opportunities that don't rely so much on someone else's decisions for them to be successful. If anything, I think the job is incredibly risky, which is really the reason I would leave. I would find something much less risky, like starting my own company.
A few minutes ago. I told them how I honestly felt about something.
If they're my friend, then I love them. If I don't love them, then they're not my friend.
Not as many as can count on me.
Two days ago on the phone with my dad.
Nothing. Changing the past would negate my current opportunity to travel through time so it would be paradoxical to take any sort of action.
Superman. Since I live on the 57th floor, I'm pretty sure that anyone walking outside my window is probably equally fictitious.
Of course. More importantly, what sort of person wouldn't?
as all of my grandparents have passed away, I would probably let the dead carcass of my relative go in order to save the still-alive newborn baby.
What the question is really asking is, which is more important, loyalty or potential? The past or the future? I'm inclined to say that the future is of more importance, and I think that any grandparent of mine would probably feel the same.
Personal projects
An hour or so ago
24.Which would you choose, true love with a guarantee of a broken heart, or never loved at all? Why?
"True love" is unconditional, and unconditional love means you don't expect or require reciprocation. And if you don't need reciprocation, then there is no chance that you would have a broken heart when or if it didn't happen.
Unity
"This is where Mark sleeps and keeps his clothes"
assumptions
both
Get more information at narom.net and wushuzilla.com