Graeme

I'm wondering if Jon and Eric have enough balls to admit what they've done to Helen, Chase and/or Brandon. Either that, or they'll put their foot in it again....

What was in the paper? I noticed that the building opposite their hotel is another hotel. I suspect it is Eric's dawn antics that were observed by a photographer in the building opposite. That would be: two members of Instinct, with three nubile girls in tow, performing weird antics on a balcony. There were several hours between that incident and the girls leaving. They may have had a phone with them and rung someone surreptitiously, but I suspect not. If it was, it wouldn't be Jon and Eric that Helen was targetting -- any article from a phone call is unlikely to mention Jon and Eric by name. No, I think it's photos from dawn that has made the papers. Apart from that.... Chase is my hero He's a wonderful guy who really knows how to stick it to his older brothers when they deserve it.

:king: :king: Happy 19th Birthday, Aaron! :king: :king: While he doesn't often visit here, I wanted to wish Aaron a very Happy Birthday. As the editor of my novels, he has made a big difference to my writing and I'm forever in his debt. The Mail Crew guys are a fantastic bunch and I'm proud and humbled to have gotten to know them.

Happy 39th Birthday! I hope you have a great day and a fantastic year ahead.

Honestly, you are probably wasting your time trying to reply. If you need a good biblical reference, I would suggest the Religious Tolerance web site. There is a lot of material to wade through, but it gives you some solid biblical statements. Some of what they have suggested are extreme (eg. while there are same-sex relationships in the bible, there is no clear evidence that any of them were sexual in nature. Similarly for one of the interpretations of the verses in Leviticus), but it gave me a good solid biblical basis for a belief in homosexuality not being a sin. A few extra things: There are two verses in the Bible that I trot out any time someone tries to defend their position by quoting from the Bible. The first is in Matthew's Gospel, during the Temptation of Jesus. In that chapter, the Devil quotes from the Bible to support his position. I can't think of a clearer warning that the ability to quote from the Bible doesn't make the argument right. The other one is at the end of 1 Peter, where Peter warns that Paul's writing is complex and easily misinterpreted. Interpreting Paul's letters should be done cautiously. Also, whenever the word "Abomination" is raised, I asked about eating shellfish (also listed as an Abomination) and women wearing men's clothes, or men wearing women's clothing (again listed as an Abomination). I've been amused at my own church in that one of the senior women who opposes homosexuality typically wears pants.... The point about sexual ethics being different to Jewish food restrictions is a fair comment, but then I ask about divorce. Jesus never said anything about homosexuality (the closest statement is "Love your neighbor as yourself"), but he did comment on divorce. He said that anyone who divorced and remarried is an adulterer/adulteress, and Paul repeated that statement. The modern church seems silent on that statement. Even the Catholic church hides from it -- they have this fanciful view that after saying a couple has been blessed by God, they can go back and say "Sorry, that was a mistake. God never blessed them and hence they were never really married in the first place. Their marriage is annulled -- they're not getting a divorce".

I don't think there's much to add -- just my own thanks to all the editors and early readers out there. You all make an important contribution and I know I couldn't do without your help. Thank you!

I've never managed a page of my stories that my editors haven't corrected. I've come close twice recently, where there was a page with only a single edit, but that's it....

Being in accepting culture makes a difference. I honestly can't think of a single person that I knew from school that even might have been gay. There was one person at university that I knew who was rumoured to be gay, but I never asked him. There were gays at university, but I didn't get to know any of them -- at least as far as I know.

One of the problems is that for a story to happen, something has to have changed. If the status-quo persists, then there's no boy-meet-boy story. So, authors have to think about how to get two people to meet and fall in love, while answering the question "why now and why didn't they meet and fall in love months/years ago?" The clich

G'day, Tarin! We won't hold it against Nick I hope you enjoy it here. Graeme

We haven't lost the poll yet -- it's still open for voting....

G'day, kashka! *does his best attempt at bowing -- which isn't very good* Nice to meet you, too

There are SO many band names out there that it's almost impossible to come up with a name that hasn't been used unless you use a made-up word. I hadn't picked up on the similarity with N'sync because I saw the name "Instinct" on its own merits -- it's a decent band name with a lot of connotations about how they play, how they want their listeners to react, etc. A worthy band name in it's own right. *cough* Really? *cough*

I'm a proud Caprican, too

Caprican has a definition, too -- a fan of C James. This is a lot more accurate a definition for the members than "herd" which is a generic term that has to be shared with lots of other things.... Welcome, Kevin! Lurk away, though you'll need to practise more. You're lurking too slowly, based on the example of CJ

I don't have a problem with C James claiming to be a lurker. It's not unhealthy, though I accept it may be a symptom of deeper problems. However, unless such deeper problems are revealed, I think we should leave him with his delusions. After all, if he is "cured", then people may start picking on my delusions.... :wacko: Oh, and the "No" vite is now down to 80%....

I'm celebrating Geelong's record victory in the AFL (Australian Football League) grand final, and also Melbourne Storm's win in the NRL (National Rugby League).

Nope. I've been there and some parts have air that is quite breathable In fact, I'll be there next week for a couple of day, too. What was more amazing was that Brandon would walk to and from the studio (when he was a roadie). I remember trying that my first time in L.A. (walking from the hotel to the office), and one of the company VP's pulled over and gave me a lift. He told me that he knew it had to be an Aussie walking, because no one else in the city walks anywhere....

I was simplifying the situation. There is a requirement for a zero-blood-alcohol limit during the first three years of your license. Since the driving age is 18 in Australia, that means until at least 21. If you didn't get your license until you were 20, it would mean no alcohol if you're driving until you turn 23. Since it can take a day for the alcohol to get out of your blood, it essentially means if you drink, you don't drive for the next 24 hours (roughly). If you lose your license and are forced to re-sit for it, the three years starts again. This is not a zero-tolerance issue, it is a legislated issue. We have random breath testing units in the cities (a lot less common in country areas) and you can be also be tested by any police vehicle that pulls you over for another offense (the testing units are handheld, though a positive results requires a blood test immediately afterwards and it is the blood test that is used for legal purposes). After those three years, the legal blood alcohol limit while driving goes to 0.05%. As for alcohol consumption before 18, the law varies from state to state, but essentially the law is about the buying of alcohol (you have to be 18 to buy it) and it is illegal to buy it on behalf of a minor. HOWEVER, you can purchase drinks for a minor if it is part of a meal and there is a parent/guardian present. Also, I believe underage drinking at home is legal -- it is assumed that the parents/guardians are responsible for the minor.

I don't think you need to reinforce it in the text because I think everyone worked out the order. It was only Eric's age that was uncertain. It was pretty clear he was the middle brother. The main argument I've heard for supporting the 21 drinking age in the USA is to do with driving. Australia has both the driving age AND the legal drinking age at 18, (which is the worst possible scenario, I think) and we have things under control. What we've done is to legislate a ZERO blood alcohol level for the first three years of your license -- effectively until you're 21. So you can drink from 18, but if you're going to drive, you can't drink until you're at least 21. It solves the driving while drunk issue quite neatly

Congratulations, Emoe! And to make Bondwriter happy the reason for the congratulations is not the total number, but the quality and enjoyability of those 500 posts

I didn't think Jon and Eric were teens? There's a comment about being old enough to legally drink, which is (in the USA) 21 (unlike the much more sensible 18 in Australia and other countries). Eric may still be a teen -- I'd have to go back to see if he's 19 or 20, but Jon isn't.

No. He may use that for the title (like he did with the Kiss title), but he won't dedicate an entire chapter to that event. He's not that mean.

I have no problem with the collective term for Capricans being "Herd". And I have to say thank you for changing your signature. It shows how nice some of The Herd can be.

You realise that CJ calls you a postaholic.... He would be shocked to hear you use the phrase "my fellow lurkers"