Search Results: her first time

1) It was not illegal at the time. Over the counter for many items

2) Steroids help with conditioning because you don't get as tired as fast

3) It only helped player with bat speed not hit ball better or further.

4) Does not make hand /eye coordination better, you must have that already.

All steroids allowed player to do is play second half of season like first half of season. So if you hit 35 HR's before All Star Break , you could hit 35 more after All Star Break.

A corked bat could give you the same results as using Steroids.

Many players the used Steroids never hit 30 HR's which proves it doesn't make people HR Hitters.

So, I think Mark McGwire, Sammy Sosa, Barry Bonds , ETC should be in Hall of Fame. Barry Bonds at most only used them 2 seasons.

You have Hall of Famers that hit their wives, shot people, used drugs , cheated on taxes, Had Affairs, doctored baseballs, and used illegal gloves in field.

Lets say you’re dating a guy and go to his place for the first time. He seems nice and the place is neat but it smells like a floral scent basically. Would that turn you off?

Apparently, I'm talking to this girl who recently gotten out of a courtship that went wrong. It appears she's healing from it and needs some time to get her emotions together.

I was just curious. I was thinking of talking to her once a week for a month to see if I could conjour anything and give her some time to heal, but also not stay in it if she's on some forever friend ish.

Was just curious on this perspective. Should I move on, continue pursuing, or a little bit in between. Thank you.

I wanted to call her but she said she wanted to get to know me first. Eventually she opened up a bit as we got to know each other and managed a call. It went pretty well. Maybe she's a bit hesitant cause she doesn't want to get hurt again. It's a bit of a confusing situation but just let me know.

A society has the right to recognize that public blasphemy against God or Christianity is not just “ordinary disagreement,” but an attack on the moral and religious foundation that shaped much of our civilization. At the founding, some states treated Christianity as part of the public moral order, and I do not think that history should be dismissed as automatically tyrannical.

That said, I would not support vague laws that punish honest theological disagreement, private unbelief, or respectful criticism. The line would need to be narrow and aimed at public, malicious, contemptuous attacks on sacred things — not at forcing belief.

I understand current First Amendment doctrine would likely reject laws like this today, but as a matter of principle, I do think states should have more authority to defend public moral order than modern secular liberalism allows.

At the time of the U. S. founding, some states had laws punishing blasphemy or speech considered contemptuous toward Christianity. Do you support or oppose allowing states to enforce blasphemy laws today?

Have you tried any new DIY projects or skills within the last year or so? Would you rather fix something in your house or car by yourself or hire someone to do it instead?

I replaced brake pads on my car for the first time by myself this weekend.