Thorned Rose

Just to put some two cents in Earths Daughter, thats a good point about evolutionists not coming knocking on your door. And an important point being that evolutionists are not actively forcing anything on anyone. Science is about proving how something works and proof speaks for itself. Religions must constantly bombard you with their beliefs to 'convert you' such as door knocking (the Jehovah's Witnesses around here just won't give up no matter how many times we send them away - very annoying). One thing I would like to point out is that Richard Pearse was actually the first to fly (about 9 months before the Wright brothers) but often isn't considered so because 1. He's not an American (a New Zealander instead) and 2. He crashed into a hedge so he himself didn't consider his flight a success but he did fly before the Wright brothers. sammaye, athiest (aphist) means you don't believe in anything not just that you don't believe in God. Souls for certain do exist but to say that they are separate from science is silly. Everything is science - science explains the universe and just because science hasn't yet explained them doesn't mean they have no scientific basis. Souls could be explained as being a type of energy that can hold a persons experiences. Life needs a soul to live just as it needs life force (or Qi [Chi]) to glue everything together.Certainly a person is in part the sum of all their experiences but that includes past lives. The soul evolves as well. People keep asking what the meaning of life is - there is no meaning to life - it just is. It may not have a meaning but it does have a point and that is to continue and become better i.e. evolve, not just physically but in the soul as well. Don't ask yourself why you are here, ask yourself "what can I do to make myself better?" - that is the point.

I don't like any mainstream toothpaste. They all contain crap like Sodium Lauryl (Laureth) Sulphate. They make me feel ill so I prefer natural toothpastes which are generally just made from calcium carbonate, sodium bicarbonate, salt, essential oils, glycerine and maybe stevia (a natural plant based sweetner). I would suggest to everyone who uses normal toothpaste to either make your own using the above ingredients or just brush your teeth with salt or baking soda. Mainstream toothpastes aren't worth the health risks and natural stuff works just as well!

Yeah, I know the feeling. I had an english teacher who would give us photocopied 'exercises' of very little value and then would take off to do 'photocopying' (i.e. chain smoke outside) for the rest of the lesson. Needless to say, I got very poor grades for english that year.Anyway, you should either tell your parents and get them to make a formal complaint or make a formal complaint yourself (preferably anonymously) though unfortunately students carry less weight than parents do. You'd be surprised how well formal complaints can razz up a teacher. It's not nice having to make them but your education is at stake - you don't want to end up like me, losing an entire year (which stuffed me up in the next) because a teacher can't pull their finger out. I'm all for creativity - the best teachers I had gave us really creative projects but they need to be relevant.At any rate, good luck!

Stop rabbiting on about 666. It was recently found that the number 666 is actually supposed to be 616. Numbers are numbers, some have meaning, some don't, most have meanings that humans have placed on them like the number 13 being unlucky - the number 13 was actually a LUCKY number back in the Celt's days (they had a 13 month calender) but then the Catholics came along and had this wonderful plan to destroy and absorb their beliefs so they made the number 13 unlucky, like Christmas was ripped of the Celtic Winter Solstice or Imbolc which the Catholics turned into St Brigid's Day (there was no St Brigid, she was made up from the Celtic goddess Brighit). Like caboking05 said, numbers and time are relative and arbitrary.

Thanks for correcting me on that one - yes that's what I meant, the coccyx. Sometimes having wool for a brain really isn't helpful

A cure isn't so far fetched and if it was developed by an independent researcher as opposed to pharmaceutical researchers then the pharmaceutical companies don't get much say in finding cures. But is definitely true that they aren't interested in cures. There's no money in healthy people unfortunately . As for the government(s) having a cure and curing rich people over night. I'm not sure the logic or evidence holds up on that one as there have been plenty of rich celebs who have and had aids - Kimberly Bergalis, Amanda Blake, Rock Hudson, Liberace, Robbin Crosby, Michael Jeter, Makgatho Mandela (Nelson Medela's son) etc all died of it. But if they did manufacture a cure, I have to agree that the people who need it most (i.e. the poor) are the ones least likely to get it. Damn pharmaceutical companies!

fffanatics, did you not read the previous posts? Milk CAUSES osteoporosis not prevents it - your body gets very little calcium from milk and actually loses more than it gains. Asidophilus and bifidus are good for you but you should get them from non-dairy sources as dairy is definitely NOT good for your digestive track. Try going dairy free for a month and you will see what I mean.

The calcium that is in cow's milk doesn't contain easily digested calcium so your body can't absorb it very well anyway, on top of that your body can't digest milk well so it draws calcium from out of your bones to aid digestion meaning you end up with less calcium. There are better sources of calcium than milk like dark leafy greens, various nuts, broccoli, seasame seeds are extremely high in calcium (5 times the amount of milk) so tahini is good too and obviously hummus which is made with tahini, boney fish etc. Here's a site that lists foods high in calcium, how much you need and things that reduce calcium absorption. Milk also causes problems like asthma, eczema, allergies, cancer, digestive problems, irritable bowel, lactose intolerance (bloating, abdominal pain, diarrhoea, constipation etc) amongst other things. Dairy is bad news - don't have dairy or at the very least minimise your intake. You can swap milk for things like rice milk. Trust me, dairy isn't worth the price you will end up paying.

My fav car for looks is the Aston Martin Vanquish: Of course if I could buy any car I wanted, I would get a Toyota Prius and whip and carbon fibre body kit on it (they really aren't much to look at) like this one And yes I am a chick.

anarchyboard88, I agree with some of what you say. A lot of people are arguing that evolution shouldn't be taught in schools because it is an unproven theory and based on belief just as I.D. is. But the problem with that argument is that science is about showing how the universe (and everything in it) works using scientific method and I.D. does not incorporate unbiased scientific method but pure belief. Not to mention that many things in science are still just theories. For example, atomic structure - technically theory because nobody has seen the structure of an atom yet the structure that is taught in schools is a given and necessary for chemistry. You cannot teach chemistry properly without teaching atomic structure. Even though atomic structure is still theory, it was deduced with scientific method. For more information on the experiments go here. Once upon a time, atoms themselves were theoretical and yet here they are: http://unews.utah.edu/ Or how about Einstein's Theory of Relativity (or more specifically Special Relativity). Theory for about 80 years until NASA did an experiment whereby they synchronised two atomic clocks, put one on the shuttle and then compared the two when the shuttle arrived back: Just because something is still only theory does not mean it isn't true. Evolution, even though it still in it's theoretical stages has scientific method to back it up - i.e. the accumulation of experiments and data that lends weight to it's positive conclusion. I.D. has no scientific method and no experiments or data in any way to back it up. It is religious theorum and thus belongs in religious studies. I have no problem with people wanting to study it either in religious studies or extracurricular but it has no place in a science class. I went to a Catholic school where both evolution and creationism were taught. There was never any conflict as they are two different subjects. And I think that if you are going to teach Religious Studies you should teach all religions unless of course you go to a religion specific school as I did (Catholic). Schools have an obligation to teach all sides and let students think for themselves rather than forcing ideas down their throats and stifling new thought and creativity. As soon as you do that you lose innovation and people become mindless slaves to indoctrination. This can be seen in many countries that have theocracies or dictatorships - they are often technologically backwards and have a high proportion of poverty e.g. Afganistan, North Korea etc

ALL human beings have a tail. It's called the sacrum (or 'tail bone) however in most humans it's still in the body. I've seen a baby born with it's sacrum outside of it's body looking just like a tail. Albeit it was longer than a normal sacrum and covered in skin (obviously). The parents had it surgically altered (part removed and part put back in the right place). Doctors told the parents it was just a deformity, probably not genetic. Given the low incidence of this deformity, it probably has no genetic foundation. Evolutionists use the example of the sacrum as an example to support humans' evolution from apes especially since the sacrum (like the apendix) serves no particular purpose and is in fact a hindrance during childbirth (why women should NOT lie down while giving birth). Kasm, as per usual, you are talking about something you obviously don't know much about. Yes the drawings are a fraud but the underlying science is still correct. If you want photo evidence, here you go. https://www.mesacc.edu/departments/cultural-science/anthropology https://www.mesacc.edu/departments/cultural-science/anthropology Can you tell which one is the human? They are two different species. While embryos may not be exactly the same, they have definite similarities including tails.

Stereotyping is unavoidable - everyone does it because it's a natural instinctive response. Interestingly on a related subject, when two people fall in love, the judgement part of the brain doesn't engage when they think or interact with their new love meaning that love literally is blind. Two people newly in love don't see a lot of the negative aspects of their girlfriend/boyfriend. Anyways, back on topic. We may make an assumption in the first two seconds of when we see someone but that assumption does not mean that it is right or that that is how that person really is. Think about someone you've known for a while and then remember what they were like when you first met them and compare it to what you remember of them now - you'll find that there are differences in those memories - the person can even seem to look different. This shows that while our instincts can tell us if someone is trustworthy or not, it can't always tell us what someone's personality is like. The moral of the story is "don't judge a book by it's cover". Even though your instincts tell you someone may seem a particular way, you should reserve your full judgement until you get to know them better. I freely admit to judging people by their appearance (I can't help it - nobody can) but I will override this instinct and say to myself, that person could be really nice or I should talk to them a bit before I disqualify them just because they look like <xxxxx>. I think that is the difference between a shallow judgmental person and a nice person - a judgemental person will just take what they see for how a person must be. I only recently got a tattoo and I saw a big difference in how people look at me. It's a very feminine tattoo not something like a flaming skull although it is a very obvious place (on my chest). I'm exactly the same person as I was before the tattoo yet I am treated differently (even by people I know). That's judgemental for you. I will judge a person by their individual merits, not by their looks. I've known people who looked really 'scary' but were the most nicest, giving people you could ever know. Of course that's not to say that if I see someone that looks like they want to beat the sh** out of me that I'm not going to avoid them, but I think that comes down to body language rather than their actual appearance. I used to dress very goth (now that I have M.E., it takes too long so I can't be stuffed) just for the very reason that people WOULD judge me - I used it as a way to weed out the judgemental people from the nice. If someone still came up to me despite my appearance and was interested in talking to me, then I knew that they we're more likely to be a halfway decent person. Try to not to be too judgemental people, you could pass over a person who could end up being your best friend, change your life for the better or become your your husband/wife just because you are stereotyping them

Kasm, you are obviously not reading what I am writing properly and I am tired of wasting my time on someone who can't be bothered reading something properly and then turns around and quotes me incorrectly. If you are going to enter into a debate, read carefully what someone writes and make sure you understand them properly before you mouth off about something you quite obviously don't understand or have enough knowledge on. My husband who studied history at university finds your knowledge of historical events laughable and points out to me all the time, inconsistencies and errors in your arguements. As I've said, I want an intelligent debate and that can't happen with someone who doesn't read posts properly and can't give intelligent replies. But I cannot let the following go unanswered: Once again I will reiterate - I DO NOT mean sexist and narrow minded as insults - they are meant in the LITERAL SENSE: So you see, I mean literal. I was never referring to just priesthood, I was referring to all aspects of their lives. And I most certainly resent your statement that women are more suited to jobs like teaching etc, as would any woman or intelligent man for that matter. Obviously you have a very small grasp of human psychology and physiology. Not to mention by the very Wikipedia definitions above, you are sexist and narrow-minded. I can see why you think they aren't sexist when you are yourself. I had to laugh when in one statement you say that women aren't suited to hunting and then in the next used an example of lionesses which of course do most of the hunting in a pride. Bees are not humans and do not have the same societal structure so can not be compared.As for dying, yes I mean literally - No heart beat and all of that. Anyway, as you can not post intelligent replies, I am going to henceforth not be bothered with you and would encourage others to do the same to preserve the sanity of all. As for everyone else, my whole point would be (as I've said numerous times before), you do not need religion to believe in God or Jesus or anything else you want to believe in. Believe in what is good and what YOU want to (not what someone else tells you to) and live a good life. Love & Life is my motto - Live love and love life.

I haven't answered any yet because I've been away from the forums for the last two days. I never said you were an extremist and I'm not sure what you mean by breaching relegional service. I can't say as I know much about modern Judaism but we used to have a Muslem living with us, whom i got on with just fine. We used to have interesting debates and he certainly left here with a much more open mind. If you read what I said carefully you would realise that was not an insult but meant in the literal sense - the men that wrote the Bible were not open to any other ideas but their own, meaning they were narrow minded, sexist because they believed that women were second class citizens and ignorant because their knowledge of the world was very small - limited to their town/village and those they visited. They didn't have T.V, Radio, Internet,documentaries etc to keep them up to play on current affairs and the like. I fail to see how I have been arrogant. I deal in reality and facts of reality is what I have pointed out. The only time I have ever said anything about my beliefs is when I said that I believe what I know to be true in my heart... I never once said that people should believe me because I believe in myself, nor have I resorted to veiled insults. If you knew my Mum, you wouldn't be calling it safe. And as this is a religious debate I am not just talking about Christians but ALL religions. Religions have been the cause of many ills in the world, including Christianity. As I said, we had a muslem living with us, I debated with him, he hasn't blown our house up if that is what you are implying as dangerous. I didn't say that the Bible was 2000 years old. I said that the story of Giglamesh was around at least 1000 years before the Bible i.e before the Old Testament, obviously even longer for the New Testament. This belongs in the ID vs Evolution thread. What's your point? I quoted the Gospel of St Thomas because it goes against organised religion. It was something that Jesus was supposed to have said. Many have concluded that the Gospel of St Thomas has not been put into the Bible for this reason - because it would damage the Church. I never rely on one source - sources can be wrong - I use many to 1. verify correct information and 2. get the bigger picture. I have seen both sides and come to a logical conclusion. Errors are errors. Just as they have recently discovered (by scientists using modern technology, not religious people) that the number of the beast is not 666 but actually 616. Look at any Bible in the world currently in print and for the last how many hundreds of years and it will say 666. How is that not an error? And if a mistake like that can be so prevalent, what other mistakes are there that are as yet undiscovered?! Here is the Bible passage that says Bats are birds. I know what a Flying Fox is and they are a type of bat. And that is exactly right - the Bible is not a scientific book and thus cannot be relied upon as an accurate representation of how the world was, is and should be. The flatness of the earth is related as at the time, that is what people believed at the time and those who opposed the idea were persecuted as heretics. My point was that the men that wrote the Bible knew what they know of the world at that time. Mnay things in the Bible have now been proven wrong and thus the Bible has errors and misinformation and cannot be relied upon as accurate. They don't coincide. If the story of Gigamesh were true then the world would have been flooded before Moses even existed. No we don't. Archaelogists can't confirm that Jesus even existed. While there are various documents from other places that are suggestive, they are in no way conclusive. The New Testament is the only document that says anything obvious about him. History is also full of holes e.g. Nanking - The Japanese butchering of Nanking: The Chinese say it happened obviously, but the Japanese completely deny that their soldiers ever raped, pillaged, butchered etc. Who's right? This is an example of recent historical inaccuracy. Who can say for sure then, what happened 1500, 1000, 500 etc years ago. Yes, they are. That doen't mean that they always follow that. Perhaps I should have clarified and been more specific but this is long enough as it is and I am too tired to repeat myself in greater depth. My point was however that most version of the Bible were reproduced by corrupt priests who could have changed as they saw fit. The fact that so many versions of the Bible exist, is testament to the fact that it has been changed. Ago, I am gald to see that you are thinking and feeling for yourself. When i was young I enjoyed sitting in Church when it was empty. But there are many places like this - Mosques, Synagogues, Temples, Parks, Beaches, Libraries, your own bedroom. You don't need a place of religious worship to feel this. My whole point is that you do not need religion (any religion, not just Christianity) to be a good person, live a good life, be close to God and go to heaven. Most religious people will call that heresy but I will let you in on something - I have died and come back and I saw the other side - I didn't go to hell and most people don't. If most religions were correct then I should have. Oh, and animals do have souls. Notice from BuffaloHELP: In the heat of the discussion it's easy to lose track of what is important as a member. Please preview your post before submitting. Your codes were out of placed and received unmeritted credits. Thank you.

alfredglenstein, thanks for all you've said. You've made a lot of the points I was going to anyway. It does feel like going round and round in circles. My reborn Christian mother drives me nuts in that respect - just when I'm finally getting somewhere she brings up some completely irrelevant point that she somehow thinks disproves what I am saying. I seem to be having a very similar arguement in the Religion Thread. My husband's going on at me just to give up because most christians will never get it. I'm about ready to give up . I hate it when people with very little understanding of biology, chemistry (and physics for that matter) go on about it like they can somehow make educated statements. And before any christian says that it the same with their religion and beliefs - I used to be catholic so I'm well and truely familiar with the bible and your beliefs and I don't believe that myself or people like alfredglenstein have pretended to be experts in your beliefs. But you have to realise there is a difference between belief and scientifically deduced 'theory'. As I said before - Just because something has not yet been 'proven' in science does not mean it does not have a scientific grounding. Everything is science and science is everything.

My sister's partner is quite a bit older than her too but then she feels that she was abondoned by our father and is quite obviously looking to him as a father figure but that's a whole nother issue. My point being, is that they have problems in their relationship becasue of the age difference. He will quite often treat her like a child and she will quite often let him walk all over her and do what he wants.I think you have to ask yourself - what do I want from this relationship, what are my expectations both now and in the future when we are older and how much am I willing to compromise? If the answers are that your expectations and wants are very different from what the relationship is and will be and that compromising will cost you too much, you will have to realise that it won't work. Relationships obviously require sacrifice and compromise but if ultimately neither partner is benefitting relationshipwise from the relationship there is very little point - you will get to the end of your life having wished that you'd done so many other things and just end up kicking yourself.Love is obviously the most important part of a relationship but a relatioship cannot work with just love. There has to be sharing, communication, equality, trust, respect etc. These are very important aspects of a relationship and if one or more is lacking, either the relationship needs working on or it's time to call it quits.I'm a big advocate of counselling and together forever meaning exactly that - too many people are all too willing to drop their relationships at the first sign of problems rather than working through differences. But at the same time, sometimes no matter how much two people love eachother, they just have to let go.I think it admirable that you are sacrificing so much for the man that you love but it would seem that the relationship has taken a negative turn and that the problems you are facing are fundamental and not changed by talking/counselling. Another thing you want to think about is - are you getting back what you are putting in or is the realtionship very one sided? The fact is that if a guy isn't willing to do something for you or bend over backwards for you or at the very least accomodate you, then either he just plain isn't all that into you or he's not as in love with you as you are with him.My advice is to sit down with him, make some argument rules (these are rules on how to argue in a civil way - like no yelling, no calling names, being straight up, telling each other exactly how you feel, no walking away etc) then discuss exactly what each of you want out of the relationship, what you want for the future and how you feel. You may come to realise that you have grown to be two very different people and that you are in love with the memories of eachother not who you are now. Anyway, that is my advice, it may or may not help you and of course, you don't have to listen to anything I've said if you don't want to At any rate, I hope it works out the best way for both of you.

I see a lot of people arguing for and against and a lot of people coming up with points that they think prove one way or the other. Also a lot of people saying that you can't prove one way or the other because there is no scientific method/experiments that can be done to prove either - On the contrary. I have seen scientific experiments for both. Some proved either side and some disproved. kasm, you said that there is no scientific proof so far for evolution and no experiments that can be done to prove it - that's not true. For example, some years ago an experiment was created that replicated primordial earth. Amino acids 'spontaneously' occurred and amino acids are one of the building blocks of life. The experiment, if left long enough, would have then produced proteins... Or another (unrelated) study found that ALL living creatures on earth have at least one gene in common. These genes are known as homeobox or hox genes. For example, humans and mice have 4 hox clusters, meaning that if a particular characteristic from these clusters was taken from one and transplanted in the other, it would function exactly the same. To clarify, if you took the gene that makes eyes from the mouse and replaced the human gene for eyes with the mouse one, the human wouldn't end up with mouse eyes, it would still have human eyes. Why? Because the mouse gene is virtually exactly the same as the human gene. Hox genes indicate that all living creatures on earth have a common ancestor. I could of course, if you like, come up with more experiments and research that lends itself towards evolution but that would take up a lot of time and space and I know that some people will only argue contradictions anyway. To be fair, I have seen some good research into Intelligent Design, but at the same time, I'm afraid, I've seen more that disproves it and more that supports evolution. That is not to say that I don't believe in God, I do but not as most people would and for that matter I don't believe humans evolved on Earth (no I am not one of those Raelians or anything remotely like them )You have to understand that everything is science and science is everything. That may sound a bit odd but true when you think about it. Science is the subject of the universe. It shows how the universe works. Just because something has not yet been 'proven' in science does not mean it does not have a scientific grounding. I'm a very spiritual person yet I believe that my soul has a scientific 'explanation' just as much as gravity, or molecular weight, or lightspeed or mendelian genetics or anything else anyone considers 'sciencey'. (And no I am not a scientologist - I don't belong to any religious group or pertain to any religious beliefs before you ask). Evolution is a much bigger subject than just genes and life on earth just as Creationism and Intelligent Design have much more far reaching implications. But before anyone accuses me of sitting on the fence, I'm with evolution. It's still happening all around if you look.

I'm afraid running away might get their attention but it won't get you their respect and to have a truely positive and constructive relationship with your parents, you want their love and respect not their wrath. No offence, but I don't think that getting physical is going to make them listen to you any better - perhaps out of fear, but then do you really want your parents fearing you? I would only ever recommend running away if your parent(s) (or caregiver for that matter) is abusive and even then only if it is the last resort and you have somewhere safe to go just as I did with my abusive father - I researched what I could do first, found that I didn't have any helpful options, rang my mum (they're divorced) who sent someone to come and get without my father knowing. My father had no respec t for me to start with and he certainly didn't give me any respect for running away. I always talk to my Mum in a civil way and she respects what I say, even if she doesn't agree with it. Getting violent and running off for no good reason will never get you anywhere.

CS2 works smooth and fast on our computer. I can't say I really see any speed difference bewteen CS2 and 7 (I believe we had 7 before CS2 as well but I'm not 100% on that). But then our computer is pretty grunty P3.2GB with 1GB RAM....

I keep trying to use the Mailing List fuction in cPanel but evertime I click edit I get a "this page cannot be found". Is this because Xisto doesn't have a mailing list function or am I doing something wrong? If I'm doing something wrong can someone please explain how you set up the mailing list. If it isn't supported, does anyone know how I can make a mailing list (like with php - though I am unfamiliar with PHP as yet, so premade scripts always go down well with me ) Thanks heaps!

You think you've got it bad! I have Myalgic Encephalomylitis (otherwise known as Chronic Fatigue Syndrome) and amongst other things means I'm immunocompromised i.e. my immune system sucks <insert expletive here>. Whenever I get sick , I get really sick. A normal cold can end up being like a flu. I almost inevitably get a nasal/sinus infection that won't go away unless I take antibiotics (which I try to avoid because it kills my immune system further) so I've had the current infection for months. Mmmmm... green snot I would like to get a flu shot but I can't because my immune system won't handle it and I will probably end up in hospital. Every injury I get, gets infected unless I keep putting antibacterial stuff on it all the time.... When I was pregnant with our daughter I was hospitalised with a kidney infection and had to be put on long term preventative antibiotics which I couldn't stop taking because they pretty much destroyed what was left of my immune system. I kept getting cystitis, which I later worked out was because of the antibiotics (which I've now stopped - the aftermath was not pretty). I still get cystitis but I treat it with natural products which work a hell of a lot better and don't destroy my immune system in the process. I would recommend natural products over the synthetic any day. Take it from my experience and proven fact - things like cough medicine do not work. I would recommend you try Comvita's Fortacold Herbal Elixir (I don't know if it's available where you are but you can order it online from Comvita's website) It's way cheaper than cough and cold remedies and you can use it for colds, coughs, flus, upset tummies etc. Only thing is that it tastes like crap but we put it in the fridge which helps. You should also take a garlic and horseradish combo supplement. Gets you right again real quick. Anyways that's what works for me and I'm guessing that if they work well for an immunocompromised person, they should work really well for normal people

Spybot Search & Destroy at https://www.safer-networking.org/ We have it on our computer and works well to get rid of most autodialers and other unpleasantries. Make sure after you install it you update the detection definitions (click on Search for Updates) then when that is finished "Check for Problems" and then finally "Immunize". Should solve your problem

Well if she regularly goes to the gym, strike up a conversation about that, then you can slip it in "how often do you come". Though, I have to agree with Unicornrose. Ask to go out and have a coffee or lunch to catch up. It's perfectly valid and 'innocent' reason for going out and you will get a foot in the door as the saying goes.

My husband and I have been together for 10 years, since we were 17. We have two wonderful children. And yes, the 'honeymoon' phase is over but it doesn't matter becasue we still love eachother and still do things together and for eachother that really make us appreciate one another. Interestingly, when you first fall in love, your brain disconnects the part of your brain that decides if someone is trustworthy etc - yes, love is literally blind. But at about the 2 year mark, for some reason that part gets switched back on. Suddenly couples start finding fault in eachother. It's not that those faults weren't there to start with, it's just that they didn't see them. Things can get very ugly. If things start to go downhill, you need to sit down and talk, make same "arguement rules'. My husband and I have rules for arguing, such as no yelling, no calling names, no interupting, being straight up, telling how we feel etc which really helps during disagreements. And don't expect to not have them - everyone is different and have different ideas and beliefs. In a relationship, those beliefs can cause problems and couples either need to work around them, through them, change them or compromise. People will say a lot, don't try to change your wife/husband because they won't - not true. It's a matter of sitting down and talking about how you feel and what can be done to fix those negative feelings. If a wife feels that her husband is insensitive, he needs to practise being more sensitive. If a husband feels that his wife needs to give him some alone time, she's needs to organise a way for him to have some time to himself. Of course, things are never that black and white and there is probably problems on both sides. e.g. maybe the husband is insensitive because he feels like his wife is distant, in which case there needs work on both sides. As for keeping the flame alive, if there are things that you enjoyed doing during the honeymoon phase, keep doing them! At any rate this is an extremely complicated subject and i could go on about the psychology of things for ages but I won't unless you have specific questions