Lynci

I have a nine-year-old spayed female indoor cat who has been my only cat since she was about five months old. Two weeks ago I attended with my sister an event at which there were many cats/kittens who needed to be adopted; I fell in love with a baby female dilute calico and decided impulsively, and against my better judgment, to adopt her. I live with my sister in a two-story townhouse. We did everything wrong with introducing Shelby, the older cat, to Shayla, the kitten, putting them together immediately, the result being that, in time, Shayla began to terrorize Shelby, and Shelby hated Shayla from the moment of her arrival, hissing and growling at her.. Last Monday, suddenly, Shelby just stopped eating; she's always been an excellent eater, liking everything -- now she'll only eat small amounts of treats, chicken, and cheese; she's obviously depressed. We took both cats to our veterinarian, who told us we must isolate them from each other and suggested that I purchase a pheromone diffuser to calm Shelby, which I did. That was last Tuesday; since then Shayla is confined to my bedroom, alone mostly while I'm at work from 9:30 a.m. until 2:30 p.m., then with me after that, and Shelby has the rest of the house to herself, with my sister for company. Additionally, I have developed a huge guilt complex, having ruined Shelby's life, keeping Shayla in confinement, and neglecting my sister! And Shelby is still clearly unhappy. I've consulted several cat books which don't address my particular problem, so I'd appreciate any advice/expertise that Yahoo Answerers can provide. Thank you in advance!

Denzel Washington is playing a character in his current movie whom he describes as a sociopath; he states further in defining the term sociopath that such persons are without consciences and are often atheists. Does it follow logically then that many atheists are sociopaths and that those who live "good" lives only do so because they fear god's condemning them to hell after their deaths if they stray?

I asked this question in another category and received only three answers so am asking again here as representative of an R & S dilemma. The state of Georgia is considering legislation which would limit the numbers of embryos a fertility physician could implant. Naturally, the impetus for the possible legislation is Nadya Suleman's recent delivery of octuplets resulting from her doctor's implantation of six embryos. She believed that the embryos were her "children", thus must be given life. Whether or not you accept that premise, would it be Constitutional to pass a law such as Georgia is contemplating? Would it be ethical? Are there those among you who believe that Nadya's reasoning is Biblically defendable, therefore reasonable?

The state of Georgia is contemplating passing legislation limiting the number of in vitro embryos which a fertility physician may implant into his patient (two if the woman is younger than 33, three if she is older). The objective is to avoid multiple births (such as Nadya Suleman's octuplets) thereby preventing some birth defects and disabilities as well as to avoid astronomical hospital bills accrued in caring for such premature infants. What do you think? Should the Government be allowed to pass such legislation? Would the law be Constitutional?

I consider myself agnostic from the point of view that I think that it is impossible to know whether or not god or a creator exists, but is that simply a fence-sitting position as in: today I believe in god but tomorrow I don't depending upon the events transpiring in my life? I definitely do not believe in the "God" of the organized religions.

On Yahoo!'s home page is a link to a video (which I am unable to view due to my dial-up internet service), apparently a physicist's alleged "proof" of the existence of god. Have you seen it? Is it believable? What are your conclusions? Thanks for your comments.

In some school districts in Florida and in Georgia, efforts are being made by school boards (successfully) to indroduce courses such as "the Bible as history" or "the history of the Bible" as elective courses in public high schools. Those programs are being contested in court, but in the interim continue to be offered and attended. What are your thoughts on this innovation? As an agnostic, I must confirm that I am naturally opposed...

Since Jesus's alleged virgin birth, his heretical ministry, his performed miracles all leading ultimately to his condemnation, crucifiction, and glorious resurrection were predestined by God's plan for him, why then the venomous antisemitism which has evolved (as exemplified recently in the behavior of Mel Gibson, for instance) when, in fact, the Jewish leaders, the Romans, even Pontius Pilate, had no free will in the affair and were only playing their designated roles in the requisite scenario preordained by God?? Why should blame of any kind be assigned to those who were only doing their duties as demanded of them by God? Very likely there would be no Christianity had not Christ been the martyr for the cause (as the story is told...). Yes??

How do you imagine that life on earth would be altered by the arrival of the Panacea, the Elixir of Life, or AurLplasm (as I named it in the novel I wrote where it was taken to Atlantis and is currently ensiled within a capsule deep in the Caribbean Sea)? The substance, whatever its appelation, possesses the power to bestow immortality and eternal youth upon the recipients. Assume that it would be available to all and that its distribution could not be controlled by any individual or nation.

Are "data entry" positions actually legitimate? Is it safe to do on-line surveys; if so, do they ever really pay anything? I'd just like to supplement my income a bit each month, preferably via my computer from home and without being scammed! Thanks for any information provided...