OmniRedOne
11-04-2005, 01:28 AM
Okie doke brilliant musical authors this a question that should reveal much.
What is your opinion answered with law of probability that an author of music containing lyrics has never scribed with any harmful intent .After you've considered your definition concerning Human nature do you feel humanity could provide a prototype author who does not use word music for harmful intent.That would incude after any authoring's initial imprint getting a response saying any
words used could potentially be misconstrued though the original catharsis absolutely innocent.Remember the dictionary says "Catharsis" is a purgative state any continual author achieves while rendering any thing creative.An answer of 100 to 1 would mean you do not believe lyrical innocent intent is ever achieved.1 to 1 would mean you believe it is and or has been achieved.Answers could range from 1-1 to 100-1.My opinion is yes 1-1 that innocent intent of no harm via lyric intepretation is or has previously been achieved.One final question heh hey pinked the number five decades ago.When did they pink the number nine and did they do so using an oblivious fellow heterosexual's prospective project?That would semm a preposterousLy predatory thing to do.Take care and God bless.Absolutely no twisted parallels.
Absoluely straight forword.Gary V. Giardina.This sent approximately 1:28 A.M.November 4th.2005.
What is your opinion answered with law of probability that an author of music containing lyrics has never scribed with any harmful intent .After you've considered your definition concerning Human nature do you feel humanity could provide a prototype author who does not use word music for harmful intent.That would incude after any authoring's initial imprint getting a response saying any
words used could potentially be misconstrued though the original catharsis absolutely innocent.Remember the dictionary says "Catharsis" is a purgative state any continual author achieves while rendering any thing creative.An answer of 100 to 1 would mean you do not believe lyrical innocent intent is ever achieved.1 to 1 would mean you believe it is and or has been achieved.Answers could range from 1-1 to 100-1.My opinion is yes 1-1 that innocent intent of no harm via lyric intepretation is or has previously been achieved.One final question heh hey pinked the number five decades ago.When did they pink the number nine and did they do so using an oblivious fellow heterosexual's prospective project?That would semm a preposterousLy predatory thing to do.Take care and God bless.Absolutely no twisted parallels.
Absoluely straight forword.Gary V. Giardina.This sent approximately 1:28 A.M.November 4th.2005.