Evidently they don't teach you EVERYTHING in private school:
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071018204832AAs7qoX&r=w
2007-10-18 17:25:45 · 12 answers · asked by rabble rouser 6 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Leo was a rather flambuoyant homosexual, much the same as many men during the renasaunce as the christian god (church) had not made it a sin yet.
It was also quite the rage to paint ones caracatures with a great deal of femininity so as to make them more angelic looking.
2007-10-18 17:30:22 · answer #1 · answered by Judo Chop 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
i think of you're staring on the "pronunciation" line in that lexicon dictionary consequence. I think of meaning it fairly is how the be conscious for "god" in Aramaic is reported. and that i'm guessing those capital letter point out which of the letters and marks could be written out in Aramaic script, for the reason that (like Hebrew) the written Aramaic be conscious would not have revealed many of the vowels. .
2016-12-15 03:37:39 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
that ad was completely inappropriate
Just because you have freedom of speech and expression doesnt mean you have the right as a human being to mock sacred things of other groups. A cartoonist mocked Islam and it was outrage and horror for weeks. Yet a gay rights group can mock christianity and christians should just get over it?
You cant ask for respect and then turn around and have zero respect for others.
2007-10-18 17:31:54 · answer #3 · answered by cadisneygirl 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Do you mean Independent school - independent of the State. No school can teach you everything and most State schools are having difficulty teaching the basics.
2007-10-18 17:30:42 · answer #4 · answered by cheir 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No, ole Leo was Bisexual. Everyone who's read the Davinci code knows that.
2007-10-18 17:34:04 · answer #5 · answered by Meatwad 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I thought DaVince was gay. I doubt that his sexuality changed from one painting to the next.
2007-10-18 17:30:21 · answer #6 · answered by kc 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I absolutely don't think that he was present doing the painting, that's for sure.
2007-10-18 17:32:02 · answer #7 · answered by Hello Kitty 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes.
2007-10-18 17:28:59 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yes.
2007-10-18 17:28:01 · answer #9 · answered by bobanalyst 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I don't think he could sit straight for that long. He must have drawn it with differenet angles.
2007-10-18 17:35:23 · answer #10 · answered by Happily Happy 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋