The way it's worded, I don't believe that one good deed, though it may indeed be great, excuses other wrong deeds. I think someone is defined by their actions (as well as the intent of said actions), but just because there acts are considered noble by one standard, and immoral in others, makes them disqualified from hero-ship. While I'm certain this immoral person can do a selfless enough act to be considered an 'heroic act', I think a person will need to continuously commit acts of altruism to become worthy of a heroes title. Perhaps a good/bad deed equilibrium of sorts?

I think having a school where the students are split by sex is more harmful to there occupants than anything. For one point, I would arise the argument of what would happen if a students gender does not fit their biological set. Gender is becoming more fluid, and more accepted in commonplace society to not a line with a person's sex. I would also argue that it impacts a youths socialization. If you are segregating and sheltering these children from their peers than I think you grow up in a more censored setting, that doesn't allow them to learn of the differences of other personalities, and ideals that may exist within other gender subsets. I think that single sex schools hinder a child's overall development, which will hinder their learning.

I believe this phrase is thrown around to loosely. A man (assuming he loves the given woman) will go to great lengths to both protect, provide, care for the woman of his affections, however we have evolved as a society to not be so foolish as to think that it's only the man who should be self sacrificing. I think it valiant for a man (or like stated, anyone of any gender/sex) to go through hardships for their partner but where is the line drawn? If a co-worker is spreading rumors behind their partners back, is it now the others duty to challenge them to a duel? Or perhaps just murder them in cold blood? Is this something a normal functioning member of society is even capable of? I think the statement holds significant sentiment and shows love, but I however don't think the concept of doing anything and everything is able to be so carelessly applied to every couple.

I don't think humans are evil. I don't think anything is born evil, however I believe humans are the only species sentient and conscious enough to chose an action, even though they possess the knowledge to understand its wrong (evil). When a loin hunts a kills, it's working off its instinct to survive, they don't have moral compass' that allow them to believe what they are doing is immoral. Humans have moral code and systems in society telling us whats right and wrong and some individuals choose to do something deemed 'evil'. (I'm arguing Mark Twain's theory, that only humans are cable of evil.)