for those who approve wider definitions of marriage
Kate Gladstone
a group seeking to keep marriage limited to one-man-one-woman
(the _soi-disant_ "American Family Association")
has begun polling the public about gay marriage - the group has stated
that it will present the poll's results to Congress. (Presumably, the
"American Family Association" expects that the majority of answers will
oppose anything but its own one-man-one-woman views)
So if you would like your own views on the subject (which may not
coincide with those of the "American Family Association") to go to
Congress, visit the following URL and pass it along to others who may
think similarly:
http://www.afa.net/petitions/marriagepoll.asp
--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Kate Gladstone - Handwriting Repair - ka...@global2000.net
http://www.global2000.net/handwritingrepair
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Ed Reppert
Kate Gladstone <ka...@global2000.net> wrote:
> So if you would like your own views on the subject (which may not
> coincide with those of the "American Family Association") to go to
> Congress, visit the following URL and pass it along to others who may
> think similarly:
>
> http://www.afa.net/petitions/marriagepoll.asp
>
Unfortunately, the poll addresses only one alternative to the 'one man,
one woman' position - that of gay marriages. It does not address any of
the many alternatives discussed in Heinlein's books. If it did, I would
participate.
The site makes a distinction between "marriage" and "civil union".
Pfui. First, any religion may establish its own rules for "acceptable"
marriages. The state has no business in that. If the Church of All
Worlds wishes to specify that multiple men and women can marry into one
large "group marriage" then the state has no business telling members
of that church they cannot do so ("Freedom of Religion"). Second,
marriage *is* a civil union, as it involves a contract, even if only
implicitly. The state's involvement in that should be only to ensure
that the terms of the contract are carried out, and that they do not
involve harm to any party to the contract, or to third parties (the
"Golden Rule").
Mormons want to practice polygyny? Fine with me. Somebody else wants to
practice polyandry? That's fine, too. Line marriage? Group? Something
else? All fine, as long as nobody's gettin' hurt. And no matter what
Mrs. Grundy says, neither she nor the neighborhood kids are harmed by
these practices. So tell her to shut up and let people live their own
lives.
LV Poker Player
>For those who approve wider definitions of marriage -
>
>a group seeking to keep marriage limited to one-man-one-woman
>(the _soi-disant_ "American Family Association")
My idea is that religion should be kept out of marriage. Any couple who wants
to be legally married must do so in a civil ceremony at a courthouse. No
ceremony performed in a church or by a minister would have any legal standing.
Wonder what AFA would think of THAT one? It is just as valid as their
position.
--
Ferengi rule of acquisition #192: Never cheat a Klingon...unless you're sure
you can get away with it.
Haqim al-khayyami
> In article <kate-1AFA44.1...@syrcnyrdrs-01-ge0.nyroc.rr.com>,
> Kate Gladstone <ka...@global2000.net> wrote:
>
>
>>So if you would like your own views on the subject (which may not
>>coincide with those of the "American Family Association") to go to
>>Congress, visit the following URL and pass it along to others who may
>>think similarly:
>>
>>http://www.afa.net/petitions/marriagepoll.asp
>>
>
>
> Unfortunately, the poll addresses only one alternative to the 'one man,
> one woman' position - that of gay marriages. It does not address any of
> the many alternatives discussed in Heinlein's books. If it did, I would
> participate.
Also, the site makes a point out of saying that they will feel free to
email you as part of their privacy policy. They DON'T say that they
will not harass you if you choose a contrary point of view.
I didn't trust them, so I did what I do on all such sites. I lied to
them.
saavik
Ed Reppert wrote:
Margo stands up and applauds!
BOYC, Ed?
Lee S. Billings
erep...@rochester.rr.invalid.com says...
>
>In article <kate-1AFA44.1...@syrcnyrdrs-01-ge0.nyroc.rr.com>,
>Kate Gladstone <ka...@global2000.net> wrote:
>
>> So if you would like your own views on the subject (which may not
>> coincide with those of the "American Family Association") to go to
>> Congress, visit the following URL and pass it along to others who may
>> think similarly:
>>
>> http://www.afa.net/petitions/marriagepoll.asp
>>
>
>Unfortunately, the poll addresses only one alternative to the 'one man,
>one woman' position - that of gay marriages. It does not address any of
>the many alternatives discussed in Heinlein's books. If it did, I would
>participate.
One step at a time. If we can ever get over the "one man, one woman" hurdle at
all, the next phase will be easier. I registered my preference because I don't
see how it can do any harm for me to do so, and it just might do some good.
Celine
--
Handmade jewelry at http://www.rubylane.com/shops/starcat
"Only the powers of evil claim that doing good is boring."
-- Diane Duane, _Nightfall at Algemron_
Lee S. Billings
says...
>Also, the site makes a point out of saying that they will feel free to
>email you as part of their privacy policy. They DON'T say that they
>will not harass you if you choose a contrary point of view.
I have *very* good filters, and no hesitation about reporting harassment to the
appropriate entities. (In this case, that would be their upstream connectivity
provider.)
LePheaux
"Ed Reppert" <erep...@rochester.rr.invalid.com> wrote in message
news:181220031815276422%<<
<<>>
Shit happens.
hell I don't care either.
just don't expect acceptance.
or tax deductions.
LePheaux
"Lee S. Billings" <stard...@mindCHEMISEspring.com> wrote in message
news:6gtEb.10156$0s2....@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> In article <181220031815276422%erep...@rochester.rr.invalid.com>,
> erep...@rochester.rr.invalid.com says...
> >
> >In article <kate-1AFA44.1...@syrcnyrdrs-01-ge0.nyroc.rr.com>,
> >Kate Gladstone <ka...@global2000.net> wrote:
> >
> >> So if you would like your own views on the subject (which may not
> >> coincide with those of the "American Family Association") to go to
> >> Congress, visit the following URL and pass it along to others who may
> >> think similarly:
> >>
> >> http://www.afa.net/petitions/marriagepoll.asp
> >>
> >
> >Unfortunately, the poll addresses only one alternative to the 'one man,
> >one woman' position - that of gay marriages. It does not address any of
> >the many alternatives discussed in Heinlein's books. If it did, I would
> >participate.
>
> One step at a time. If we can ever get over the "one man, one woman"
hurdle at
> all, the next phase will be easier. I registered my preference because I
don't
> see how it can do any harm for me to do so, and it just might do some
good.
<<>>
do any good that iz.
not that I disagree either.
Dont Be Fuelish
> >
> >> So if you would like your own views on the subject (which may
> >> not coincide with those of the "American Family Association")
> >> to go to Congress, visit the following URL and pass it along to
> >> others who may think similarly:
> >>
> >> http://www.afa.net/petitions/marriagepoll.asp
> >>
When I voted I found out that at this point the vote is split down the
middle. At this point the result is not going to be something the AFA
will be widely advertising, Ibetcha.
Tian
--
"It may be a tough thing to admit but it's true: though
many Hollywood execs may seem to have no idea
how to make films, they still know a lot more about
it than any of us." - MJ Simpson
Michael Houghton
In article <48sEb.1560$J14...@nwrdny01.gnilink.net>,
Yep. They have an "opt out" policy without the ability to opt out right
up front. Very slimy.
...and the email address they say to write to to stop such emails looks
suspiciously like one that will remove your vote from the poll...
I think I'll pass on this rigged poll...
yours,
Herveus
--
Michael and MJ Houghton | Herveus d'Ormonde and Megan O'Donnelly
her...@radix.net | White Wolf and the Phoenix
Bowie, MD, USA | Tablet and Inkle bands, and other stuff
| http://www.radix.net/~herveus/
Bill Reich
> >From: Kate Gladstone
>
> >For those who approve wider definitions of marriage -
> >
> >a group seeking to keep marriage limited to one-man-one-woman
> >(the _soi-disant_ "American Family Association")
>
> My idea is that religion should be kept out of marriage. Any couple who wants
> to be legally married must do so in a civil ceremony at a courthouse. No
> ceremony performed in a church or by a minister would have any legal standing.
I think you have it backwards. Marriage should not be a state
institution. It should be a matter decided between or among
individuals and involve a religious entity if they so choose. Since
consent is involved, those individuals should be those society judges
capable of consent, adult human beings, for the most part.
A contractual arrangement for the purposes of dividing up property or
otherwise forging a legal partnership for whatever purpose is, of
course, a matter for the courts to enforce and would have legal
standing. Such a contract would be part of some, possibly most,
marriages. It would not BE a marriage. Anyone who wanted to define
someone else's marriage as not being a real marriage would be free to
do so but no one need care.
Tax exemptions should end right now. Maybe four seconds from now as I
am a patient man. The madness of the state encouraging reproduction
has no logical basis except that many people like kids. Many people
like guppies also. I like both (well, I don't like guppies all that
much) but I see no reason to subsidize others in their raising of
either. State enforcement of the ownership of ones partner's sexuality
should end sooner than that.
> Wonder what AFA would think of THAT one? It is just as valid as their
> position.
--
Will in New Haven
"Fuck YOU, we do what we want" Jefferson Airplane (Grace and Paul)
around 1970
Mr_B...@reservoirdogs.com
>> who wants to be legally married must do so in a civil ceremony at a
>> courthouse. No ceremony performed in a church or by a minister would
>> have any legal standing.
>
> I think you have it backwards. Marriage should not be a state
> institution. It should be a matter decided between or among
> individuals and involve a religious entity if they so choose. Since
> consent is involved, those individuals should be those society judges
> capable of consent, adult human beings, for the most part.
> A contractual arrangement for the purposes of dividing up property or
> otherwise forging a legal partnership for whatever purpose is, of
> course, a matter for the courts to enforce and would have legal
> standing. Such a contract would be part of some, possibly most,
> marriages. It would not BE a marriage. Anyone who wanted to define
> someone else's marriage as not being a real marriage would be free to
> do so but no one need care.
> Tax exemptions should end right now. Maybe four seconds from now as I
> am a patient man. The madness of the state encouraging reproduction
> has no logical basis except that many people like kids. Many people
> like guppies also. I like both (well, I don't like guppies all that
> much) but I see no reason to subsidize others in their raising of
> either. State enforcement of the ownership of ones partner's sexuality
> should end sooner than that.
>
Then would you also be in favour of no legal recourse in the matter of any
divorce? Unless there were a legal contract separate from the marriage
which stated division of properties etc?
============================
Mr_Blonde Presents the: "MORON OF THE MONTH" Club:
LNC, Adam Albright, Clough, DemsLackGravitas, Hognoxious
============================
Haqim al-khayyami
> I have *very* good filters, and no hesitation about reporting harassment to the
> appropriate entities. (In this case, that would be their upstream connectivity
> provider.)
>
> Celine
>
Actually, what scared me was giving my true name to them. Kate recently
had an experience where harassing phone calls came because someone
figured out her phone number.
Ed Reppert
> Margo stands up and applauds!
Thanks. :)
> BOYC, Ed?
Sorry?
Shalon Wood
I voted. I run my own mailserver, and there's currently an 'afapoll'
email alias in place.
Current results (snicker):
America's Poll on Homosexual Marriage
I oppose legalization of homosexual marriage and "civil unions"
45.78%
(138485 votes)
I favor legalization of homosexual marriage 46.56%
(140822 votes)
I favor a "civil union" with the full benefits of marriage except for
the name 7.66%
(23165 votes)
Somehow, I _don't_ think this is what they were after....
Shalon Wood
--
Check out Strange Love -- an ezine of science fiction, fantasy, and
paranormal erotica. Only $2 for more than 20,000 words of fiction!
pixelmeow
<ds...@pele.cx> scribbled:
>>>> In article <kate-1AFA44.1...@syrcnyrdrs-01-ge0.nyroc.rr.com>,
>>>> Kate Gladstone <ka...@global2000.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>http://www.afa.net/petitions/marriagepoll.asp
>>>>>
>
>I voted. I run my own mailserver, and there's currently an 'afapoll'
>email alias in place.
I run my own mailserver, also, and have received no emails. I don't
care about the other, I'm just sick of people who think they can stick
their noses in my bedroom (or anywhere else it doesn't belong, for
that matter) getting their way about it. If you love him or you love
her, or you love him and her and her and him and [...], what the hell
business is it of mine? Are you hurting anyone? Are you taking
something that's mine? No? Didn't think so. Just because I may not
want to do things the same way doesn't mean I get to tell you that you
*can't*.
<grumble. thought this country was about personal freedoms.>
>Current results (snicker):
>
>America's Poll on Homosexual Marriage
>I oppose legalization of homosexual marriage and "civil unions"
>45.78%
>(138485 votes)
>
>I favor legalization of homosexual marriage 46.56%
>(140822 votes)
This has come up since last night when I voted. ;-)
>I favor a "civil union" with the full benefits of marriage except for
>the name 7.66%
>(23165 votes)
>
>Somehow, I _don't_ think this is what they were after....
That sure is too bad, isn't it? <innocent smile>
--
~teresa~
AFH Barwench
^..^ "Never try to outstubborn a cat." Robert A. Heinlein ^..^
http://pixelmeow.com/ && http://heinleinsociety.org/
http://pixelmeow.com/Book_Exchange/index.htm
http://www.storesonline.com/site/thesurvivalstation/
http://rose-n-thorn-llc.com/
aim: pixelmeow msn:pixe...@passport.com
Kate Gladstone
suggests:
> [keeping] religion ... out of marriage. Any couple who wants
> to be legally married must do so in a civil ceremony at a courthouse. No
> ceremony performed in a church or by a minister would have any legal standing.
... though I'd prefer a rule that "You're married if you say you're
married, at least if the marriage doesn't involve a non-adult or a close
blood-relative. Whatever a priest/rabbi/pastor/imam thinks of the
marriage of any two/three/four/etc. unrelated adults, the
society/government will accept it as a marriage regardless, with all the
rights and responsibilities pertaining thereto."
>Wonder what AFA would think of THAT one? It is just as valid as their
> position.
I suspect that AFA would try VERY hard to defeat any move towards either
LVPP's position or the one I've expressed.
Kate Gladstone
> ... an experience where harassing phone calls came because someone
> figured out her phone number.
Actually, I've had more than one such experience (and have grown used to
such experiences except where I have reason to believe that the calls
come from someone I'd want to trust).
"Figuring out my phone-number" doesn't take much because it appears on
my web-page (through which I get many business-contacts which I wouldn't
get if my phone-number and contact-info didn't appear there).
So I have to live with this, even though it means that each year
I can expect (for instance) a certain number of phone-calls from
weirdoes who denounce me for "teaching a Satanic, Communist,
anti-American form of handwriting" and the like.
David Wright
"Kate Gladstone" <ka...@global2000.net> wrote in message
news:kate-BA037A.1...@syrcnyrdrs-01-ge0.nyroc.rr.com...
(snip)
>a certain number of phone-calls from
> weirdoes who denounce me for "teaching a Satanic, Communist,
> anti-American form of handwriting" and the like.
>
Just so I don't called up to answer to the 'handwriting police', just what
kind of writing qualifies as "a Satanic, Communist, anti-American form of
handwriting" ? :>)
--
David Wright
Help Us Collect Matching Funds:
http://heinleinsociety.org/news/trustmatchingfund.html
Benefit The Heinlein Society by ordering books thru:
http://home.alltel.net/dwrighsr/heinlein-amazon.htm
Bill Reich
Divorce, meaning the dissolution of a marriage, would not be a state
matter. The dissolution of any civil contract would be. Calling the
civil contract marriage is one of the reasons that people with
religious axes to grind want to weigh in on who should be allowed to
make these contracts. Not calling it marriage leaves them without a
leg to stand on. Not as colorful or fun as actually cutting off their
@%#$%^ legs but less of a hassle.
Mr_B...@reservoirdogs.com
No, sir... You're missing a HUGE amount of what happens when a person
dies fer instance... Who inherits property? I ain't gonna explain
further (because of bad recent memories) but it couldn't be ignored by
the state...
Mr_B...@reservoirdogs.com
>> of any divorce? Unless there were a legal contract separate from the
>> marriage which stated division of properties etc?
>>
>
> matter. The dissolution of any civil contract would be. Calling the
> civil contract marriage is one of the reasons that people with
> religious axes to grind want to weigh in on who should be allowed to
> make these contracts. Not calling it marriage leaves them without a
> leg to stand on. Not as colorful or fun as actually cutting off their
> @%#$%^ legs but less of a hassle.
>
So who gets the money from a wealthy second marriage? The first children?
The second set of children? The 4th cousins? Something tells me that
you're not thinking of all the ramifications... And if you wanna get
nasty, let me know beforehand, as such is not my intent here, and I'd as
soon see it dropped...
Kate Gladstone
>
> Just so I don't called up to answer to the 'handwriting police', just what
> kind of writing qualifies as "a Satanic, Communist, anti-American form of
> handwriting" ? :>)
According to the folks who phone about it,
"Satanic/Communist/anti-American" handwriting means
anything that doesn't join 100% of letters within each word,
as well as anything that doesn't stick entirely to "cursive" forms for
each and every letter of the writing.
LV Poker Player
>> Just so I don't called up to answer to the 'handwriting police', just what
>> kind of writing qualifies as "a Satanic, Communist, anti-American form of
>> handwriting" ? :>)
>
>According to the folks who phone about it,
>"Satanic/Communist/anti-American" handwriting means
>anything that doesn't join 100% of letters within each word,
>as well as anything that doesn't stick entirely to "cursive" forms for
>each and every letter of the writing.
Wow. Let's see, these are people who get out on the street and drive, and I
have to trust my life and health to their judgement. These are people who vote
on what the government will do.
This does not reassure me.
Do they give any reason why non cursive, non joining handwriting is so evil?
Barry Gold
>According to the folks who phone about it,
>"Satanic/Communist/anti-American" handwriting means
>anything that doesn't join 100% of letters within each word,
>as well as anything that doesn't stick entirely to "cursive" forms for
>each and every letter of the writing.
I abandoned cursive writing in the 9th grade, so I guess that makes
my printing 100% Satanic, Communist, and anti-American.
These people sound even crazier than the Chick publications anti-D&D
comics.
--
I pledge allegiance to the Constitution of the United States of America, and
to the republic which it established, one nation from many peoples, promising
liberty and justice for all.
Kate Gladstone
- reported by PixelMeow as ...
> >America's Poll on Homosexual Marriage
> >I oppose legalization of homosexual marriage and "civil unions"
> >45.78%
> >(138485 votes)
> >
> >I favor legalization of homosexual marriage 46.56%
> >(140822 votes)
>
> This has come up since last night when I voted. ;-)
>
> >I favor a "civil union" with the full benefits of marriage except for
> >the name 7.66%
> >(23165 votes)
> >
> >Somehow, I _don't_ think this is what they were after....
>
> That sure is too bad, isn't it? <innocent smile>
- I start to wonder whether AFA might now have resolved to consider
quietly "forgetting" its publicly announced plans to bring this poll's
results to the attention of Congress.
If the poll continues to increasingly disfavor AFA's notions, and
if AFA therefore"forgets" to follow through with presenting Congress
with the poll's results, should/will some other group step in and
remember to present what AFA might rather "forget"?
David Wright
> David Wright asks:
>
> >
> > Just so I don't called up to answer to the 'handwriting police', just
what
> > kind of writing qualifies as "a Satanic, Communist, anti-American form
of
> > handwriting" ? :>)
>
> According to the folks who phone about it,
> "Satanic/Communist/anti-American" handwriting means
> anything that doesn't join 100% of letters within each word,
> as well as anything that doesn't stick entirely to "cursive" forms for
> each and every letter of the writing.
>
Damn, I'd better watch out. They're gonna come get me. :<)
Lee S. Billings
NJZLIR...@spammotel.com says...
>>Current results (snicker):
>>
>>America's Poll on Homosexual Marriage
>>I oppose legalization of homosexual marriage and "civil unions"
>>45.78%
>>(138485 votes)
>>
>>I favor legalization of homosexual marriage 46.56%
>>(140822 votes)
>
>This has come up since last night when I voted. ;-)
>
>>I favor a "civil union" with the full benefits of marriage except for
>>the name 7.66%
>>(23165 votes)
Yesterday when I voted, the first 2 percentages were 52% and 40% respectively.
This is a significant change in just 24 hours! The third percentage hasn't
changed very much.
I will admit to having passed the poll URL along to a gay friend...
lal_truckee
>>>Then would you also be in favour of no legal recourse in the matter
>>>of any divorce? Unless there were a legal contract separate from the
>>>marriage which stated division of properties etc?
>>>
>>
>>Divorce, meaning the dissolution of a marriage, would not be a state
>>matter. The dissolution of any civil contract would be. Calling the
>>civil contract marriage is one of the reasons that people with
>>religious axes to grind want to weigh in on who should be allowed to
>>make these contracts. Not calling it marriage leaves them without a
>>leg to stand on. Not as colorful or fun as actually cutting off their
>>@%#$%^ legs but less of a hassle.
>>
>
>
> So who gets the money from a wealthy second marriage? The first children?
> The second set of children? The 4th cousins? Something tells me that
> you're not thinking of all the ramifications... And if you wanna get
> nasty, let me know beforehand, as such is not my intent here, and I'd as
> soon see it dropped...
Do you think all this is somehow attached to the word "married?" It's
not. It's spelled out in law. If you went through the legal books and
replaced "marriage" with "civil partnership" or somesuch it all remains
just as it is today. Leave "marriage/divorce" to the churches - they can
do what ever they want; but a "marriage ceremony" wouldn't automatically
invoke the "civil partnership" - the future partners need to go to city
hall and declare their partnership on the record, and would need to go
through the normal legal wranglings attached to dissolving said partnership.
Kate Gladstone
> >"Satanic/Communist/anti-American" handwriting [which they identify as]
> >anything that doesn't join 100% of letters within each word,
> >as well as anything that doesn't stick entirely to "cursive" forms for
> >each and every letter of the writing. ...
LV PokerPlayer points out that ...
> ... these ... people ... get out on the street and drive, and I
> have to trust my life and health to their judgement.
One of them, in fact, took a few funny minutes to rant against all cars
that didn't have a stick-shift as the Good Lord intended. (I don't know
why he blamed automatic transmission on me along with "evil" handwriting
- I don't even drive!)
> ... Do they give any reason why non cursive, non joining handwriting is so evil?
When I ask, most of them hang up. The three or four who've stayed on the
line long enough to actually answer this question, or try to, have said
things that basically boil down to "A good American would automatically
know, without being told, that it is improper not to write like a good
American." (One said: "I have been teaching school for almost forty
years, Miss [sic] Gladstone, and I can tell you that if you had the
proper American feelings on the subject you would recognize immediately,
without being told, the truth of the matter. It would be far preferable
for the writing to be absolutely illegible and even quite slow as long
as it is completely free of such transgressions as a capital that is
printed or a pen that has been lifted within the word. If any of my
students fell so far below standard, no matter how legible or rapid the
writing he would not be let off lightly by any means."
The funniest thing, in my view, happened when that righteously outraged
teacher followed up her phone-call on my "transgressions" by mailing me
a neatly handwritten note summarizing her statement.
Her very legibly written note, to my amused surprise, showed
quite a few "printed-looking" letters (mostly among the capitals) and
more than a few places where she had lifted the pen within a word. I
wrote her back, enclosing a photocopy of the note with each of her
"transgressions" marked in red and footnoted in red, by me, with a
request for an explanation of her behavior. She did not, as I'd hoped,
reply once again in writing - she did, though, phone me once again,
merely to hang up after delivering herself of this sentiment:
"It's people like you, Miss Gladstone, who are causing the youth to
disrespect society and rebel against their parents and teachers. And I
pray to Jesus Christ that some day you will learn better."
LV Poker Player
> "It's people like you, Miss Gladstone, who are causing the youth to
>disrespect society and rebel against their parents and teachers. And I
>pray to Jesus Christ that some day you will learn better."
I have often wondered where some Christians find "Thou shalt not gamble" "Thou
shalt not look at pictures of naked women" and such in their Bible. Now I have
to wonder where they find "Thou shalt not print" and "Thou shalt not lift thy
pen in the midst of a word."
Stick shifts, the way God intended (snipped that part). I thought people who
believed in scientific creationism were wierd.
I honestly had not heard about objections to printing and lifting the pen
before now. Or to automatic transmissions, for that matter. I hope the
percentage of the population is small, smaller than the number who believe in
scientific creationism.
I guess since Jesus drove a stick shift, that should be good enough for us too.
I bet their thought processes (if any) are along these lines.
Kate Gladstone
> ... where some Christians find "Thou shalt not gamble"
> "Thou halt not look at pictures of naked women" and such in their Bible. Now I
> have to wonder where they find "Thou shalt not print" and "Thou shalt not lift thy
> pen in the midst of a word."
... especially because Hebrew (for instance) routinely lifts the pen
after each letter (even when you write in Hebrew cursive).
Matthew
Barry Gold wrote:
>Kate Gladstone <ka...@global2000.net> wrote:
>
>
>>According to the folks who phone about it,
>>"Satanic/Communist/anti-American" handwriting means
>>anything that doesn't join 100% of letters within each word,
>>as well as anything that doesn't stick entirely to "cursive" forms for
>>each and every letter of the writing.
>>
>>
>
>I abandoned cursive writing in the 9th grade, so I guess that makes
>my printing 100% Satanic, Communist, and anti-American.
>
>These people sound even crazier than the Chick publications anti-D&D
>comics.
>
>
crazier yes. as funny? not nearly
Ed Murphy
Beverage Of Your Choice, i.e. "can I buy your next round?".
Stephanie
I never adapted well to cursive (it was one of my learning blocks, and still
looks like it did in second grade). Yet, when I choose to take the time, my
print can look nearly as perfect as this typeface.
Stephanie
http://hometown.aol.com/merfilly27/myhomepage/profile.html
Ellen K Hursh
> Re the current results of the "AFA Marriage Poll" at
> http://www.afa.net/petitions/marriagepoll.asp
<snip results that favor legalized marriage for MOTSS couples>
> - I start to wonder whether AFA might now have resolved to consider
> quietly "forgetting" its publicly announced plans to bring this poll's
> results to the attention of Congress.
> If the poll continues to increasingly disfavor AFA's notions, and
> if AFA therefore"forgets" to follow through with presenting Congress
> with the poll's results, should/will some other group step in and
> remember to present what AFA might rather "forget"?
I figure AFA'll just whine about eeeevil homosexuals being mean and
slanting the numbers, and walk off in a huff.
Or maybe I've just been on Usenet too long. :-)
William Hughes
<dwri...@alltel.net> wrote:
> Damn, I'd better watch out. They're gonna come get me. :<)
"They're coming to take him away ha ha
They're coming to take him away he he ho ho ha ha
To the funny farm
Where life is wonderful all the time..."
With apologies to Napoleon XIV
RB
PrinceOfBaja
>... though I'd prefer a rule that "You're married if you say you're
>married, at least if the marriage doesn't involve a non-adult or a close
>blood-relative.
<snip>
No close blood relatives? Are you sure you've been paying attention when
reading RAH? The taboo about consanguinity being involved in "marriage" stems
from the time when we couldn't identify genetic barriers to such a union. And
if the people invooved weren't interested in procreating, what's your objection
to their union, Mrs, Grundy?
Steve
PrinceOfBaja
40.86% for just a man and a woman
50.83% for legalizing gay marriage
8.something% for civil unions
I have a hunch they'll be dismantling the site and survey soon...
Steve
Kate Gladstone
The Prince of Baja asks me:
> ... Are you sure you've been paying attention when
> reading RAH?
I've also paid close attention to the fact that we don't - yet - have
routine full-genome testing for those who marry and plan to have
children (or who don't plan *not* to have children).
If we lived in a world where (as RAH depicts, say, Secundus) social
customs apparently made such testing universal or nearly so (RAH says
somewhere in TEFL that, on Secundus, the notion of getting your genome &
your partner's genome tested pre-maritally has replaced the notion of
not marrying close kinfolk), then one could make a good case for
changing this.
If (in our present culture) you remove rules against reproducing
with your brother or sister or son or daughter, then - in our present
culture, at least - you can't safely expect that people who might have
this on their minds would also just decide in advance to refrain from
sex (or to refrain from unprotected sex, or possibly to have abortions)
if the gene-tests indicate possible problems.
After all, a lot of the incest that currently goes on in the USA
(laws or no laws) reportedly occurs in places where a fair number of
people oppose contraception, oppose abortion, and/or oppose genetic
testing. Removing/reducing the existing legal and social penalties for
Doing It with one's mother/father/sister/brother does not therefore
strike me, for the moment, as a Marvelously Good Idea. (Even RAH, even
in TEFL,took great care to /a/ make sure that Joe and Llita learned
from Lazarus certain Facts of Life as they affect or can affect
consanguineous couples & /b/ to also make sure that Joe and Llita
understood full well why "the Landfellows [denizens of the planet
Landfall] are not tetched in the head" for regarding such relationships
as wrong.)
pixelmeow
lvpoke...@aol.com (LV Poker Player) scribbled:
>I guess since Jesus drove a stick shift, that should be good enough for us too.
KEYBOARD!!!!!
pixelmeow
(PrinceOfBaja) scribbled:
I just got an email back from Jane saying they are going off about
some automated respondents and are going to throw a bunch of votes
out. Yeah, riiiiiiiiiight... whatta surprise!
Kate Gladstone
> I just got an email back from Jane saying they are going off about
> some automated respondents and are going to throw a bunch of votes
> out. Yeah, riiiiiiiiiight... whatta surprise!
Well, just keep finding more people to
/a/
keep those votes coming in
(licit and honest unautomated votes, of course - but constantly coming
in, in a stream strong enough to counter those that the AFA throws out
... or at least to "die trying" to)
and
/b/ spread the word so other people can keep the votes coming in faster
than the AFA keeps throwing them out.
If we can't make the AFA give up in disgust,
we can at least give them a run for their money.
pixelmeow
<ka...@global2000.net> scribbled:
>Re the AFA "marriage poll, PixelMeow writes:
>
>> I just got an email back from Jane saying they are going off about
>> some automated respondents and are going to throw a bunch of votes
>> out. Yeah, riiiiiiiiiight... whatta surprise!
>
>Well, just keep finding more people to
>
>/a/
>keep those votes coming in
>(licit and honest unautomated votes, of course - but constantly coming
>in, in a stream strong enough to counter those that the AFA throws out
>... or at least to "die trying" to)
>
>and
>
>/b/ spread the word so other people can keep the votes coming in faster
>than the AFA keeps throwing them out.
>
>If we can't make the AFA give up in disgust,
>we can at least give them a run for their money.
ROFL!!! You got it, Kate!
Ed Reppert
<emur...@socal.rr.com> wrote:
> Beverage Of Your Choice, i.e. "can I buy your next round?".
Sure, and thanks! :-)
Who's on the bar? I'll have a leapyfrog, please.
reply@jaceeprint.demon.co.uk marc
lvpoke...@aol.com says...
>
> I have often wondered where some Christians find "Thou shalt not gamble" "Thou
> shalt not look at pictures of naked women" and such in their Bible. Now I have
> to wonder where they find "Thou shalt not print" and "Thou shalt not lift thy
> pen in the midst of a word."
>
bottle on the table " It's not the sort of thing that should be seen in a
Christian household"
Pat Galea
> My soon to be ex-mother-in-law once ranted against me placing a milk
> bottle on the table " It's not the sort of thing that should be seen in a
> Christian household"
"Pardon him. Theodotus: he is a barbarian, and thinks that the customs
of his tribe and island are the laws of nature."
-- Caesar and Cleopatra (G.B. Shaw)
--
Pat Galea - p...@dudegalea.co.uk - www.dudegalea.co.uk
"The author of the Iliad is either Homer or, if not Homer, somebody else
of the same name." - Aldous Huxley
Nancy Lebovitz
Kate Gladstone <ka...@global2000.net> wrote:
>When I ask, most of them hang up. The three or four who've stayed on the
>line long enough to actually answer this question, or try to, have said
>things that basically boil down to "A good American would automatically
>know, without being told, that it is improper not to write like a good
>American." (One said: "I have been teaching school for almost forty
>years, Miss [sic] Gladstone, and I can tell you that if you had the
>proper American feelings on the subject you would recognize immediately,
>without being told, the truth of the matter. It would be far preferable
>for the writing to be absolutely illegible and even quite slow as long
>as it is completely free of such transgressions as a capital that is
>printed or a pen that has been lifted within the word. If any of my
>students fell so far below standard, no matter how legible or rapid the
>writing he would not be let off lightly by any means."
I see why you're planning on writing an sf novel about people who are
vulnerable to early imprinting.
--
Nancy Lebovitz na...@netaxs.com www.nancybuttons.com
Now, with bumper stickers
Using your turn signal is not "giving information to the enemy"
bookman
"Matthew" <matthe...@mail.mcgill.ca> wrote in message
news:3FE38802...@mail.mcgill.ca...
Try this:
http://www.howardhallis.com/bis/cthulhuchick/
Regards,
Rusty the bookman
synchronicity in action - it's predestined!
Prophet
> Re the current results of the "AFA Marriage Poll" at http://www.afa.net/petitions/marriagepoll.asp
>
> - reported by PixelMeow as ...
>
> > >America's Poll on Homosexual Marriage
> > >I oppose legalization of homosexual marriage and "civil unions"
> > >45.78%
> > >(138485 votes)
> > >
> > >I favor legalization of homosexual marriage 46.56%
> > >(140822 votes)
> >
> > This has come up since last night when I voted. ;-)
> >
> > >I favor a "civil union" with the full benefits of marriage except for
> > >the name 7.66%
> > >(23165 votes)
> > >
> > >Somehow, I _don't_ think this is what they were after....
> >
> > That sure is too bad, isn't it? <innocent smile>
>
> - I start to wonder whether AFA might now have resolved to consider
> quietly "forgetting" its publicly announced plans to bring this poll's
> results to the attention of Congress.
> If the poll continues to increasingly disfavor AFA's notions, and
> if AFA therefore"forgets" to follow through with presenting Congress
> with the poll's results, should/will some other group step in and
> remember to present what AFA might rather "forget"?
>
Now, now, with statistics, it's all in how you read 'em.
Given the above, "A majority of Americans do not favor gay marriage."
It's right there.
Personally, I favor expanding the institution bacause to me,
family values means loving marriages regardless of the details,
especially for households with children. Loving partners, loving
parents, loving children, loving siblings, with plenty of attention
to nurturing, respect and, yes, honor.
A vote for me, is a vote for real family values!
Sorry, bad influences here in the land of the eternal primaries.
Marc C Allain http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mca
Native American Cultural Association. http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mca/naca.html
Mein Gedanken Sind Frei!
saavik
Ed Reppert wrote:
*boggle* '_Who's_ on the bar'?! This is Callahan's Place...Mike is, of
course. *amused grin*
"A 'leapfrog' it is for the gentleman, Mike. and I'd like a mocha
coffee, please", says the woman in the black duster and backpack, as the
'plink, plink' of two loonies strike the polished bar.
I'm sure Mike knows and can produce one to perfection, but what's a
leapfrog?
Here's to your good health *clink*.
Margo
Matthew
bookman wrote:
<snorf>
good old cthulu :)
Kate Gladstone
call ...
> ... 100% Satanic, Communist, and anti-American ...
... may get a giggle out of an e-mail I received the other day:
I get e-mails of this kind, making one or both of the requests made in
what follows, at least two or three times a year.
>> FROM: [name/e-mail address suppressed]
>> TO: ka...@global2000.net
>> DATE: Fri Dec 19, 2003 6:22:35 PM America/New_York
>> SUBJECT: handwriting class needs help
>>
>> Dear Kate Gladstone,
>>
>> I saw your page on the Internet because it came up in a search of
>> pages on penmanship, so I need your help. I am a third grade teacher
>> who is looking for ways to motivate kids to want to write in cursive.
>> Please write a statement from your point of view as a handwriting
>> expert. The statement needs to say that cursive is necessary for
>> developing and maintaining adult brain growth. Or other scientific
>> justification that would be applicable to supporting cursive. I have
>> long believed that cursive handwriting must have a scientific reason
>> for teaching it, however I have not been able to find any statements
>> which would support that. Formerly I used to tell my studnets that
>> signing a legal signature requires to be in the cursive style of
>> writing and letter formations, however I have read that this is not
>> true, therefore, I need a new powerful and more supportive statement
>> which would cause the studnets to be motivated in this area. I teach
>> cursive to the third graders beginning on the day they return from
>> winter vacation, therefore I will need your statement as soon as
>> possible. Since you are presumably interested in the teaching of
>> penmanship please comply. Additionally it would be very useful if
>> you can provide any availiable information on how to change a
>> left handed individual to right handed. As every year I have had one
>> or more left handed persons in my class, doubtless this is a result
>> of the fact that one of our first grade and one of our second grade
>> teachers are left handed. It has not been possible for me to correct
>> the teachers on this, therefore it is necessary to have a way of
>> recovering the studnets from being left handed to being normal. Or is
>> it too late and this is only possible at a younger age.
>>
>> Sincerely yours, [name suppressed]
Kate Gladstone
...
> writ[e] an sf novel about people who are
> vulnerable to early imprinting.
Of course, I don't think any normally intelligent humans *avoid*
"vulnerability to early imprinting" - particularly in crucial matters
such as sex. (If you grew up in a society where the Folks In Charge had
lock-and-key power over your reproductive development, either you would
prove properly "vulnerable" to their commanding influences or -
eventually - your genes would die out.)
Kate Gladstone
> My soon to be ex-mother-in-law once ranted against me placing a milk
> bottle on the table " It's not the sort of thing that should be seen in a
> Christian household"
Well, I doubt very seriously that Jesus, Joseph, or Mary
ever did put a milk-bottle on their dinner-table at home
(unless we define "bottle" rather widely - as including containers made
of ceramic or skin) -
milk 2000 years ago, after all, didn't normally arrive in bottles of
glass, plastic, or paper.
;-)
Seriously ...
about the presumed un-Christianity of bottled milk at the dinner-table,
Marc might have quoted re this issue Jesus' own words as they appear in
the Book of Matthew, chapter 15, verse 11
(I've used the King James Version -
since people who pronounce freely upon the "un-Christian-ness"
of things the Bible doesn't cover
generally regard only the KJV as a true English translation) -
> Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man;
> but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.
Rowan Hawthorn
"Kate Gladstone" <ka...@global2000.net> wrote in message
news:kate-34E2CB.1...@syrcnyrdrs-01-ge0.nyroc.rr.com...
> Barry and all the rest who write in some way that a few people would
> call ...
>
>
> > ... 100% Satanic, Communist, and anti-American ...
>
"Been called all the above at one time or another, but never because of my
handwriting, although my second-grade teacher went to the extremes of having
another student *monitor* me to make sure I made my 'O's in the 'right
direction'. I was kinda hoping she was an anomoly, but apparently not."
> ... may get a giggle out of an e-mail I received the other day:
> I get e-mails of this kind, making one or both of the requests made in
> what follows, at least two or three times a year.
>
"That's just...sad. Not surprising, though."
--
Rowan Hawthorn
"I love mankind, it's PEOPLE I can't stand!" - Linus Van Pelt
Kate Gladstone
also to begin GLORY ROAD) -
> "Pardon him. Theodotus: he is a barbarian, and thinks that the customs
> of his tribe and island are the laws of nature."
- many of us have certainly had difficulties dealing with those who take
the attitude this quote describes.
Has any of you experienced (as I have)
equal or greater difficulties dealing with
those who make the opposite error?
(those who regard actual laws of nature as
merely "customs of their tribe and island"?)
For instance (and as I've mentioned here earlier),
I've run into schoolteachers who regard the multiplication-table
or other established realities
as things they can change at whim, just by saying so,
if someone finds them difficult or disturbing.
("Okay, Johnnie, it seems '7x8=56' is too hard for you to remember
so we'll just make this one easier for you
and let you say '7x8=52' instead -
it's only numbers, after all ...
... when you get right down to it,
one way of saying things is just as good as another,
so you might as well pick the easiest way to learn it ... )
Motherthing
"saavik" <saa...@igs.net> wrote in message news:3FE470C6...@igs.net...
The "leapyfrog" is a name used for Laphroiag whisky in the afh bar, and
thanks to crossposting, that's where Ed is posting from...
--
Motherthing
Life is a banquet, and most poor suckers
are starving to death.
- Rosalind Russell
Ogden Johnson III
>> Who's on the bar? I'll have a leapyfrog, please.
>*boggle* '_Who's_ on the bar'?! This is Callahan's Place...Mike is, of
>course. *amused grin*
The dangers inherent in cross-posting. "Who's on the bar?" is a valid
question in a.f.h, since we have a variable roster of bartenders here.
[Amazingly, somehow, they're all female - won't let the guys get
anywhere near the bar.]
>"A 'leapfrog' it is for the gentleman, Mike. and I'd like a mocha
>coffee, please", says the woman in the black duster and backpack, as the
>'plink, plink' of two loonies strike the polished bar.
That was "leap*y*frog, Margo.
> I'm sure Mike knows and can produce one to perfection, but what's a
>leapfrog?
Laphroaig. Neat. Preferably in a small snifter. Possibly with a
splash - a *very* small splash; but, as everyone knows, never ice.
--
OJ III
[Email sent to Yahoo addy is burned before reading.
Lower and crunch the sig and you'll net me at comcast]
Kate Gladstone
> ... having another student *monitor* me to make sure I made my 'O's in the 'right
> direction'.
For technical reasons (too difficult and boring to explain here), moving
the pen in a particular direction when making a particular letter or
number (such as "O/o/zero" really does, on balance, help most people
avoid certain difficulties of legibility as their handwriting speeds up
over time.
However, in my experience and observation (so far),
/a/ this does not justify a lot of the other handwriting-expectations
that some teachers inflict,
and /b/ this does not justify identifying those who can't or won't
follow various expectations (reasonable or otherwise) in handwriting
as "Satanic Commie un-Americans" or whatever. (One of my callers
actually described me and my successful students as "handwriting
Antichrists")
Dan Goodman
34E2CB.120...@syrcnyrdrs-01-ge0.nyroc.rr.com:
>>> I am a third grade teacher
>>> who is looking for ways to motivate kids to want to write in cursive.
>>> Please write a statement from your point of view as a handwriting
>>> expert. The statement needs to say that cursive is necessary for
>>> developing and maintaining adult brain growth. Or other scientific
>>> justification that would be applicable to supporting cursive. I have
>>> long believed that cursive handwriting must have a scientific reason
>>> for teaching it, however I have not been able to find any statements
>>> which would support that.
Does this person actually believe that everything taught in school is
taught because it's been scientifically proven to be essential education?
Most teachers have at least a twinge of doubt. Or does this person
believe that only about handwriting?
>>> Additionally it would be very useful if
>>> you can provide any availiable information on how to change a
>>> left handed individual to right handed. As every year I have had one
>>> or more left handed persons in my class, doubtless this is a result
>>> of the fact that one of our first grade and one of our second grade
>>> teachers are left handed. It has not been possible for me to correct
>>> the teachers on this, therefore it is necessary to have a way of
>>> recovering the studnets from being left handed to being normal. Or is
>>> it too late and this is only possible at a younger age.
The idea that there's nothing wrong with being lefthanded has been taught
in teachers' colleges since at least the 1950s. This
person must be very, very good at hearing only what she wants to hear.
What's your standard reply to such crap?
--
Dan Goodman
Journal http://dsgood.blogspot.com or
http://www.livejournal.com/users/dsgood/
Whatever you wish for me, may you have twice as much.
Kate Gladstone
> Does this person actually believe that everything taught in school is
> taught because it's been scientifically proven to be essential education?
> Most teachers have at least a twinge of doubt. Or does this person
> believe that only about handwriting?
I don't know what she believes or how far she takes it, as I have had no
further contact with her.
It seemed to me (from her letter) that she expects others to
concoct "scientific" justifications (after the fact) for whatever she
has already decided to teach (since her letter boils down to: "I teach
this way, so please give me some scientific proof that I should continue
doing so.")
>
> >>> Additionally it would be very useful if
> >>> you can provide any availiable information on how to change a
> >>> left handed individual to right handed. As every year I have had one
> >>> or more left handed persons in my class, doubtless this is a result
> >>> of the fact that one of our first grade and one of our second grade
> >>> teachers are left handed. It has not been possible for me to correct
> >>> the teachers on this, therefore it is necessary to have a way of
> >>> recovering the studnets from being left handed to being normal. Or is
> >>> it too late and this is only possible at a younger age.
>
> The idea that there's nothing wrong with being lefthanded has been taught
> in teachers' colleges since at least the 1950s. This
> person must be very, very good at hearing only what she wants to hear.
She gave me that impression.
> What's your standard reply to such crap?
Believe me, you don't want to read my standard reply.
I show that reply *only* to the generators of "such crap."
Rowan Hawthorn
> Re ...
>
> > ... having another student *monitor* me to make sure I made my 'O's in
the 'right
> > direction'.
>
> For technical reasons (too difficult and boring to explain here), moving
> the pen in a particular direction when making a particular letter or
> number (such as "O/o/zero" really does, on balance, help most people
> avoid certain difficulties of legibility as their handwriting speeds up
> over time.
>
> However, in my experience and observation (so far),
>
> /a/ this does not justify a lot of the other handwriting-expectations
> that some teachers inflict,
>
"Especially since my handwriting is orders of magnitude better since I got
away from those teachers, and (although I *do* make my 'O's in the "right"
direction now) completely changed my handwriting style to suit myself rather
than someone else."
> and /b/ this does not justify identifying those who can't or won't
> follow various expectations (reasonable or otherwise) in handwriting
> as "Satanic Commie un-Americans" or whatever. (One of my callers
> actually described me and my successful students as "handwriting
> Antichrists")
>
"Ergh."
LV Poker Player
>Believe me, you don't want to read my standard reply.
>I show that reply *only* to the generators of "such crap."
I don't blame you.
The handwriting nonsense is bad enough, but from what I understand trying to
"correct" lefthandedness leads to some serious difficulties, if the teacher
(parent, or whoever) takes it far enough. Do you refer them to
http://www.io.com/~cortese/left/southpaw.html or anything similar?
Probably wouldn't help, but I hope you try.
--
Ferengi rule of acquisition #192: Never cheat a Klingon...unless you're sure
you can get away with it.
saavik
Ogden Johnson III wrote:
Thanks MotherThing and OJ 111 for the explanation. I had not noticed the
cross posting, so did not realize Ed was only semi-intentionally here and
would not necessarily be familiar with Mike's Place at all.
Margo
Kate Gladstone
to information countering their views.
The remainder of my standard letter to such persons, I fear, does not
express things anywhere as politely as LVPP has done.
David M. Silver
Ogden Johnson III <oj3...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> [Amazingly, somehow, they're all female - won't let the guys get
> anywhere near the bar.]
They won't let *you* get near the bar. Some of us, OJ, remember what
happened to the good hooch the last time that happened!
--
David M. Silver www.heinleinsociety.org
"The Lieutenant expects your names to shine!"
Robert Anson Heinlein, USNA '29, Lt.(jg), USN, R'td, 1907-88
suzilem
"Kate Gladstone" <ka...@global2000.net> wrote in message
news:kate-BC360D.1...@syrcnyrdrs-01-ge0.nyroc.rr.com...
> Dan asks:
>
> > >>> Additionally it would be very useful if
> > >>> you can provide any availiable information on how to change a
> > >>> left handed individual to right handed. As every year I have had one
> > >>> or more left handed persons in my class, doubtless this is a result
> > >>> of the fact that one of our first grade and one of our second grade
> > >>> teachers are left handed. It has not been possible for me to correct
> > >>> the teachers on this, therefore it is necessary to have a way of
> > >>> recovering the studnets from being left handed to being normal. Or
is
> > >>> it too late and this is only possible at a younger age.
> >
> > The idea that there's nothing wrong with being lefthanded has been
taught
> > in teachers' colleges since at least the 1950s. This
> > person must be very, very good at hearing only what she wants to hear.
>
> She gave me that impression.
>
> > What's your standard reply to such crap?
>
> Believe me, you don't want to read my standard reply.
> I show that reply *only* to the generators of "such crap."
>
I *am* quite interested in your *standard reply* to the left-handed version
of "such crap". :-)
Sue (the sinister sinistral)
LV Poker Player
>I do (as LVPP suggests) refer "please-make-my-lefties-normal" inquirers
>to information countering their views.
>
>The remainder of my standard letter to such persons, I fear, does not
>express things anywhere as politely as LVPP has done.
I don't question your justification, not in the slightest. Expressing things
less than politely might not be the best strategy and tactics for getting
through to them though.
Then again, as I wrote before, it probably does not matter. You probably will
not get through to them no matter how you express yourself. If Moses were to
appear with tablets and say "The eleventh commandment is Thou Shalt not attempt
to turn lefties into righties" they STILL would do it.
David M. Silver
lvpoke...@aol.com (LV Poker Player) wrote:
> If Moses were to
> appear with tablets and say "The eleventh commandment is Thou Shalt not
> attempt
> to turn lefties into righties" they STILL would do it.
That's because the new version of the Torah that has the Eleventh
Commandment isn't in the list of books approved at the Council of Nicea,
silly. ;-)
Dr. Rufo
marc wrote:
< li'l' ol' sah-nee-yup >
> My soon to be ex-mother-in-law once ranted against me placing a milk
> bottle on the table " It's not the sort of thing that should be seen in a n
> Christian household"
Marc:
I believe you've provided an example of what I've come to identify
(only in my mind to this point) as a "Gladstone experience." It begins,
as best I can define it, when an entity (other than Ms. Kate Gladstone)
espouses a moral, ethical, pedagogical, doctrinal or existential
position in the relatively near vicinity of Ms. Gladstone. This
voiced statement causes her (Ms. Gladstone) to undergo a Koyaanisqatsi
("life out of balance") experience. Then, during the next decade or so,
she (Ms. Gladstone) decants and airs the episode to each sentient (or
nearly so) entity who comes relatively near to her. As the time
progresses, she (Ms. Gladstone) will take to muttering corrective
counter-spells to dis-arm the other entity's statement thereby
moderately lengthening the story; or, she will sublimate the experience
within a soi disant "filk" which considerably lengthens the story.
Until your report, the number of "Gladstone experience incidents" has
been relatively few and limited to her (Ms. Gladstone). I sincerely hope
(and, if you'll allow me, I "pray,") that their spread shall be
curtailed. "Forbid it, Almighty God!! I know not What Course Others may
take, but as for Me, give Me Liberty. . ." sorry, wrong hobby-horse.
In fine, Marc, I think you've been "Gladstoned" by your
soon-to-be-ex-Mother-in-law. There should be no cause for real concern
on your part (aside from the irritation caused by such an event) UNLESS
you begin to have the almost-overpowering desire to write a set of song
lyrics to a previously-published melody which is the intellectual
property of another.
Best regards,
Dr. Rufo
Oscagne
This is very funny. I am particularly amused that he/she spelled "studnets"
the same way twice, so she's either very consistent in her misspellings, or
she thinks that's the way the word is supposed to be spelled.
--
Oscagne, High Priest of Skeptics and Cynics <--- shaking his head
wanna read a story? http://users.ev1.net/~mcgrew/mss
or see my goofy website? http://users.ev1.net/~mcgrew/webpage/home.htm
Mitch Wagner
> Barry and all the rest who write in some way that a few people would
> call ...
>
>
>> ... 100% Satanic, Communist, and anti-American ...
>
> ... may get a giggle out of an e-mail I received the other day:
> I get e-mails of this kind, making one or both of the requests made in
> what follows, at least two or three times a year.
>
<snip>
>>>
>>> I saw your page on the Internet because it came up in a search of
>>> pages on penmanship, so I need your help. I am a third grade teacher
>>> who is looking for ways to motivate kids to want to write in cursive.
>>> Please write a statement from your point of view as a handwriting
>>> expert. The statement needs to say that cursive is necessary for
>>> developing and maintaining adult brain growth. Or other scientific
>>> justification that would be applicable to supporting cursive. I have
>>> long believed that cursive handwriting must have a scientific reason
>>> for teaching it, however I have not been able to find any statements
>>> which would support that. ...
...
>>> Additionally it would be very useful if
>>> you can provide any availiable information on how to change a
>>> left handed individual to right handed. As every year I have had one
>>> or more left handed persons in my class, doubtless this is a result
>>> of the fact that one of our first grade and one of our second grade
>>> teachers are left handed. It has not been possible for me to correct
>>> the teachers on this, therefore it is necessary to have a way of
>>> recovering the studnets from being left handed to being normal. Or is
>>> it too late and this is only possible at a younger age.
>>>
>>> Sincerely yours, [name suppressed]
I'm curious as to WHY this woman thinks cursive writing is better than
block writing, and WHY she thinks left-handedness needs to be corrected. My
brother is left-handed, and because of that I knew that in past generations
adults tried to change lefties into righties, but I hardly expected to
enconter this attitude in the 21st Century.
My brother is left-handed, and there's nothing wrong with HIM, except for a
regrettable tendency to enjoy reality TV shows.
--
Mitch Wagner * http://www.internetweek.com *
http://WagBlog.internetweek.com * http://blog.mitchwagner.com/ * Asked by
agents if he had anything else to tell them, Cusack responded: "Yes, I've
got monkeys in my pants." -- CNN.com, Dec. 19, 2002
David Wright
"Kate Gladstone" <ka...@global2000.net> wrote in message
news:kate-34E2CB.1...@syrcnyrdrs-01-ge0.nyroc.rr.com...
(snip)
Additionally it would be very useful if
> >> you can provide any availiable information on how to change a
> >> left handed individual to right handed. As every year I have had one
> >> or more left handed persons in my class, doubtless this is a result
> >> of the fact that one of our first grade and one of our second grade
> >> teachers are left handed. It has not been possible for me to correct
> >> the teachers on this, therefore it is necessary to have a way of
> >> recovering the studnets from being left handed to being normal. Or is
> >> it too late and this is only possible at a younger age.
I've always known there was something strange about me. I started life as a
'left-hander' and was forced to change to 'normal'.
However, it didn't take fully, as I am still a lefty in many things.
Now, I'll have the 'left-handed police' after me as well as the
'anti-communist, anti-Satanic police'. ;>)
--
David Wright
http://heinleinsociety.org
http://home.alltel.net/dwrighsr/
Benefit The Heinlein Society by ordering your books thru:
http://home.alltel.net/dwrighsr/heinlein-amazon.htm
Simon Jester US
"David M. Silver" <ag.pl...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:ag.plusone-03C8F...@news.fu-berlin.de...
> In article <20031220164803...@mb-m04.aol.com>,
> lvpoke...@aol.com (LV Poker Player) wrote:
>
> > If Moses were to
> > appear with tablets and say "The eleventh commandment is Thou Shalt not
> > attempt
> > to turn lefties into righties" they STILL would do it.
>
>
> That's because the new version of the Torah that has the Eleventh
> Commandment isn't in the list of books approved at the Council of Nicea,
> silly. ;-)
Yeah, but it is under consieration by the Diet or Worms...
Heather Murray
>>Believe me, you don't want to read my standard reply.
>>I show that reply *only* to the generators of "such crap."
>
>
> I *am* quite interested in your *standard reply* to the left-handed version
> of "such crap". :-)
>
> Sue (the sinister sinistral)
Seconded. Pleeeeeeease?
Heather
...pure handwriting weirdo
TreetopAngel
"Ogden Johnson III" writes:
> saavik <saa...@igs.net> wrote:
>
>
> The dangers inherent in cross-posting. "Who's on the bar?" is a valid
> question in a.f.h, since we have a variable roster of bartenders here.
> [Amazingly, somehow, they're all female - won't let the guys get
> anywhere near the bar.]
>
problem is you forget you should be serving and the barwenches have had
to find a better hiding place for the Leapyfrog.
<gets OJ a double) sliiiide>>>
E!
AFH Barwench
David M. Silver
"David Wright" <dwri...@alltel.net> wrote:
> "Kate Gladstone" <ka...@global2000.net> wrote in message
> news:kate-34E2CB.1...@syrcnyrdrs-01-ge0.nyroc.rr.com...
>
> (snip)
>
> Additionally it would be very useful if
> > >> you can provide any availiable information on how to change a
> > >> left handed individual to right handed. As every year I have had one
> > >> or more left handed persons in my class, doubtless this is a result
> > >> of the fact that one of our first grade and one of our second grade
> > >> teachers are left handed. It has not been possible for me to correct
> > >> the teachers on this, therefore it is necessary to have a way of
> > >> recovering the studnets from being left handed to being normal. Or is
> > >> it too late and this is only possible at a younger age.
>
> I've always known there was something strange about me. I started life as a
> 'left-hander' and was forced to change to 'normal'.
> However, it didn't take fully, as I am still a lefty in many things.
>
> Now, I'll have the 'left-handed police' after me as well as the
> 'anti-communist, anti-Satanic police'. ;>)
You do know what Homer Simpson thinks of Ned Flanders, don'cha, David
the Elder? And, no, you can't have your hedge trimmer back because I
sold it to Lennie. <Sez the guy who's naturally a left-legged lead when
jumping, and whose trigger eye is his left.>
David M. Silver
"Oscagne" <Osc...@ev1.net> wrote:
> This is very funny. I am particularly amused that he/she spelled "studnets"
> the same way twice, so she's either very consistent in her misspellings, or
> she thinks that's the way the word is supposed to be spelled.
Howdya know she's not referring to the male in a breeding pair of fish
catching devices?
Oscagne
> In article <bs2l63$8oe10$1...@ID-124148.news.uni-berlin.de>,
> "Oscagne" <Osc...@ev1.net> wrote:
>
> > This is very funny. I am particularly amused that he/she spelled
"studnets"
> > the same way twice, so she's either very consistent in her misspellings,
or
> > she thinks that's the way the word is supposed to be spelled.
>
> Howdya know she's not referring to the male in a breeding pair of fish
> catching devices?
Correction: 3 times. I missed one.
--
Oscagne, High Priest of Skeptics and Cynics
PrinceOfBaja
>Because I stipulated "no close blood relatives,"
>The Prince of Baja asks me:
>> ... Are you sure you've been paying attention when
>> reading RAH?
>I've also paid close attention to the fact that we don't - yet - have
>routine full-genome testing for those who marry and plan to have
>children (or who don't plan *not* to have children).
> If we lived in a world where (as RAH depicts, say, Secundus) social
>customs apparently made such testing universal or nearly so (RAH says
>somewhere in TEFL that, on Secundus, the notion of getting your genome &
>your partner's genome tested pre-maritally has replaced the notion of
>not marrying close kinfolk), then one could make a good case for
>changing this.
> If (in our present culture) you remove rules against reproducing
>with your brother or sister or son or daughter, then - in our present
>culture, at least - you can't safely expect that people who might have
>this on their minds would also just decide in advance to refrain from
>sex (or to refrain from unprotected sex, or possibly to have abortions)
>if the gene-tests indicate possible problems.
> After all, a lot of the incest that currently goes on in the USA
>(laws or no laws) reportedly occurs in places where a fair number of
>people oppose contraception, oppose abortion, and/or oppose genetic
>testing. Removing/reducing the existing legal and social penalties for
>Doing It with one's mother/father/sister/brother does not therefore
>strike me, for the moment, as a Marvelously Good Idea. (Even RAH, even
>in TEFL,took great care to /a/ make sure that Joe and Llita learned
>from Lazarus certain Facts of Life as they affect or can affect
>consanguineous couples & /b/ to also make sure that Joe and Llita
>understood full well why "the Landfellows [denizens of the planet
>Landfall] are not tetched in the head" for regarding such relationships
>as wrong.)
I understand what you are saying very well, Kate, but you are still advocating
the nanny-state government. You are still giving approval to government's
meddling in what should be private matters. If people want to risk giving birth
to defectives, what business is it of yours?
Steve
PrinceOfBaja
>Yeah, but it is under consieration by the Diet or Worms...
Diet of Worms? eeeewwwww!!
Steve
Ogden Johnson III
[Snip the, by now memorized by everyone, dumb letter]
>I'm curious as to WHY this woman thinks cursive writing is better than
>block writing, and WHY she thinks left-handedness needs to be corrected. My
>brother is left-handed, and because of that I knew that in past generations
>adults tried to change lefties into righties, but I hardly expected to
>enconter this attitude in the 21st Century.
>
>My brother is left-handed, and there's nothing wrong with HIM, except for a
>regrettable tendency to enjoy reality TV shows.
You misspelled "deplorable and downright perverse".
William Hughes
(PrinceOfBaja) wrote:
You've never been to survival school, have you?
"Slimy, but satisfying."
RB
Jiri Baum
Kate:
> ... may get a giggle out of an e-mail I received the other day: I get
> e-mails of this kind, making one or both of the requests made in what
> follows, at least two or three times a year.
"Well, the main justification for cursive writing is that it's faster
than hand-printing, which helps with things like taking notes.
"As for changing a left-handed individual into a right-handed one, I
suggest she install a mirror in her class and place such students so
that she only sees them in the mirror," suggests Jiri, not entirely
seriously.
Jiri
--
Jiri Baum <ji...@baum.com.au> http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~jirib
MAT LinuxPLC project --- http://mat.sf.net --- Machine Automation Tools
pixelmeow
III <oj3...@yahoo.com> scribbled:
>saavik <saa...@igs.net> wrote:
>
>>> Who's on the bar? I'll have a leapyfrog, please.
*gently sets down glass*
>>*boggle* '_Who's_ on the bar'?! This is Callahan's Place...Mike is, of
>>course. *amused grin*
>
>The dangers inherent in cross-posting. "Who's on the bar?" is a valid
>question in a.f.h, since we have a variable roster of bartenders here.
>[Amazingly, somehow, they're all female - won't let the guys get
>anywhere near the bar.]
"bartenders"??? Excuse me, but there have NEVER been "bartenders" in
our bar. JANI's bar, if you'll recall... and we are Barwenches, and
David Silver has reminded you of *why* you in particular are never let
near the bar! :-P
>>"A 'leapfrog' it is for the gentleman, Mike. and I'd like a mocha
>>coffee, please", says the woman in the black duster and backpack, as the
>>'plink, plink' of two loonies strike the polished bar.
>
>That was "leap*y*frog, Margo.
>
>> I'm sure Mike knows and can produce one to perfection, but what's a
>>leapfrog?
>
>Laphroaig. Neat. Preferably in a small snifter. Possibly with a
>splash - a *very* small splash; but, as everyone knows, never ice.
One for you, OJ?
--
~teresa~
AFH Barwench
^..^ "Never try to outstubborn a cat." Robert A. Heinlein ^..^
http://pixelmeow.com/ && http://heinleinsociety.org/
http://pixelmeow.com/Book_Exchange/index.htm
http://www.storesonline.com/site/thesurvivalstation/
http://rose-n-thorn-llc.com/
aim: pixelmeow msn:pixe...@passport.com
Lee S. Billings
>"Well, the main justification for cursive writing is that it's faster
>than hand-printing, which helps with things like taking notes.
As with many things, it depends on who you ask. I print *much* faster than I
can write in cursive -- and more legibly, and with fewer spelling errors. If I
try to keep up with my printing rate in cursive, the legibility goes to hell.
Celine
--
Handmade jewelry at http://www.rubylane.com/shops/starcat
"Only the powers of evil claim that doing good is boring."
-- Diane Duane, _Nightfall at Algemron_
pixelmeow
Silver" <ag.pl...@verizon.net> scribbled:
>In article <20031220164803...@mb-m04.aol.com>,
> lvpoke...@aol.com (LV Poker Player) wrote:
>
>> If Moses were to
>> appear with tablets and say "The eleventh commandment is Thou Shalt not
>> attempt
>> to turn lefties into righties" they STILL would do it.
>
>
>That's because the new version of the Torah that has the Eleventh
>Commandment isn't in the list of books approved at the Council of Nicea,
>silly. ;-)
ROFL!!! Shame JMA isn't around for this one!
I'm a *Proud* mom of a southpaw!!!
pixelmeow
III <oj3...@yahoo.com> scribbled:
>Mitch Wagner <mit...@sff.net> wrote:
>
>[Snip the, by now memorized by everyone, dumb letter]
>
>>I'm curious as to WHY this woman thinks cursive writing is better than
>>block writing, and WHY she thinks left-handedness needs to be corrected. My
>>brother is left-handed, and because of that I knew that in past generations
>>adults tried to change lefties into righties, but I hardly expected to
>>enconter this attitude in the 21st Century.
>>
>>My brother is left-handed, and there's nothing wrong with HIM, except for a
>>regrettable tendency to enjoy reality TV shows.
>
>You misspelled "deplorable and downright perverse".
KEYBOARD!!! I *hate* those damn shows, yuk.
pixelmeow
<margaret...@worldnett.attANTISPAM.net> scribbled:
I admit I am totally consumed with curiosity... (mother of a
lefty!!!)
pixelmeow
"TreetopAngel" <treeto...@micro-mania.net> scribbled:
I have found him *under* the bar with the Leapyfrog, several times,
before you came on board, E!!! But then, I've also joined him under
the bar, with my Ten High... Whatever happened to all our under the
table parties! *snif*
J. F. Cornwall
> On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 17:18:31 -0700, in alt.fan.heinlein,
> "TreetopAngel" <treeto...@micro-mania.net> scribbled:
>
>
>>"Ogden Johnson III" writes:
>>
>>>saavik <saa...@igs.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>The dangers inherent in cross-posting. "Who's on the bar?" is a valid
>>>question in a.f.h, since we have a variable roster of bartenders here.
>>>[Amazingly, somehow, they're all female - won't let the guys get
>>>anywhere near the bar.]
>>>
>>
>>Ah, com'on OJ several of the guys have made excellent Bargoyles. Your
>>problem is you forget you should be serving and the barwenches have had
>>to find a better hiding place for the Leapyfrog.
>
>
> I have found him *under* the bar with the Leapyfrog, several times,
> before you came on board, E!!! But then, I've also joined him under
> the bar, with my Ten High... Whatever happened to all our under the
> table parties! *snif*
Since our favorite Gnu wandered off to other pastures, we haven't needed
to shelter beneath the tables quites as often! But hey, if you wanna
join me under this one for a while... Arrrrrrr, maties, give yer
barwench a rest break whilst she hides from her worries under this here
table!!! <Wink>
Jim!
(who is posting at 4 am because he's up chaperoning the offspring's 18th
-birthday all-night-movies-and-video-games party... Oh, and he also
passed his Eagle Scout board Friday nite, the day before his birthday!)
Simon Jester US
"David M. Silver" <ag.pl...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:ag.plusone-C66B1...@news.fu-berlin.de...
> "Oscagne" <Osc...@ev1.net> wrote:
>
> > This is very funny. I am particularly amused that he/she spelled
"studnets"
> > the same way twice, so she's either very consistent in her misspellings,
or
> > she thinks that's the way the word is supposed to be spelled.
>
> Howdya know she's not referring to the male in a breeding pair of fish
> catching devices?
*sniffing*
Do I smell a pun thread coming on?
Simon Jester US
"David M. Silver" <ag.pl...@verizon.net>
> You do know what Homer Simpson thinks of Ned Flanders, don'cha, David
> the Elder? And, no, you can't have your hedge trimmer back because I
> sold it to Lennie. <Sez the guy who's naturally a left-legged lead when
> jumping, and whose trigger eye is his left.>
My eyesight started going bad when I was a late teenager. ONLY in my right
eye. Well, for a while I tried to learn how to shoot right handed, using
the left eye. Doesn't work. So I tired to shoot left handed. Ewww... It
was years before I gave in and got some glasses. But in the interim, I
stopped shooting. I was pretty good at one point too.
TreetopAngel
"pixelmeow" writes:
> On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 17:18:31 -0700, in alt.fan.heinlein,
> "TreetopAngel" <treeto...@micro-mania.net> scribbled:
>
> >
> >"Ogden Johnson III" writes:
> >> saavik <saa...@igs.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> The dangers inherent in cross-posting. "Who's on the bar?" is a
valid
> >> question in a.f.h, since we have a variable roster of bartenders
here.
> >> [Amazingly, somehow, they're all female - won't let the guys get
> >> anywhere near the bar.]
> >>
> >Ah, com'on OJ several of the guys have made excellent Bargoyles.
Your
> >problem is you forget you should be serving and the barwenches have
had
> >to find a better hiding place for the Leapyfrog.
>
> I have found him *under* the bar with the Leapyfrog, several times,
> before you came on board, E!!! But then, I've also joined him under
> the bar, with my Ten High... Whatever happened to all our under the
> table parties! *snif*
>
<tissue>
E!
Sean Cleary
> "Kate Gladstone" <ka...@global2000.net> wrote in message
> news:kate-34E2CB.1...@syrcnyrdrs-01-ge0.nyroc.rr.com...
>
> (snip)
>
> Additionally it would be very useful if
> > >> you can provide any availiable information on how to change a
> > >> left handed individual to right handed. As every year I have had one
> > >> or more left handed persons in my class, doubtless this is a result
> > >> of the fact that one of our first grade and one of our second grade
> > >> teachers are left handed. It has not been possible for me to correct
> > >> the teachers on this, therefore it is necessary to have a way of
> > >> recovering the studnets from being left handed to being normal. Or is
> > >> it too late and this is only possible at a younger age.
>
> I've always known there was something strange about me. I started life as a
> 'left-hander' and was forced to change to 'normal'.
> However, it didn't take fully, as I am still a lefty in many things.
>
> Now, I'll have the 'left-handed police' after me as well as the
> 'anti-communist, anti-Satanic police'. ;>)
I have always been right handed, but an injury has caused me to favor
my left lately. Actually did successively infiltrate a fannish
lefthanded group at one time: I can now eat left handed with
chopsticks.
Sean
Major oz
(PrinceOfBaja) writes:
>I understand what you are saying very well, Kate, but you are still
>advocating
>the nanny-state government. You are still giving approval to government's
>meddling in what should be private matters. If people want to risk giving
>birth
>to defectives, what business is it of yours?
>
>Steve
None whatsoever, assuming that they will never seek any form of government aid
for "special needs" for that offspring.
If they do, it becomes Kate's (and my) business.
cheers
oz
Major oz
Gladstone <ka...@global2000.net> writes:
>I do (as LVPP suggests) refer "please-make-my-lefties-normal" inquirers
>to information countering their views.
>
>The remainder of my standard letter to such persons, I fear, does not
>express things anywhere as politely as LVPP has done.
Were it I (meaner than you appear to be), a copy of her inquiry would be
forwarded to her principal.
cheers
oz
PrinceOfBaja
>aid
>for "special needs" for that offspring.
>
>If they do, it becomes Kate's (and my) business.
>
>cheers
>
>oz
Ah, yes; but Kate also phrased her reply to my original comment in such a
manner as to indicate that she thinks people can't be trusted to ensure that
they refrain from having offspring. Not just some people; she implied that no
one can be so trusted.
Steve