Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
2.7% of Pennsylvanians Want to be Given Special Rights
2 views
Skip to first unread message
J
Mar 6, 2013, 12:48:03 AM3/6/13
to
Former Congressman Davis does make a valid point; “The 2.7 percent of
Pennsylvania citizens who identify as homosexual, bisexual or
transgender have the same rights as every Pennsylvanian." Why is it
necessary to extend 'special rights' to this tiny minority? After all,
equality is the name of the game.
http://afaofpa.org/archives/p4064/
(Harrisburg) — In April 2011 UCLA’s pro-homosexual think tank the
Williams Institute released a report finding that 4 percent of the US
population identifies as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender (LGBT),
with only 4 million or 1.7 percent identifying as “gay.” Now the same
think tank, upon reviewing Gallup Polling data, has reported that 3.5%
of the US population identity as LGBT. Pennsylvania is below the
national average at 2.7% of the Pennsylvania population identifying as
LGBT. The statewide traditional values group, the American Family
Association of Pennsylvania (AFA of PA), notes that there are
increased efforts within the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to extend
special protections to this very small group of individuals simply
because of the sexual activity in which they engage. The AFA of PA
will make this information available to all members of the General
Assembly.
“Are laws in Pennsylvania being written or re-written to accommodate
2.7% of the entire population — 331,589 people?” asked Diane Gramley,
president of the AFA of PA. “This is a very small, but vocal group
demanding Pennsylvania validate sexual perversion.”
Already a bill has been introduced to legalize fake marriage — civil
unions. Hate crimes legislation which equates changeable ‘sexual
orientation” with unchangeable race and ethnicity has also been
introduced. A school anti-bullying bill which contains a list of
protected classes including ‘sexual orientation’ and ‘gender identity’
will, if passed, target students with deeply held religious beliefs
that homosexuality is wrong. As in past years, there will be another
effort to add “sexual orientation and gender identity” to the PA Human
Relations Act.
Former Congressman Artur Davis has made it clear that equating the
efforts by homosexuals to advance ‘gay rights’ with those of
African-Americans is wrong. He notes that homosexuals have never been
prevented from voting, nor excluded from public accommodations or
union shops. Their struggle is not the same as those faced by
African-Americans.
“The 2.7 percent of Pennsylvania citizens who identify as homosexual,
bisexual or transgender have the same rights as every Pennsylvanian.
Saying there is a need for ‘sexual orientation’ and ‘gender identity ‘
to be added to laws so they won’t lose their jobs or be thrown out of
their apartment is disingenuous,” noted Gramley.
J Young
jdyo...@ymail.com
Jeanne Douglas
Mar 6, 2013, 2:27:50 AM3/6/13
to
In article <9jldj89rct00cchq7...@4ax.com>,
J <jdyo...@ymail.com> wrote:
> Former Congressman Davis does make a valid point; 典he 2.7 percent of
--
JD
"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden
J <jdyo...@ymail.com> wrote:
> Former Congressman Davis does make a valid point; 典he 2.7 percent of
> Pennsylvania citizens who identify as homosexual, bisexual or
> transgender have the same rights as every Pennsylvanian."
No need to read past this lie.
> transgender have the same rights as every Pennsylvanian."
--
JD
"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden
Dakota
Mar 6, 2013, 4:07:07 AM3/6/13
to
On 3/6/2013 1:27 AM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> In article <9jldj89rct00cchq7...@4ax.com>,
> J <jdyo...@ymail.com> wrote:
> No need to read past this lie.
>
Every day will be 'Terri Schiavo is Still Dead Day!' for as long as
> In article <9jldj89rct00cchq7...@4ax.com>,
> J <jdyo...@ymail.com> wrote:
> No need to read past this lie.
>
vile J continues to post here at a.a.
Message has been deleted
Syd M.
Mar 6, 2013, 8:25:29 AM3/6/13
to
On Mar 6, 12:48 am, J <jdyou...@ymail.com> wrote:
> Former Congressman Davis does make a valid point; “The 2.7 percent of
> Pennsylvania citizens who identify as homosexual, bisexual or
> transgender have the same rights as every Pennsylvanian."
If they can't marry who they want, then that is a lie.
> Former Congressman Davis does make a valid point; “The 2.7 percent of
> Pennsylvania citizens who identify as homosexual, bisexual or
> transgender have the same rights as every Pennsylvanian."
PDW
WangoTango
Mar 6, 2013, 11:33:07 AM3/6/13
to
In article <hlwdjsd2-5AEB2A.23275005032013@c-131-121-196-
216.gonavy.usna.edu>, hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com says...
> > Former Congressman Davis does make a valid point; =3FThe 2.7 percent of
statement.
216.gonavy.usna.edu>, hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com says...
> > Former Congressman Davis does make a valid point; =3FThe 2.7 percent of
> > Pennsylvania citizens who identify as homosexual, bisexual or
> > transgender have the same rights as every Pennsylvanian."
>
> No need to read past this lie.
>
>
Yeah, funny how he tends to destroy all credibility during the thesis
> > transgender have the same rights as every Pennsylvanian."
>
> No need to read past this lie.
>
>
statement.
Davej
Mar 6, 2013, 12:09:27 PM3/6/13
to
On Mar 5, 11:48 pm, J <jdyou...@ymail.com> wrote:
> [...]
J Young is just sore that he still won't be able to marry his pet
goat.
> [...]
J Young is just sore that he still won't be able to marry his pet
goat.
Ken
Mar 6, 2013, 12:13:25 PM3/6/13
to
MarkA
Mar 6, 2013, 12:41:06 PM3/6/13
to
On Tue, 05 Mar 2013 21:48:03 -0800, J wrote:
>
> Former Congressman Davis does make a valid point; “The 2.7 percent of
> Pennsylvania citizens who identify as homosexual, bisexual or
> transgender have the same rights as every Pennsylvanian." Why is it
> necessary to extend 'special rights' to this tiny minority? After all,
> equality is the name of the game.
>
Yes, and, as soon as LGBT people actually DO have the same rights as
>
> Former Congressman Davis does make a valid point; “The 2.7 percent of
> Pennsylvania citizens who identify as homosexual, bisexual or
> transgender have the same rights as every Pennsylvanian." Why is it
> necessary to extend 'special rights' to this tiny minority? After all,
> equality is the name of the game.
>
others, they will stop making a fuss.
--
MarkA
If you can read this, you can stop reading now.
Wayne
Mar 6, 2013, 1:38:44 PM3/6/13
to
"MarkA" wrote in message
news:pan.2013.03.06....@somewhere.invalid...
On Tue, 05 Mar 2013 21:48:03 -0800, J wrote:
>
> Former Congressman Davis does make a valid point; “The 2.7 percent of
> Pennsylvania citizens who identify as homosexual, bisexual or
> transgender have the same rights as every Pennsylvanian." Why is it
> necessary to extend 'special rights' to this tiny minority? After all,
> equality is the name of the game.
>
# others, they will stop making a fuss.
And what "rights" might that be?
linuxgal
Mar 6, 2013, 2:37:51 PM3/6/13
to
one's spouse in the hospital before they die, and if they do die, to
inherit the estate rather than seeing it turned over to the next of kin,
some of whom hadn't even spoken with the deceased ever since they
learned he or she was gay.
nature bats_last
Mar 6, 2013, 8:56:33 PM3/6/13
to
On Mar 5, 10:48 pm, J <jdyou...@ymail.com> wrote:
;
department. For a while Loirbaj showed a cartain
promise, but then he mysteriously imploded, underwent a
total meltdown, and fell right off the trollscape.
It hardly needs saying that J's act hasn't changed
since the heyday of vaudeville. Even if you're in the
mood for a good jolt of outrage, J's not your boy,
hardly has been since...since... show of hands: did
this transparent act of his ever work? Even once?
Maybe trolls advertise on Craig's list? Is there an
alt.troll.wanted? It's to the point that I'd trade J,
Loirbaj, and Zachy for one untested bush league troll,
maybe with another to be named later.
<sigh>
NBL
;
> Former Congressman Davis does make a valid point;
`alt.atheism' certainly has gone downhill in the troll
department. For a while Loirbaj showed a cartain
promise, but then he mysteriously imploded, underwent a
total meltdown, and fell right off the trollscape.
It hardly needs saying that J's act hasn't changed
since the heyday of vaudeville. Even if you're in the
mood for a good jolt of outrage, J's not your boy,
hardly has been since...since... show of hands: did
this transparent act of his ever work? Even once?
Maybe trolls advertise on Craig's list? Is there an
alt.troll.wanted? It's to the point that I'd trade J,
Loirbaj, and Zachy for one untested bush league troll,
maybe with another to be named later.
<sigh>
NBL
J
Mar 7, 2013, 12:30:46 AM3/7/13
to
On Wed, 06 Mar 2013 12:41:06 -0500, MarkA <som...@somewhere.invalid>
wrote:
>On Tue, 05 Mar 2013 21:48:03 -0800, J wrote:
>
>>
>> Former Congressman Davis does make a valid point; ?The 2.7 percent of
'marriage' issue you are referring to, every non-married person of
legal age is permitted to marry another non-married person of legal
age of the opposite sex and who is not a sibling, parent, or
offspring.
J Young
jdyo...@ymail.com
wrote:
>On Tue, 05 Mar 2013 21:48:03 -0800, J wrote:
>
>>
>> Pennsylvania citizens who identify as homosexual, bisexual or
>> transgender have the same rights as every Pennsylvanian." Why is it
>> necessary to extend 'special rights' to this tiny minority? After all,
>> equality is the name of the game.
>>
>
>Yes, and, as soon as LGBT people actually DO have the same rights as
>others, they will stop making a fuss.
They have the same exact rights as everyone else. If it is the
>> transgender have the same rights as every Pennsylvanian." Why is it
>> necessary to extend 'special rights' to this tiny minority? After all,
>> equality is the name of the game.
>>
>
>Yes, and, as soon as LGBT people actually DO have the same rights as
>others, they will stop making a fuss.
'marriage' issue you are referring to, every non-married person of
legal age is permitted to marry another non-married person of legal
age of the opposite sex and who is not a sibling, parent, or
offspring.
J Young
jdyo...@ymail.com
Jeanne Douglas
Mar 7, 2013, 5:14:46 AM3/7/13
to
In article <uh8gj81ukepv4f7j5...@4ax.com>,
That's not equal rights.
Equal rights is each person being allowed to marry any consenting adult
they choose.
Equal rights is each person being allowed to marry any consenting adult
they choose.
Message has been deleted
Dakota
Mar 7, 2013, 8:56:31 AM3/7/13
to
J
Mar 7, 2013, 10:47:02 AM3/7/13
to
straight woman cannot not marry her brother, whether they both consent
or not. Neither can a lesbian. That is equality under the law.
J Young
jdyo...@ymail.com
Jeanne Douglas
Mar 7, 2013, 4:28:43 PM3/7/13
to
In article <kbdhj8hpou5u0jsm8...@4ax.com>,
J <jdyo...@ymail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 07 Mar 2013 02:14:46 -0800, Jeanne Douglas
> <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <uh8gj81ukepv4f7j5...@4ax.com>,
> > J <jdyo...@ymail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 06 Mar 2013 12:41:06 -0500, MarkA <som...@somewhere.invalid>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Tue, 05 Mar 2013 21:48:03 -0800, J wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Former Congressman Davis does make a valid point; ?The 2.7 percent of
> >> >> Pennsylvania citizens who identify as homosexual, bisexual or
> >> >> transgender have the same rights as every Pennsylvanian." Why is it
> >> >> necessary to extend 'special rights' to this tiny minority? After all,
> >> >> equality is the name of the game.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >Yes, and, as soon as LGBT people actually DO have the same rights as
> >> >others, they will stop making a fuss.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> They have the same exact rights as everyone else. If it is the
> >> 'marriage' issue you are referring to, every non-married person of
> >> legal age is permitted to marry another non-married person of legal
> >> age of the opposite sex and who is not a sibling, parent, or
> >> offspring.
> >
> >That's not equal rights.
> >
> >Equal rights is each person being allowed to marry any consenting adult
> >they choose.
>
>
>
> No it's not. Equal rights is the same laws applying to everyone. A
Exactly. Everyone is allowed to marry the person they choose to marry.
> On Thu, 07 Mar 2013 02:14:46 -0800, Jeanne Douglas
> <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <uh8gj81ukepv4f7j5...@4ax.com>,
> > J <jdyo...@ymail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 06 Mar 2013 12:41:06 -0500, MarkA <som...@somewhere.invalid>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Tue, 05 Mar 2013 21:48:03 -0800, J wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Former Congressman Davis does make a valid point; ?The 2.7 percent of
> >> >> Pennsylvania citizens who identify as homosexual, bisexual or
> >> >> transgender have the same rights as every Pennsylvanian." Why is it
> >> >> necessary to extend 'special rights' to this tiny minority? After all,
> >> >> equality is the name of the game.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >Yes, and, as soon as LGBT people actually DO have the same rights as
> >> >others, they will stop making a fuss.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> They have the same exact rights as everyone else. If it is the
> >> 'marriage' issue you are referring to, every non-married person of
> >> legal age is permitted to marry another non-married person of legal
> >> age of the opposite sex and who is not a sibling, parent, or
> >> offspring.
> >
> >That's not equal rights.
> >
> >Equal rights is each person being allowed to marry any consenting adult
> >they choose.
>
>
>
> No it's not. Equal rights is the same laws applying to everyone. A
Wayne
Mar 7, 2013, 4:55:09 PM3/7/13
to
"Jeanne Douglas" wrote in message
news:hlwdjsd2-ADEB69...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu...
Does that include children, family members, the dead, etc. If no, then you
admit there are limits on marriage.
One of the limits is different sex. If you are looking for equal "rights",
then go after those rights rather than going after a definition change that
is going to piss off a huge number of people.
IMHO getting "rights" is a much easier battle than changing the definition.
MarkA
Mar 7, 2013, 5:39:38 PM3/7/13
to
On Thu, 07 Mar 2013 07:47:02 -0800, J wrote:
> On Thu, 07 Mar 2013 02:14:46 -0800, Jeanne Douglas
> <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
>>In article <uh8gj81ukepv4f7j5...@4ax.com>,
>> J <jdyo...@ymail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 06 Mar 2013 12:41:06 -0500, MarkA <som...@somewhere.invalid>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> >On Tue, 05 Mar 2013 21:48:03 -0800, J wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >> Former Congressman Davis does make a valid point; ?The 2.7 percent
>>> >> of Pennsylvania citizens who identify as homosexual, bisexual or
>>> >> transgender have the same rights as every Pennsylvanian." Why is it
>>> >> necessary to extend 'special rights' to this tiny minority? After
>>> >> all, equality is the name of the game.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >Yes, and, as soon as LGBT people actually DO have the same rights as
>>> >others, they will stop making a fuss.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> They have the same exact rights as everyone else. If it is the
>>> 'marriage' issue you are referring to, every non-married person of
>>> legal age is permitted to marry another non-married person of legal age
>>> of the opposite sex and who is not a sibling, parent, or offspring.
>>
>>That's not equal rights.
>>
>>Equal rights is each person being allowed to marry any consenting adult
>>they choose.
>
>
>
> No it's not. Equal rights is the same laws applying to everyone.
No, equal rights is the law granting the same rights to everyone. Like
> On Thu, 07 Mar 2013 02:14:46 -0800, Jeanne Douglas
> <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
>>In article <uh8gj81ukepv4f7j5...@4ax.com>,
>> J <jdyo...@ymail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 06 Mar 2013 12:41:06 -0500, MarkA <som...@somewhere.invalid>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> >On Tue, 05 Mar 2013 21:48:03 -0800, J wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >> Former Congressman Davis does make a valid point; ?The 2.7 percent
>>> >> of Pennsylvania citizens who identify as homosexual, bisexual or
>>> >> transgender have the same rights as every Pennsylvanian." Why is it
>>> >> necessary to extend 'special rights' to this tiny minority? After
>>> >> all, equality is the name of the game.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >Yes, and, as soon as LGBT people actually DO have the same rights as
>>> >others, they will stop making a fuss.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> They have the same exact rights as everyone else. If it is the
>>> 'marriage' issue you are referring to, every non-married person of
>>> legal age is permitted to marry another non-married person of legal age
>>> of the opposite sex and who is not a sibling, parent, or offspring.
>>
>>That's not equal rights.
>>
>>Equal rights is each person being allowed to marry any consenting adult
>>they choose.
>
>
>
> No it's not. Equal rights is the same laws applying to everyone.
marriage.
--
MarkA
Keeper of Things Put There Only Just The Night Before
About eight o'clock
J
Mar 8, 2013, 4:22:49 PM3/8/13
to
On Thu, 07 Mar 2013 17:39:38 -0500, MarkA <nob...@nowhere.invalid>
J Young
jdyo...@ymail.com
So, then I'll repeat what I just wrote:
They have the same exact rights as everyone else. If it is the
'marriage' issue you are referring to, every non-married person of
legal age is permitted to marry another non-married person of legal
age of the opposite sex and who is not a sibling, parent, or
offspring.
Kindly tell which part is not 'equal'?
They have the same exact rights as everyone else. If it is the
'marriage' issue you are referring to, every non-married person of
legal age is permitted to marry another non-married person of legal
age of the opposite sex and who is not a sibling, parent, or
offspring.
J Young
jdyo...@ymail.com
osugeography
Mar 8, 2013, 5:06:31 PM3/8/13
to
On Mar 8, 3:22 pm, J <jdyou...@ymail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 07 Mar 2013 17:39:38 -0500, MarkA <nob...@nowhere.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Thu, 07 Mar 2013 07:47:02 -0800, J wrote:
>
> >> On Thu, 07 Mar 2013 02:14:46 -0800, Jeanne Douglas
> >> <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 07 Mar 2013 17:39:38 -0500, MarkA <nob...@nowhere.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Thu, 07 Mar 2013 07:47:02 -0800, J wrote:
>
> >> On Thu, 07 Mar 2013 02:14:46 -0800, Jeanne Douglas
>
> >>>In article <uh8gj81ukepv4f7j50sj6tbr7d5dnks...@4ax.com>,
> >>> J <jdyou...@ymail.com> wrote:
>
> >>>> On Wed, 06 Mar 2013 12:41:06 -0500, MarkA <some...@somewhere.invalid>
Kindly tell us your opinion of "the marriage issue" before the year
1967, when marriage rights were more or less as you described, except
that black-white intermarriage was forbidden by law in sixteen or
seventeen states. Equal or not equal?
Marvin Sebourn
osugeo...@aol.com
Message has been deleted
Father Haskell
Mar 8, 2013, 7:25:25 PM3/8/13
to
On Mar 6, 12:48 am, J <jdyou...@ymail.com> wrote:
> Former Congressman Davis does make a valid point; “The 2.7 percent of
> Pennsylvania citizens who identify as homosexual, bisexual or
> transgender have the same rights as every Pennsylvanian." Why is it
> necessary to extend 'special rights' to this tiny minority? After all,
> equality is the name of the game.
How are the same rights "special?"
> Pennsylvania citizens who identify as homosexual, bisexual or
> transgender have the same rights as every Pennsylvanian." Why is it
> necessary to extend 'special rights' to this tiny minority? After all,
> equality is the name of the game.
MarkA
Mar 8, 2013, 9:05:36 PM3/8/13
to
of gender, fucktard. You know that. Since you are determined not to
acknowledge that homosexuals are the victims of discrimination, there's
nothing more to say.
Jeanne Douglas
Mar 8, 2013, 9:08:51 PM3/8/13
to
In article <nglkj89tlo1badbbv...@4ax.com>,
The part where people are not allowed to marry the person they love.
Mitchell Holman
Mar 8, 2013, 10:02:42 PM3/8/13
to
J <jdyo...@ymail.com> wrote in
news:nglkj89tlo1badbbv...@4ax.com:
It IS the marriage issue.
What is your objection to same sex marriages
between people you don't even know?
news:nglkj89tlo1badbbv...@4ax.com:
What is your objection to same sex marriages
between people you don't even know?
osugeography
Mar 8, 2013, 10:42:42 PM3/8/13
to
On Mar 8, 5:33 pm, J <jdyou...@ymail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Mar 2013 14:06:31 -0800 (PST), osugeography
> >osugeogra...@aol.com
>
> You are answering my question with a question, not an answer.
> Deflection noted and rejected.
You didn't address your question to me. You took a stance, and I
questioned your
stance. Not like we wouldn't know your answer.
Marvin Sebourn
osugeo...@aol.com
> On Fri, 8 Mar 2013 14:06:31 -0800 (PST), osugeography
>
> You are answering my question with a question, not an answer.
> Deflection noted and rejected.
You didn't address your question to me. You took a stance, and I
questioned your
stance. Not like we wouldn't know your answer.
Marvin Sebourn
osugeo...@aol.com
J
Mar 9, 2013, 12:24:01 AM3/9/13
to
those pre-1967 laws. If a Chinaman and a negress wish to marry, there
is no law that should bar them from doing so. Thankfully, in 2013
there aere no such laws prohibitinng the union of one man and one
women.
J Young
jdyo...@ymail.com
Jeanne Douglas
Mar 9, 2013, 2:19:24 AM3/9/13
to
Dakota
Mar 9, 2013, 3:31:49 AM3/9/13
to
Hey, J. TSISD!
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Father Haskell
Mar 9, 2013, 9:38:02 AM3/9/13
to
On Mar 9, 12:24 am, J <jdyou...@ymail.com> wrote:
> Thankfully, in 2013
> there aere no such laws prohibitinng the union of one man and one
> women.
Who's proposing that?
> Thankfully, in 2013
> there aere no such laws prohibitinng the union of one man and one
> women.
Father Haskell
Mar 9, 2013, 9:40:57 AM3/9/13
to
On Mar 6, 8:56 pm, nature bats_last <seqkl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It hardly needs saying that J's act hasn't changed
> since the heyday of vaudeville.
I would have said since Geoffrey Chaucer.
> It hardly needs saying that J's act hasn't changed
> since the heyday of vaudeville.
osugeography
Mar 9, 2013, 1:21:11 PM3/9/13
to
In 1993 I went to England with my teenage son. We had been in London
for several days, and during the morning of our last full day there,
we walked about seven miles in central London. After lunch we visited
Westminister Abbey and took the guided tour, grateful for the change
of pace. As we leaned back and rested upon the cool stones in Poet’s
Corner, our guide pointed out the resting places of the greats: “There
lies Edmund Spencer, and Rudyard Kipling. There rests John Masefield.
And oh yes, the two American gentlemen” and she pointed to my son and
me “are seated upon Geoffrey Chaucer”.
Marvin Sebourn
osuge...@aol.com
Dakota
Mar 9, 2013, 3:43:06 PM3/9/13
to
osugeography
Mar 9, 2013, 4:28:00 PM3/9/13
to
>
> What a great experience to remember with your son.
Yes. Thank you, Dakota.
> What a great experience to remember with your son.
Marvin
Marvin Sebourn
osugeo...@aol.com
Father Haskell
Mar 9, 2013, 5:05:13 PM3/9/13
to
the author of the Miller's Tale.
Jeanne Douglas
Mar 9, 2013, 6:27:36 PM3/9/13
to
In article <khg6pg$n0f$1...@dont-email.me>, Dakota <ma...@NOSPAMmail.com>
wrote:
> On 3/9/2013 12:21 PM, osugeography wrote:
> > On Mar 9, 8:40 am, Father Haskell <fatherhask...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> On Mar 6, 8:56 pm, nature bats_last <seqkl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> It hardly needs saying that J's act hasn't changed
> >>> since the heyday of vaudeville.
> >>
> >> I would have said since Geoffrey Chaucer.
> >
> >
> > OT, Here rests Geoffrey Chaucer.
> >
> > In 1993 I went to England with my teenage son. We had been in London
> > for several days, and during the morning of our last full day there,
> > we walked about seven miles in central London. After lunch we visited
> > Westminister Abbey and took the guided tour, grateful for the change
> > of pace. As we leaned back and rested upon the cool stones in Poetąs
> > Corner, our guide pointed out the resting places of the greats: łThere
wrote:
> On 3/9/2013 12:21 PM, osugeography wrote:
> > On Mar 9, 8:40 am, Father Haskell <fatherhask...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> On Mar 6, 8:56 pm, nature bats_last <seqkl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> It hardly needs saying that J's act hasn't changed
> >>> since the heyday of vaudeville.
> >>
> >> I would have said since Geoffrey Chaucer.
> >
> >
> > OT, Here rests Geoffrey Chaucer.
> >
> > In 1993 I went to England with my teenage son. We had been in London
> > for several days, and during the morning of our last full day there,
> > we walked about seven miles in central London. After lunch we visited
> > Westminister Abbey and took the guided tour, grateful for the change
> > Corner, our guide pointed out the resting places of the greats: łThere
> > lies Edmund Spencer, and Rudyard Kipling. There rests John Masefield.
> > And oh yes, the two American gentlemen˛ and she pointed to my son and
> > me łare seated upon Geoffrey Chaucer˛.
> > And oh yes, the two American gentlemen˛ and she pointed to my son and
> >
> > Marvin Sebourn
> > osuge...@aol.com
> >
> What a great experience to remember with your son.
I agree. Totally cool.
> > Marvin Sebourn
> > osuge...@aol.com
> >
> What a great experience to remember with your son.
osugeography
Mar 9, 2013, 11:48:11 PM3/9/13
to
expect that from a man of the cloth!
Marvin
Marvin Sebourn
osugeo...@aol.com
osugeography
Mar 9, 2013, 11:51:37 PM3/9/13
to
On Mar 9, 5:27 pm, Jeanne Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> In article <khg6pg$n0...@dont-email.me>, Dakota <ma...@NOSPAMmail.com>
> > > Corner, our guide pointed out the resting places of the greats: ³There
>
> > > Marvin Sebourn
> > > osugeoga...@aol.com
Marvin
Marvin Sebourn
osugeo...@aol.com
> In article <khg6pg$n0...@dont-email.me>, Dakota <ma...@NOSPAMmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 3/9/2013 12:21 PM, osugeography wrote:
> > > On Mar 9, 8:40 am, Father Haskell <fatherhask...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >> On Mar 6, 8:56 pm, nature bats_last <seqkl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >>> It hardly needs saying that J's act hasn't changed
> > >>> since the heyday of vaudeville.
>
> > >> I would have said since Geoffrey Chaucer.
>
> > > OT, Here rests Geoffrey Chaucer.
>
> > > In 1993 I went to England with my teenage son. We had been in London
> > > for several days, and during the morning of our last full day there,
> > > we walked about seven miles in central London. After lunch we visited
> > > Westminister Abbey and took the guided tour, grateful for the change
> > > of pace. As we leaned back and rested upon the cool stones in Poet¹s
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 3/9/2013 12:21 PM, osugeography wrote:
> > > On Mar 9, 8:40 am, Father Haskell <fatherhask...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >> On Mar 6, 8:56 pm, nature bats_last <seqkl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >>> It hardly needs saying that J's act hasn't changed
> > >>> since the heyday of vaudeville.
>
> > >> I would have said since Geoffrey Chaucer.
>
> > > OT, Here rests Geoffrey Chaucer.
>
> > > In 1993 I went to England with my teenage son. We had been in London
> > > for several days, and during the morning of our last full day there,
> > > we walked about seven miles in central London. After lunch we visited
> > > Westminister Abbey and took the guided tour, grateful for the change
> > > Corner, our guide pointed out the resting places of the greats: ³There
> > > lies Edmund Spencer, and Rudyard Kipling. There rests John Masefield.
> > > And oh yes, the two American gentlemen² and she pointed to my son and
> > > me ³are seated upon Geoffrey Chaucer².
> > > And oh yes, the two American gentlemen² and she pointed to my son and
>
> > > Marvin Sebourn
> > > osugeoga...@aol.com
>
> > What a great experience to remember with your son.
>
> I agree. Totally cool.
>
> --
> JD
>
> "Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden
Jeanne--thank you for the kind reply.
> > What a great experience to remember with your son.
>
> I agree. Totally cool.
>
> --
> JD
>
> "Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden
Marvin
Marvin Sebourn
osugeo...@aol.com
0 new messages