New word, "martinize"
Douglas Cox
Definition:
to martinize, v. Means to change or pervert the meaning of a word by
altering it to mean something else.
Examples of words that have been martinized are: gay, firmament, and
most recently, marriage.
At one time, gay was a respectable word meaning happy. Its meaning has
changed.
The word "firmament" was redefined as the rigid heaven in Jerome's
Latin translation of the Bible, called the Vulgate. He may not have
been the first to use it in this way, but his use of the word caused a
permanent change in its meaning. It was not used for the sky at all in
Old Latin, but referred to a support or prop, and "the strong point in
an argument".
The word martinize is suggested for altering the meaning of a word as
it seems appropriate, upon the passing of legislation allowing
same-sex marriage in Canada in June 2005, a bill promoted by Prime
Minister P. Martin.
Previous use of "martinize"
The word seems to have been used for a commercial process of
dry-cleaning in Oregon USA, that involves the use of a toxic toxic
solvent called perchloroethylene.
Related discussions:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/953064/posts
http://tinyurl.com/cxjc9
Doug
Noone Inparticular
Douglas Cox wrote:
> This is to propose a new word, "martinize"
>
> Definition:
> to martinize, v. Means to change or pervert the meaning of a word by
> altering it to mean something else.
>
> Examples of words that have been martinized are: gay, firmament, and
> most recently, marriage.
>
> At one time, gay was a respectable word meaning happy.
It is *still* a respectable word.
Perhaps we should coin a word which means "ignorant, hateful
expressions of an obnoxious jerk trying to look intelligent".
I propose "Coxian".
rich hammett
> This is to propose a new word, "martinize"
> Definition:
> to martinize, v. Means to change or pervert the meaning of a word by
> altering it to mean something else.
I don't care what you call it, as long as you can get it done
within an hour!
rich
> Examples of words that have been martinized are: gay, firmament, and
> most recently, marriage.
> At one time, gay was a respectable word meaning happy. Its meaning has
> changed.
> The word "firmament" was redefined as the rigid heaven in Jerome's
> Latin translation of the Bible, called the Vulgate. He may not have
> been the first to use it in this way, but his use of the word caused a
> permanent change in its meaning. It was not used for the sky at all in
> Old Latin, but referred to a support or prop, and "the strong point in
> an argument".
> The word martinize is suggested for altering the meaning of a word as
> it seems appropriate, upon the passing of legislation allowing
> same-sex marriage in Canada in June 2005, a bill promoted by Prime
> Minister P. Martin.
> Previous use of "martinize"
> The word seems to have been used for a commercial process of
> dry-cleaning in Oregon USA, that involves the use of a toxic toxic
> solvent called perchloroethylene.
> Related discussions:
> http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/953064/posts
> http://tinyurl.com/cxjc9
> Doug
--
-to reply, it's hot not warm
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
\ Rich Hammett http://home.hiwaay.net/~rhammett
/ Estragon: People are bloody ignorant apes.
chris.li...@gmail.com
I think this is a load of santorum.
Chris
John Harshman
> This is to propose a new word, "martinize"
I think it's wonderfully self-referential that you have martinized
"martinize". Keep up the good work.
r norman
wrote:
Why pick on dry-cleaners? Do you know of a non toxic toxic (or even a
non toxic) alternative dry cleaning solvent? Do you realize that only
a few people have been injured or killed with dry cleaning solvents
compared with the enormous numbers who have died in contact with the
solvent used in wet cleaning?
unrestra...@hotmail.com
It is not limited to careless "mom and pop" light industries. Hydronium
hydroxide is linked to most poisonings, fatal or otherwise, and indeed,
many poisoning emergencies could not have occured without it, although
it is rarely implicated. Its industrial advocates seem to have
successfully silenced most critics in the mainstream news media.
See this link for more information:
http://www.dhmo.org/facts.html
Kermit
Dana Tweedy
<chris.li...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1120058301.5...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
snipping and trimming crossposts
>
> I think this is a load of santorum.
>
> Chris
And we're already knee deep in gish.
DJT
>
Robert Weldon
"r norman" <rsn_@_comcast.net> wrote in message
news:iof5c15m9pgde7mup...@4ax.com...
Well, sure, but most people don't swim in perc.
And on a serious note, the main problem with perc and other dry cleaning
solvents isn't the worker exposure, although it does have some nasty
effects on human health; it is the groundwater contamination resulting in
spills and leaks from dry cleaning operations. Speaking as one who does
environmental engineering, most of the worst sites I have been involved with
have been dry cleaning operations, gasoline and waste oil leaks are much
easier to delineate and clean up.
Robert Weldon
Douglas Cox
<jharshman....@pacbell.net> wrote:
> Douglas Cox wrote:
>
> > This is to propose a new word, "martinize"
>
> I think it's wonderfully self-referential that you have martinized
> "martinize". Keep up the good work.
Congratulations! You are the first to actually use the new word in a
real sentence!
John Harshman
> On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 15:22:47 GMT, John Harshman
> <jharshman....@pacbell.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Douglas Cox wrote:
>>
>>
>>>This is to propose a new word, "martinize"
>>
>>I think it's wonderfully self-referential that you have martinized
>>"martinize". Keep up the good work.
>
>
> Congratulations! You are the first to actually use the new word in a
> real sentence!
And possibly the last.
Steve Schaffner
Perchloroethylene is much nicer than the things it replaced, like
carbon tetrachloride.
--
Steve Schaffner s...@broad.mit.edu
Immediate assurance is an excellent sign of probable lack of
insight into the topic. Josiah Royce
r norman
DMHO is not the real problem, contrary to that web site. The fact is
that DMHO spontaneously dissociates to form another product that is
lethal at concentrations of 1 part in 10 billion!
I shouldn't have glossed over so casually the true hazards of
chemicals like perc in the environment, as Robert Weldon points out.
Still, this particular choice of a word seems exceeding strange.
Douglas Cox
(Bobby D. Bryant) wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Jun 2005, "Noone Inparticular" <unre...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Douglas Cox wrote:
> >> This is to propose a new word, "martinize"
> >>
> >> Definition:
> >> to martinize, v. Means to change or pervert the meaning of a word by
> >> altering it to mean something else.
> >>
> >> Examples of words that have been martinized are: gay, firmament, and
> >> most recently, marriage.
> >>
> >> At one time, gay was a respectable word meaning happy.
> >
> > It is *still* a respectable word.
> >
> > Perhaps we should coin a word which means "ignorant, hateful
> > expressions of an obnoxious jerk trying to look intelligent".
> >
> > I propose "Coxian".
>
> After reading all the replies, I can only hope he didn't x-post to
> t.o. in the expectation of finding smypathy.
Oh no, it's to show sympathy, not to find it.
Greg G.
It's all the way up to our dembski.
>
> DJT
>
> >
--
Greg G.
Don't ever give up your ignorance.
You can never get it back.
Matthew Isleb
>>>>The word "firmament" was redefined as the rigid heaven in Jerome's
>>>>Latin translation of the Bible, called the Vulgate. He may not have
>>>>been the first to use it in this way, but his use of the word caused a
>>>>permanent change in its meaning.
>>>
>>>St Jerome's erroneous use of words in no sense "redefined" them nor did
>>>it cause in any of them a "permanent change" of meaning. Nothing is
>>>permanent. Permanent once meant "motionless". Your point?
>>
>>
>> Lots of words change, but sometimes it is done because someone has an
>> agenda. This may require legislation, or the decree of a king, or
>
> The legal definition of "marriage" was changed to include same-sex
> unions. Some religious folks have their knickers in a knot because they
> think it has cosmic implications. Guess what? Legally, marriage is
> just a contract, mostly about property. The churches can (continue to)
> define marriage, in its sacremental aspects, anyway they want. It's
> always bneen obvious to me that these two parallel aspects existed, with
> no necessary connection between them. So I wish one of the objectors
> would explain to me why they're so hung up on the word "marriage".
It is symbolic of the decline of "morals" in our culture... or something
like that. I guess they think that if we just can repress homosexuality,
it won't exist. And I am sure many of them are trying this without their
own sexuality as we speak.
-matthew
loua...@yahoo.com
against him! Sounds like he richly deserves your thumbs down.
OTOH if you aren't a Canadian citizen, it appears to be none of your
business. If you are a Canadian citizen, voted against him, and a
majority of your fellow citizens voted for him, then you appear to be a
victim of democracy. When the Mounties turn up
to force you to marry some gay man, I'll be backing you with anything
including lethal force.
Oh, the law only _allows_ gay marriage instead of _requiring_ it? I
once again seem to be missing the part where this is your problem ...
Deadrat
<loua...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1120077067.7...@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Well good lord, man, what are you waiting for? Run right out and vote
> against him! Sounds like he richly deserves your thumbs down.
>
> OTOH if you aren't a Canadian citizen, it appears to be none of your
> business. If you are a Canadian citizen, voted against him, and a
> majority of your fellow citizens voted for him, then you appear to be a
> victim of democracy. When the Mounties turn up
> to force you to marry some gay man, I'll be backing you with anything
> including lethal force.
But what if the Mountie is really, really cute?
Lt. Kizhe Catson
> Well good lord, man, what are you waiting for? Run right out and vote
> against him! Sounds like he richly deserves your thumbs down.
>
> OTOH if you aren't a Canadian citizen, it appears to be none of your
> business. If you are a Canadian citizen, voted against him, and a
> majority of your fellow citizens voted for him, then you appear to be a
<nit> Actually they didn't -- only a plurality (I forget the exact
numbers). </nit>
> victim of democracy. When the Mounties turn up
> to force you to marry some gay man, I'll be backing you with anything
> including lethal force.
>
> Oh, the law only _allows_ gay marriage instead of _requiring_ it? I
> once again seem to be missing the part where this is your problem ...
From
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=841&e=1&u=/nm/20050629/wl_canada_nm/canada_marriage_col
=============
Conservative critics complain that the Liberals are using the Charter of
Rights and Freedoms -- designed to prevent discrimination against
minorities -- to impose minority beliefs on the majority, and say the
document gives too much power to the courts rather than to Parliament.
"We don't believe this is a good law or a just law for the nation of
Canada. It's a law that was imposed on a majority of Canadians," said
Reverend Tristan Emmanuel of the Equipping Christians for the Public
Square Center."
===============
Bah, I wish just one of these twits could explain how allowing someone
else to do something that doesn't affect you is an "imposition". It's
the ultimate in sticking one's nose in other people's business.
-- Kizhe
Jitze Couperus
<mike_l...@REMOVETHISyahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>My first reaction to the word was that it sounded like something one
>of Kipling's adored subalterns might have said his chaps had done to
>the P'thans. "Well, then we commanded the nullah, and rather
>Martinised them, don't ye know?" A voice put in, "Dashed unsporting,
>wasn't it, when he only had jezails?" The face, old beyond its years,
>turned gravely to the last speaker: "Well, you see, the men had seen
>what their women had done to O'Brien's wounded after what the headman
>had sworn was a truce, and I'm afraid there wasn't much holding them
>after that."
>
For those who might not grok the reference here "...and rather
Martinised them, ...
This is a reference to one of the main artefacts that enabled
the British Empire to expand into places like Africa
"I am inclined to think, that the first experience of the
Martini-Henrys will be such a surprise to the Zulus that
they will not be formidable after the first effort"
Lord Chelmsford, 23 November 1878
Some details I gleaned from the web to refresh my
memory
The Martini-Henry Rifle is a weapon of Empire. Unlike the
Snider-Enfield it replaced, it was England's first service
rifle designed from the ground up as a breechloading metallic
cartridge firearm. It protected and served the British
Empire and her colonies for over 30 years. This robust
weapon utilized a falling block, self-cocking, lever operated,
single-shot action designed by Friedrich von Martini of
Switzerland. The barrel used the Henry Rifling System, designed
by Alexander Henry. Henry Peabody, an American, was actually
the father of the Martini action. His design utilized an
external hammer to strike a firing pin for cartridge ignition.
Mr. Martini's refinement of the design basically consisted of
conversion to an internal coiled spring activated striker.
Martini's improved design flourished and Mr. Peabody's is nearly
forgotten. Later in the British Martini's career, other rifling
patterns such as the Metford System and even a system devised at
Enfield were adopted. It is therefore common to hear these weapons
also referred to as Martini-Enfields or Martini-Metfords. The first
Martini adopted for service in the British Army was the M-H Mark I,
which entered service in June of 1871
Unfortunately, these early rifles tended to fall eventually into
the hands of the bad guys, and surface many years later
when the natives got restless.
During my illustrious military career, we ran into some unpleasantness
from Shifta rebels who were armed with old Martinis. We vastly
out-gunned them because we had much more recent Lee-Enfields
which were fully 30 years more advanced.
Jitze
Raymond Griffith
rsn_@_comcast.net wrote on 6/29/05 11:35 AM:
Dihydrogen monoxide is lethal for the vast majority of those who breathe it.
According to the Centers for Disease Control, "during 2001, a total of 3,372
persons suffered fatal" injestion of the substance in the USA. "Nonfatal and
fatal injury rates were highest for children aged <4 years and for males of
all ages", the report continues.
An attempt was made several years ago to ban the substance. However, the
economic impact of this was deemed too costly.
This substance, used in most under-the-counter cleaning products, is found
in large quantities in your drinking water -- and filters let it through. It
is found in the air.
Email your congressman about controlling this deadly substance!
Regards,
Raymond E. Griffith
Matthew Isleb
errr *with* their own sexulaity.
Raymond Griffith
bdbr...@mail.utexas.edu wrote on 6/29/05 2:54 PM:
> On Wed, 29 Jun 2005, Douglas Cox <t...@sentex.net> wrote:
>
>> This is to propose a new word, "martinize"
>>
>> Definition:
>> to martinize, v. Means to change or pervert the meaning of a word by
>> altering it to mean something else.
>>
>> Examples of words that have been martinized are: gay, firmament, and
>> most recently, marriage.
>>
>> At one time, gay was a respectable word meaning happy. Its meaning has
>> changed.
>>
>> The word "firmament" was redefined as the rigid heaven in Jerome's
>> Latin translation of the Bible, called the Vulgate. He may not have
>> been the first to use it in this way, but his use of the word caused a
>> permanent change in its meaning. It was not used for the sky at all in
>> Old Latin, but referred to a support or prop, and "the strong point in
>> an argument".
>>
>> The word martinize is suggested for altering the meaning of a word as
>> it seems appropriate, upon the passing of legislation allowing
>> same-sex marriage in Canada in June 2005, a bill promoted by Prime
>> Minister P. Martin.
>
> Byoo, hjoo.
>
> Now let's talk about 'martiniize'...
Shaken, not stirred.
Raymond E. Griffith
Pip R. Lagenta
(Bobby D. Bryant) wrote:
>On Wed, 29 Jun 2005, Douglas Cox <t...@sentex.net> wrote:
>
>> This is to propose a new word, "martinize"
>>
>> Definition:
>> to martinize, v. Means to change or pervert the meaning of a word by
>> altering it to mean something else.
>>
>> Examples of words that have been martinized are: gay, firmament, and
>> most recently, marriage.
>>
>> At one time, gay was a respectable word meaning happy. Its meaning has
>> changed.
>>
>> The word "firmament" was redefined as the rigid heaven in Jerome's
>> Latin translation of the Bible, called the Vulgate. He may not have
>> been the first to use it in this way, but his use of the word caused a
>> permanent change in its meaning. It was not used for the sky at all in
>> Old Latin, but referred to a support or prop, and "the strong point in
>> an argument".
>>
>> The word martinize is suggested for altering the meaning of a word as
>> it seems appropriate, upon the passing of legislation allowing
>> same-sex marriage in Canada in June 2005, a bill promoted by Prime
>> Minister P. Martin.
>
>Byoo, hjoo.
>
>Now let's talk about 'martiniize'...
"Martiniize"? Is that the ice that you put into a Martini?
--
內躬偕爻,虜,齯滌`偕爻,虜,齯滌`偕爻,虜,齯滌`偕爻,虜,齯滌`偕爻,
Pip R. Lagenta Pip R. Lagenta Pip R. Lagenta Pip R. Lagenta
�虜,齯滌`偕爻,虜,齯滌`偕爻,虜,齯滌`偕爻,虜,齯滌`偕爻,虜,齯滌
-- Pip R. Lagenta
President for Life
International Organization Of People Named Pip R. Lagenta
(If your name is Pip R. Lagenta, ask about our dues!)
<http://home.comcast.net/~galentripp/pip.html>
(For Email: I'm at home, not work.)
Pip R. Lagenta
>
>Definition:
>to martinize, v. Means to change or pervert the meaning of a word by
>altering it to mean something else.
>
>Examples of words that have been martinized are: gay, firmament, and
>most recently, marriage.
>
>At one time, gay was a respectable word meaning happy. Its meaning has
>changed.
>
>The word "firmament" was redefined as the rigid heaven in Jerome's
>Latin translation of the Bible, called the Vulgate. He may not have
>been the first to use it in this way, but his use of the word caused a
>permanent change in its meaning. It was not used for the sky at all in
>Old Latin, but referred to a support or prop, and "the strong point in
>an argument".
>
>The word martinize is suggested for altering the meaning of a word as
>it seems appropriate, upon the passing of legislation allowing
>same-sex marriage in Canada in June 2005, a bill promoted by Prime
>Minister P. Martin.
So, if it is martinized, then it should be kept in the closet?
John Wilkins
--
John S. Wilkins, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Biohumanities Project
University of Queensland - Blog: evolvethought.blogspot.com
"Darwin's theory has no more to do with philosophy than any other
hypothesis in natural science." Tractatus 4.1122
Greg G.
Pip R. Lagenta wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 18:54:37 +0000 (UTC), bdbr...@mail.utexas.edu
> (Bobby D. Bryant) wrote:
>
snippage
> >
> >Now let's talk about 'martiniize'...
>
> "Martiniize"? Is that the ice that you put into a Martini?
Isn't that what Dean looks at a martini with?
--
Greg G.
I'm going down to the liquor store for their "Try Before You Buy" sale
and back home before they find out about it.
Jeffrey Turner
> Poet Fury wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 15:08:54 -0000, rich hammett wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>In talk.origins Douglas Cox <t...@sentex.net> sanoi, hitaasti kuin hämähäkki:
>>>
>>>
>>>>This is to propose a new word, "martinize"
>>>
>>>>Definition:
>>>>to martinize, v. Means to change or pervert the meaning of a word by
>>>>altering it to mean something else.
>>>
>>>I don't care what you call it, as long as you can get it done
>>>within an hour!
>>
>>
>>Feeling a bit shirty?
>
>
> He's panting, and pressing to get it done soon.
I think we can tailor a solution to the distress.
--Jeff
--
The shepherd always tries to persuade
the sheep that their interests and
his own are the same. --Stendhal
loua...@yahoo.com
>loua...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> Well good lord, man, what are you waiting for? Run right out and vote
>> against him! Sounds like he richly deserves your thumbs down.
>>
>> OTOH if you aren't a Canadian citizen, it appears to be none of your
>> business. If you are a Canadian citizen, voted against him, and a
>> majority of your fellow citizens voted for him, then you appear to be a
>
><nit> Actually they didn't -- only a plurality (I forget the exact
>numbers). </nit>
Must ... not ... make... Florida 2000 ... joke....
Louann
Douglas Cox
> Douglas Cox wrote:
> > On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 18:34:04 +0100, "John Dean"
> > <john...@frag.lineone.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Douglas Cox wrote:
> >>
> >>>This is to propose a new word, "martinize"
> >>>
> >>>Definition:
> >>>to martinize, v. Means to change or pervert the meaning of a word by
> >>>altering it to mean something else.
> >>>
> >>>Examples of words that have been martinized are: gay, firmament, and
> >>>most recently, marriage.
> >>>
> >>>At one time, gay was a respectable word meaning happy. Its meaning has
> >>>changed.
> >>
> >>At one time, "happy" was a respectable word meaning "fortuitous". Its
> >>meaning has changed. Your point?
> >>And "gay" was used to mean "brightly coloured, showy" earlier than it
> >>was used to mean "happy". Your point?
> >>
> >>
> >>>The word "firmament" was redefined as the rigid heaven in Jerome's
> >>>Latin translation of the Bible, called the Vulgate. He may not have
> >>>been the first to use it in this way, but his use of the word caused a
> >>>permanent change in its meaning.
> >>
> >>St Jerome's erroneous use of words in no sense "redefined" them nor did
> >>it cause in any of them a "permanent change" of meaning. Nothing is
> >>permanent. Permanent once meant "motionless". Your point?
> >
> >
> > Lots of words change, but sometimes it is done because someone has an
> > agenda. This may require legislation, or the decree of a king, or
>
> The legal definition of "marriage" was changed to include same-sex
> unions. Some religious folks have their knickers in a knot because they
> think it has cosmic implications. Guess what? Legally, marriage is
> just a contract, mostly about property. The churches can (continue to)
> define marriage, in its sacremental aspects, anyway they want. It's
> always bneen obvious to me that these two parallel aspects existed, with
> no necessary connection between them. So I wish one of the objectors
> would explain to me why they're so hung up on the word "marriage".
It is about the pollution of language. Language is made up of words,
and changing the meaning of words can have major effects. In all
countries, there was once a clear meaning attached to the word
marriage, that becomes lost when the word is applied to same-sex
unions. So now, when one reads that a person is married, one may need
to ask, "does this mean married in the Canadian sense, or in the
non-Canadian sense?" or "does it mean married in a pre-2005 Canadian
sense, or in a post-2005 Canadian sense?" The word "married" is no
longer unambiguous in its meaning, as it once was, and from a
philosophical point of view, this is unfortunate, as it is a bit like
other kinds of pollution, there is a price.
>
> > something similar. In the case of Jerome's use of 'firmament', it was
> > a translation of 'stereoma' in the LXX, which in turn was a
> > translation of the Hebrew word 'raqia'. The meaning of that word was
> > changed in the Bible to promote the geocentric cosmology and religion
> > of the Greeks, in the time of Antiochus IV, a Seleucid king of Syria
> > in the 2nd century BC. There were numerous other cosmological changes
> > made as well, which had unfortunate consequences for scholars and
> > leaders of the Church in the time of Galileo. There is still a lot of
> > confusion about the meaning of 'firmament' to this day.
>
> ...but trust our Douglas to tie this issue in with his favorite obsession.
>
Doug
Craig T
Mike Lyle
> On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 20:03:04 +0100, "Mike Lyle"
> <mike_l...@REMOVETHISyahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>
>> My first reaction to the word was that it sounded like something
one
>> of Kipling's adored subalterns might have said his chaps had done
to
>> the P'thans. "Well, then we commanded the nullah, and rather
>
> For those who might not grok the reference here "...and rather
> Martinised them, ...
>
> This is a reference to one of the main artefacts that enabled
> the British Empire to expand into places like Africa
>
> "I am inclined to think, that the first experience of the
> Martini-Henrys will be such a surprise to the Zulus that
> they will not be formidable after the first effort"
>
> Lord Chelmsford, 23 November 1878
As the Welsh Borderers may or may not have said, "Oops!"
Assay-you-guys!
> Some details I gleaned from the web to refresh my
> memory
>
> The Martini-Henry Rifle is a weapon of Empire. Unlike the
> Snider-Enfield it replaced, it was England's first service
> rifle designed from the ground up as a breechloading metallic
> cartridge firearm. It protected and served the British
> Empire and her colonies for over 30 years. This robust
> weapon utilized a falling block, self-cocking, lever operated,
> single-shot action designed by Friedrich von Martini of
> Switzerland. [...]
Way back, we had a very solid .22 Martini-action target rifle. Made
by Vickers, I seem to remember, and as good as anything if one wasn't
positively anal-retentive on the subject.
--
Mike.
John Dean
>
> In all
> countries, there was once a clear meaning attached to the word
> marriage, that becomes lost when the word is applied to same-sex
> unions.
Nope. Always been confusing. A man may have several wives according to
the law of the country where he married them. Each woman will answer
"Yes" to the question "Are you married?" wherever it is asked, but in
many parts of the world that answer is not valid. The situation only
becomes clear when a more complicated question is asked. And if the more
complicated question was carefully framed, it will work equally well in
the case of same sex marriages.
The Catholic church's view on divorce may also require someone to answer
"Yes" to the marriage question while the person who made the vows with
them answers "No". In the Church's eyes, one of them is right. In the
State's eyes, one of them is right. And the one who's right is probably
not the same person in the eyes of Church and State.
--
John Dean
Oxford
Deadrat
"Matthew Isleb" <mis...@onshore.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2005.06.29....@onshore.com...
I'm sure some of them would rather do without.
Deadrat
Deadrat
"Douglas Cox" <t...@sentex.net> wrote in message
news:ph66c11g5d87u62c1...@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 15:08:50 -0400, "Lt. Kizhe Catson"
> <lt.k...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Douglas Cox wrote:
> > > On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 18:34:04 +0100, "John Dean"
> > > <john...@frag.lineone.net> wrote:
>.... So I wish one of the objectors
> > would explain to me why they're so hung up on the word "marriage".
>
> It is about the pollution of language. Language is made up of words,
> and changing the meaning of words can have major effects. In all
> countries, there was once a clear meaning attached to the word
> marriage, that becomes lost when the word is applied to same-sex
> unions. So now, when one reads that a person is married, one may need
> to ask, "does this mean married in the Canadian sense, or in the
> non-Canadian sense?" or "does it mean married in a pre-2005 Canadian
> sense, or in a post-2005 Canadian sense?" The word "married" is no
> longer unambiguous in its meaning, as it once was, and from a
> philosophical point of view, this is unfortunate, as it is a bit like
> other kinds of pollution, there is a price.
>
"Bad" now sometimes has the connotation of "good." A gangbanger was
once a gang raper and is now just a gang member. Language changes all
the time. Why not just be honest with yourself (and us) and admit that you
can't stand the idea of giving gay people an equal and ordinary place in
society?
It really doesn't have anything to do with the purity of language. Go
ahead.
Admit your homophobia. I promise to think less of you for it.
Deadrat
<snip>
Doug
>
>
Jitze Couperus
<mike_l...@REMOVETHISyahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>As the Welsh Borderers may or may not have said, "Oops!"
>Assay-you-guys!
>
Their RSM changed his name to Nobby Clark so as
to hide his Irish origins. He was originally Knob Kerry.
Jitze
Greg G.
Noone Inparticular wrote:
> Douglas Cox wrote:
> > This is to propose a new word, "martinize"
> >
> > Definition:
> > to martinize, v. Means to change or pervert the meaning of a word by
> > altering it to mean something else.
> >
> > Examples of words that have been martinized are: gay, firmament, and
> > most recently, marriage.
> >
> > At one time, gay was a respectable word meaning happy.
>
> It is *still* a respectable word.
But does it get the respect it deserves? As someone whose last name is
Gay, I have to tell you that it does not.
--
Greg G.
My next house will have a secret passage behind a bookcase.
Greg G.
John Dean
> On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 15:22:47 GMT, John Harshman
> <jharshman....@pacbell.net> wrote:
>
>> Douglas Cox wrote:
>>
>>> This is to propose a new word, "martinize"
>>
>> "martinize". Keep up the good work.
>
> Congratulations! You are the first to actually use the new word in a
> real sentence!
Sadly, you are over 400 years too late to claim that, as you are to
insist on the immutability of meaning.
From OED:
1591 Greene Farew. Folly Ded., Wks. (Grosart) IX. 228, I cannot
Martinize, sweare by my faie in a pulpit, and rap out gogs wounds in a
tauerne.
--
John Dean
Oxford
Bobby D. Bryant
> This is to propose a new word, "martinize"
>
> Definition:
> to martinize, v. Means to change or pervert the meaning of a word by
> altering it to mean something else.
>
> Examples of words that have been martinized are: gay, firmament, and
> most recently, marriage.
>
> At one time, gay was a respectable word meaning happy. Its meaning has
> changed.
>
> The word "firmament" was redefined as the rigid heaven in Jerome's
> Latin translation of the Bible, called the Vulgate. He may not have
> been the first to use it in this way, but his use of the word caused a
> permanent change in its meaning. It was not used for the sky at all in
> Old Latin, but referred to a support or prop, and "the strong point in
> an argument".
>
> The word martinize is suggested for altering the meaning of a word as
> it seems appropriate, upon the passing of legislation allowing
> same-sex marriage in Canada in June 2005, a bill promoted by Prime
> Minister P. Martin.
Byoo, hjoo.
Now let's talk about 'martiniize'...
--
Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas
John Dean
> This is to propose a new word, "martinize"
>
> Definition:
> to martinize, v. Means to change or pervert the meaning of a word by
> altering it to mean something else.
>
> Examples of words that have been martinized are: gay, firmament, and
> most recently, marriage.
>
> At one time, gay was a respectable word meaning happy. Its meaning has
> changed.
At one time, "happy" was a respectable word meaning "fortuitous". Its
meaning has changed. Your point?
And "gay" was used to mean "brightly coloured, showy" earlier than it
was used to mean "happy". Your point?
>
> The word "firmament" was redefined as the rigid heaven in Jerome's
> Latin translation of the Bible, called the Vulgate. He may not have
> been the first to use it in this way, but his use of the word caused a
> permanent change in its meaning.
St Jerome's erroneous use of words in no sense "redefined" them nor did
it cause in any of them a "permanent change" of meaning. Nothing is
permanent. Permanent once meant "motionless". Your point?
--
John Dean
Oxford
Poet Fury
> In talk.origins Douglas Cox <t...@sentex.net> sanoi, hitaasti kuin hämähäkki:
>> This is to propose a new word, "martinize"
>
>> Definition:
>> to martinize, v. Means to change or pervert the meaning of a word by
>> altering it to mean something else.
>
> I don't care what you call it, as long as you can get it done
> within an hour!
Feeling a bit shirty?
--
http://www.newvague.com/tdis/index.html
Of course it's music. It has notes in it, doesn't it?
John Harshman
> Douglas Cox wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 18:34:04 +0100, "John Dean"
>><john...@frag.lineone.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>Lots of words change, but sometimes it is done because someone has an
>>agenda. This may require legislation, or the decree of a king, or
>
>
> The legal definition of "marriage" was changed to include same-sex
> unions. Some religious folks have their knickers in a knot because they
> think it has cosmic implications. Guess what? Legally, marriage is
> just a contract, mostly about property. The churches can (continue to)
> define marriage, in its sacremental aspects, anyway they want. It's
> always bneen obvious to me that these two parallel aspects existed, with
> no necessary connection between them. So I wish one of the objectors
> would explain to me why they're so hung up on the word "marriage".
>
>
>>something similar. In the case of Jerome's use of 'firmament', it was
>>a translation of 'stereoma' in the LXX, which in turn was a
>>translation of the Hebrew word 'raqia'. The meaning of that word was
>>changed in the Bible to promote the geocentric cosmology and religion
>>of the Greeks, in the time of Antiochus IV, a Seleucid king of Syria
>>in the 2nd century BC. There were numerous other cosmological changes
>>made as well, which had unfortunate consequences for scholars and
>>leaders of the Church in the time of Galileo. There is still a lot of
>>confusion about the meaning of 'firmament' to this day.
>
>
> ...but trust our Douglas to tie this issue in with his favorite obsession.
Ask him about the Tarim Basin some time.
Mike Lyle
My first reaction to the word was that it sounded like something one
of Kipling's adored subalterns might have said his chaps had done to
the P'thans. "Well, then we commanded the nullah, and rather
Martinised them, don't ye know?" A voice put in, "Dashed unsporting,
wasn't it, when he only had jezails?" The face, old beyond its years,
turned gravely to the last speaker: "Well, you see, the men had seen
what their women had done to O'Brien's wounded after what the headman
had sworn was a truce, and I'm afraid there wasn't much holding them
after that."
--
Mike.
Douglas Cox
<john...@frag.lineone.net> wrote:
Lots of words change, but sometimes it is done because someone has an
agenda. This may require legislation, or the decree of a king, or
something similar. In the case of Jerome's use of 'firmament', it was
a translation of 'stereoma' in the LXX, which in turn was a
translation of the Hebrew word 'raqia'. The meaning of that word was
changed in the Bible to promote the geocentric cosmology and religion
of the Greeks, in the time of Antiochus IV, a Seleucid king of Syria
in the 2nd century BC. There were numerous other cosmological changes
made as well, which had unfortunate consequences for scholars and
leaders of the Church in the time of Galileo. There is still a lot of
confusion about the meaning of 'firmament' to this day.
Doug
http://vinyl2.sentex.ca/~tcc/Noise.html
Lt. Kizhe Catson
The legal definition of "marriage" was changed to include same-sex
unions. Some religious folks have their knickers in a knot because they
think it has cosmic implications. Guess what? Legally, marriage is
just a contract, mostly about property. The churches can (continue to)
define marriage, in its sacremental aspects, anyway they want. It's
always bneen obvious to me that these two parallel aspects existed, with
no necessary connection between them. So I wish one of the objectors
would explain to me why they're so hung up on the word "marriage".
> something similar. In the case of Jerome's use of 'firmament', it was
> a translation of 'stereoma' in the LXX, which in turn was a
> translation of the Hebrew word 'raqia'. The meaning of that word was
> changed in the Bible to promote the geocentric cosmology and religion
> of the Greeks, in the time of Antiochus IV, a Seleucid king of Syria
> in the 2nd century BC. There were numerous other cosmological changes
> made as well, which had unfortunate consequences for scholars and
> leaders of the Church in the time of Galileo. There is still a lot of
> confusion about the meaning of 'firmament' to this day.
...but trust our Douglas to tie this issue in with his favorite obsession.
-- Kizhe
Bobby D. Bryant
> Douglas Cox wrote:
>> This is to propose a new word, "martinize"
>>
>> Definition:
>> to martinize, v. Means to change or pervert the meaning of a word by
>> altering it to mean something else.
>>
>> Examples of words that have been martinized are: gay, firmament, and
>> most recently, marriage.
>>
>> At one time, gay was a respectable word meaning happy.
>
> It is *still* a respectable word.
>
> Perhaps we should coin a word which means "ignorant, hateful
> expressions of an obnoxious jerk trying to look intelligent".
>
> I propose "Coxian".
After reading all the replies, I can only hope he didn't x-post to
t.o. in the expectation of finding smypathy.
Lt. Kizhe Catson
> On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 15:08:54 -0000, rich hammett wrote:
>
>
>>In talk.origins Douglas Cox <t...@sentex.net> sanoi, hitaasti kuin hämähäkki:
>>
>>>This is to propose a new word, "martinize"
>>
>>>Definition:
>>>to martinize, v. Means to change or pervert the meaning of a word by
>>>altering it to mean something else.
>>
>>I don't care what you call it, as long as you can get it done
>>within an hour!
>
>
> Feeling a bit shirty?
He's panting, and pressing to get it done soon.
-- Kizhe
chris.li...@gmail.com
snip
> >
> > It is symbolic of the decline of "morals" in our culture... or something
> > like that. I guess they think that if we just can repress homosexuality,
> > it won't exist. And I am sure many of them are trying this without their
> > own sexuality as we speak.
>
> errr *with* their own sexulaity.
Well if you're sexcluding the religious orders, I guess you mean all
those sexular humanists.
Chris
Bill Hudson
The sexular humanists could use a sexulaity. I mean, why else would
you call them a "lay"-person?
Bill Hudson
ew, sorry for the x-post. I failed to check the headers. followups set
to talk.origins only.
Owain
>>>At one time, gay was a respectable word meaning happy.
>>It is *still* a respectable word.
> But does it get the respect it deserves? As someone whose last name is
> Gay, I have to tell you that it does not.
Would you rather be a Smellie? Or even a Goodwillie?
Just be grateful your parents named you Greg, not Randolph ;-)
Owain
Owain
>>... When the Mounties turn up to force you to marry some gay man,
>> I'll be backing you with anything including lethal force.
> But what if the Mountie is really, really cute?
They say a Mountie always gets his man!
Owain
Greg G.
Before my brother was born, my great-aunt asked me and my cousin (her
grandson) what Mom and Dad were planning to name him. We told her
"Benjamin Hyphen". She didn't get it and, after the birth, asked Mom
how little Ben was doing.
--
Greg G.
Soooo analgesic retentive!
Stephen Poley
<tiffirg...@ctc.net> wrote:
>in article iof5c15m9pgde7mup...@4ax.com, r norman at
>rsn_@_comcast.net wrote on 6/29/05 11:35 AM:
>
>> Why pick on dry-cleaners? Do you know of a non toxic toxic (or even a
>> non toxic) alternative dry cleaning solvent? Do you realize that only
>> a few people have been injured or killed with dry cleaning solvents
>> compared with the enormous numbers who have died in contact with the
>> solvent used in wet cleaning?
>
>Dihydrogen monoxide is lethal for the vast majority of those who breathe it.
Fortunately only true above a certain threshold level. I have survived
breathing small quantities [1] on numerous occasions. Mainly while
reading t.o. ...
[1] At approx 60 degrees C, suffused with substances extracted from a
tropical plant.
--
Stephen Poley
Barendrecht, Holland
r norman
Those substances are secondary compounds, specifically selected by
evolution to be highly toxic to the animal that ingests them! The
best way to offset the effect is to add the waste product produced by
fungal anaerobic fermentation of the mono and disaccharides in grain.
Lt. Kizhe Catson
> On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 15:08:50 -0400, "Lt. Kizhe Catson"
> <lt.k...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> and changing the meaning of words can have major effects. In all
> countries, there was once a clear meaning attached to the word
> marriage, that becomes lost when the word is applied to same-sex
> unions. So now, when one reads that a person is married, one may need
> to ask, "does this mean married in the Canadian sense, or in the
> non-Canadian sense?" or "does it mean married in a pre-2005 Canadian
> sense, or in a post-2005 Canadian sense?" The word "married" is no
> longer unambiguous in its meaning, as it once was, and from a
> philosophical point of view, this is unfortunate, as it is a bit like
> other kinds of pollution, there is a price.
Oh, the Pollution Of Language is a terrible thing, I couldn't agree more
(why, it's almost as bad as mucking with our Precious Bodily Fluids).
But you seem to have missed a much earlier (and in the scheme of things,
far more significant) example of such pollution. Referring to your use
of the word "person" in the preceding paragraph: did you mean that in
the pre-1929 Canadian sense, or the post-1929 Canadian sense? If you
don't know what I refer to, look here:
http://www.albertasource.ca/aspenland/eng/society/activism_rights_persons.html
Now, doesn't that make you feel so confused -- not knowing whether
"person" is supposed to include women or not? Does it make you feel
devalued to know that, when you are referred to as a "person", it also
refers to women? Damn those Privy Councillors, polluting the language
that way!
BTW, Doug: I'm married. The identity of my spouse is none of your
business, unless I choose to make it so. Is this a problem for you?
er...@swva.net
> On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 15:08:50 -0400, "Lt. Kizhe Catson"
> <lt.k...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
The term "pollution" with respect to language has no scientific
meaning, and if it did, it would mean something that rendered a study
inaccurate by affecting the responses ao f a native speaker.
> Language is made up of words,
> and changing the meaning of words can have major effects. In all
> countries, there was once a clear meaning attached to the word
> marriage, that becomes lost when the word is applied to same-sex
> unions.
How do you figure? I find the use of the word "marriage" for gay
unions incongruous, and would prefer a civil union with all the rights
of marriage, but that's based on my sense of esthetics. If a state
wants to call gay unions "marriages" I may think it's clumsy
linguisticall, but there is no basis for opposing on linguistic
grounds.
> So now, when one reads that a person is married, one may need
> to ask, "does this mean married in the Canadian sense, or in the
> non-Canadian sense?" or "does it mean married in a pre-2005 Canadian
> sense, or in a post-2005 Canadian sense?"
Why would any of that matter? It would just mean that they were
already married, so don't put the moves on one of them, if you don't
want a black eye or worse.
> The word "married" is no
> longer unambiguous in its meaning, as it once was, and from a
> philosophical point of view, this is unfortunate, as it is a bit like
> other kinds of pollution, there is a price.
It doesn't resemble pollution in any sense.
Eric Root
rja.ca...@excite.com
Douglas Cox wrote:
> This is to propose a new word, "martinize"
>
> Definition:
> to martinize, v. Means to change or pervert the meaning of a word by
> altering it to mean something else.
>
> Examples of words that have been martinized are: gay, firmament, and
> most recently, marriage.
"Marry" already meant other things besides.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=marry
George R. Welch
Isn't that why they're called "mount"ies?
--George
--
George R. Welch
// Send $2 to P.O. Box 904; Latexo, TX 75849 for a copy of Grand Mothers
// tremendous southern cornbread recipe! Easy to follow and the best I
// have ever tasted. Don't forgit to include your address.
Mark Isaak
wrote:
>This is to propose a new word, "martinize"
>
>Definition:
>to martinize, v. Means to change or pervert the meaning of a word by
>altering it to mean something else.
>
>Examples of words that have been martinized are: gay, firmament, and
>most recently, marriage.
Yeah. It's horrible how the fundamentalist so-called Christians are
trying to redefine marriage to make it based on hate, by outlawing
love-based marriage and making bigotry and prejudice an essential part
of it. I will never get married where that is what marriage means.
--
Mark Isaak eciton (at) earthlink (dot) net
"Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of
the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are
being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and
exposing the country to danger." -- Hermann Goering
Andrew Arensburger
> I guess they think that if we just can repress homosexuality,
> it won't exist.
You mean, the same way that homosexuality didn't exist at any
time during the past six millennia, until some hippies invented it in
the 1960s? Or the way that pornography didn't exist until Hugh Hefner
founded Playboy? Or the way that Richard Nixon hadn't done anything
wrong until Woodward and Bernstein exposed Watergate? (And presumably,
since the press didn't say anything about JFK's affairs, he's
blameless as well.)
By that logic, I suppose that benzene or lead in drinking
water isn't toxic until some EPA snoop starts making a fuss about it.
--
Andrew Arensburger, Systems guy University of Maryland
arensb.no-...@umd.edu Office of Information Technology
If you can wave a fan, and you can wave a club, can you wave a fan club?
John Wilkins
tasteless, it is a deadly poison. I have spent years building up a tolerance
to it.
--
John S. Wilkins, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Biohumanities Project
University of Queensland - Blog: evolvethought.blogspot.com
"Darwin's theory has no more to do with philosophy than any other
hypothesis in natural science." Tractatus 4.1122
Michael Siemon
John Wilkins <j.wil...@uq.edu.au> wrote:
> Stephen Poley wrote:
....
> >>Dihydrogen monoxide is lethal for the vast majority of those who breathe it.
> >
> >
> > Fortunately only true above a certain threshold level. I have survived
> > breathing small quantities [1] on numerous occasions. Mainly while
> > reading t.o. ...
> >
> > [1] At approx 60 degrees C, suffused with substances extracted from a
> > tropical plant.
> >
> What you do not smell is DiHydrogen Monoxide. Odourless, colourless and
> tasteless, it is a deadly poison. I have spent years building up a tolerance
> to it.
"I tell a tale I heard told; Mithridates, he died old."
John Wilkins
included an antidote to poison (unfortunately the details are not preserved
;-) ). So says Dioscorides...
Bill Hudson
You must have practiced the rhino-ejection technique.
--
Bill Hudson
The email address above is a spamtrap. My real address
is hudsonwj at yahoo dot com
Stephen Poley
wrote:
Pachydermatous propulsion?
Oh, I see what you mean. ;-)
Or maybe ;<)
Greg G.
d...@yahoo.com wrote:
> I don't get it either. Is this a gay (corny gay, not homosexual gay)
> joke that doesn't make sense to people my age?
Benjamin Hyphen Gay would be Ben-Gay.
Maybe you're too young to use that product.
--
Greg G.
It's a Mensa thing. You wouldn't understand.
r norman
No, I am just old enough to remember that the proper spelling of the
product, named after the French pharmacist who developed it, was
Bengue.
Greg G.
de...@yahoo.com wrote:
> Greg G. wrote:
> > Noone Inparticular wrote:
> > > Douglas Cox wrote:
> > > > This is to propose a new word, "martinize"
> > > >
> > > > Definition:
> > > > to martinize, v. Means to change or pervert the meaning of a word by
> > > > altering it to mean something else.
> > > >
> > > > Examples of words that have been martinized are: gay, firmament, and
> > > > most recently, marriage.
> > > >
> > > > At one time, gay was a respectable word meaning happy.
> > >
> > > It is *still* a respectable word.
> >
> > But does it get the respect it deserves? As someone whose last name is
> > Gay, I have to tell you that it does not.
> >
>
> You should what Marvin Gaye, Luther Vandross, a little Anita, did, and
> change it to "GayE" (No, Fontana, that does NOT mean gay English,
> girlfriend, okay?!), if you really don't think your name gets no
> respect.
I wouldn't change it. Family pride and all that. There's a pro golfer
named Brian Gay and a cornerback for the Super Bowl Champion New
England Patriots named Randall Gay.
>
> The reason your name might not get respect is not because people don't
> like homosexual gays, but because people don't like cheesy, naive gays
> from the 40's and 50's.
My cousin traced the family tree back to a Jonathan Gay, a Quaker who
fought in the Revolutionary War. A Quaker who fought in a war, you may
ask? Seems he was excommunicated from the Quakers for "sundry
disorders" and the army was notified that he was no longer a
conscientious objector. His records were expunged, so my cousin's
pursuit was foiled for that line. (More distant cousins have analyzed
all the Gays in the Virginia/North Carolina area and were able to
determine his parents by elimination due to age and his probable
grandfather's will mentioned a 5 year old Jonathan.)
I'm proud that my ancestor pissed off the Quakers that much.
The funniest story I have heard was about a presumed distant cousin who
worked for an airline, so he could fly for free on standby. On one
ocassion, he was assigned a seat. The guy beside asked if he minded
trading places, so he complied.
The flight attendant then came back to his assigned seat and asked the
passenger, "Are you Gay?"
"As a matter of fact, I am," replied the man.
"I'm sorry, we've overbooked the flight so you'll have to deplane,"
said the stewardess.
"No, I'm Gay," said Mr. Gay.
"Oh, then you'll have to get off," said the stewardess.
The guy behind them had heard enough and stood up to say, "Well, Hell,
I'm gay, too! They can't throw us all off!"
--
Greg G.
One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that
you end up being governed by your inferiors. --Plato
John Wilkins
de...@aol.com
Greg G. wrote:
> de...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > Greg G. wrote:
> > > Noone Inparticular wrote:
> > > > Douglas Cox wrote:
> > > > > This is to propose a new word, "martinize"
> > > > >
> > > > > Definition:
> > > > > to martinize, v. Means to change or pervert the meaning of a word by
> > > > > altering it to mean something else.
> > > > >
> > > > > Examples of words that have been martinized are: gay, firmament, and
> > > > > most recently, marriage.
> > > > >
> > > > > At one time, gay was a respectable word meaning happy.
> > > >
> > > > It is *still* a respectable word.
> > >
> > > But does it get the respect it deserves? As someone whose last name is
> > > Gay, I have to tell you that it does not.
> > >
> >
> > You should what Marvin Gaye, Luther Vandross, and a little Anita,
Marvin Gaye is dead, now Luther Vandross is dead (RIP), is Anita Baker
next?
did, and
> > change it to "GayE" (No, Fontana, that does NOT mean gay English,
> > girlfriend, okay?!), if you really don't think your name gets no
> > respect.
>
> I wouldn't change it.
GOOD for you! That's what I was hoping you'd say! When I first heard
that Marvin Gay(e) changed his name because he was being taunted, I
remember thinking that it was the gaye-est (pun not intended) thing I'd
ever heard! He basically let the ignorant people of the world win with
that one. I'd be willing to bet that "Gay" was a name long before it
ever came to mean happy, or anything else. (I wonder if his father
killed him because he dissed the family name...?)
Family pride and all that. There's a pro golfer
> named Brian Gay and a cornerback for the Super Bowl Champion New
> England Patriots named Randall Gay.
Yup, and Enola Gay.
> >
> > The reason your name might not get respect is not because people don't
> > like homosexual gays, but because people don't like cheesy, naive gays
> > from the 40's and 50's.
>
> My cousin traced the family tree back to a Jonathan Gay, a Quaker who
> fought in the Revolutionary War. A Quaker who fought in a war, you may
> ask? Seems he was excommunicated from the Quakers for "sundry
> disorders" and the army was notified that he was no longer a
> conscientious objector. His records were expunged, so my cousin's
> pursuit was foiled for that line.
That sucks! You should try to track down the descendants of the people
who did that to your
great-great-great-great-great-great-etc-grandfather, and sue them. I
can only track my ancestry back as far as the ones who first came to
this country from Italy. But, at least, if I ever want to go back
further, I have my cousins in Italy who still probably have those
records (unless the frigging Nazis burned them--people were really
ridiculous back before 1900 or so with their disregard for history!).
(More distant cousins have analyzed
> all the Gays in the Virginia/North Carolina area and were able to
> determine his parents by elimination due to age and his probable
> grandfather's will mentioned a 5 year old Jonathan.)
>
> I'm proud that my ancestor pissed off the Quakers that much.
Well, me too. But, I'd still be downright pissed at the Quakers for
robbing you of your ancestry past that point. I'd like to see someone
try and do that with, say, Elizabeth Windsor or Ted Kennedy. Or the
Osaka-Bush family tree!
>
> The funniest story I have heard was about a presumed distant cousin who
> worked for an airline, so he could fly for free on standby. On one
> ocassion, he was assigned a seat. The guy beside asked if he minded
> trading places, so he complied.
>
> The flight attendant then came back to his assigned seat and asked the
> passenger, "Are you Gay?"
>
> "As a matter of fact, I am," replied the man.
>
> "I'm sorry, we've overbooked the flight so you'll have to deplane,"
> said the stewardess.
>
> "No, I'm Gay," said Mr. Gay.
>
> "Oh, then you'll have to get off," said the stewardess.
>
> The guy behind them had heard enough and stood up to say, "Well, Hell,
> I'm gay, too! They can't throw us all off!"
OMG! This is a TRUE story? It sounds like something out of a Seinfeld
episode! I LOVE IT! Would you mind if I tell my friends the story and
that I spoke to the person at the AUE whose cousin had this happen to
them?
Greg G.
John Wilkins wrote:
> Greg G. wrote:
> >
> > d...@yahoo.com wrote:
> >
> >>Greg G. wrote:
> >>
> >>>Owain wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>Greg G. wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>At one time, gay was a respectable word meaning happy.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>It is *still* a respectable word.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>But does it get the respect it deserves? As someone whose last name is
> >>>>>Gay, I have to tell you that it does not.
> >>>>
> >>>>Would you rather be a Smellie? Or even a Goodwillie?
> >>>>
> >>>>Just be grateful your parents named you Greg, not Randolph ;-)
> >>>
> >>>Before my brother was born, my great-aunt asked me and my cousin (her
> >>>grandson) what Mom and Dad were planning to name him. We told her
> >>>"Benjamin Hyphen". She didn't get it and, after the birth, asked Mom
> >>>how little Ben was doing.
> >>
> >>I don't get it either. Is this a gay (corny gay, not homosexual gay)
> >>joke that doesn't make sense to people my age?
> >
> >
> > Benjamin Hyphen Gay would be Ben-Gay.
> >
> > Maybe you're too young to use that product.
> >
> Or not in the right cultural frame. What's Ben-Gay? A hemarrhoid cream?
Uh, yeah, that's it. How'd you guess?
(Don't anybody tell, hee, hee, hee.)
--
Greg G.
The Force is like a box of chocolates. There are dark chocolates and
light chocolates.
--Forrest Wan Kenobi
de...@aol.com
John Wilkins wrote:
> >
> Or not in the right cultural frame. What's Ben-Gay? A hemarrhoid cream?
>
No, no. It's for pulled muscles. I know Ben-Gay. It's for pulled
muscles, not hemarrhoids. And, hey, don't associate hemarrhoids with
OLD people only! We ALL get them! I used to get some awful ones back
when I was as young as 7 or 8, because I believed that I had to force
out my crap (sorry, a little gross...maybe don't read this while
eating, but true) and that I had to wipe MUCH more aggressively than I
really did. I mean, I guess we're all still kinda learning how to go
to the bathroom on our own at that age. I'd push so hard that I'd
bleed. Then, I'd wipe that so hard that it'd burn. Also, I think if
you have diahrreah at ANY age, and it lasts too long, that that can
develop into burning hemarrhoids too. But, anyway, I digress. My
point is, I HAVE used hemarrhoid creme (although, I have proudly been
hemarrhoid-free now for 15 years strong!); but I have never used
Ben-Gay or any of its substitute goods. (I do know what it is,
though.) Muscle ointment is more so for older people than hemarrhoid
creme.
Ben-Gay has made a bit of a comeback in the '00, I think. When I first
heard my grandmother's Atomic Balm story, in the mid to late 1990's, I
had had no idea what Ben-Gay, Atom Balm, or anything similar to them
was, and thought the whole concept of rubbing a creme on the skin for a
pulled muscle seemed odd. I guess, it still DOES seem odd (can anyone
say SCAM?), but I am used by this point, what with Ben-Gay and those
Vicks Vapo-Rubs all over the place again in the '00.
(Oh: kinda off-topic, but a genius song just came on the radio that I
ain't heard in forever!! Who else loves the "Twilight Zone"?! 2
Unlimited needs to make a major comeback in the 2007!!)
de...@aol.com
Douglas Cox wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 15:22:47 GMT, John Harshman
> <jharshman....@pacbell.net> wrote:
>
> > Douglas Cox wrote:
> >
> > > This is to propose a new word, "martinize"
> >
> > I think it's wonderfully self-referential that you have martinized
> > "martinize". Keep up the good work.
What did it mean before he martinized it?
>
> Congratulations! You are the first to actually use the new word in a
> real sentence!
>
> >
> > > Definition:
> > > to martinize, v. Means to change or pervert the meaning of a word by
> > > altering it to mean something else.
> > >
> > > Examples of words that have been martinized are: gay, firmament, and
> > > most recently, marriage.
> > >
> > > At one time, gay was a respectable word meaning happy. Its meaning has
> > > changed.
> > >
> > > The word "firmament" was redefined as the rigid heaven in Jerome's
> > > Latin translation of the Bible, called the Vulgate. He may not have
> > > been the first to use it in this way, but his use of the word caused a
> > > permanent change in its meaning. It was not used for the sky at all in
> > > Old Latin, but referred to a support or prop, and "the strong point in
> > > an argument".
> > >
> > > The word martinize is suggested for altering the meaning of a word as
> > > it seems appropriate, upon the passing of legislation allowing
> > > same-sex marriage in Canada in June 2005, a bill promoted by Prime
> > > Minister P. Martin.
> > >
> > > Previous use of "martinize"
> > > The word seems to have been used for a commercial process of
> > > dry-cleaning in Oregon USA, that involves the use of a toxic toxic
> > > solvent called perchloroethylene.
> > >
> > > Related discussions:
> > > http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/953064/posts
> > > http://tinyurl.com/cxjc9
>
> Doug
> > >
de...@aol.com
Matthew Isleb wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 15:08:50 -0400, Lt. Kizhe Catson wrote:
>
> >>>>The word "firmament" was redefined as the rigid heaven in Jerome's
> >>>>Latin translation of the Bible, called the Vulgate. He may not have
> >>>>been the first to use it in this way, but his use of the word caused a
> >>>>permanent change in its meaning.
> >>>
> >>>St Jerome's erroneous use of words in no sense "redefined" them nor did
> >>>it cause in any of them a "permanent change" of meaning. Nothing is
> >>>permanent. Permanent once meant "motionless". Your point?
> >>
> >>
> >> Lots of words change, but sometimes it is done because someone has an
> >> agenda. This may require legislation, or the decree of a king, or
> >
> > The legal definition of "marriage" was changed to include same-sex
> > unions. Some religious folks have their knickers in a knot because they
> > think it has cosmic implications. Guess what? Legally, marriage is
> > just a contract, mostly about property. The churches can (continue to)
> > define marriage, in its sacremental aspects, anyway they want. It's
> > always bneen obvious to me that these two parallel aspects existed, with
> > no necessary connection between them. So I wish one of the objectors
> > would explain to me why they're so hung up on the word "marriage".
>
> It is symbolic of the decline of "morals" in our culture... or something
> like that. I guess they think that if we just can repress homosexuality,
> it won't exist. And I am sure many of them are trying this without their
> own sexuality as we speak.
They are assexual?
de...@aol.com
chris.li...@gmail.com wrote:
> Matthew Isleb wrote:
>
> snip
>
> > >
> > > It is symbolic of the decline of "morals" in our culture... or something
> > > like that. I guess they think that if we just can repress homosexuality,
> > > it won't exist. And I am sure many of them are trying this without their
> > > own sexuality as we speak.
> >
> > errr *with* their own sexulaity.
>
> Well if you're sexcluding the religious orders, I guess you mean all
> those sexular humanists.
Well, they can't HAVE sex, so they're assexual!
Jim Byrd
>
>
>John Wilkins wrote:
>> Greg G. wrote:
>> >
>> > d...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> >
>> >>Greg G. wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>Owain wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>>Greg G. wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>>>>At one time, gay was a respectable word meaning happy.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>It is *still* a respectable word.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>But does it get the respect it deserves? As someone whose last name is
>> >>>>>Gay, I have to tell you that it does not.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>Would you rather be a Smellie? Or even a Goodwillie?
>> >>>>
>> >>>>Just be grateful your parents named you Greg, not Randolph ;-)
>> >>>
>> >>>Before my brother was born, my great-aunt asked me and my cousin (her
>> >>>grandson) what Mom and Dad were planning to name him. We told her
>> >>>"Benjamin Hyphen". She didn't get it and, after the birth, asked Mom
>> >>>how little Ben was doing.
>> >>
>> >>I don't get it either. Is this a gay (corny gay, not homosexual gay)
>> >>joke that doesn't make sense to people my age?
>> >
>> >
>> > Benjamin Hyphen Gay would be Ben-Gay.
>> >
>> > Maybe you're too young to use that product.
>> >
>> Or not in the right cultural frame. What's Ben-Gay? A hemarrhoid cream?
>
>Uh, yeah, that's it. How'd you guess?
Wrong answer. It is the answer to the question "Who drives a chariot
and wears pink tights?"
Greg G.
I think it comes from France through England.
> (I wonder if his father
> killed him because he dissed the family name...?)
I don't think so but a few years ago, the guys at work pointed out an
article about a guy named Gay who went into a gay bar and started
shooting because he was tired of being teased.
>
> Family pride and all that. There's a pro golfer
> > named Brian Gay and a cornerback for the Super Bowl Champion New
> > England Patriots named Randall Gay.
>
> Yup, and Enola Gay.
>
> > >
> > > The reason your name might not get respect is not because people don't
> > > like homosexual gays, but because people don't like cheesy, naive gays
> > > from the 40's and 50's.
> >
> > My cousin traced the family tree back to a Jonathan Gay, a Quaker who
> > fought in the Revolutionary War. A Quaker who fought in a war, you may
> > ask? Seems he was excommunicated from the Quakers for "sundry
> > disorders" and the army was notified that he was no longer a
> > conscientious objector. His records were expunged, so my cousin's
> > pursuit was foiled for that line.
>
> That sucks! You should try to track down the descendants of the people
> who did that to your
> great-great-great-great-great-great-etc-grandfather, and sue them.
I'm probably related to them as well so I'd have to take myself to
court, then beat me up in a dark alley.
My uncle told the story a long time ago in but I also read it in a
magazine... I'm thinking it was "All in a Day's Work" in Reader's
Digest.
When I take my girlfriend to a restaurant where we have to wait to be
seated, it's worth the wait when they call "Gay, party of two" and
everyone looks disappointed to see a man and woman.
--
Greg G.
Never try to catch two frogs with one hand. --Chinese Proverb
John Wilkins
sports injuries, or it's a baseball player...
John Drayton
news:1120264962....@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> John Wilkins wrote:
> > >
> > Or not in the right cultural frame. What's Ben-Gay? A hemarrhoid cream?
> >
>
> No, no. It's for pulled muscles. I know Ben-Gay. It's for pulled
> muscles, not hemarrhoids. And, hey, don't associate hemarrhoids with
> OLD people only! We ALL get them! I used to get some awful ones back
> when I was as young as 7 or 8, because I believed that I had to force
> out my crap (sorry, a little gross...maybe don't read this while
> eating, but true) and that I had to wipe MUCH more aggressively than I
> really did. I mean, I guess we're all still kinda learning how to go
> to the bathroom on our own at that age. I'd push so hard that I'd
> bleed. Then, I'd wipe that so hard that it'd burn.
And if you mistook BenGay for hemarrhoid cream it'd burn even more:
Active Ingredients: Methyl Salicylate 15%, Menthol 10%
Ouch.
I've learned two important things in life:
1. Don't scratch your nuts just after you've used a cream like that.
2. Don't clean your contact lenses just after you've been chopping
up fresh chillies.
Jeffrey Turner
>
> Greg G. wrote:
>
>>Noone Inparticular wrote:
>>
>>>Douglas Cox wrote:
>>>
>>>>This is to propose a new word, "martinize"
>>>>
>>>>Definition:
>>>>to martinize, v. Means to change or pervert the meaning of a word by
>>>>altering it to mean something else.
>>>>
>>>>Examples of words that have been martinized are: gay, firmament, and
>>>>most recently, marriage.
>>>>
>>>>At one time, gay was a respectable word meaning happy.
>>>
>>>It is *still* a respectable word.
>>
>>But does it get the respect it deserves? As someone whose last name is
>>Gay, I have to tell you that it does not.
>>
>
>
> You should what Marvin Gaye, Luther Vandross, a little Anita, did, and
> change it to "GayE" (No, Fontana, that does NOT mean gay English,
> girlfriend, okay?!), if you really don't think your name gets no
> respect.
Not sure if this needs to be broken better but Mr. Vandross just
died.
--Jeff
--
The shepherd always tries to persuade
the sheep that their interests and
his own are the same. --Stendhal
de...@aol.com
Jeffrey Turner wrote:
> >>
> >
> >
> > You should what Marvin Gaye, Luther Vandross, a little Anita, did, and
> > change it to "GayE" (No, Fontana, that does NOT mean gay English,
> > girlfriend, okay?!), if you really don't think your name gets no
> > respect.
>
> Not sure if this needs to be broken better but Mr. Vandross just
> died.
I know. It looks like my friend (who predicted the deaths of Walter
Matthau, Jack Lemmon, Carrol O'Connor, Ted Danson, the Pope, and her
French teacher) has passed her gift of predicting celebrity deaths onto
me. Maybe if I write Britney Spears' name enough, the world will get
an unexpected surprise!
de...@aol.com
> You bastards won't tell me so I went and Googled. It's either a cream for
> sports injuries, or it's a baseball player...
>
*I* told you! The rest of them is too busy playing Gayvende.
de...@aol.com
Greg G. wrote:
>
> I don't think so but a few years ago, the guys at work pointed out an
> article about a guy named Gay who went into a gay bar and started
> shooting because he was tired of being teased.
Eeek...wouldn't it have made more sense to go into a straight bar or an
anti-gay bar and start shooting? Who do you dislike more for dissing
your name, gays or anti-gays? It seems like it'd be anti-gays. Then
again, maybe people with your last name are fed up with whoever stole
your name and started using it to mean "overly happy", the reason why
so many of my generation view the word as having a negative
connotation. So far, from what I've read of you, you are not this type
of gay. You come across as happy about things that people should be
happy about and seem to find enjoyable things that people should find
enjoyable, without doing it to the extreme of gayness. Come to think
of it, I'm hard-pressed to think of ANYONE at the AUE who is gay (well,
in this sense--we all know that Gary Taylor is a homosexual gay). Some
of Fontana's posts have a gay element about them, but I am almost
certain that he does it purposely. I've seen Fontana get ticked (then
again, I think he does that on purpose too). Cooper can be gay-ish at
times, as well. Perhaps that Per person is the closest example of gay
I can find at this group. Unless, of course, you count Bun Mui as a
real person. Then she's pretty gay. As is Jay Stevens, but does he
even count?
BTW, did your friends only point the article out to you because of your
name? They didn't ask if he was a relative, did they? I hope they
weren't worrying that you might do the same thing.
> > That sucks! You should try to track down the descendants of the people
> > who did that to your
> > great-great-great-great-great-great-etc-grandfather, and sue them.
>
> I'm probably related to them as well so I'd have to take myself to
> court, then beat me up in a dark alley.
Huh? Why do you assume you're related to them? You wouldn't have to
get violent over this situation, but a good lawsuit could work wonders!
Indian-Americans have sued people over what their ancestors did, as
have Nubians. Usually, they've been successful.
> > OMG! This is a TRUE story? It sounds like something out of a Seinfeld
> > episode! I LOVE IT! Would you mind if I tell my friends the story and
> > that I spoke to the person at the AUE whose cousin had this happen to
> > them?
>
> My uncle told the story a long time ago in but I also read it in a
> magazine... I'm thinking it was "All in a Day's Work" in Reader's
> Digest.
>
> When I take my girlfriend to a restaurant where we have to wait to be
> seated, it's worth the wait when they call "Gay, party of two" and
> everyone looks disappointed to see a man and woman.
If Vanna White can be black and Jack Black can be white, why can't
someone Gay be straight and vice-versa?
de...@aol.com
Never experienced that, as I've never experienced Ben Gay, BUT...
> 2. Don't clean your contact lenses just after you've been chopping
> up fresh chillies.
I learned that one the hard way too.
John Wilkins
Bill Hudson
Stephen Poley wrote:
> On 01 Jul 2005 12:30:08 EDT, Bill Hudson <oldgee...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Stephen Poley wrote:
> >> On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 17:10:42 -0400, Raymond Griffith
> >> <tiffirg...@ctc.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>>in article iof5c15m9pgde7mup...@4ax.com, r norman at
> >>>rsn_@_comcast.net wrote on 6/29/05 11:35 AM:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Why pick on dry-cleaners? Do you know of a non toxic toxic (or even a
> >>>>non toxic) alternative dry cleaning solvent? Do you realize that only
> >>>>a few people have been injured or killed with dry cleaning solvents
> >>>>compared with the enormous numbers who have died in contact with the
> >>>>solvent used in wet cleaning?
> >>>
> >>>Dihydrogen monoxide is lethal for the vast majority of those who breathe it.
> >>
> >>
> >> Fortunately only true above a certain threshold level. I have survived
> >> breathing small quantities [1] on numerous occasions. Mainly while
> >> reading t.o. ...
> >>
> >> [1] At approx 60 degrees C, suffused with substances extracted from a
> >> tropical plant.
> >
> >You must have practiced the rhino-ejection technique.
>
> Pachydermatous propulsion?
>
> Oh, I see what you mean. ;-)
> Or maybe ;<)
>
As an elder geek, and a refugee from alt.sysadmin.recovery, I was of
course referring to the ancient forumla: C|N>K
> --
> Stephen Poley
> Barendrecht, Holland
Greg G.
de...@aol.com wrote:
> Greg G. wrote:
> >
> > I don't think so but a few years ago, the guys at work pointed out an
> > article about a guy named Gay who went into a gay bar and started
> > shooting because he was tired of being teased.
>
> Eeek...wouldn't it have made more sense to go into a straight bar or an
> anti-gay bar and start shooting? Who do you dislike more for dissing
> your name, gays or anti-gays? It seems like it'd be anti-gays.
I blame society.
> Then
> again, maybe people with your last name are fed up with whoever stole
> your name and started using it to mean "overly happy", the reason why
> so many of my generation view the word as having a negative
> connotation. So far, from what I've read of you, you are not this type
> of gay. You come across as happy about things that people should be
> happy about and seem to find enjoyable things that people should find
> enjoyable, without doing it to the extreme of gayness. Come to think
> of it, I'm hard-pressed to think of ANYONE at the AUE who is gay (well,
> in this sense--we all know that Gary Taylor is a homosexual gay). Some
> of Fontana's posts have a gay element about them, but I am almost
> certain that he does it purposely. I've seen Fontana get ticked (then
> again, I think he does that on purpose too). Cooper can be gay-ish at
> times, as well. Perhaps that Per person is the closest example of gay
> I can find at this group. Unless, of course, you count Bun Mui as a
> real person. Then she's pretty gay. As is Jay Stevens, but does he
> even count?
I'm out of talk.origins, so I wouldn't know. I'm oblivious to a
person's orientation, most of the time.
>
> BTW, did your friends only point the article out to you because of your
> name? They didn't ask if he was a relative, did they? I hope they
> weren't worrying that you might do the same thing.
I was in a bad mood at work recently because I got stuck with a
difficult job and nobody offered to help. My co-workers seemed
surprized that I could even express anger. I found that amusing.
Yesterday, we received an announcement that a coworker named Tom would
return from his vacation as Tamera. I worked with him quite a bit and
never had given that a thought. I'm rather shocked but others feel
betrayed. One guy with an Elmer Fudd accent said "That's an abomination
to my wewigion." His supervisor, who I'm told is gay, nearly attacked
him physically when he asked if he should say "he", "she" or "it".
>
> > > That sucks! You should try to track down the descendants of the people
> > > who did that to your
> > > great-great-great-great-great-great-etc-grandfather, and sue them.
> >
> > I'm probably related to them as well so I'd have to take myself to
> > court, then beat me up in a dark alley.
>
> Huh? Why do you assume you're related to them? You wouldn't have to
> get violent over this situation, but a good lawsuit could work wonders!
> Indian-Americans have sued people over what their ancestors did, as
> have Nubians. Usually, they've been successful.
Several lines from my family tree come from that area.
>
> > > OMG! This is a TRUE story? It sounds like something out of a Seinfeld
> > > episode! I LOVE IT! Would you mind if I tell my friends the story and
> > > that I spoke to the person at the AUE whose cousin had this happen to
> > > them?
> >
> > My uncle told the story a long time ago in but I also read it in a
> > magazine... I'm thinking it was "All in a Day's Work" in Reader's
> > Digest.
> >
> > When I take my girlfriend to a restaurant where we have to wait to be
> > seated, it's worth the wait when they call "Gay, party of two" and
> > everyone looks disappointed to see a man and woman.
>
> If Vanna White can be black and Jack Black can be white, why can't
> someone Gay be straight and vice-versa?
Vanna is white. How about Al Greene?
--
Greg G.
One good thing about repeating your mistakes is that you know when to
cringe.
Owain
>>Or not in the right cultural frame. What's Ben-Gay? A hemarrhoid cream?
> Uh, yeah, that's it. How'd you guess?
> (Don't anybody tell, hee, hee, hee.)
I think you've both lead a very sheltered life.
Owain
Owain
>>>But does it get the respect it deserves? As someone whose last name is
>>>Gay, I have to tell you that it does not.
>>Just be grateful your parents named you Greg, not Randolph ;-)
Actually I might have meant Randall, the diminutive of which is Randy.
I read in Time Magazine of an American couple who named their son Randy
after their favourite football star.
Unfortunately their surname was Ponce.
I presume Randy and Ponce don't mean anything in American English :-)
Owain
shane
I kid you not, but an American minister in the church i grew up in, was
named, and commonly called, Randy Dick. Went over a treat in Australia.
--
shane
And the truth shall set you free.
r norman
I can predict the death of anybody you want to know about. It is just
the timing that I am uncertain about.
de...@aol.com
Greg G. wrote:
>
> Yesterday, we received an announcement that a coworker named Tom would
> return from his vacation as Tamera.
Does he have dissosiatatiative disorder? Why did he name her Tamera?
I don't like that name. I would've gone with "Tonya", or picked
something TOTALLY different like Latifah.
I worked with him quite a bit and
> never had given that a thought. I'm rather shocked but others feel
> betrayed. One guy with an Elmer Fudd accent said "That's an abomination
> to my wewigion."
Elmur Fudd is GENIUS!! I miss him!
His supervisor, who I'm told is gay, nearly attacked
> him physically when he asked if he should say "he", "she" or "it".
That is not very nice of the gay man. Some homosexual gays can be
overly sensitive about things like that. Take RuPaul: it doesn't care
if you call her HE, SHE, OR IT. EVERYONE should follow Ru's lead!
What does Tom/Tamera like to be called?
> > Huh? Why do you assume you're related to them? You wouldn't have to
> > get violent over this situation, but a good lawsuit could work wonders!
> > Indian-Americans have sued people over what their ancestors did, as
> > have Nubians. Usually, they've been successful.
>
> Several lines from my family tree come from that area.
Quaker?
> > If Vanna White can be black and Jack Black can be white, why can't
> > someone Gay be straight and vice-versa?
>
> Vanna is white. How about Al Greene?
Isn't Vanna White a Hispanic black? That's what I always thought. Is
Al Green red or something? (What is the opposite of green?)
> One good thing about repeating your mistakes is that you know when to
> cringe.
Huh?