A new Amendment I Give Unto Thee..

these aren't mine, but...

PROPOSED CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
A. Marriage in the United States shall consist of a union between one man and one or more women. (Genesis 29:17-28; II Sam 3:2-5)
B. Marriage shall not impede a man's right to take concubines, in addition to his wife or wives. (II Sam 5:13; I Kings 11:3; II Chron 11:21)
C. A marriage shall be considered valid only if the wife is a virgin. If the wife is not a virgin, she shall be executed. (Deuteronomy 22:13-21)
D. Marriage of a believer and a non-believer shall be forbidden. (Gen 24:3; Num 25:1-9; Ezra 9:12; Neh 10:30)
E. Since marriage is for life, neither this Constitution nor the constitution of any State, nor any state or federal law, shall be construed to permit divorce. (Deuteronomy 22:19; Mark 10:9)
F. If a married man dies without children, his brother shall marry the widow. If he refuses to marry his brother's widow or deliberately does not give her children, he shall pay a fine of one shoe. (Deuteronomy 25:5-10)

Heh, heh, Monger. Those are goodun's. A fine of one shoe? lol.

What say ye, McGentrix?

Three peer approval points for Monger.

All Sealpoets will be required to adopt a human for one week to train them in the art of soft barks and gentle manners including instruction on how to write limericks.

Florida politicos shall be suspended from voting in 2004 as punishment for irregularities in the 2000 election.

Hilariously adroit
Sure, lots of chuckles there, as well as seemingly very possible, which is of course, the right kind of mix for satire. However, what's funny now will be forced upon us down the road somewhere, if the neocons have their way with moralizing society. Of course, women will take the brunt of it as they are slammed down into subservience again. Ever read "The Handmaiden's Tale"? That's the dark side of this issue, and no one will be laughing when it happens.

Out here in the woods, we does what we wants. But for how long?

Hilariously adroit
Sure, lots of chuckles there, as well as seemingly very possible, which is of course, the right kind of mix for satire. However, what's funny now will be forced upon us down the road somewhere, if the neocons have their way with moralizing society. Of course, women will take the brunt of it as they are slammed down into subservience again. Ever read "The Handmaiden's Tale"? That's the dark side of this issue, and no one will be laughing when it happens.

Out here in the woods, we does what we wants. But for how long?

ooops. Sorry about the double post. Being just hatched, I am new to this place.

The Biblical laws regarding marriage are a killer to this issue! Good job sniffing them out. Through in the ban on interracial marriage in 1912 from someone else's post, and sprinkled with Bush's current prejudiced stances, it all combines to make Bush look like a real SOB....like there was ever any doubt about that.

Umbagog
Umbagog, welcome to Able2Know, glad to have you here.

However, be forewarned that members are only allowed one double post per each calendar year on penalty of having to watch Bush election commericals 7-24. :wink:

To delete your second post, just return to it and click on the edit button, then on the x to delete the extra post.

BumbleBeeBoogie

Yes, umbagog. Welcome. For those of you who are not familiar with The Handmaid's Prayer (science fiction, already), here is a link:

http://www.wsu.edu:8000/~brians/science_fiction/handmaid.html

A little under the weather right now, so I hope that BBB will carry on.

Thanks for the tips - and the warnings....

By the way, "The Handmaiden's Tale" is a book, not a prayer. It WAS science fiction, but not a fiction so ridiculous that it couldn't happen, even in our lifetimes. Pollution is very real, and could impact our species in a seriously negative way, as the author suggests was the impetus for the Nazi/Bible society that formed as a result. It's a must read if you want insights into the plight of women and themind of the Christian right.

Sorry Letty. Once I clicked on your link, I realized you did know what you are talking about. I'm a bit twitchy right about now. I quit smoking, and I have an all-important interview for a job today I must win or else face what comes after the splat.

Your link expounds upon my statement is a humongous way. Thanks.

Umbagog, no problem. Nothing is scarier than back pain when one is a smoker. Oh, dear.

Another amendment.

Employers should be required to hire folks who are nervous during an interview, because it is a certainty that they will be good at their job.

Incidentally, I half way believe that, because "jitters" indicate that a person will be an avid and great employee. Make sense?

Good luck, my friend. Let us know how things turn out. Frankly, I would tell the employer that you have quit smoking :wink: In the long run, he/she will look at your credentials.

I didn't follow that, Litty. Why would nervous people be good workers? Sorry if I'm just oblivious.

Anyway, I disagree with what the authot was angry about, but I agree with the way they said it.

Well, SCoates, If I were in the business of hiring, I would look at the fact that my potential employee would be eager to work and therefore a tad on the edge. No one makes a better worker than those who need the job. Understand? Of course, we must exclude the nepotism factor, or the "pull is better than push" variable.

Oh, okay. I hope my boss looks at my temper, and laziness on the job the same way... but I don't suppose he would?

hmmmm.... what more is there to add after Monger's post (and Letty's posts).

If there is an ambiguous vote count during elections of any public figure, then elections should be held again.

privacy.

Hmm...here's one.

Any holder of any political office, at any level, elected or appointed, who violates the Constirtution in any way, shape, or form shall be put to death by public hanging.