Guest guest Posted March 9, 2006 Report Share Posted March 9, 2006 did. I deleted the posts. But I am still ashamed to fight for people who scorn my willing to die for them. Tom Administrator > Tom: " ....... to the defense of disdainful, snobby people like you. " Somebody put this guy on moderation! This is the 'definition' of a personal attack! Rainbow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 9, 2006 Report Share Posted March 9, 2006 Thanks for deleting the posts. I'd just like to quickly reply to a couple of things in it, since I was asked some direct questions. (Feel free to delete this reply too, if you wish.) Tom: > I have a few questions of my own to ask you: > Would Sweden have been able to overthrow the Nazis if the US hadn't landed at Normandy and Russia hadn't moved in from the East? As a right-wing bully on another list told me once, we'd all be speaking very good German, no doubt. :-) But just so that this is clear: I have never said we Europeans are not greatful for that particular intervention. It's just that it does not forever after excuse every single war that the U.S. feels like initiating under ever thinner excuses. I'd like to see some peace and mutual respect in this world, that's all. From everyone. > What political ideology would your country be operating under if the US hadn't kept trying to combat the Iron Curtain economically, and with the threat of nuclear anhilation? Sweden was never part of Nato, and thus not under your 'protection'. > What would the map of southeast Asia look like if we had ignored the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor where my great Uncle was blown to pieces and was picked up by his brother in a basket and brought to the base mortuary? I'm very sorry to hear about your uncle. I would have been very upset if that had happened to an uncle of mine. Peace? Inger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 9, 2006 Report Share Posted March 9, 2006 This is how I see it. If do not stand for something, you most assuredly fall for everything. Raven > > > Tom: " ....... to the defense of disdainful, snobby people like you. " > > Somebody put this guy on moderation! > > This is the 'definition' of a personal attack! > > Rainbow > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 9, 2006 Report Share Posted March 9, 2006 - I proudly served 6 years in the AFRES as a aerovac medical technician. We flew on c 7's and c 130's. Had a great time. I was not thrilled about the possibility of going to war but would have done so.Incidentally that is where I met my husband who was a pilot supporting our unit in aeromed.-- In , " Rainbow . " <rainbow@...> wrote: > > > Inger: " Peace? " > > Ahhhh, now isn't that just what being a hippie is/was all about? > > Proud to be one, > > Let me repeat that I, personally, was drafted into the Vietnam 'war' > and filed for Conscientious Objector to War status. I was the first, > and probably only, person from my home town to ever have been granted > such status. The draft law itself made it clear in a tiny, fine print > footnote, on the very bottom of the last page, that if one believed > in God, and had a moral objection to violence, one might 'serve' the > people of the United States by performing an 'alternative' service > that would be in the interest of the health and safety of our > citizens. I was granted this status, labeled 'C.O.', in light of the > fact that, to prove my sincerity, I was already working as an > Occupational Therapy Aide in a local psychiatric hospital. I > continued in this position for a full two years, the equivalent time > one would have spent in the army. > > Rainbow > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 9, 2006 Report Share Posted March 9, 2006 I also believe if a cause is worth dying for it's even better to live for it :-) > > > > > Tom: " ....... to the defense of disdainful, snobby people like > you. " > > > > Somebody put this guy on moderation! > > > > This is the 'definition' of a personal attack! > > > > Rainbow > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 9, 2006 Report Share Posted March 9, 2006 Though I am against war and killing and would not ask you to nor want you to fight for me nor kill others on my behalf and would prevent it if I could, I would not scorn it. I would think it was a very unselfish, honorable thing for you to do and would be profoundly sad to watch you and others be hurt physically and mentally or not come back at all. Many of the Vietnam war protestors realized the harm they caused by scorning the ones who were sacrificed along with scorning the War itself, and Americans remember that and try to honor the war victims today. > > > Tom: " ....... to the defense of disdainful, snobby people like you. " > > Somebody put this guy on moderation! > > This is the 'definition' of a personal attack! > > Rainbow > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 9, 2006 Report Share Posted March 9, 2006 I really don't want to keep this thread going but I some things I find worth arguing for/against. :-) I'm willing to leave it when the pro-war faction is. To the point: No disrespect to your cousin, but such statements/sentiments as Patton's frankly scare me. Isn't that other "son of a bitch" more likely a "son of a caring mother" just like yourself? Won't she be as sad to lose him as yours would be? Aren't we all HUMAN? Why do we need to keep KILLING each other?? And then parade it as if it is something to be proud of? I really don't get it. Sorry. I guess I'm just too naive for this planet. :-( Inger Re: Re: Not a Hippie In a message dated 3/9/2006 3:34:24 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, julie.stevenson16@... writes: I also believe if a cause is worth dying for it's even better to live for it :-) I prefer the way my cousin General Patton looked at it. He told his soldiers, "I don't want you to die for your country, but make that other poor son of a bitch die for his!", or something like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 9, 2006 Report Share Posted March 9, 2006 *Sigh* I do see your point, but I still can't help feel as sorry for he German soldier's mother as for the American. Can we let the subject rest now and perhaps talk about something other than killing and war? I'm finding this utterly depressing. Inger Re: Re: Not a Hippie In a message dated 3/9/2006 4:35:59 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, inglori@... writes: To the point: No disrespect to your cousin, but such statements/sentiments as Patton's frankly scare me. Isn't that other "son of a bitch" more likely a "son of a caring mother" just like yourself? Won't she be as sad to lose him as yours would be? Aren't we all HUMAN? Why do we need to keep KILLING each other?? And then parade it as if it is something to be proud of? I really don't get it. Sorry. I guess I'm just too naive for this planet. :-( Inger The point Patton was trying to make was that live soldiers were more important than dead heroes. He wanted his men to fight skillfully and well, but not take undue risks. If the enemy took undue risks, then take advantage of it. The point other, which you see to addressing, is that, from an American perspective, the fewer grieving American mothers the better. If that meant more grieving German mothers, then that is the way it has to be. Do bear in mind that the Nazis started WWII and the Germans gave Hitler very high approval ratings up through even the invasion of Poland and France. The Nazis also were committing mass genocide everywhere they went. So, lives were well spent stopping them. However, I did like Winston Churchill's preference, to let the Nazis and Communists bleed each other white and then for the Allies to defeat the weakened winner of that contest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 9, 2006 Report Share Posted March 9, 2006 Oooooooooops only just got to this post now - I tend to read in order - so sorry if I have inadvertendly continued the subject. > > *Sigh* I do see your point, but I still can't help feel as sorry for he German soldier's mother as for the American. > > Can we let the subject rest now and perhaps talk about something other than killing and war? I'm finding this utterly depressing. > > Inger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 10, 2006 Report Share Posted March 10, 2006 Inger: The Patton quote (however mangled in actual words, the idea is correct) is a simplistic view of how to win a war: make it too expensive for the other side to keep fighting. The ideal situation (for war) would be inviting all parties involved to a chess game with high stakes, but where the only deaths are those of the pieces on the board, and have that determine who wins or loses the conflict. Oh, if only it were that simple and neat.... > > I really don't want to keep this thread going but I some things I find worth arguing for/against. :-) I'm willing to leave it when the pro-war faction is. > > To the point: > No disrespect to your cousin, but such statements/sentiments as Patton's frankly scare me. > > Isn't that other " son of a bitch " more likely a " son of a caring mother " just like yourself? Won't she be as sad to lose him as yours would be? Aren't we all HUMAN? Why do we need to keep KILLING each other?? And then parade it as if it is something to be proud of? I really don't get it. Sorry. > > I guess I'm just too naive for this planet. :-( > > Inger > > > > Re: Re: Not a Hippie > > > In a message dated 3/9/2006 3:34:24 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, julie.stevenson16@... writes: > I also believe if a cause is worth dying for it's even better to live > for it :-) > > > > I prefer the way my cousin General Patton looked at it. He told his soldiers, " I don't want you to die for your country, but make that other poor son of a bitch die for his! " , or something like that. > > > > > FAM Secret Society is a community based on respect, friendship, support and acceptance. Everyone is valued. > > Don't forget, there are links to other FAM sites on the Links page in the folder marked " Other FAM Sites. " > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 10, 2006 Report Share Posted March 10, 2006 OK. Thanks for explaining. I too wish they would fight wars like you suggest. Or just fight them man-to-man. Bush against Saddam for example. I really don't see the point in fighting at all since it invariably causes losses on both sides. Seems like an awful waste to me! I have such a hard time getting over all the beautiful medieval cities in Europe being turned to ashes, and all the painstakingly created/collected art & knowledge (e.g. the library of andria) being lost forever due to this constant warring. It's just too barbaric for words. :-( Inger Re: Re: Not a Hippie > > > In a message dated 3/9/2006 3:34:24 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, julie.stevenson16@... writes: > I also believe if a cause is worth dying for it's even better to live > for it :-) > > > > I prefer the way my cousin General Patton looked at it. He told his soldiers, " I don't want you to die for your country, but make that other poor son of a bitch die for his! " , or something like that. > > > > > FAM Secret Society is a community based on respect, friendship, support and acceptance. Everyone is valued. > > Don't forget, there are links to other FAM sites on the Links page in the folder marked " Other FAM Sites. " > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 10, 2006 Report Share Posted March 10, 2006 Yes I agree with what you have said below and yes I indeed would stand up for what I believe - but I would still rather live thanks :- ) So far fortunately God has not specifically asked me to die for him, of which I am quite grateful. I am not quite prepared to die just yet - if I can avoid it. I want to know first that my son is okay and has the abilities to deal with this world - once I know that he will be okay, then I will be less bothered about leaving him. Death has never particularly bothered me - as in been dead - the actual dying bit can be cause for concern within me though - I would rather a quick death than a drawn out painful lingering kind. As for Jesus he was perfect and way above any mortal man - I think he was actually God embodied? Such stuff sometimes confuses me - I think Jesus was meant to be God in flesh? Am I getting this stuff correct? What confuses me is that it says God sent his only son - and yet I thought Jesus was God too? This is where I get confused. > > > > I also believe if a cause is worth dying for it's even better to > live > > for it :-) > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 10, 2006 Report Share Posted March 10, 2006 , This is one thing where some group back in the 300's A.D. (first revision in 325, second in 381) decided that " Yeah, that's what we want to say it is! " and defined God (Christian) according to their interpretations, in a way that isn't supported in the Bible or logic, and this is known as the Nicene creed. There is an interpretation difficulty that they ran into, so they defined that for all practical intents and purposes, God the Father, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost/Spirit are all the same being, or at least that's how I interpret what they've said. However, the scriptures and my beliefs indicate that it isn't that simple and confusing (at the same time) but rather there's 3 separate entities/beings (the Godhead) that are one with each other *in purpose* and not in body, for further clarification: this is where a huge amount of confusion happens, is too literal of interpretation of certain things. To be more precise, the Holy Ghost is a spirit in form, and at this time, does not have a body: God the Father is someone with a full body that is eternal; and Jesus Christ is the oldest spirit child *and* physically conceived son of God the Father, thus, " God's only begotten son " and before Jesus was on earth in a physical body that was half immortal and half mortal man, Jesus was formerly known as Jehovah and The Lord and quite a few other names as used in the old testament. Jesus is " The Lord " due to His role in the creation of earth and the universe: because He created and fulfilled the plan of Salvation, he also was put in charge of creation, and did that under the direction of God the Father; thus, He organized all that we know of the physical realm. Where does God the Father come in for this whole thing? He is the father of our spirits, though not of our bodies: before something is created in physical form, it is first created in spirit form: this is the case for every physical thing. That is, everything has an eternal soul of some form that has both a physical portion and a portion of spirit, which can be thought of as real and imaginary components in mathematical terms (warning: don't take that too literally :PPP) As physical matter/energy has always existed and always will (it would defy the laws of physics to create or destroy energy/matter, as they can only be transformed from one into the other) so, too, have intelligences always existed in some form or another; like the physical body is organized by the various genetic traits, the various intelligences (like genetic code) have always existed in some primitive form, which is organized (note that I don't believe there's anything clearly in the Bible that refers to how intelligences and spirits came about). Now, going on personal belief/theory that I don't have a reference to point to at all in any literature I'm aware of off the top of my head, (going all-terrain mode here!) I believe that one reason you can't truly " cure " autism/aspie-ness is because the way our body and spirit exist together isn't fully understood by science as we know it. My personal belief is that our physical body (to put things in terms of a computer analogy) is the hardware, our spirit is the software, and our brain is purely an interface. What do I base that logic off of? If we are supposed to remember everything that we have done in our lives, and be judged accordingly after we're dead, it stands to reason that (and if you believe in the existence of ghosts, which, if you believe in the Godhead and the Holy Ghost, seems a logical extension) if the body is destroyed, all our knowledge would also be destroyed after we die, or even a large amount would be destroyed with physical brain damage that didn't kill us. Our knowledge we gain with our mortal bodies and our spirits forever remains with us, and all the brain exists to do is to provide a physical interface to our spirit that allows bidirectional communication between the two, where the exact organization of the brain determines what we can tune into that is broadcast from our spirit. If you change the brain, how well you can tune in your spirit (or that of anything else) also changes, but it doesn't change what the spirit already knows, whether or not what it (the spirit) already knows can be reached. So, too, our bodies are matched to our spirits: thus, our bodies and spirits are matched sets, and you can't just put any body with any spirit and have it work correctly for the same reason. By this line of reasoning, there's no logic to believe that you can " cure " something of an eternal nature: that of having the spirit of an autie or an aspie, anymore than you could cure a dog of being a dog, or a cat of being a cat, because that's what the autie, the aspie, the dog and the cat are, respectively, in the eternal sense, regardless of how much people think they should function differently. Thus, you can't put an NT spirit in an aspie body or the other way around, because they simply won't interface correctly, if at all. I suspect this post will create a lot of food-for-thought > > > > > > I also believe if a cause is worth dying for it's even better to > > live > > > for it :-) > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 10, 2006 Report Share Posted March 10, 2006 This reminds me of the Christmas Eve cease-fire in 1914 during WWI. I heard this recently on the radio. They said that the Germans started singing Christmas songs and the British and French--only 30 feet away in some cases, peeked their heads above their trenches (a total no- no) and shouted " Good, old Fritz " " Encore, encore " " more, more " . The Germans answered, " Merry Christmas, Englishmen " " We not shoot, you not shoot! " They put candles on their rifles and held them up in the air to show them to the other side. The English were suspicious at first because these were the hated 'huns' 'barbarians' and 'krauts'. It must have been difficult once the dehumanization was erased and replaced with humanization. How could they go back to shooting the 'barbarians' after that? In , " Inger Lorelei " <inglori@...> wrote: > > I really don't want to keep this thread going but I some things I find worth arguing for/against. :-) I'm willing to leave it when the pro-war faction is. > > To the point: > No disrespect to your cousin, but such statements/sentiments as Patton's frankly scare me. > > Isn't that other " son of a bitch " more likely a " son of a caring mother " just like yourself? Won't she be as sad to lose him as yours would be? Aren't we all HUMAN? Why do we need to keep KILLING each other?? And then parade it as if it is something to be proud of? I really don't get it. Sorry. > > I guess I'm just too naive for this planet. :-( > > Inger > > > > Re: Re: Not a Hippie > > > In a message dated 3/9/2006 3:34:24 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, julie.stevenson16@... writes: > I also believe if a cause is worth dying for it's even better to live > for it :-) > > > > I prefer the way my cousin General Patton looked at it. He told his soldiers, " I don't want you to die for your country, but make that other poor son of a bitch die for his! " , or something like that. > > > > > FAM Secret Society is a community based on respect, friendship, support and acceptance. Everyone is valued. > > Don't forget, there are links to other FAM sites on the Links page in the folder marked " Other FAM Sites. " > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 10, 2006 Report Share Posted March 10, 2006 I read in order, too. Tom said he does too. There's our Aspie obsessiveness! > > > > *Sigh* I do see your point, but I still can't help feel as sorry for > he German soldier's mother as for the American. > > > > Can we let the subject rest now and perhaps talk about something > other than killing and war? I'm finding this utterly depressing. > > > > Inger > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 10, 2006 Report Share Posted March 10, 2006 " I suspect this post will create a lot of food-for-thought " Yes it has, but since I am not feeling too well do not know how long I will be able to maintain conversations. I liked a lot of your analogies - some of the trinity business still confuses me - maybe when I feel better I will re-read and try get a better grasp. " That is, everything has an eternal soul of some form that has both a physical portion and a portion of spirit,... " What are anyones ideas/beliefs/explanations on how soul and spirit differ? What is the difference between soul and spirit? > > , > > This is one thing where some group back in the 300's A.D. (first > revision in 325, second in 381) decided that " Yeah, that's what we > want to say it is! " and defined God (Christian) according to their > interpretations, in a way that isn't supported in the Bible or logic, > and this is known as the Nicene creed. There is an interpretation > difficulty that they ran into, so they defined that for all practical > intents and purposes, God the Father, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost/Spirit > are all the same being, or at least that's how I interpret what > they've said. However, the scriptures and my beliefs indicate that it > isn't that simple and confusing (at the same time) but rather there's > 3 separate entities/beings (the Godhead) that are one with each other > *in purpose* and not in body, for further clarification: this is where > a huge amount of confusion happens, is too literal of interpretation > of certain things. To be more precise, the Holy Ghost is a spirit in > form, and at this time, does not have a body: God the Father is > someone with a full body that is eternal; and Jesus Christ is the > oldest spirit child *and* physically conceived son of God the Father, > thus, " God's only begotten son " and before Jesus was on earth in a > physical body that was half immortal and half mortal man, Jesus was > formerly known as Jehovah and The Lord and quite a few other names as > used in the old testament. Jesus is " The Lord " due to His role in the > creation of earth and the universe: because He created and fulfilled > the plan of Salvation, he also was put in charge of creation, and did > that under the direction of God the Father; thus, He organized all > that we know of the physical realm. Where does God the Father come in > for this whole thing? He is the father of our spirits, though not of > our bodies: before something is created in physical form, it is first > created in spirit form: this is the case for every physical thing. > That is, everything has an eternal soul of some form that has both a > physical portion and a portion of spirit, which can be thought of as > real and imaginary components in mathematical terms (warning: don't > take that too literally :PPP) As physical matter/energy has always > existed and always will (it would defy the laws of physics to create > or destroy energy/matter, as they can only be transformed from one > into the other) so, too, have intelligences always existed in some > form or another; like the physical body is organized by the various > genetic traits, the various intelligences (like genetic code) have > always existed in some primitive form, which is organized (note that I > don't believe there's anything clearly in the Bible that refers to how > intelligences and spirits came about). > > Now, going on personal belief/theory that I don't have a reference to > point to at all in any literature I'm aware of off the top of my head, > (going all-terrain mode here!) I believe that one reason you can't > truly " cure " autism/aspie-ness is because the way our body and spirit > exist together isn't fully understood by science as we know it. My > personal belief is that our physical body (to put things in terms of a > computer analogy) is the hardware, our spirit is the software, and our > brain is purely an interface. What do I base that logic off of? If > we are supposed to remember everything that we have done in our lives, > and be judged accordingly after we're dead, it stands to reason that > (and if you believe in the existence of ghosts, which, if you believe > in the Godhead and the Holy Ghost, seems a logical extension) if the > body is destroyed, all our knowledge would also be destroyed after we > die, or even a large amount would be destroyed with physical brain > damage that didn't kill us. Our knowledge we gain with our mortal > bodies and our spirits forever remains with us, and all the brain > exists to do is to provide a physical interface to our spirit that > allows bidirectional communication between the two, where the exact > organization of the brain determines what we can tune into that is > broadcast from our spirit. If you change the brain, how well you can > tune in your spirit (or that of anything else) also changes, but it > doesn't change what the spirit already knows, whether or not what it > (the spirit) already knows can be reached. So, too, our bodies are > matched to our spirits: thus, our bodies and spirits are matched sets, > and you can't just put any body with any spirit and have it work > correctly for the same reason. By this line of reasoning, there's no > logic to believe that you can " cure " something of an eternal nature: > that of having the spirit of an autie or an aspie, anymore than you > could cure a dog of being a dog, or a cat of being a cat, because > that's what the autie, the aspie, the dog and the cat are, > respectively, in the eternal sense, regardless of how much people > think they should function differently. Thus, you can't put an NT > spirit in an aspie body or the other way around, because they simply > won't interface correctly, if at all. > > I suspect this post will create a lot of food-for-thought > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 10, 2006 Report Share Posted March 10, 2006 More specifically, the group you speak of was known as The Council of Nicaea. Many churches use what is called the Nicene Creed which is based on what was decided at The Council. But most Proterstant Churches, including mine, the Missouri Synod Lutheran Church, do not take all of what was resolved at The Council of Nicaea to heart, primarily because its meeting was political and not religious. The Pope at that time never attended and thus never officially approved or disapproved of what was resolved there. Nevertheless, the Missori Synod Lutheran Church follows some of what was resolved. The Nicene Creed as we have it reads thus: http://www.lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=3356 Nicene Creed I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth and of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of His Father before all worlds, God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father; by whom all things were made; who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the virgin and was made man; and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate. He suffered and was buried. And the third day He rose again according to the Scriptures and ascended into heaven and sits at the right hand of the Father. And He will come again with glory to judge both the living and the dead, whose kingdom will have no end. And I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son, who with the Father and the Son together is worshiped and glorified, who spoke by the prophets. And I believe in one holy Christian and apostolic Church. I acknowledge one Baptism for the remission of sins, and I look for the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come. Amen. Tom Administrator This is one thing where some group back in the 300's A.D. (first revision in 325, second in 381) decided that " Yeah, that's what we want to say it is! " and defined God (Christian) according to their interpretations, in a way that isn't supported in the Bible or logic, and this is known as the Nicene creed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 10, 2006 Report Share Posted March 10, 2006 That's a cute story. Reminds me of another war story (can't swear as to it's authenticity but this is what I heard anyway, can correct me if he knows more about it). I think it was back in the 1600s, possibly between the German and French. A battle was scheduled at dawn the next day. But just before dawn a messenger from one of the sides arrived into the enemy camp with a letter saying that their soldiers had no clean lace cuffs left, so if they could please postpone the battle for another day so as to have time to wash them? They were granted this extra time. To fight in dirty cuffs - unthinkable! How barbaric! :-) Inger Re: Re: Not a Hippie > > > In a message dated 3/9/2006 3:34:24 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, julie.stevenson16@... writes: > I also believe if a cause is worth dying for it's even better to live > for it :-) > > > > I prefer the way my cousin General Patton looked at it. He told his soldiers, " I don't want you to die for your country, but make that other poor son of a bitch die for his! " , or something like that. > > > > > FAM Secret Society is a community based on respect, friendship, support and acceptance. Everyone is valued. > > Don't forget, there are links to other FAM sites on the Links page in the folder marked " Other FAM Sites. " > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 10, 2006 Report Share Posted March 10, 2006 I have no idea. Not familiar with the expression. Perhaps Kate would know. Inger Re: Re: Not a Hippie > > > > > > In a message dated 3/9/2006 3:34:24 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, > julie.stevenson16@... writes: > > I also believe if a cause is worth dying for it's even better to > live > > for it :-) > > > > > > > > I prefer the way my cousin General Patton looked at it. He told his > soldiers, " I don't want you to die for your country, but make that > other poor son of a bitch die for his! " , or something like that. > > > > > > > > > > FAM Secret Society is a community based on respect, friendship, > support and acceptance. Everyone is valued. > > > > Don't forget, there are links to other FAM sites on the Links page > in the folder marked " Other FAM Sites. " > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.