I will look this weekend.



Cheers for being grown up enough to admit it ;)

He ain't the only one. As a matter of fact, you'd be hard pressed to find anyone here that would say otherwise, and I'm not ashamed to say that I'm a little insulted by your implication otherwise. No one here has ever shown any anti-christian sentiment, only anti-christian rule. There's huge difference.

You choose to preceive insult where none exists- and no, I don't doubt that he is the only one, but he admits his bias.

You seem outraged that this is not in the news- and all I pointed out was that I doubted there would be outrage from many here for the flip side- the Christian who was court-ordered to not teach an anti-Gay message. To deny that seems truly disingenuous- sorry, but it does.

I personally do not think any court should dictate morality teaching of any kind- period.

I agree, and if you can show me a story where that happened, I would direct an equal amount of outrage in that direction.

Here's my random mental wandering for the day:

What if the parent practiced some truly old school Catholicism and insisted that despite what the kid's school was teaching, the earth was actually the center of the universe and did not revolved around the sun. Surely that would breed the same sort of confusion the judge was purportedly trying to avoid? Would it have engendered the same result?

Perhaps Indiana needs a handbook of approved beliefs and practices to hand out to all current and prospective parents?

(Side note: Sometimes I really wish I was in practice already and on a particular case. Oh the fun I could have! Noting the pagan origins of so-called "mainstream" practices. Comparing numbers of Wiccans to numbers of other faiths and denominations and asking for equal treatment. (No Diwali for you, mister! And that goes double for Visakha Bucha!) And that doesn't even touch the constitutional issues! I suspect the reason this didn't get more press is because it's so obviously wrong. There was a follow-up article 2 days later indicating that most thought it would be quickly overturned upon appeal. But wouldn't it be entertaining for a brief moment to demonstrate what that ruling really meant? To try to ellicit a definition of "mainstream"?)

Me? Try to provoke a response? You are confusing me with Sac, apparently.

And yes, I'm going nuts with boredom this workday. Preparing documents as support for an DOD audit is mind numbingly dull. I'm done, but I'm waiting to send them off until the end of business so no one calls me to tell me they need them revised.

Don't flatter yourself, toaster whore. Although, in reality, we're probably more alike than either one of us would like to admit. I like sunshine and butterflies. Do you?

I hear people in the Clinton administration like sunshine and butterflies.

And hummers.

So, if I'm a toaster whore, are you a corndog whore?