Life Rules

[sukkafu]

dear diva, i am so impressed with your FANTASTIC list of rules. i agree with all of them and i'm assuming that you follow these as best as you can, i am grateful to be
in the same circle as you. thank you for sharing some important moral codes of conduct!

[Ivory Fair]

LOL! Diva, is your #18 for me?

[Jonel]

20. The toilet paper goes on the roll so that it comes up over the top, not from below. To do otherwise wastes paper, it has been clinically proven.

I'd like to say a big "AMEN" to this one. I have to say though that its great when people at least replace the roll, even if they put the full roll on top of the rod. At least there's toilet paper there, and I can install it properly. ;D

[Jonel]

krispy kreme donuts are not important in my book.they are so overrated and overpriced. it's a trend.



Sukka, how could something that has been popular for over 65 years be a trend?

[ftp]http://www.krispykreme.com/history.html[/ftp]

[DramaLJDiva]

LOL, Ivory do you really tell people how to dress? Actually, I was thinking of these people who I went to school with these years. They belong to a group where everyone dresses alike. Whenever someone dresses different from them, they have to point it out, which makes me VERY, VERY angry, because I have my own personal style. These people are into sporty shirts, short little midriff tops, and the worst...BELL BOTTOMS WITH TENNIS SHOES! When I wear jeans with a bell bottom or a flare, I always wear platforms with them, so they need to LOOK INSIDE THEIR MINDS before telling other people to sacrifice their personal style just to become a member of the NoImaginationClone Crowd.

[sukkafu]

deev, it would be nice to see a woman with tennies out here-they ALL where platforms in so. cal.

[sukkafu]

dear jonel, i appreciate the southern history of the krispy kreme franchise. it parallels the tobacco companies- long tradition, stuff not healthy.

you guys love your kk's and defend them to the death. that's cool. i am more defensive of the pledge of allegiance, in which an idiot judge in san fran 9th circuit
court of appeals threw out ''under God''. it always seems that lately the pendulum has swung to the other extreme- from no rights for a minority to total rights for a wacko and none for the vast God fearing majority.
76% of the people surveyed said keep the words intact.
i'd say that was a mandate!
let's throw that judge in a vat of krispy kremes and fry his butt! oops, maybe not- he might taste better!

[Ivory Fair]

LOL! Well Diva, I don't go up to someone and tell them how to dress (unless they're a loved one who's about to embarrass me in public, ha ha) I usually just wait til they've passed and lean over to one of my friends and say, "did you SEE what she was wearing?!"

So Sukka, how do you get around the first amendment? I'm Church of Christ, and we're about as conservative as they get, but the first amendment, ("Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof") pretty much means to me that Congress didn't have the right to add "In God We Trust," to the pledge in 1950. The truth is, we are a diverse nation, and, unfortunately, not everyone believes in God. But the constitution was put in place to protect the rights of the minority, not as a vehicle to maintain the power of the majority. If we only went by majoirty rule, most of my friends would STILL be sitting at the back of the bus. God's gonna still reign supreme whether we pledge to our country "under" him or not.

[sukkafu]

in 1954, a catholic organization ,the knights of columbus, was instrumental during the eisenhower administration to get congress to add the words, under god. the thing is that 90% of all decisions rendered by the wacko 9th circuit court in san fran are overturned by the supreme court. the supreme court will uphold the pledge as it is, because it does not establish a religion.
even an atheist is a believer; he believes that he doesn't believe in God. jehovah's witnesses don't say the pledge at all. they don't believe in an earthly govt.
they believe in a theocracy.
i have no problem with either not believing in the pledge, but don't mess with it.

it wouldn't be right if someone came into our message board and all they wanted to do was tell you to post anything you want as long as you delete any mention of temptations or anything related to temptations.
that person should go somewhere else if they don't like the tempts, but don't be messin' with our board!
as a founding member of the institute for the healing of racism, as well as a charter member of community cousins in san diego, and being married to a black puerto rican woman with a bunch of mixed race kids,
i know about the ''minority'' and its woes.
i do believe it's so crazy how we protect the criminals now and look out for his rights that we over look the victim that he caused pain and suffering to.

[AKA THE FUF]

sukkafu, you hit it right on the head, I'll testify to your insight. If it wasn't for GOD, we all would not be here.

[Ivory Fair]

Sukka, are you saying that if someone doesn't agree with it being in there that they should leave the country? There's a BIG difference between leaving a message board and leaving a country, come on now. And I agree with you, adding "under God," did not establish a religion, but it helped to establish Judeo/Christianity (and Islam too I suppose) as the official religion of this country. And it DID violate the "free exercise thereof" clause. Now the only catch is that Congress didn't make it a law to say the pledge, we're not required to say it. That's the only way that I could see how the Supreme Court could get around it. I think it follows the letter of the law, just not the spirit. I have no problem with you and I, as Christians, getting together and saying it, I just think Congress, as governmental body, had no right to add the clause in the first place. They are there to make laws, not promote religion.

And I know what you're saying, I was raised by one of the "commie Northern outside agitator" members of SNCC and a card-carrying member of the NAACP (seriously, he really does have a card) and I've got my fair share of African American family members and loved ones, but I don't think we can ever REALLY say we "know" what minorities go through because it's not the same. Sure, Bubba Billybob and his inbread wife and kids may stare and look down at me when I walk into the Wal-Mart with Mr. Ivory and his black self, but I can leave him any day and they'll stop staring at me. Where's he gonna go? Know what I mean?

And Sukka, I hope (((you))) don't take my disagreeing with you personally. I'm a believer in the notion that intelligent, rational people (like you) can agree to disagree and still be friends.

[sukkafu]

ivory, we are tight baby! we don't have a problem! sad to say it but too many people have a problem!

interpretation of the constitution is not even agreed upon by the justices- the last few votes last week were 5-4 so it's easy to see how there are 560 different christian sects ,let alone differing factions of the islamic and judaic and all the other buddhists and hindu.

[Jonel]

it parallels the tobacco companies- long tradition, stuff not healthy

Touche Sukka!