
« February 15, 2004 - February 21, 2004 | Main | February 29, 2004 - March 6, 2004 »
02/28/2004 in Art/Design, Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)
02/28/2004 in Games | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)
02/28/2004 in Art/Design | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)
A list of seven factory tours from around the USA from The Travel Channel.
02/28/2004 in Kids, Travel | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
From Ahajokes.com:
Spanish singer Julio Iglesias was on television with British TV host Anne Diamond when he used the word 'manyana'. Diamond asked him to explain what it meant. He said that the term means "maybe the job will be done to-morrow, maybe the next day, maybe the day after that. Perhaps next week, next month, next year. Who cares?" The host turned to Irishman Shay Brennan who was also on the show and asked him if there was an equivalent term in Irish. "No. In Ireland we don't have a word to describe that degree of urgency.", replied Brennan.
02/28/2004 in Humor | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
From the article Homosexual "Marriage" and Civilization by Orson Scott Card:
Regardless of their opinion of homosexual "marriage," every American who believes in democracy should be outraged that any court should take it upon itself to dictate such a social innovation without recourse to democratic process. And we all know the course this thing will follow. Anyone who opposes this edict will be branded a bigot; any schoolchild who questions the legitimacy of homosexual marriage will be expelled for "hate speech." The fanatical Left will insist that anyone who upholds the fundamental meaning that marriage has always had, everywhere, until this generation, is a "homophobe" and therefore mentally ill.
In response to this, Cory Doctorow over at BoingBoing shoots these terms at Orson Scott Card:
Irony, oh irony. And what's the point, really?
- disgraceful
- notorious
- revolting
- anti-gay
- homophobia
- sophistry
- shameful
02/27/2004 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0)
From The Vladivostok News:
The head of a county in the Far Eastern Amur region has been accused of using over 600,000 rubles ($20,000) from the local budget to train officials in administrative techniques designed by the founder of Scientology, Ron Hubbard, Interfax reported Tuesday. Boris Shalimov, the head of the Skovorodino County, sent colleagues on a course at two companies transferring them 646,000 rubles ($21,500) of the local budget. The companies propagate organizational technologies devised by Hubbard, whose religion claims to set people spiritually free using the nonscientific theory of dianetics-explaining behavior in terms of an individual's experiences prior to birth. Igor Shalmarov, head of the regional police department to fight institutional corruption, noted that Shalimov faces charges of abusing his position and that a report is in its final stages of preparation before being sent to the regional prosecutor. If found guilty Shalimov could face a fine of 300,000 rubles ($10,000), or imprisonment for up to seven years.
02/27/2004 in Religion | Permalink | Comments (0)
From Frances J Beckwith:
Social conservatives have fought back by asking a local judge to issue a stay to prohibit the mayor from issuing any more illegal licenses. Of course, this is precisely what the other side wants: It creates "victims" and will keep the issue in the judiciary so that in the near future a federal bench may issue a ruling supporting same-sex marriage long before the social conservatives can pass an amendment to the federal Constitution.And what could be more fun, eh?I believe, however, that given present circumstances that the best strategy is to take the mayor at his word and employ "street theatre" in a provocative way in order to force the other side to defend their marital nihilism in all its glory. Here's the plan: Have about 50 folks go to San Francisco city hall and request marriage licenses, but not for gay marriages, rather, for other sorts of "unions" that are also forbidden by the state: three bisexuals from two genders, one person who wants to marry himself (and have him accuse the mayor of "numberism," the prejudice that marriage must include more than one person), two married couples who want a temporary "wife-swap lease," a couple consisting of two brothers, two sisters, or a brother and a sister, an adult mother and son, and a man who wants to add a second wife and a first husband in order to have a "marital ensemble," etc., etc. Let's see if the mayor will give these people "marriage" licenses. If not, why not? If not, then the jig is up and the mayor actually has to explain the grounds on which he will not give licenses to these folks. But what could those grounds be? That it would break the law? That marriage has a nature, a purpose, that is not the result of social construction or state fiat? If so, then what is it and why?
02/27/2004 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)
A nice one. Some examples:
02/27/2004 in Wisconsin | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
02/27/2004 in History, Music | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0)