To Have And To Hold And To Not Dis On Your Blog. (Trees And Things)

pO157: Re: Jesus FTW!

Tue, 15 Jan 2008 19:16:30 EST

Mmmm.... nullification sex.

thefadd: Re: Jesus FTW!

Tue, 15 Jan 2008 18:37:12 EST

I will have to remember that one -- once you've had the make-up sex, adulterous acts are legally nullified!

Acefantastik: Re: I can picture a future version of this

Tue, 15 Jan 2008 16:47:52 EST

I think you are over-parsing my original definition of "widely held", which was originally lumped in with the "vast right wing conspiracy" and later clarified to regard the far, far right wing. ergo, I have no trouble standing by my original stateme

zyxwvutsr: Re: I can picture a future version of this

Tue, 15 Jan 2008 16:41:14 EST

You seriously have never come across this?

Nope, never. I've never heard of SoCalPundit before either.

I have no trouble believing that a number of people think such things, but I have a hard time believing that those opi

Acefantastik: Re: I can picture a future version of this

Tue, 15 Jan 2008 15:14:51 EST

Well, I may read more Free Republic than you do, and I've seen it alot. I also managed to find this link in about 3 seconds.

In my ti

zyxwvutsr: Re: Jesus FTW!

Tue, 15 Jan 2008 11:08:56 EST

Doesn't the law say both have to agree for the one year period to work?

Yes.

pO157: Re: Jesus FTW!

Tue, 15 Jan 2008 10:15:19 EST

I wish you were there when the angry post office clerk was informing my spouse and I how the state had ruined her life. Twice. All we wanted to do was renew some passports. Sheesh.

Then again, perhaps she was married to some idiot who refused to sign of

zyxwvutsr: Re: Jesus FTW!

Tue, 15 Jan 2008 08:49:43 EST

...The Empire State is the only one in the union that does not allow no-fault divorce making any trip to divorce court a likely harrowing and messy experience!

It need not be messy - indeed it need not require a trip to court

zyxwvutsr: Re: I can picture a future version of this

Tue, 15 Jan 2008 08:44:15 EST

...the widely held right wing conspiracy belief that if HRC loses this election, the Clintons will divorce

I've never heard that idea, so I've got to wonder how "widely held" it is. Or did you just make it up?

pO157: Jesus FTW!

Tue, 15 Jan 2008 06:21:54 EST

Oooooooooooh. Bad state to move to, Hillary.

I was not aware until I had read several angry letters to the editor from jilted spouses and had an awkward conversation with a bitter postal clerk, but The Empire State is the only one in the union that doe

Acefantastik: I can picture a future version of this

Mon, 14 Jan 2008 19:46:30 EST

But which Clinton will be the blogger blaming their ex-spouse1 for the failure for HRC to win the 2008 election?

1. I am of course referring to the widely held right wing conspiracy belief that if HRC loses this election, the Clintons wi

thefadd: Re: To Have And To Hold And To Not Dis On Your Blo

Mon, 14 Jan 2008 13:13:29 EST

I think these issues arise because the internet is so ubiquitous and (in our society) relatively easy to access. I think that ends up bringing lots more people into the equation than otherwise wouldn't be aware--so there's greater scrutiny. That said, if h

skeeter1: Re: To Have And To Hold And To Not Dis On Your Blo

Sun, 13 Jan 2008 17:06:43 EST

I'm all for standing behind the first amendment. Blogs are just one more way of communicating. It goes beyond blogs. Just look here for O. J. Simpson.

I guess all that I'm saying