December 20, 2007
Forcing your beliefs on others.
So you work for this company that likes to pride itself in being "diverse" and respecting different religions and beliefs of it's employees. Yet when it comes to this time of the year they show their true colors. You see that they are all talk because they are only tolerant of differences if it coincides with what they want.
Let's say you don't celebrate Christmas for various reasons, including religious. You've made it clear to not only your co-workers, but supervisors, managers and anyone you work with that you don't. And as part of your beliefs you do not accept or give gifts this time of year. If you've made this clear every year, you'd think they would catch on. Nope, they do things like ask you to put on Christmas plays, join in on Christmas gift exchanges, and participate in Christmas activities. Now sure they try to mask it by saying, we'll just call it a "Holiday" party or celebration. And just accept the gift as a celebration of your holiday.
The narrow minded don't always realize not all religions have a holiday this time of year.
Every day for the two weeks before Christmas you have someone, who knows better, continually try to get you to join in on the Christmas activities, or give you gifts even with your protests. It's just falling on deaf ears. They continually do it Management and co-workers. Some people respect your beliefs and support you, but the vast majority doesn't.
If this person worked in your office, would you give them the same advice I did? Contact a lawyer and sue for hostile work environment?
The person I'm talking about is very tolerant of other religions and beliefs. They don't complain about all the activities and Christmas/Hanukkah/Kwanza themes floating around. They really don't care, yet other than myself and one other person, no one is respecting their decision.
Posted by: Contagion at
06:23 PM
| Comments (15)
| Add Comment
Post contains 326 words, total size 2 kb.
1
One idea might be to just let the celebration go as a national tradition & holiday rather than focusing on the religious aspects. A good big percentage of people who celebrate Christmas couldn't give a rat's ass about the religious part of it.
Posted by: Shadoglare at December 20, 2007 10:49 PM (WlOIU)
2
In the least have they contacted HR about this? That would be the first step.
And for discrimination cases you first have to contact the EEOC and give them first shot and if they deny it then they will give a letter so you can go to a lawyer.
Any lawyer would tell the person this as the EEOC must always be contacted first.
Posted by: Quality Weenie at December 21, 2007 07:20 AM (uHRYR)
3
I think you are missing the point. To this individual it is a violation of their beliefs/religion. You and I grew up in a household that celebrated Christmas as is the majority of households in America. You view it as harmless tradition. however if someone asked you to slaughter a goat in the spring as a celebration of the season as it's their tradition, you might be a little upset too.
I know they've talked to HR, but HR is giving them the same song and dance that Shadoglare stated.
Posted by: Contagion at December 21, 2007 08:08 AM (Q5WxB)
4
Well, I seem to be running into a little bit of a mental impass in that it feels like we're comparing apples & oranges with that example. If I'm getting your example right the goat slaughtering "tradition" has direct religious bearing, and is actually part of a religoius ritual. Exchanging Christmas gifts is not.
In fact, although it was tagged as an excuse to celebrate the birth of a religious icon, most Christmas traditions stem from activities that are pretty darned non-Christian in nature; although in some cases slightly modified by Christians.
The gift giving tradition stems from a saint who used to sneak around at night tossing pouches of gold into the windows of the poor so they wouldn't have to sell their daughters into prostitution (which, although was started by a saint, really has no religious value - he was just a nice guy). Guy's name was Saint Nikolas.
The Christmas tree is a modification of decorated tree used as part of a pagan sacrificial cerimony.
Rudolph started as a marketing campaign for Montgomery Ward.
Mistletoe's traditions stemmed from a druidic belief that slimy juice of the berries was god-semen.
Really about the only Christmas tradition that is actually Christian in origin is the manger story and any carols specifically referencing it. Something hardcore Christians may not want to admit (or even know), but it's the truth.
So if *those* are being forced on you I'd have a problem with it as well, otherwise that mental disconnect is still there.
Posted by: Shadoglare at December 21, 2007 09:29 AM (Volhe)
5
To me it would be the same as if that person were a recovering alcoholic and the co-workers were constintly trying to get them to drink or go to the bar even when the recovering alcoholic tells them no.
They are trying to force them to do something that they wish not to do and have repeatedly told them they don't want to do it.
Having to endure that yearly is harrassment.
Posted by: Quality Weenie at December 21, 2007 09:51 AM (uHRYR)
6
Are you saying he's a recovering Christian that's worried he may be tempted to go back to church if he slips up and gives somebody a Christmas gift?
Contagion I know you well enough to know you follow a different belief system, however I'm really having trouble grasping why you seem to actually get upset over being asked to participate. Somebody could ask me to spin a draedle with them every year, and even if I have no interest in it I don't see myself getting bent out of shape over it even if they try to get me to do it on a yearly basis. Is it being implied that if you don't participate that it will affect your work or career?
Posted by: Shadoglare at December 21, 2007 11:23 AM (Volhe)
7
Yes, it wasn't the best example, mainly because I don't have a good one. But if the exchanging of gifts is against this persons beliefs, then yes you are forcing your beliefs on this individual, especially if they have asked you to stop. And no matter how much you try to be secular about the Christmas holiday, it is what it is, a Christian holiday. So even in a "traditional" observation of it you are acknowledging and celebrating the birth of Jesus. To some people that is wrong.
As for the history of gift giving, you are right for the most part. You just forgot the giving of gifts by the three Magi to the baby jesus. Although the idea of the modern gift exchange didn't really come to fruit until the 19th century, there are still earlier connections than St. Nick.
And there are religions and belief systems out there that find the exchanging of gifts to be taboo unless for particular reasons. In this individuals case the exchange of a gift this time of year is stricktly part of the Christian observance of Christmas or the Jewish observation of Hannukah or what ever other holiday is this time of year that people exchange gifts for.
Posted by: Contagion at December 21, 2007 11:40 AM (Q5WxB)
8
Well, this really isn't directly about me, although I do sympathize with the individual. Shadoglare, I think you are missing the overall point still is that this person has told them they do not want to participate as it violates their beliefs. Yet for the entire month the same individuals continue to push the issue even after they have said no.
What has me in a bind and why I'm pissed about it is the complete lack of respect that is being shown to this employee. I'm a firm believer that each person has a right to their beliefs and religious choice. As long as you don't go forcing it on others you can do what ever you want. It's an individual freedom. This whole issue is nothing more than the narrow-minded christian majority not showing the same respect to my employee that they are showing them.
And yes it has effected their job because they are stressing over the entire issue.
Posted by: Contagion at December 21, 2007 11:47 AM (Q5WxB)
9
Hmmm... I guess if that belief system had some type of doctrine specifically forbidding such a type of celebration that I could see it as a more valid point - apparently I'm not familiar enough with said belief system to recognize it as an issue, which may be the case with the other employees as well.
Posted by: Shadoglare at December 21, 2007 11:57 AM (Volhe)
10
The thought also struck me of an email going to all parties in management explaining that it's against her religion, but then I remembered that work environment and figured this would probably be akin to opening Pandora's box or at least a big can of worms...
Posted by: Shadoglare at December 21, 2007 12:05 PM (Volhe)
11
Even if it was just this person stating, "I don't celebrate Christmas or any holidays this time of year. I also don't do anything to acknowledge the celebration of it as it goes against my beliefs" should be more than enough. Just because you and others want to force people into your belief system and traditions doesn't give you the right to do so. They have every right to say no and stop. But yes there are a lot of religions and beliefs that state gift giving is bad. And each individual may view acknowledging another religions holiday as wrong. That's why you don't see too many Christians celebrating Ramadon.
Posted by: Contagion at December 21, 2007 12:21 PM (Q5WxB)
12
I think it comes down to this: People feel better about themselves when they give a gift during the Holiday season. They can't fathom the fact that someone else might not want the gift, and refusing the gift bruises there sense of self worth, therefore they force the issue.
Posted by: ktreva at December 21, 2007 04:52 PM (QQZMi)
13
Whether or not he escalates this, he has to think of how he might be able to work with these people the rest of the year. In other words, once you bring in the big guns, while it might get you what you want, it will incur the anger of those who get the hammer dropped on them. They already know they're wrong for pressing him after he asked them to stop - so bringing in people with bigger clout to point this out to the world will piss them off big time. (no one likes it publicly pointed out that they've been a jerk). Thus they will be very angry indeed - and this will be a breach that may not be able to be mended. It's going to impact his relations with everyone for the rest of his career at this place...not just the Christmas season. That might not be fair- but that's life.
If he's that uncomfortable, he should be looking for a new job. If he doesn't want to quit then I would tell him to cultivate a lovely vacant stare. He has told all of these people he does not participate, if they can't hear him, he should fail to hear them when they talk about it. Totally ignore it. If they ask him, he should walk away (even out of his office if necessary).
There are things that drive one nuts at any job - if this is pushing his buttons to the point that he can't simply say "No" and walk away - he may need a total change because I'm betting there are other things happening between him and these co-workers too. It's never just one thing - it's a build up - but this is the easiest one to see and to take hold of because it isn't work related.
That's my take, not knowing the people involved.
Posted by: Teresa at December 22, 2007 12:38 AM (rVIv9)
14
Hello. Long time reader, first time commenter, etc.
Probably should have read all the comments, but thought I'd throw in that I sympathize with the "non-Christian" (as I am one, myself), I also agree with Shadoglare. Perhaps it's superficial, but I don't mind putting up a Christmas (*cough* Yule) tree and laying out presents for my daughter because Santa came. It's not so much the religious part of it for me, but the fun of it. It really is just an excuse for me to party if up. Sort of like Cinco de Mayo. I'm not Mexican, but I still find an excuse to go out to a bar and partake.
Posted by: Barmy Mama at December 22, 2007 05:51 PM (VuiPf)
15
Yeah there's probably some of what Ktreva said too... if this person doesn't accept their offers... they feel *rejected* - Can't have that!
Posted by: Shadoglare at December 22, 2007 11:57 PM (WlOIU)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
November 27, 2007
Chili question number 3
You may recall I've asked you questions about Chili in
the past. I have some more for you.
Chili: With or with out beans?
What is the best meat for chili?
Let me know what you think, a very important decision hinges on all of your answers.
Posted by: Contagion at
05:20 PM
| Comments (10)
| Add Comment
Post contains 55 words, total size 1 kb.
1
For my Hubby? No beans and made with steak AND hamburger.
For me?? Beans are awesome in chili! And beef is the meat of choice...
Did I help?
Posted by: Richmond at November 27, 2007 05:29 PM (cTBnn)
2
Totally beans! In fact I kinda like a mix of.. uhh.. can't remember the names of them now.. the "usual" softer brownish bean, and there's a sort of meatier/thicker reddish bean that's good in chili too.
I prefer the ground beef, though small steak chunks might be good too. In that last batch I had with the steak I think it was just the fact that the steak was in "strip" form that bugged me.
Posted by: Shadoglare at November 27, 2007 08:37 PM (4iXDP)
3
Beans. Of course.
Steak is fine, but I usually use burger....for cost as well as ease of preperation....
Posted by: Tammi at November 28, 2007 06:13 AM (so3V6)
4
I prefer with beans.
As for the meat, you must try beef tri-tip cut into 1 inch cubes. Makes a very hearty and beefy chili. You'll need to use a Dutch Oven or other heavy pot for preparation as the tri-tip needs to cook longer than say hamburger but man is it ever worth it. Got a couple of good recipes, let me know if you'd like to see them.
Posted by: spurs at November 28, 2007 07:17 AM (SQsl6)
5
must.have.beans
and beef
Posted by: Quality Weenie at November 28, 2007 07:30 AM (ZM3Qb)
6
Originally, Chili did not have meat. Chili with any kind of meat is actually Chili con carne, or "chili with meat." If my memory serves me correctly, the original style chili did not have beans, either.
But for me, it doesn't work without the meat and beans. At our house, we usually use ground beef, our good family farm raised stuff.
I also know a LOT of guys who make their chili with venison. Similar to beef, most people won't know the difference, but it is actually healthier.
I also know a guy who makes "Pork Chop Chili." More about the pork chops than the chili, it is very good. He cooks pork chops in a large pan of very spicy chili. Eaten off a plate, it is important to have something good to drink with it, otherwise your mouth will melt out of your head.
Posted by: Petey at November 28, 2007 08:36 AM (tmnSV)
7
Deer.
Beans.
And all the peppers the law will allow
Mine Won. 
Posted by: BloodSpite at November 28, 2007 09:43 AM (xUF9P)
8
I shall defer this to those who actually make chili... I've never been a big fan of it. Although I prefer chili with meat and beans.
Posted by: Teresa at November 28, 2007 09:59 AM (rVIv9)
9
I use equal amounts of stew beef and ground sirloin (5 lbs or better ea) with about a half pound of ground sausage. the bigger the pot the more to freeze (even better re-heated). definitely brown the meat in small stages so it won't steam in the pot. then cook for 1 hr in covered pot with chicken broth before adding the spices for the last couple of hours or so.
to cut acidity of you can add a half lb of mexican chocolate. sounds strange but it works.
Beans are up to you, pintos are traditional, but gassy. red kidney beans (drained and washed) are good too if you want to reduce the amount of gaseous aftermath.
that's my 2 cents worth
Posted by: SB at November 28, 2007 04:50 PM (C/5ks)
10
Beans - ground and cubed beef (we also use venison here) yummy!
Posted by: oddybobo at November 29, 2007 12:10 PM (mZfwW)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
A spoon full of Cinnamon
Earlier today one of my employees came to me and asked, "Can a human swallow a spoonful of cinnamon?" After staring at her blankly for about 30 seconds I responded with, "I don't know... and don't you have some work you should be doing?" Of course this planted a seed of wonder in my head as to why she would ask such a question. 30 minutes later I approach her and ask her "Why did you ask me if a human could swallow a spoonful of cinnamon?" At which point I was caught in the middle of a disagreement.
One of my people said they heard on the radio this morning that a human can not swallow a spoonful of cinnamon. They went so far as to try it on the radio show with multiple people and none of them where successful. My other employee stated it's baloney, there is no reason a human couldn't do it. Well I honestly don't know, and really don't want to try it. So I suggested each go home and give it a try and bring back the results tomorrow.
Until then, do any of you know if a human can swallow a spoonful of cinnamon?
Posted by: Contagion at
05:13 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 212 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Sure! If you mix it with enough water - or better yet, cookie dough!
Posted by: Richmond at November 27, 2007 05:30 PM (cTBnn)
2
Looked it up :p It's *hard* to swallow because it's a fine power and it's an irritant (especially to the throat), plus the saliva kinda turns it into a paste... but not impossible.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2KladqtSLM
http://my.break.com/content/view.aspx?ContentId=256563
Posted by: Shadoglare at November 27, 2007 08:34 PM (4iXDP)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
August 30, 2007
Tattoo?
Okay, right now I'm thinking about getting my upper ear pierced twice. Actually it's pretty much a set deal, I just need to go in and get it done.
But I've been going back and forth on the idea of getting a tattoo. First off I know what I want, but I just can't find it in a "design" format. It's a Norse dragon's head inside a Celtic knot work circle. The problem is that I go from yes, I want it. To no, it's stupid.
So what do you all think. Would you get a tattoo? Why or why not? And if so, what kind?
Posted by: Contagion at
04:11 PM
| Comments (10)
| Add Comment
Post contains 108 words, total size 1 kb.
1
No tattoos for me. I don't care if other people get them, I just don't want one. There is nothing I want inked into my skin that I might want to live with for 50 years (or however much time I have left to me). I tend to get tired of things and a tattoo is not something I could get rid of easily. That's just me - like I said, I have no problem with others getting them.
Posted by: Teresa at August 30, 2007 05:23 PM (rVIv9)
2
I personally wouldn't get a tattoo strictly for decorative purposes. About the only tattoo that I've thought of is a possibility is maybe a "shared" one (such as an image split into two that becomes one when placed together) with whatever woman I end up marrying.
Posted by: Shadoglare at August 30, 2007 08:15 PM (cVQZJ)
3
I am biased (3 piercings in the ear and 2 tats)
I say go for it!
Posted by: Bruce at August 30, 2007 09:41 PM (a87ev)
4
I believe that a tattoo needs to be deeply personal. Personally, I have often considered getting some sort of Masonic Square and Compasses. In your case, the design sounds very personal, the dragon's head for Ktreva, and the Celtic Knot for the connection to Scotland, right?
I believe that most tattoo parlors have someone in-house that can actually create your design, but you may need to take samples of the knot.
Posted by: Petey at August 30, 2007 09:44 PM (JhiOW)
5
Petey's right, & I know I've told you before, don't do it unless you want to see it, on your body, for the rest of your life. A tattoo has to have meaning for you, & your idea really does suit you. Besides, you *do* need something to swear by...
I recommend that you don't go to the shop I last went to -- that f@cker is a butcher -- took me 4 months to heal the half-inch gash in my forearm!
Posted by: Wes at August 30, 2007 10:57 PM (BUOAa)
6
Every tat should be deeply personal.
The fact that I consider my tat of Bill the Cat in a leather speedo hoisting a beer deeply personal speaks volumes about my psyche....
Posted by: Graumagus at August 31, 2007 06:11 AM (dl+55)
7
I have mine sketched out, just haven't had the time to get to get inked. But I say it needs to be personal.
Posted by: Oddybobo at August 31, 2007 06:50 AM (mZfwW)
8
Yeah, sure, go ahead and get the tatoo. Then when you get to be my age, with gravity pulling your chest way south and the other parts of your body sagging you'll be able to look at that tatoo and wonder what the hell it is supposed to look like.
Tatoos are great, all you have to do is die young and they'll look fine.
Posted by: Peter at August 31, 2007 11:09 AM (DMnkh)
9
I love the young women who get tattoos of hummingbirds on their breasts. At about 50, the tats turn into flamingos!
Just don't get one on your man-mories and you'll be fine. ;-)
Posted by: Wes at August 31, 2007 11:21 PM (BUOAa)
10
I say go for it.
I already have one and am looking at 2 more probably in December.
Of course it needs to have meaning for you because why would you get a tatoo otherwise.
Posted by: Quality Weenie at September 01, 2007 02:57 PM (BksWB)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
July 11, 2007
End of the Review?
ItÂ’s been slightly over a year now since IÂ’ve started doing the beer reviews. Yet, IÂ’m leaning towards discontinuing them. ItÂ’s not that I mind drinking beer every Wednesday, even if it is some god-awful crap and sharing my opinion with everyone. ItÂ’s that IÂ’m not sure anyone is even reading these reviews on here.
The main reason I started doing these reviews was because of a bad beer incident that happened to myself in April 2006, Damn you Camo Silver Ice High Gravity Lager!!!! I thought maybe if I sampled beers, my good readers and others wouldnÂ’t end up drinking a beer that wasnÂ’t fit to run farm machinery on. Sure, I like trying the different beers, but if IÂ’m only doing this for myself, then IÂ’m not going to waste your time posting them on here.
So let me know, do you get anything from these reviews or are you just skipping over them to something else?
Posted by: Contagion at
06:00 PM
| Comments (11)
| Add Comment
Post contains 167 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Personally I really like 'em. I don't comment on them because normally it's a beer I don't know anything about and thus can't really add anything, but still, I like to read what your thoughts were on the different brews.
Posted by: Shadoglare at July 11, 2007 09:43 PM (f7zjv)
2
I read them so I get ideas on what to buy the hubby. I don't comment, cause, well, I'm usually at work and trying to fly under the radar!
Posted by: oddybobo at July 12, 2007 07:29 AM (mZfwW)
3
I dont comint beekuz I cant rite, butt I reelee upresheate them.
Posted by: That 1 Guy at July 12, 2007 07:49 AM (amJz2)
4
I like them because it reminds me to drink a beer each week.
Just in case I forget.
Hey, it could happen.
Posted by: Ogre at July 12, 2007 08:49 AM (oifEm)
5
I read them, but since I don't drink beer I don't feel like I should comment. I read for the enjoyment factor. *grin*
Posted by: Teresa at July 12, 2007 09:14 AM (gsbs5)
6
I read 'em. It's the only way I know what kind of beer to buy. Without you Paradise wouldn't have any beer at all!!!!
Can you handle that kind of pressure???
Posted by: Tammi at July 12, 2007 09:50 AM (PesK3)
7
*seconds Teresa's comment*
Posted by: Jenna at July 12, 2007 10:27 AM (fd/rX)
8
Yeah, I read your Beer Reviews, it's always fun to see what strange brew you found for the week, to either torture yourself, or tolerate, or enjoy. When you hit on a good one, I find myself feeling happy for you that you gambled and won. When you find a real disgusting one, I enjoy that too, it's like the same (almost) entertainment as watching some kid eat his own scabs for a quarter. :-)
I hope you keep 'em!
Posted by: Sarah at July 12, 2007 10:45 AM (BO+Dq)
9
I enjoy the beer reviews. It's been almost 22 years since I was last able to drink, beer was my favorite.
I still miss beer.
Posted by: Peter at July 12, 2007 12:32 PM (A5s0y)
10
Keep em. I like to know what you are bringing over to football Sundays for us to finish off for you. Demolition anyone???
Posted by: Bruce at July 13, 2007 07:33 PM (tKtgB)
11
I read.
I enjoy.
I don't comment because, like Shadoglare, I'm too ignorant to add anything relevant.
However, I'm glad the reviews exist, because I'd like to do more beer experimentation, and I plan to peruse your reviews before shopping.
Also, since I pretty much know your taste in beer, I feel like I can trust your opinions.
Posted by: Harvey at July 16, 2007 09:26 AM (L7a63)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
June 20, 2007
I wonder.
If you are working from home, you are technically on the clock. That means you really should abide by company policy and rules. But I'm wondering...
Is it okay to have a beer or two with lunch?
I mean no one will know unless my manager happens to stop by the house.
Posted by: Contagion at
10:27 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 56 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Done writing the reviews? Then I give you permission.
Posted by: That 1 Guy at June 20, 2007 03:37 PM (amJz2)
2
I have been since about 2:00. Although part of me wanted to drink while writing them.
Posted by: Contagion at June 20, 2007 03:39 PM (9BGCC)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
June 12, 2007
Speed, I am speed!
I have a quick poll for everyone tonight. On my way to my “meeting” today, I was cruising at an above the posted limit rate of speed. Some of the people in the car thought I was driving way too fast. Me, I was keeping up with the flow of traffic. (I was driving down 39 and 88 heading to Naperville). At some points when there was no traffic, I set my speed at what I felt comfortable driving. Now at some points I was passing others. At other times I had cars passing me like I was standing still… and I wasn’t. This brought up an interesting conversation on the ride home. How fast is too fast?
more...
Posted by: Contagion at
06:40 PM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 162 words, total size 3 kb.
1
Where you were driving today? On 39 I keep it at 6-7 over. 88? about 10. I don't think it's "too fast" unless is +20.
Posted by: Tammi at June 12, 2007 07:21 PM (wbVY2)
2
For me it depends on where in the country I am driving. Around here 5-10 MPH over the limit. In South Dakota - I set the cruise at 83 and GO!
Posted by: Richmond at June 13, 2007 03:00 PM (e8QFP)
3
How fast is to fast?
Fast is never to fast unless the cops pull you over.
We have 70mph speed limit on our freeways here and I usually do about 80mph, don't feel comfy going over that but while doing 80mph people are passing me like I am standing still.
Posted by: Quality Weenie at June 13, 2007 03:58 PM (BksWB)
4
It depends.
On highways that are busy - I keep up with the general flow. On highways where I'm alone I try to keep it at 10 over sometimes 15. On highways where I know the cops watch frequently - I keep it between 5-10 over.
My basic premise is that I don't want the hefty ticket. For that matter I don't want a ticket at all - but I'm not driving at the speed limit just to avoid it. Heh.
Posted by: Teresa at June 14, 2007 06:03 PM (gsbs5)
5
On the highways I go about 5 over. In housing developments and heavy traffic areas, I stay with the traffic and speed limit. And on long trips on I-95... I have been known to go 10 over... Speed limit is 70 already... But while in Germany... I did enjoy the Autobahn... GRIN
Posted by: vw bug at June 15, 2007 01:03 PM (FPOeI)
6
I work on the theory that there's a hefty price jump between a ticket for 0-9 over and one for 10-19 over, and most cops won't bother issuing a 0-9 unless they're feeling pissy or they have an additional reason for pulling you over (like a busted tail light or expired tags).
Posted by: Harvey at June 18, 2007 12:41 AM (L7a63)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
June 06, 2007
What day is it?
Just out of curiosity, how many of you remembered that 63 years ago today Allied forces stormed the beaches of Normandy in the D-Day invasion?
To all the men who fought and died at that battle, here's to you!
So far everyone I've asked didn't remember.
Posted by: Contagion at
06:13 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 54 words, total size 1 kb.
1
The only reason I knew was because I've been watching the History Channel all day while "working". They are having a tribute. Man when you see the complexity of this plan and what all they had to go through....it's overwhelming.
Posted by: spurs at June 06, 2007 01:06 PM (3lsFM)
2
I did a post on it linking several round up's as well as a Mammoth research article I did on the Battle of Fox Green Beach.
Had planned on doing another one, this one on Destroyer Squadron 23 "The Little Beavers' but work interfered with my planning and researching /sigh
Maybe next year
Posted by: BloodSpite at June 06, 2007 11:23 PM (+SBBH)
Posted by: fjdk at February 26, 2009 11:39 PM (eqMrT)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
May 15, 2007
We need your input.
I need your input on a disagreement Ktreva and I had last night. We both agreed that we would pose the question to everyone and then abide by the decision. As you all know I have a fascination with Zombies. I love zombie movies, IÂ’ve studied the biology (Maybe that should be Dieology) of them, and I even have contingency plans for when (yes when, itÂ’s going to happen) the next zombie rising happens. There isnÂ’t a day that goes by that I donÂ’t think about, talk about or watch something on zombies.
Last night Ktreva and I were discussing a show on TV where there was some role playing in the bedroom. We talked about all the standards, Doctor, naughty nurse, cop and prostitute, thief and harem girl, etc. Then we started talking about unusual onesÂ… and that is when I came up with Sole survivor and Zombie Girl. Yea, IÂ’m sure with the opening paragraph you all saw that one coming. I made the suggestion she dress up, with the make up, as the sexy zombie from Land of the Dead.
I thought Ktreva was going to burst a gasket.
She likened it to necrophilia and the like and stated that in no way under the sun would she ever participate in anything like that. Our conversation went from light and joking to her seriously being mad at me. I tried to explain that it seriously was a joke; I was just trying to think up different situations. However, because IÂ’m enthralled with zombies she isnÂ’t convinced I am. Then I started thinking about it, is it so weird? Well, okay sleeping with the dead is weird, but this isnÂ’t the dead, itÂ’s undead. And actually youÂ’re not really sleeping with the dead or undead, just someone dressed up as a zombie.
What we want to know is: Is a bedroom role playing game involving zombies wrong?
Posted by: Contagion at
05:15 AM
| Comments (11)
| Add Comment
Post contains 327 words, total size 2 kb.
1
I'm gonna refrain from contributing my thoughts on "makin' it with a Zombie" or even thinkin' you are. Yeah, not gonna go there.
HOWEVER - please tell your wife, it sounds to me like she's needin' a little "time away" about now, and I got some celebrating to do. That's right Contagion. I'm kidnapping your wife again. And you can bet this whole post will come up in convesation. For your sake, you better hope it's BEFORE we start doin' shots!!!
Zombie play? OMG.....
Posted by: Tammi at May 15, 2007 08:54 AM (Bitcf)
2
There is a line between play that lets people explore some fantasies and have fun in a safe and controlled fasion, and play that starts people into areas they really shouldn't go. Where this falls, I'm not sure. What I am sure of is that I will laugh my a** off if you talk her into this, she gets into it, and chomps your head (either) while purring "braaiinnnsss" *EG*
Posted by: Laughing Wolf at May 15, 2007 09:38 AM (O/VnN)
3
Dude, when it was about shooting your .45 at them it was OK.
When it became shooting your wad in them, it crossed the line.
Stick with green leathered Green Bay Packer fetish gear already, sheesh....
Posted by: Graumagus at May 15, 2007 09:59 AM (FFj2f)
4
Or you could just tell her that you don't have necro fantasies, just ones where you shoot her in the head after sex... err.. nevermind, not helping here...
Posted by: Graumagus at May 15, 2007 10:02 AM (FFj2f)
5
Weird, yes sir
Wrong, I don't know
It is "role" playing
Posted by: Spurs at May 15, 2007 10:44 AM (3lsFM)
6
I see nothing wrong with it, it's role playing and anything goes in role playing as long as both parties are willing.
Posted by: Quality Weenie at May 15, 2007 03:06 PM (BksWB)
7
Tammie: Coward!
Wow, this is not going the way I thought it would. I'm actually seeing some support for the pro-zombie role playing camp.
Posted by: Contagion at May 15, 2007 04:22 PM (T4WRc)
8
I am *NOT* going to be your living dead girl! As Quality Weenie stated "anything goes in role playing as long as both parties are willing"
Well, I ain't willing on this one!
Posted by: KTreva at May 15, 2007 06:25 PM (T4WRc)
9
Asking a guy who loves midgets and monkeys this question.....
Just remember the Safe Word!!
Posted by: Bruce Wayne at May 16, 2007 08:25 AM (GSpXJ)
10
I think I missed something here...
What's the fuss?
Posted by: That 1 Guy at May 16, 2007 11:15 AM (amJz2)
11
Especially if it were a Catholic School girl zombie...
Posted by: That 1 Guy at May 16, 2007 07:43 PM (WQMql)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
January 10, 2007
Chili Again
Do you add any of the following, if so which?
Shredded cheese
Sour Cream
Crackers
Jalapenos
Other (Please specify)
WeÂ’ve determined that Chili should be thick, however the level of thickness varies.
Posted by: Contagion at
07:01 PM
| Comments (10)
| Add Comment
Post contains 36 words, total size 1 kb.
1
I can see topping it with crackers and cheese... I don't get the sour cream thing at all. And jalepenos would kill me - yeah I'm a wimp about hot stuff.
Posted by: Teresa at January 10, 2007 07:44 PM (gsbs5)
2
I like the cheese on mine. It adds a little extra flavor if your chili has some "Zip" to it, and it thickens it as well. It's a win win, in my book. Jalapenos or Crackers are cool on the side, but I think Sour Cream is meant for a Taco Salad, not Chili. My two cents.
Posted by: Johnny - Oh at January 10, 2007 08:54 PM (w9whA)
3
cheese. And hubby adds chopped onions. But I like it with lots of cheese.
Posted by: caltechgirl at January 10, 2007 09:34 PM (r0kgl)
4
Those are toppings for us. Mainly because we have some wimps in our family for the spicy stuff. Though I have a great thick chili recipe that can be nice and spicy. Notice I didn't say HOT. Though Habanero's can be added if you just must have hot as well as spicy. Hmmm. I think we'll have chili next week.
Posted by: vw bug at January 11, 2007 07:20 AM (OBsVv)
Posted by: Quality Weenie at January 11, 2007 07:40 AM (BksWB)
6
Cheese, crackers on the side. The hubby adds onions as well.
Posted by: oddybobo at January 11, 2007 07:51 AM (mZfwW)
7
None for me thanks. The chili should speak for itself.
Posted by: spurs at January 11, 2007 08:04 AM (3lsFM)
8
Definitely shredded cheese, a few onions.
I don't get the cracker thing at all.
Posted by: Raging Mom at January 11, 2007 11:57 AM (l+Chn)
9
Cheese, onions, and tomatoes. Sometimes served with crackers.
Posted by: Sissy at January 11, 2007 09:29 PM (y2kUf)
Posted by: BloodSpite at January 13, 2007 08:06 AM (ZTGJT)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
January 09, 2007
Making Ammo?
In my post about buying more ammo, Peter of
Shakey PeteÂ’s ShootinÂ’ Shack made the comment;
For what you spent today you could have bought a Lee turret press and a set of .38/.357 dies and a autodisc powder measure. Then you'd never have to buy .38s and .357 again. And it would only cost about thirty
bucks to add a handgun cartridge to your line up.
Factory ammo is a waste of money.
I wonÂ’t deny that factory ammo is a waste of money. ItÂ’s expensive and the cheaper brands are dirtier and/or are unreliable. There are certain brands I wonÂ’t buy because of the way it jams in my firearms and fouls them up horribly.
IÂ’ve thought about getting a reloading press and making my own ammo. The only problem I have is that I donÂ’t get to go modern shooting as much as I would like. Is it worth to buy a press to use it maybe 4-6 times a year? Even if it is the other problem is a lack of time to make it. For re-enacting I have a hard time getting all the round ball I need cast up.
So what IÂ’m asking my readers that shoot or have friends that do, is it really worth it for me to look into investing in a press? What are the pros and cons of making your own ammo? I really donÂ’t know, and am interested in finding out.
Posted by: Contagion at
07:23 PM
| Comments (7)
| Add Comment
Post contains 247 words, total size 1 kb.
1
You can get a lot of the stuff you need used on ebay. I bet you can put together a kit for $100. You need a scale, a press, and dies. I'll give you a powder measure. If you load 300 rounds a year, you'll pay for it in no time. Plus, you can consider cartridges that are uncommon or expensive, and shoot more.
I lose 1/2" off my muzzleloader groups if i weigh them, too. Makes a difference.
Posted by: og at January 09, 2007 07:43 PM (iqbdN)
2
Okay, Contagion, I've just checked out Midway's website. You can buy a three hole Lee Turret Press for $57.99, a set of carbide dies for $23.99.
A Lee autodisc powder measure is $19.99 and the powder funnel is $2.99. Spring for the more expensive RCBS hand priming tool at $26.99.
This is assuming that nothing is on sale, Midway has sales all the time.
Eventually you would want a powder and bullet scale, you might alread have one being a caster, but you can do fine without one for a while, just stay away from the real hot loads.
Lead has got real high lately so bullets are pricier than they used to be, you can still buy 500 .38/357 lead bullets for thirty bucks, plus shipping.
Once you are set up for one cartridge, a new one is much cheaper. You can buy te die set for the same $23.99 and by buying another turret for $9.99 and not have to worry about adjusting dies.
Now the hard part is time but that is easier than we think. There is no reason to sit down and load a gazillon rounds at once. I come home from shooting and resize and decap my empties.
I toss them into the GRR, the vibratory tumbler for cleaning because I shoot mostly The Holy Black, and run it 'til they're clean.
Then I toss them into ziplock bags or coffee cans and, while watching TeeVee I prime them. Back into the bag or can and then I put the charge in, seat and crimp the bullet. It only takes a few minutes to prime a hundred cases.
Then the powder, Lee die set bells the casemouth and drops the charge at the same time. Fifty cases in about seven minutes, including a look down each to see that each case has a charge and the level is all about the same. This protects me from double charges.
Then I put a bullet into each casemouth, when I run it into the die it seats and crimps, together.
Assuming I have the dies all adjusted and the powder measure set I can put the powder charge and seat and crimp the bullet for fifty rounds in about fifteen minutes. Without hurrying.
Note that I'm touting the lower priced stuff, here. You can buy the Dillon Progessive Square Deal B, set up for one cartridge for $319.95 and get a loaded rund for every pull of the lever. Of course it costs a lot more to add a new cartridge and I prefer doing my loading in stages, or maybe I'm just cheap.
Posted by: Peter at January 09, 2007 08:31 PM (RPBzx)
3
Ok...here is my take on reloading. It does take time, certainly. If you are a frequent shooter certainly worth it. However, if you would rather be shooting, but are spending time reloading...
not fun.
Also fun if you are reloading to shoot, not fun if you are one of those wierdos that keeps a reloading diary etc...
Posted by: armywifetoddlermom at January 09, 2007 08:51 PM (4c1vy)
4
A reloading diary? Is this going to be a reloading blog?
Posted by: Bou at January 09, 2007 09:34 PM (PQFHD)
5
For me reloading has always been a matter of economics. Even when I could not afford to by comercial ammo I could always reload. I have been reloading since I was 16, which was a long time ago (46+years. Ihave realoded for a whole host of cartridges, both pistol and rifle. I taught my boys to reload and I am getting ready to teach a grandson. Do it.
Posted by: DE644 at January 11, 2007 02:12 PM (/C3Pw)
6
It's worth it.
It's also one of those hobbies where you can start cheap, or spend as much as you want/can with very little trouble.
But definitely worth it.
Posted by: jimmyb at January 11, 2007 08:54 PM (WgPA3)
7
Reloading is a good hobby as well as a way to save money on factory ammo. I suggest not to buy equipment that you will outgrow soon or will not turn out quality rounds. how much shooting will you be doing? learn how to customize the rounds for your firearms and your accuracy will improve.
Posted by: greg at April 12, 2007 04:35 AM (heWaS)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Chili
Should it be thick or thin?
Please tell me which way you like best.
Posted by: Contagion at
06:25 PM
| Comments (10)
| Add Comment
Post contains 16 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Thick, thicker than refried beans even
Posted by: BloodSpite at January 09, 2007 07:22 PM (ZTGJT)
Posted by: Tammi at January 09, 2007 07:53 PM (3UQTn)
3
very very thick. Lots of chunks. Otherwise it's just tomato soup with beans and meat.
Posted by: caltechgirl at January 09, 2007 08:26 PM (r0kgl)
4
Medium thick. You want enough sauce that you must use a spoon instead of a fork. If it isn't a little runny there's nothing to carry the spices.
There needs to be enough spice to give you a warm feeling the next day.
Posted by: Peter at January 09, 2007 08:36 PM (RPBzx)
5
Must be able to eat it with a fork.
Posted by: Mrs_Who at January 09, 2007 09:12 PM (9sFe8)
6
Mid-Thick, saucy thickness!
Posted by: oddybobo at January 09, 2007 09:35 PM (Pbc4V)
7
Thick and caustic enough to require storing in pyrex lest it eat through a mere plastic bowl...
Again...
Posted by: Graumagus at January 10, 2007 07:35 AM (Rayvs)
8
Absolutely has to be thick, so thick that your oyster crackers don't absorb.
Posted by: Raging Mom at January 10, 2007 11:50 AM (l+Chn)
9
What Caltechfirl said and add just enough spice to feel warm the next day.
Posted by: DE644 at January 10, 2007 02:37 PM (/C3Pw)
10
Thick!!!!
Eat with a fork thick!!
And I want my butt to feel it the next day too!
Posted by: Quality Weenie at January 10, 2007 03:59 PM (BksWB)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
February 28, 2006
Candy lovers please help.
There is a very pressing issue I need your assistance. There is actually a degree of importance and urgency to this.
Plain Chocolate
Chocolate and Peanut Butter
Chocolate and Caramel
Which is better?
I will explain later when my issue is resolved.
Posted by: Contagion at
04:15 PM
| Comments (25)
| Add Comment
Post contains 50 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Well it really depends on the brand of candy and also the persons personal preference.
I like carmel with my chocolate but if its Godiva brand I will take it plain or with anything in it.
But there are also days I like it with PB and just plain.
I guess it depends on my mood, but if I had to choose only one I would go with Carmel and Chocolate.
Posted by: Machelle at February 28, 2006 02:59 PM (ZAyoW)
2
Chocolate and Caramel as long as the caramel is not hard/chewy.
Posted by: Carmen at February 28, 2006 03:03 PM (YgY2c)
Posted by: Oddybobo at February 28, 2006 03:14 PM (6Gm0j)
4
Chocolate and soft caramel is divine as is chocolate and PB but it depends on personal preference and what you have to make up for
Posted by: Maranda Rites at February 28, 2006 03:17 PM (5u5N6)
5
Chocolate and Peanut Butter followed by Plain Chocolate. (Caramel sucks! I've hated it ever since they added it to the Whatchamacallit.)
Posted by: Tige at February 28, 2006 03:20 PM (QgCnE)
6
Chocolate with peanut butter. Mmmmm.....
Posted by: Sarah at February 28, 2006 03:29 PM (oO5Nu)
7
I will honestly say this has nothing to do with getting me out of trouble.
Posted by: Contagion at February 28, 2006 04:25 PM (e8b4J)
8
no chocolate.
But if there must be chocolate, chocolate and caramel.
Posted by: caltechgirl at February 28, 2006 04:28 PM (/vgMZ)
9
If you think chocolate is your way out of the dog house....
you better get a truckload of all 3!!
My DH installed a revolving door on his doghouse. Makes it easier to get in and out!
Posted by: armywifetoddlermom at February 28, 2006 04:29 PM (Or8cJ)
10
I don't think you can go wrong with
any of the choices... For me though, plain chocolate... Mmmmmm...
Posted by: Richmond at February 28, 2006 05:03 PM (e8QFP)
11
well, first we need to know what kind of chocolate. If it's real chocolate then it's plain, but if your talking milk chocolate then it needs to go with peanut butter.
Posted by: tommy at February 28, 2006 05:34 PM (a+qRX)
12
chocolate and caramel fo' sho' yo'
Posted by: spurs at February 28, 2006 05:34 PM (27GT7)
13
Chocolate and caramel would be my choice, for a couple reasons:
Caramel has three states, gooey, not so gooey, and frozen. Each is unspeakably toothsome. As long as we're talking REAL caramel and not the little squares. Peanut butter has the unwelcome property of being potentialy healthy and wholesome. Of course, peanut butter AND caramel is best. Unless you can get chocolate and chocolate. Better send it all to me, for testing.
Posted by: og at February 28, 2006 05:54 PM (m52cG)
14
While all very good choices - it's gotta be chocolate and caramel. Caramel just makes everything really really good. ;-)
Posted by: Tammi at February 28, 2006 05:59 PM (lfQya)
15
If it is really good chococate (like Hoffman's or Ghiradelli's) then just plain please. If something is added, I prefer peanut butter... nice break from the sweet... but I would not turn down chocolate with caramel.
Posted by: vw bug at February 28, 2006 06:20 PM (+g7h9)
16
Well...if it's dark chocolate then it must be plain. If it has to be milk chocolate, I'd go for peanut butter over caramel.
Posted by: MathCog Idiocy at February 28, 2006 06:49 PM (TkrQP)
17
Hmmm...tough one, I say chocolate and caramel (if they are those new Hersey's kisses), otherwise the chocolate and peanut butter kisses are excellent as well!
Posted by: ktreva at February 28, 2006 07:15 PM (e8b4J)
18
Sign me up with the chocolate and PB bunch. Hell, I like to smear the stuff on chocolate covered donuts.
Posted by: Jim - PRS at March 01, 2006 02:37 AM (njBz/)
19
Chocolate and peanut butter.
Posted by: Jenna at March 01, 2006 10:16 AM (f/kUC)
20
Reese's Peanut Butter cups - very cold- with a pail of colder whole milk. All else pales in comparison.
Posted by: Shawn at March 01, 2006 11:25 AM (9vBnd)
21
Caramel, certainly.
Unless you're talking about real chocolate -- which means chocolate not made in the US with tons of wax and preservatives. If you can get the real stuff (like Milka from Germany), then plain is perfect.
Posted by: Ogre at March 01, 2006 01:52 PM (/k+l4)
22
I agree with Og - I don't eat regular stuff - mainly because all the preservatives and crap give me a headache - not to mention tasting metalic.
Give me straight up bittersweet chocolate and I'm in heaven. Caramel annoys me because it sticks to my teeth - and I don't like peanuts in anything - I only eat them plain too.
Posted by: Teresa at March 01, 2006 03:08 PM (FZwDL)
23
Chocolate fudge and microwave burrito.
Posted by: Graumagus at March 01, 2006 08:30 PM (5u5N6)
24
Milky Way candy bars - which is chocolate, caramel, AND chocolate nougat.
What I find especially appealing is that Milky Way's caramel walks the perfect center between too runny & too chewy.
However, you can never go wrong with plain chocolate.
Everything else is a taking a risk, unless you know SPECIFICALLY what texture of peanut butter or caramel the recipient prefers.
Posted by: Harvey at March 02, 2006 08:15 AM (ubhj8)
25
Our Max would say chocolate & shrimp. Yes, his favorite dip for shrimp is chocolate pudding. As for me I prefer chocolate & caramel together. Especially in brownie form. YUM YUM
Posted by: Red at March 06, 2006 01:56 PM (1JOXU)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
February 03, 2006
Dilemma
I have a dilemma that IÂ’m going to ask my contaminants to assist me in. IÂ’ve contemplated on this for the last 24 hours, and I just canÂ’t make up my mind. My head tells me one thing and this shriveled up lump in my chest tells me another. IÂ’m hoping one of you will be able to help me make an informed decision.
Yesterday a minion of mine stopped me while I was walking through the department. She says to me, “Mr. Contagion, can I ask you a question?”
Contagion: (rolls eyes) “If you must.”
Minion: “I’ve heard you own some guns, is that true.”
Contagion: (Waiting for the anti-gun rant) “Yes, I own a couple.”
Minion: “Do you think you could do me a favor?”
Contagion: (Being apprehensive) “If you ask me to kill your husband I’m going to be very upset.”
Minion: “NO, no. Not that. We live out in the country on an old farm. We rent the land out to other farmers to actually farm. We kept some of the land so we could some animals. Unfortunately, one of them has become sick and is in a lot of pain. We can barely make ends meet right now since my husband was laid off, and the vet bill for the visit cleared out our savings.”
Contagion: (Hopeful) “Please tell me it’s a Llama.”
Minion: “ Llama? No, why? It’s a bull mastiff.”
Contagion: “Never mind, it’s a long story. Okay, so what do you want from me?”
Minion: “We can’t afford to pay to have him put down. Rocky, the dog, is one of our favorites and we are awfully attached to him. We don’t own a gun and even if we did, I don’t think we could bring ourselves to shooting him.”
Contagion: (Seeing where this is going) “Okay….”
Minion: “Since I know you don’t have any problems with killing animals. I was wondering if you would mind coming out and shooting Rocky for us?”
Contagion: “Yea, I need to think on that one. It’s not like I’m just picking off Bambi’s mother at 200 yards. This is actually somewhat humanitarian. It’s not something I normally do, just shooting an animal to put it out of its misery. It’s up close and personal.”
Minion: “I understand.”
I went back to my desk and pondered on this situation. After I got home and the excitement of the baby, I sat and pondered on it. As I tried to sleep last night, I continued to ponder on it. All morning, while bathing, getting dressed, making breakfast, driving to work, sitting through meetings and passing out work, IÂ’ve been thinking of this. IÂ’m just not sure what to do.
What do you think?
.357 magnum or .30-30 rifle?
Posted by: Contagion at
12:39 PM
| Comments (12)
| Add Comment
Post contains 463 words, total size 3 kb.
1
Go with the 30-30, that way you can have enough distance between you and the dog to not get any doggy brains on you and still make an acurate shot.
Posted by: Dr. Phat Tony at February 03, 2006 11:50 AM (fk/lm)
2
Whichever one will leave the dog intact but still dead quick. They may want to bury the dog, and it would suck if the head was missing.
Just a thought.
Posted by: Sarah at February 03, 2006 12:02 PM (opsxT)
3
You're a better man than I am Charlie Brown.
I couldn't do it. I can kill rats and mice any time, but not a dog.
Posted by: caltechgirl at February 03, 2006 01:19 PM (uI/79)
4
I once chased my dog around the yard with a .30-.30 but my husband wouldn't let me shoot her . . . damn husband.
That's a nice thing you are contemplating doing for them. I'd go with the .30-.30 if you are dead accurate. The .357 if you need to get a bit closer. ;-)
Posted by: oddybobo at February 03, 2006 01:30 PM (6Gm0j)
5
.357, base of the skull.
Posted by: That 1 Guy at February 03, 2006 01:57 PM (lfQya)
6
It’s a very noble thing you're considering. One suggestion, I wouldn't shoot'em I'd recommend a Framing or Engineer's hammer and the same location as T1G said.
Just as quick and a lot less messy. It sounds callous, but it really is a less stressful if there aren't gapping holes in fluffy when the family says good bye.
Just don't look in his eyes, 'cause well that just sucks.
Posted by: phin at February 03, 2006 02:16 PM (Xvpen)
7
.357 at the base of the scull. I do not envy you!
Posted by: DE644 at February 03, 2006 02:20 PM (/C3Pw)
8
.22 at the base of the skull, or go with the .357 in the same place.
Posted by: Laughing Wolf at February 03, 2006 06:55 PM (5cMH5)
9
I'm so horrified I cannot quit laughing! Holy shit!
Posted by: Bou at February 03, 2006 10:06 PM (iHxT3)
Posted by: Graumagus at February 04, 2006 03:25 AM (05CfS)
11
I've always heard that you can inject a syringe full of air into an artery and when that sucker hits the heart, you're done fer, so that might be a slightly cleaner option.
Although if messiness doesn't matter, I kinda like Grau's mortar idea...
Posted by: LadyGunn at February 04, 2006 04:27 AM (9K1q4)
12
Word got out somehow and I've gotten this request about 6 times over the last couple of years myself. Some say it's harsh but I personally use a 30-30 to the forehead. Why? I don't know, I guess I've never considered the base of the skull. I'll have to try that next time.
Posted by: Tige at February 04, 2006 11:37 AM (QgCnE)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
January 30, 2006
What was I doing?
Have you ever been so pre-occupied with something you canÂ’t think about anything else? What about if that something isnÂ’t very important or even urgent?
ThatÂ’s me today. My brain is so wrapped around re-enacting I cannot think clearly. All day IÂ’ve been thinking of up coming trade shows and the schedule of events for this year. IÂ’m also pre-occupied with all the small details, nothing big. Stuff like for the first time in 7 years changing my facial hair for my character, getting a different style of hat, figuring out what the cheapest/smelliest whisky I can find is to pass off as rot gut IÂ’m distilling. The thing is that my normal re-enacting season doesnÂ’t even start until the last weekend in April, and my first pre-season Trade Show February 25 and 26. IÂ’d say this is part of the rondyflu, but I donÂ’t think it is. There is no urge to be re-enacting, I'm just planing on re-enacting.
IÂ’m just curious if IÂ’m the only one that gets this way or is this something common with other people. Well, probably a different subject, but you know what I mean.
Posted by: Contagion at
12:39 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 199 words, total size 1 kb.
1
I think it is a common affliction, though i don't recommend it while driving
Posted by: oddybobo at January 30, 2006 01:00 PM (6Gm0j)
2
Keep me posted on the re-enacting gig. I think that is actually something I could get Old Sarge out to.
Posted by: Raging Mom at January 30, 2006 02:54 PM (L+bvJ)
3
You ain't the only one... there are others. I think.
Posted by: That 1 Guy at January 30, 2006 03:16 PM (lfQya)
4
All the time. ALL the time.
Posted by: Ogre at January 31, 2006 08:34 AM (/k+l4)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
December 12, 2005
Theological?
I had a brief discussion with a minion of mine today that led to an interesting question. Since we were unable to come to a consensus with everyone we asked, I decided to share it with you to see if you might share your opinion.
With all the medical and scientific knowledge that we have today, we know that certain things are unhealthy/bad for us. Such things as smoking, excessive drinking and over-eating we know will cause health complications that could lead to death.
Since we know that, if a person dies from an illness that was brought on or a direct result of smoking, drinking or over-eating, did that person commit a form of suicide? And if so would they be denied to the right to go to heaven?
Posted by: Contagion at
03:43 PM
| Comments (17)
| Add Comment
Post contains 132 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Wow, first it really depends on what faith you buy into. Say, Catholicism, if you were to repent, ask for forgivenance, complete some sort of pennance, and not repeat the offense that got you in the predicament if the first place; Heaven is still obtainable.
Posted by: Dr. Phat Tony at December 12, 2005 02:55 PM (fk/lm)
2
Nope - not until they can prove conclusively and 100% that the eating, drinking, or smoking would always kill you...
Think of it this way - a person severely allergic to peanuts... you know the allergy that kills several children and some adults each year... now if they know they have this allergy and they then go home, open a jar of peanuts and proceed to eat - THAT could be considered suicide.
BUT with most eating, drinking, and yes even smoking... the effects generally take years to make themselves known AND not everyone dies from indulging in these activities... not even a majority of people might be said to die from these activities. Plus there is the fact that we don't know enough about genetics to understand why one person who does everything wrong will live to be 100 and another does everything right and dies of cancer at age 25...
Before there is a correlation with suicide - the activity MUST lead to death - and that fairly quickly. Otherwise, like speeding a bit in a car - it might be risky behavior, but not expected to lead to death. Therefore not suicide.
Posted by: Teresa at December 12, 2005 03:12 PM (FZwDL)
3
I have to disagree with Dr Tony, Catholics will always get into heaven.
All you have to do is confess your sins on your death bed and get forgiveness and your a shoe in for heaven.
Plus overeating, smoking and drinking isn't one of the 7 deadly sins and your not breaking any commandments with those so you have nothing to worry about.
Posted by: Machelle at December 12, 2005 03:23 PM (ZAyoW)
4
Actually Gluttony (over eating) is a deadly sin.
Posted by: Dr. Phat Tony at December 12, 2005 03:27 PM (fk/lm)
5
I am so not getting into heaven . . .
Posted by: oddybobo at December 12, 2005 03:50 PM (6Gm0j)
6
"could lead to death". Everything could lead to death, including accidentally stabbing ones self in the eye with a communion wafer and dying from a horrable gruesome eye infection.
One really has to watch it with the "could lead to death" stuff. :-)
Posted by: Sarah at December 12, 2005 04:08 PM (DnDmi)
7
hell in a handbasket all the way.....
Posted by: armywifetoddlermom at December 12, 2005 08:18 PM (2PEda)
8
Machelle: ANYone who asks forgiveness, even on a deathbed, and is sincere, is a shoe in, not just us Catholics. (Ain't Grace a wonderful thing?)
Gluttony (an over-indulgence in anything, not just food) IS one of the 7 deadly sins, but not because it can kill you; constantly over-indulging in ANYTHING, is considered a "deadly sin", for it's something we put between us and God. It's a death of the spirit, not the body, that concerns God most.
That being said, I don't see how drinking, smoking, or over eating can be forms of suicide, UNLESS you're eating, drinking, or smoking something that you know FOR A FACT will kill you immediately.
Just my $.02 worth.
Posted by: Wes at December 12, 2005 08:55 PM (XKQLY)
9
I'm with the majority here -- nope. Anything COULD lead to death.
Posted by: Ogre at December 13, 2005 06:22 AM (/k+l4)
10
Eat, Drink & Be Merry (and watch football)! Worry about that other shit later. BTW- I think I'll get the job of Bus Driver on my trip to Hell!
Posted by: Shawn at December 13, 2005 09:08 AM (9vBnd)
11
"Life is an inevitably fatal sexually-transmitted disease."
Everybody dies. As I see it, the sin in suicide isn't in dying, it's in refusing to use what life you have to help fulfill God's Will. Making poor choices and
possibly messing up your future isn't the same as deliberately choosing to deny God's plan for your future by making sure you have no future at all.
And yet it's still sin. But sin can be forgiven. And I'm not qualified to say who will be denied Heaven by God - that's His job.
Posted by: Jenna at December 13, 2005 11:06 AM (f/kUC)
12
What's this heaven that you speak of??? Will there be booze, food and smokes...I sure hope so...
Posted by: spurs at December 13, 2005 11:30 AM (tdOZ4)
13
Okay, can't say anything about overeating... yet..., but as far as drinking and smoking:
Drinking is good, and good for you. We see all the time that dark beer is healthy, or wine has benefits. Is it suicide by health kick?
And smoking, while it can damage your life, also is responsible for many people being alive. Most smokers I know will kill folks if they can't get their smoky treat. Surely, they'll be forgiven for slowly killing themselves, in order that others won't suffer a violent death.
That's the best I can do...
Posted by: That 1 Guy at December 13, 2005 12:47 PM (4Cmvi)
14
Shawn: I call shotgun!
Posted by: Wes at December 13, 2005 03:02 PM (XKQLY)
15
Hmmm... I'm thinking suicide would probably be defined as a deliberate attempt to take one's own life - and bad habits, although we know they're not good for us, aren't really deliberate suicide attempts.
Driving 55 in a 45 zone also increases my chances of death... I don't think that counts as a ticket to hell tho...
Posted by: Shadoglare at December 14, 2005 07:47 PM (/T7Ab)
16
I consider smoking and drinking as a "repentable sin".
..recalling the incident when the Pharasees were making a mockery of the _temple of Jeruselem_ by deeds of evil.....
later in the Bible...
Jesus tells us "the body is the temple of God and life is his gift to us"....
aren't we making a mockery to the 'temple of god' (viz) our body by destroying it part by part by smoking drinking......
[[[Many say that drinking is not a sin and that depends on their conscience. They give the example
that people drink in the cooler regions to keep them warm arent they sinning to survive?]]]
Drinking creates heat in the body which is sometimes necessary for survival. We should leave it to our conscience to decide whether we should drink or not.....
but at the thought of conscience, we should remember that every human has two conscience' , bad and good. The good c and bad c always contradict each other. and many a times the bad wins......
.... but we can strengthen our conscience, and the
best way to do that is by ceasless PRAYER......
.. in prayer we should make it a point to ask the holy spirit to strengthen our Good c and to give us the Gift of wisdom, which will help us to discern between good and Evil.
Robert D'Almeida(Jesus youth-India)
rbrtcda@yahoo.co.in
Posted by: Robert at January 06, 2006 10:20 PM (EPnvw)
17
"[[[Many say that drinking is not a sin and that depends on their conscience. They give the example
that people drink in the cooler regions to keep them warm arent they sinning to survive?]]]
Drinking creates heat in the body which is sometimes necessary for survival. We should leave it to our conscience to decide whether we should drink or not....."
Unfortunately that is not accurate. Drinking gives a false sense of warmth. It actually thins the blood and makes on more succeptable to hypothermia. So no, they are not sinning to survive.
As for the original question. After doing more research on the subject, the key to suicide is intent, not the result. If a person is over-eating, drinking or smoking, even though and contrary to some opinions, they know it will lead to health problems and ultimately death, unless they are doing said activities with the intent to cause their own death it is not suicide.
Posted by: Contagion at January 06, 2006 10:33 PM (e8b4J)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
November 12, 2005
Blog-o-shopping.
IÂ’ve decided to dump some money back into the blogosphere. ItÂ’s been good to me and I thought I should return the favor. After some thinking, I decided that I was going to do this by purchasing some blogwear. What do I mean by blogwear? IÂ’m talking about shirts that people use to either promote their blog, support an organization, or just try to make some money. The problem is that there are only a handful of blogs that actually have t-shirts for their blogÂ… in which I am aware.
I know that Blackfive has his shirt.
Harvey has a store of his own. (Does anyone else find it amusing that the name of his shop, Bad Example Goodie Shop, makes the acronym BEGS?)
Dr. Phat Tony also has a little shop set up.
But those are the only ones that I A) know of, 2) Read 4) like.
What am I going to do with all these shirts? Well I can be blog fashionable at blogmeets. Maybe I can promote blogging while shopping in local stores. Mostly IÂ’ll probably wear them to exercise in so I donÂ’t funk up my good shirts. Hey, what do you care? After I paid for it, itÂ’s mine and I could use it to dust my furniture! You get the money either way.
If any of you out there have a little “swag” shop set up, and I missed it on your side bar, let me know.
Posted by: Contagion at
12:18 PM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 246 words, total size 2 kb.
1
I wear my Blackfive shirt all the time. Why, I took it camping with me! People ask what it is and I take time to explain about supporting our troops. All goodness in the end.
Posted by: Bou at November 14, 2005 07:10 AM (5JHEt)
2
Hey thanks for pimpin' my swag. I'll be adding you to the blogroll sometime today, just have to get a second to do it.
Posted by: Dr. Phat Tony at November 14, 2005 09:47 AM (fk/lm)
3
Stock up on teddy bears for your minions :-)
Posted by: Harvey at November 15, 2005 03:54 PM (ubhj8)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
July 26, 2005
To read or not to read.
I just can’t do it anymore, I can’t. After trying for 5 months now, I’m starting to go insane! My brain is starting to slide away from me and I feel that my work and family are starting to pay the price. In a last desperation attempt, I am turning to you for help. Some of you might be asking, “Why would I turn to you for help?” Well I’m glad you asked! The answer is simple; all of you are uniquely qualified to be able to provide a solution to my conundrum. There is one trait that all of share! It is upon that trait that I call upon for an answer to this enigma. By now, I’m sure you want me to explain myself.
You are all Bloggers. You read and/or have your own blogs. That is the single trait that we all share, the trait that brings us all together. Some of you may not have your own blog yet, itÂ’s just a matter of time. You, in my book, are still a blogger. If you spend time at other peopleÂ’s blogs reading, what they write and maybe even working up the nerve actually to leave a comment or two, then to me you are a blogger. You might not have taken the final step in your conversion to the fold, but the temptation is there. Go ahead and call me wrong, I wonÂ’t argue with you. Better yet, why not start a blog and post why IÂ’m wrong? There is nothing wrong with being a blogger. No calumny intended.
Finally, that brings us to my problem. There are so many blogs I enjoy reading, I just cannot find the time to sit down and do it. Especially with the added responsibilities of my new position, I just do not have the time to read everyone daily. If I keep trying to do that, I will lose my job, my wife and my family. IÂ’ve taken to skimming posts. Not only do I hate doing this, but also I feel I am robbing the individual that wrote it. While I get the general gist of the post, I am missing out on the quality and flavor of their words.
Right now, I feel I only have a couple of options. The first is to give up the daily reading of some blogs, and once a week read only the topics that seem like they might interest me. The other option is to eliminate blogs from my daily read and only read them when time presents itself. If I choose this route, how would I go about selecting which blogs to read or not read? Most of the blogs I read are either friends, people I find interesting or people with whom I feel I could be friends with if they lived closer. For me to quit reading any one of your blogs is not something I relish.
I enjoy my quality time getting to know you. Reading your posts is what helps to keep me from going insane. Making this decision, for me at least, would be like deciding which one of my children I would save if I could only save one from a burning building. That is why I must turn to you my gentle and kind readers, my online friends and family for assistance. One of you may have a solution that I have over looked. There is even a chance that one of you is in the same position I am in and has devised way to cope with this issue. You have yet to set me upon a path of execration and it is that knowledge with which I have faith in you.
How do you find the time to do it?
Posted by: Contagion at
01:01 PM
| Comments (13)
| Add Comment
Post contains 642 words, total size 3 kb.
1
You don't have to read my blog, I never say anything important anyway.
I read the family and a select few others. Sometimes every day or so, that seems to help. Then there are days I go crazy and read everyone that I like. I like those days. Ahh, I am so going to lose my job.
Posted by: Oddybobo at July 26, 2005 01:31 PM (6Gm0j)
2
I genrally read the people I know will update daily on a daily basis, everyone else I hit every two or three days and read through everything they've posted since my last visit.
The sites I absolutely do not miss daily are the ones I read for news and stuff (Like Michelle Malkin).
Posted by: Graumagus at July 26, 2005 03:51 PM (mrXMt)
3
Hey would you mind summarizing or bullet-pointing this post? It was awful long and I didn't really have time to read it...
Posted by: S at July 26, 2005 06:56 PM (LC9a6)
4
I read the family daily. That's a given.
Others, are every few days or once a week.
I have a newsreader that I skim to make sure I'm not missing anything major out there like a birthday, birth, or anything like that.
Posted by: Sissy at July 26, 2005 08:11 PM (uXS+O)
5
Grau, I tried something like that. What I discovered was I would not read a blog for 2-3 days saving time, but then I would spend 2-3 times as long reading that blog on a different day. It all balanced out.
S. No, now go get back on the phones!
Sissy, I don't even read the entire family everday. I don't have time for that.
Posted by: Contagion at July 27, 2005 07:04 AM (Q5WxB)
6
NewsReader. Not everyone posts every day. And it also gives you a 'highlight' of the posts as you browse through them. Some I read entirely, a lot I don't. It has cut my time down considerably. I'm not looking through my
Posted by: vw bug at July 27, 2005 07:40 AM (dkZJv)
7
Had to run... not looking through every blog on my blogroll...
Posted by: VW Bug at July 27, 2005 11:08 AM (dkZJv)
8
I've heard RSS feed-readers do save time.
Me, I'm having the same problem. But I find that if I only make the rounds every other day, the trip through my blogroll still takes about the same amount of time.
Posted by: Harvey at July 27, 2005 12:50 PM (ubhj8)
9
I certainly don't read all of the ones I want to every day. Like Sissys, I try to read certain Core blogs every day - starting with the Castle Denizens, and then on to the Frizzen Kin and so on.
But I have to skim most of them to save time. Even RSS feeds only help somewhat - since some of my favs don't have it available.
Posted by: Barb at July 27, 2005 03:36 PM (u8Zgq)
10
I'm dyin' too Contagion. Since the move and a real 8-5 job I don't even have time to hit all the family. Comment? Yeah, right. It's making me crazy and it's gonna get worse. I'm going to have to do the majority of my blogging at night now as the mornings are about to get complicated.
I don't have an answer but I'll keep checking back in hopes that someone can help us!!!
Posted by: Tammi at July 27, 2005 06:32 PM (R+YM1)
11
Just read what you can when you can. It doesn't mean you still don't love us if you don't read everything daily. You don't call, you don't write... but deep down... I know that you probably still wouldn't even if you had the time. :-)
Posted by: virtue at July 28, 2005 12:04 AM (qcsNc)
12
p.s. I'm still a rookie though, so maybe you should feel like a horrible blogfriend if you don't read everything everyday... In fact, yes, I'm sure that's much more reasonable.
Posted by: virtue at July 28, 2005 12:07 AM (qcsNc)
13
RSS reader. Hands down. Not only do some people post rarely, but you can also look at the titles of people' posts and excerpts and decide if somethings are worth reading or not...
Posted by: caltechgirl at July 28, 2005 01:46 AM (uShTW)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
128kb generated in CPU 0.0364, elapsed 0.0867 seconds.
78 queries taking 0.0581 seconds, 323 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
