anonemouse

That's how I felt when I had to get an upper GI done. The doctor and tech kept telling me to just gulp it, but I was having trouble getting the little sips I was taking down. I was having to fight my gag reflex with every sip. I know without a doubt that if I had tried to gulp, it would have ALL come up. I was nearly crying by the end of it.

I'd rather have a pelvic exam with a cold speculum than upper GI things with barium. When I had mine, it was all I could do not to puke on them. I kept trying to keep the fizzy stuff down, but every time I'd try to swallow the barium, I'd gag, which them made me burp. The doctor wasn't too happy with me because I couldn't take gulps of the barium (it was all I could do to sip!) and I kept burping, but I didn't care. I was just happy that I didn't throw up all over their nice machine.

There's plenty of sparkle around the neckline, so I wouldn't bother with a necklace. A couple of pretty bracelets and a nice pair of earrings should do the trick nicely.

I slept until 1 PM today then had a nap from 7:30 - 10:00, and I'm still tired! To top it all off, I feel sort of icky and have a sinus headache. I've been trying to get a paper done that's due this coming Wednesday, but I have no energy.:faint:

How about a trip to somewhere in Europe? There are packages you can get, where you can travel through several countries and see the sights. It might be a little expensive, but it would be worth it, IMO.

Excuse me? You're going a little far, don't you think, implying that any of us are pro-pedophilia? Talk about petty and argumentative!

It wasn't the FAQ (frequently asked questions) of this site, it was the FAQ of the site that was listed. I looked long enough to know that it was about pedophilia.

This thread being deleted won't help them. It has an anti-Christian slant because the website that the thread is talking about is for Christian pedophiles. Of course there is going to be discussion about the hypocrisy of it. It would be different if the thread was promoting the practice. It isn't, though. If this thread is removed, what happens the next time someone wants to discuss drug use, or something else illegal, even if no one on the thread is promoting it or supporting it?

Oh, I can understand not knowing what it was. I was like 99% sure, but I had to go check out the FAQ section of that site just to make sure. I didn't want to assume that it was about pedophilia without being certain. Admittedly, Mark could have elaborated a little in the starting post. But I was also the first person to post in the thread, so there weren't any other clues beyond the title. By now, though, if people fail to read the thread before clicking on the link, that's their fault.

I was thinking the same thing, Sunta. It's more than highly offensive to me to equate homosexuality or unwed pregnancy to pedophilia.

I don't think it does. Remember, a wedding is about the bride, not the guests. I would go for attractive but understated. I think a pretty gold neckace and earrings would do well, as long as they are not over the top.

Unless you know for a fact that these folks know the difference between a False Morel and an edible one, be very careful. The two look almost identical, and people have died from eating wild mushrooms that they thought were edible.

You know, I really find all the fuss over this thread quite amusing. Heck, people even started a whole other thread just to bitch! Hasn't it occured to any of them that the more they fuss, the more attention they bring to this thread? Common sense says that if you want a thread to die, you stop posting to it, and you stop posting to a thread complaining about the first one. The more you bump a thread to the top, and the more you fuss about a certain thread, the more people are curious and interested. The end result? The thread that you want to die goes on. On the other hand, if you ignore said thread, eventually other people will too (especially if there isn't any controversy).

I'm not offended by the post, so why do I need reasoning to bump it to the top? I was just wondering about the reasoning behind why people (I wasn't really referring to just you, I'd noticed several people doing it) post to threads that they find offensive. I thought it was fairly obvious that the more posts a thread gets and the more often it gets bumped to the top of the list, the more attention it gets. If I ever want a thread to die, I ignore it and hope everyone else does the same. I certainly don't post in it and bring more attention to it. I don't know about anyone else, but I found the title of the thread to be quite informative. What did you think "boylove" meant?

I was wondering about this. What's the thought behind posting to a thread (essentially bringing more attention to it by bumping it up), just to ask that people ignore it? Wouldn't not posting to the thread and being one less person to bump it to the top essentially work better than bringing attention to it? Eventually, as people stop posting to a thread, the thread is ignored. The more often a thread is bumped to the top, the more attention it gets.

Currently acceptable or currently acknowledged? Something being talked about and acknowledged in today's world doesn't mean that it is accepted. The exception to this, of course, are those things that don't hurt anyone. Jim being gay doesn't hurt anyone. Jill not being a virgin on her wedding night doesn't hurt anyone. LuAnn having a baby 6 months after her wedding night doesn't hurt anyone. Those things are acceptable because they harm no one. Pedophilia may be talked about and the occurance of it may be acknowledged, but it will never be accepted, simply because of the fact that it is, by definition, rape.

I agree, Lisah25. Things really haven't changed very much. Things may be more open today, but they still happened 30 or 40 years ago. That doesn't necessarily mean that they are more acceptable, just that we're more honest. Of course, certain things are more acceptable, simply because we have come to the realization that it really doesn't matter whether Jane had sex before she was married or if Jim is gay or if LuAnn had a child six months after she got married. It doesn't make them immoral or bad people. The fact remains, though, that there is a difference between things like that and having sex with a child. Pedophilia will NEVER be acceptable in our society.

That is just so typical. I think you are a very bright lady mousecrazy and I agree with a good portion of what you say. But censorship is not the answer. How can the moderators be in a position of deciding which content is unacceptable? The fact is, so much of what has been said on various threads here is highly offensive to me. So, should those threads be removed? If you don't like this thread, don't read it. This is the rants and raves section. If you don't like it, don't read it. You conservative religious folks simply do not get to dictate to others what they can read, or, more significantly, how they live. This precise confrontation is the exact reason I posted this thread. Thank you for helping. And by the way, I want to reiterate, I have nothing personal against you at all and, indeed, even find myself agreeing with you from time to time. I agree with this. The only people here who have the right to determine what the rest of us can or can't read are the moderators. Like Alexandra said, anyone here has the right to complain, but the final decision lies with them. The thread may offend your sensibilities, but if we deleted or locked all threads that anyone found offensive, there wouldn't be any threads in RnR. I am personally highly offended by several of the threads and posts here in RnR, but you haven't seen me asking the moderators to delete those threads, have you? The fact is, it is a parent's responsibility to keep their kids out of certain websites and away from certain threads here, if they wish. If you don't want your kids seeing it, don't let them. It's that simple. You have no right, however, to determine what WE can look at. We aren't your kids.

Especially when you have views that aren't exactly popular with some people. That's why I got attacked, anyway, and had my feelings hurt enough that I lashed out. Several people apparently decided to punish me for my political views and were hurting my "rep-power".

I think I will start doing that this summer. I have several recipes that I just do by memory, but every so often, I'll forget and have to think if I used two eggs or four. And of course, by that time, I've thrown out the original recipe.

We've got a few of those charity cookbooks (you know, the ones made by churches, Rotary, or the radiology department of the local hospital) laying around somewhere. I never use them because I am never sure about what a lot of the ingredients are. I've had to ask my mom what oleo was, for example. I'll stick with BC and the old Southern Living yearly cookbooks. I found the BEST ham, celery, onion, an brown sugar stuffed acorn squash recipe in one of those. I just can't remember which year it was, damn it!

Those are CUTE! If I didn't hate kids so much, I'd have one just to buy baby clothes. (just joking, so don't kill me, anyone)

If you are into wildlife or anything like that, the Everglades are great around that time of year. It's not as hot or as buggy as it is in the wet season. There are lots of trails and little things to do. Of course, Yellowstone would be good, too, but cold. If you are more the "be lazy on a beach" type, a trip to the Bahamas or Mexico would be good.

Jack, I think I am going to take a page from BJean's book (from another thread). Feel free to respond to any of my posts, but I won't be seeing them.

And the customers don't have to order Rocky Mountain Oysters if they don't want to. The restaurant can still serve them to the customers that do.