I found an age where my body could no longer process alcohol. I was lucky it came to this because I feel certain I've driven home UI more times in my life that most 'free thinkers' here!
On Nov 3, 8:38 am, CrossBow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ha ha, so did I! then I felt really old the next day:) hope all is well > today! Wanda's Palin impersonation was absolutely awesome! > > > > On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 10:35 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > *Sorry, I didn't remember tequila being any different than whisky but it > > knocked me out! I had a little more than you and I went to the car for > > something and conked out in the seat. It was way past my bed time, that was > > part of it but when we got to the motel my head was spinning. Felt like a > > stupid youngster again!* > > ** > > ** > > *Jr.* > > ** > > > *xactly!* > > > dude, you nearly killed me with the tequila! my brain felt like a > > centrifuge when I was leaving and my eyes saw two or more roads on the way > > home! But, I was up at 8am taking care of the house:) Just glad my pancreas > > and kidneys are functioning! > > > On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 10:05 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> *Sounds pretty "Thorny" to me.* > >> ** > >> *J.* > > >> BBDD, Several freethinker groups have been exposed to bigotry in the past > >> and some of us are very sensitive to the possibility of it. This smells > >> like a trap to some of us and when you have been on this site longer you > >> will realize that. Maybe all knowledge is not worth having? at what price? > > >> On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 9:44 AM, BBDD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >>> What is with the choice? It is strange to encounter such bigotries in > >>> a group supposedly dedicated to free thought. To a bigot it means one > >>> thing. To a friend I call out, "MY NIGGAH!", to it means quite > >>> another. The site is so named to test those who PRETEND to be free > >>> thinkers. Niggerwise is that highest of wisdoms; the wisdom won > >>> through oppression. It is best you not click on it. You no doubt are > >>> more comfortable in the most narrow view affordable in this day and > >>> age. Knowledge by any name never hurt a truly free mind. > > >>>http://niggerwise.com > > >>> On Nov 3, 7:11 am, "Liz Purkrabek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> > What's with the below title? Seems a strange choice for a web address > >>> name. > >>> > I would have a hard time posting something like that unless I were > >>> > illustrating some point. What gives? > > >>> > Liz > > >>> >http://niggerwise.com/ > > >>> > -----Original Message----- > >>> > From: [email protected] > > >>> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of BBDD > >>> > Sent: Monday, November 03, 2008 4:57 AM > >>> > To: Memphis Freethought Alliance > >>> > Subject: Re: Hidden Cameras on Private Property > > >>> > Actually, no you do not. Who ever advised you that was the case is > >>> > entirely incorrect. It is not the case with ordinary photography > >>> > unless sold as a professional shot. You can do with it whatever you > >>> > wish... when the money rolls in the issue arises. Not until. Then the > >>> > right to the model is only to some reasonable portion of that profit. > >>> > Even that is usually superseded by the publics right to know. If you > >>> > have fame, you lose the right and become fare game ~ paparazzi creed. > > >>> > More especially, it most certainly is not the case with any "crafted" > >>> > painting. Then, even after profit there is no such requirement under > >>> > law. > > >>> >http://niggerwise.com > > >>> > On Oct 31, 10:51 am, CrossBow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> > > When I do portraits, whether paint or photo, I have to get a model > >>> > release, > >>> > > NO matter where, when, or who. Because of the child pornography > >>> problem, > >>> > > there may be big trouble with anything child related IF the parent > >>> wants > >>> > to > >>> > > make it an issue.... > > >>> > > On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 11:42 AM, Jason (Memphis) > >>> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >>> > > > wrote: > > >>> > > > If a fundamentalist Christian recorded on video/audio statements at > >>> > > > one of our freethought meetings without our consent and then sent > >>> > > > those videos to various employers of MFA members who had known > >>> > > > Christian fundamentalist bosses, would that be a legal, ethical > >>> issue > >>> > > > or both? Would the fundamentalist be breaking the law by recording > >>> > > > someone on video without their consent? What if minors at our > >>> meeting > >>> > > > were also filmed?- Hide quoted text - > > >>> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > >>> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Memphis Freethought Alliance" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/memphisfreethoughtalliance?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
