Aye, the girl across the street is on vaca or something. :) The Queen mum? I guess so, overactive imagination aside. :)
Dana wrote: > tsk. I submit that there are indeed cases where the sight of a pearl > necklace would not stir your obviously overactive imagination :) Is > that girl across the street not home today or something? LOL. > Seriously, a pearl necklace on the Queen Mother would be just that, > right? > > Dana > > On 6/28/05, Ray Champagne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>Unless it's a Pearl necklace. :) >> >>Dana wrote: >> >>>true... and children are subject to all sort of limitations as to the >>>clothes *they* can wear to school. While I think that some >>>restrictions are necessary (see-through blouses and gang colors come >>>to mind) a number of schools I have dealt with had some really silly >>>restrictions. Pink frilly dresses were not ok at age five because red >>>is a gang color? Come on :) The boy can't dye his hair green? Why not? >>> >>>Still, to paraphrase Freud, sometimes a necklace is only a necklace. >>> >>>Dana >>> >>>On 6/28/05, S. Isaac Dealey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> >>>>>One case comes to my mind. A public school teacher wore a >>>>>gold cross around her neck. Just a little necklace. >>>> >>>>>A child complained that it was offensive (we won't discuss >>>>>the silliness of this assertion). The ACLU came swooping >>>>>in on the side of the CHILD. This really bothered me, as >>>>>I see the teacher's right to wear a small, personal >>>>>sign of her faith, as an important right. >>>> >>>>>If she was using the cross to preach her religion to the >>>>>class, or was wearing an inappropriate religious message >>>>>of some ilk, I might understand....but this just seemed >>>>>stupid to me. >>>> >>>>Unless all religious messages are inappropriate then there's no such >>>>thing as an inappropriate religious message. In a private school, I >>>>would be in favor of the teacher, since the parents have some choice >>>>in determining where their chidren attend... In a public school, just >>>>as with cops, I believe they need to take off the religious symbols >>>>while they're on the job. Jobs tell people to take out tongue, lip, >>>>nose and eyebrow rings all the time, which is trivial, so I don't >>>>think it's beyond the pale to ask a public servant to act as though >>>>they're serving the public and not just those members of the public >>>>who happen to agree with their particular religious inclinations. >>>> >>>> >>>>s. isaac dealey 954.522.6080 >>>>new epoch : isn't it time for a change? >>>> >>>>add features without fixtures with >>>>the onTap open source framework >>>> >>>>http://www.fusiontap.com >>>>http://coldfusion.sys-con.com/author/4806Dealey.htm >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support efficiency by 100% http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:162264 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
