Galen

I use and really like: AdAware 6.0 to search for and clean out spyware. I use SpamPal to pre-sreen my mail, McAfee Virus Scan to monitor my system for viruses and scan my network, PopUp Stopper to control popups, Speakonia so I can listen to my e-mail [as well as listen to things I write, to check grammer], Word / Outlook for work, Weather Bug to monitor local weather, Tag Master to strip ugly tags from my music, Quick Verse 8 to do research, WallPaper Changer to display all my photos, EasyClean, RegClean, TweakUI to clean and arrange my system.

Keep in mind some of them, at least the moderator from there has been here on GS for some time now. :-)

dmiller: "...Ted Patrick was the *famous* deprogrammer who was hired by concerned families to get their loved ones out of cults." There were many of those freaks, not just one. Remember our fight on 'Conservatorship' Laws? Was that 1980? It took lots of guys in many states for there to be enough of an anti-cult movement to get those laws on the ballet in so many states. One member of one of my twigs was captured and held by a De-Programmer for 3 days, in 1985. :-)

Hammeroni: There is only two kinds of vessels on that ocean my friend. There are Submarines and there are targets. While in civilian attire I commonly wear T-shirts with that slogan and I have for many years. :-) During WWII over 90% of all sunken tonnage was sunk by the 'Silent Service’, which at the time accounted for less than 1% of the Navy. In the most recent one hundred years ‘boats’ have done more for maintaining open lanes of sea-going traffic and commerce than anyone’s surface targets.

Todays newspaper has an article blaming 'outdated' charts. The "National Geo-Spactial-Intelligence Agency" said that older 'NAVOCEANO' charts did not show any obstacle in the area where the USS San Fransisco was working. Apparantly their new-whizz-bang charts do show stuff. We commonly did 'find' things that where not on the charts, mountains and what-not. Unfortunately because of the secrecy of the community, where we go, and what we do; much of that information has not been traditionally shared with the map makers. Many areas where we noramally operate, we find things and share them among the sub-community, but it stays there, and is not used to update the surface-community's charts. They are kind of left on their own to map things. On the other hand, what does a surface ship need with detailed charts showing sea mounts. If your keel draft is 75 feet, then what lays at 400+ feet is beyond your area of concern. Super-tankers with drafts down to 150 feet are more concerned, but again their area of concern kind of stops at 150 feet. I have been present to chart numerous sea mounts that were in areas where we operated repeatedly. They move. They grow. They change. If we are tracking our own position by watching the contours of the ocean bottom beneath us, and that bottom contour changes, we notice. Ideally these changes are rarely close enough to us that us bump into them. But not always. Most unique 'features' that we use to navigate by, have been used by many subs. We annotate their global movement, so that each time we pass over one we can update it's position and thus update our own position as we pass by. Anytime a 'feature' is noted as changing it's movement patterns in any way, we stop using it and notify the rest of the sub fleet to stop using that 'feature' as well. It is just un-fortunate when anyone bumps into one.

The military really pushes for servicemembers to have SGLI, which is a life insurance policy paid from your salary each month. It is not a very competative policy, and everyone is automatically signed up for a $100,000 policy while in bootcamp. I have assisted many single sailors to cancel their SGLI policy, as being single what do they need to be paying for life-insurance for anyway? The idea of a life insurance policy being that they are supporting someone who would be left 'un-supported' in the event of your death. Once we started collecting apartment buildings, we realized that many states require that the 'escrow' account include a life-insurance policy against the mortgage holder. In California, we found this out, and fought with the bank, as we wanted to have Bonnie as that policy's beneficiary. It is law there to have a life-insurance policy but the banks commonly are the beneficiary, and they are under no requirement to use that money to pay off the mortgage if the mortgage holder dies. While in escrow, we fought over the issue for weeks, before they finally agreed to allow Bonnie to be the beneficiary. Apparantly it is yet another method by which banks make money, they have life-insurance policys on all their mortgage holders. Since we have these buildings, and should I die, then the buildings would then be paid off [by Bonnie, since she is the beneficiary], we decided that I still have no need for a life-insurance policy. So I have not carried SGLI either. My family is taken care of, in the event of my death. Bonnie would still have the income derived from the properties, as well as she would still have the housing for herself and children as provided by these properties. A $100,000 policy would never provide a life-long home to live in, nor would it provide a life-long income, as owning an apartment building would. In the years that have followed these desicions, Bonnie did decide that she wanted a seperate policy against my life. I have refused to pay for it. So she pays for it. In my mind that means that she is 'betting' or 'wagering' that I will die, which is not the side of the table wherein I would desire to place my money. But she does have this policy, and she pays for it from the money that she earns. She can well do as she pleases with her money. In the case where the chidren have reached adulthood already, I see no need for the parents to still be providing anything for them in the event of their death. I have no idea of the best method of handling inheritance. Family members can get very ugly while fighting over the remains of a person's life. :-)

RottieGrrrl: "I have a Big ugly mole on my butt that I HATE. It's GROSS." That is what they call a beauty mark. "I have no boobies." Neither do I. :-)

ex70'shouston: "In 1986 God answered a prayer and sent my family in a new direction." Excellent. "We left the big city and moved to a small town. If you have never lived in a small town a lot of this may sound strange. First of all a small town is population 20000 or smaller without a large town within 50 miles. That means you live and work here." We once lived in Upper Lake, California. At the time it's population was 125, the county seat [Lakeport, Ca} was around 5,000. Small town are really different. And nice. "I myself have learned to be myself and not to pretend to be what people want me to be or expect me to be." Welcome to America. Man I dislike big cities. We live in one now and I truly dislike it. We are very much excited about moving out of this and back to a small town area. "Here everyone knows who you really are so why try and be someone your not." Sonds good. "OK, now about political correctness. Why do we want everyone to be correct when they really are just people. Poor little Harry was just being a young man being himself. He was born a Royal, but that doesn't mean he was born differant than us so why expect differant." True but most people dont see that. In fact most people these days never will see that part of themselves. Again the Big-city mindset. The foster children we recently had were so removed from reality, they had no conceptual relationship with where their food came from. The idea that some living breathing animal died to give you that hamburger, or that a handsome was once that chicken we are eating. The example that I give is children, but it runs true with many of these adults as well. "OK, I was born the son of a dry dirt share croper who learned english as a second language. I didn't know that I really needed to take a bath more than once a week until I was in high school. You didn't urinate in the toilet unless it was real cold or raining(the back fence worked great). So when I sound like a red neck / hick. Quess what, I am and proud of it." HEH HEH HEH, My family sharechopped when I was a lad as well. They had lost their farms during the dust-bowl and were still climbing out of that loss. As a child, I used the bath-tub last, after my parents and then each of my syblings had used it. We each took a bath once a week, where we needed it or not. We had indoor plumbing and my mother was proud of it. But she still did not want to run the water-heater any more than she had to. She still doesn't. My parents attended grammar school up to the 6th grade. My father was taught by his parents, until everyone lost their farms. My mother was taught by similarly but her parents did not serve as school-marm. The schools were 'funded' by donations from the families who had children in attendance. My syblings and I were the first in our family-tree to have attended public-funded schools. My family-tree goes back to the Pilgrims on one side, and to a Missouri settler in 1770 on the other side. I think that my up-bringing was as red-neck as you can get. "So all you politicly perfect people. Go sit on it." LOL

Mark: "First: For those who now lean to the left side of the political spectrum, what was your political alignment (if any) BEFORE you got into TWI?" I dont recall, sorry, it was too long ago. "#2: I was a non-Church going Methodist before hand. From High School, I was a "seeker," exploring around with tons of different religions, ..." I was a 'Baptist-church-member' turned 'non-church-attending-Methodist'. Then I too was actively 'seeking'. :-)

Cowgirl: "I rode across the United States on a motorcycle." Cool, so have I. What route did you use? I have used I-40, I-80 and Highway #2 [The Queen's Highway] of Canada; to bike from coast to coast. :-)

I think a serious conversation with 'Bob' about enabling these girl's behavior is in order. The life-insurance policy may have made much more sense when the girls were little, meaning when Bob was their source of income and support. Now that they are 'grown-up' adults they should be supporting themselves. If they still want to have some form of inheritance, then they should be paying the annual fee for 'their' policy. As a seperate issue, if you want a policy for your children and YOU [since these ladies will certainly fight you over any of their policy], then start another policy and let Bob pay it, until your children are grown. Good luck. I have two neices, they are mid-30s, still live at home, and have never been 'allowed' to date. The eldest has a law degree [she commuted to college], the younger has a Liberal Arts B.A. Their father is very controlling, a deacon of the home town Baptist church. My sister recently passed away, so now it is my brother-in-law and his 2 daughters, living on their farm. When he passes away, it will be 2 elderly maiden sisters running a 400 acre grape vineyard. I dont understand some families. :-)

I once knew a Gary Durbin, he was a wonderful beleiver and I liked him a lot. He did have brothers in the ministry. Gary married a girl who had sisters that were also in the ministry [one of whom I nearly dated, but alas my closest freind at the time, married her, Hey Dave and Gail]. I wonder if this Durbin could be one of the Gary's brothers? Sorry I dont recall any of their names, I never did meet any of them. Does anyone else here know Gary Durbin, and whether or not this is one of his brothers?

Ouch, sounds bad. I would definitely file a complaint with your local PD, just to document what has happened. In the extremely rare and un-usual event that you should ever find that he has visited your home address, that previous documentation will be handy in making a case with the authorities. To my knowledge, anyone can stop using his or her Ebay account and start using a 'new' logon account at any time. I have had previous accounts that got bad 'ratings' [while stationed overseas, commonly mail gets 'lost' or the carrier decides not to ship, etc]; and as a result I have changed to a new logon. Ebay had no way of telling how many separate logons each person might have. What if you had a family of 20 all living together in the same home? So what I am saying is that this one individual could easily begin using a new logon at any time, and you would not know it was still he or she. Lacking any other advice, I would file a complaint just to document what has already transpired. Just in case. Also consider, as post-WTO attack America does fund further integration of all governmental infrastructure, agencies are sharing more information than ever before. If guy 'A' herasses person 'B' in Nevada, than herasses person 'C' in Utah, then herasses person 'D' in Florida; and assuming that each herassed person files a complaint, then there does exist a possibility that one day these separate complaints would be collated together and would follow that person no matter where he goes. .

I was not aware that some were not 'allowed' PMs, my apology.

We gave to TWI 10% of our gross. We figured that amount was our 'increase'. Also a portion of the vegetable garden. What we gave then, we give now [just not to TWI]. 10% from our gross, including what we grow or raise. We figure it out before taxes [though in fact no money comes out of my paychecks for taxes anyway, we have been income-tax-exempt since 1983]. I think that 'forced' thrift does teach soemthing, and by holding to that 'lesson' it has taught us a lot, and it such has helped us to invest more and build my Net Worth more. I have seen [as well as the fact that I personally have gone through the experience] servicemembers start out earning $800 / month, over the years we are promoted and we all get pay raises and they soon are earning an average of $5,000 / month. If your cost-of-living is scrapping at the low end, and still scrapping at the upper end of that scale; then you have no control over your cost-of-living. If one guy can raise a family on $10k/year, and next door his neighbor is whining that he has problems trying to support a family on $80k/year; than maybe, just maybe something else is going on. I learned from reading "The Millionaire Next Door" that gaining financal affluence in my life is not about controlling my income, but rather it is from controlling my cost-of-living. If you want to begin to control your income taxes, then take a few courses on tax-theory or tax-planning. Income taxes can be a lot, 28%, 35%, 45%; ouch. If anyone is concerned about spending money on other beleivers [in the way of a church], at a lower rate than they are spending money on their government [who spends billions of tax-payers money on totally stupid things]; then you really are whining over split milk, standing in the path of a freight train. :-)

Sure it happens. Once on The G.C. Marshall we were pulling into port, knowing that the river was not dredged deep enough for our normal draft. Most of the river was dredged deep enough, but there was one spot in particular were it is kind of shallow. So we timed our trip to happen during the extra-high high-tide, and while coming in we maintained the air-blow into the main-ballast tanks to try and keep us riding just a little higher in the water than we normally ride. Subs don’t turn on a dime so we don’t normally travel real fast when in restrictive waters, but in this case we did run a full-bell as we hoped that if we did drag on the bottom we would have enough inertia to push us over the shallow spot. We did hit, and our inertia did carry us forward. It happens. Sometimes while out to sea, the Navigator will lay out the track ahead of time, maybe for weeks ahead of time. The Quartermaster on watch will pull out the next set of charts as we come to the edge of the paper. Usually a track might be 20 miles wide and the on-watch OOD has the 'freedom' to operate anywhere within that track, so long as he does not allow the boat to get behind it's projected PIM. If the quartermaster does not fully read and examine each chart as he lays them out, he may miss noted that the Navigator has put on them, saying that our maximum operating depth needs to be raised until we pass a certain point. So because we were operating at one depth for the past week without any problems, when we traverse onto the next chart, we might not come up to an appropriate depth to clear all sea-mounts on the next chart. Bump. On fast-attacks they don’t really keep as close attention to their position as we do on boomers. They go out to sea and so long as they can find the next port when they are ready to, they don’t really need to know exactly where they are to any precise degree. Come up to PD (periscope depth) 40 miles from land and start looking for navigational beacons, to figure out where you are, before lining up to surface and pull into port. But looking through fog and waves, you don’t really see everything, so you hope you are one place and that directly South is beacon number 34, but what if it is really beacon number 36? You plot the boat as passing beacon 34, and everyone gets ready to turn [thinking that the beacon is a channel marker showing a dredged channel, whereas in reality it is a buoy marking shoals. The boat turns a mile early and drives straight into shoal rocks. Bump, crunch, scrape … Every time a boat surfaces it is at extreme hazard. Our sonar systems work reasonably well horizontally within each thermal-layer, but trying to ‘look’ up is only possibly within your layer. So when we go up to the surface you can not know if anyone is above us. Looking up through the periscope we may see shapes or shadows from surface ships, but clouds, rain squalls and fog-banks make them also. Which is why boats surface underneath air-craft carriers and tankers. Imagine building a steel room; outside you mount a propulsion system so the room can travel around, but you don’t build any windows. Now lock yourself inside and drive around. Now find the spot where you started, go back there and park. :-)

In one job I had, we used to work and sleep in areas that had these stupid signs everywhere. They were yellow and purple The wording on the signs included: 'no loitering, no eating, no drinking, no smoking, no berthing; within 20 feet on this bulkhead.' We had these stupid signs on the walls of our bunkrooms [we would commonly hang posters over the signs]. :=)

"WASHINGTON, Jan. 8, 2005 – About 20 crew members are injured, one critically, after the Los Angeles-class submarine USS San Francisco ran around Jan. 7 about 350 miles southeast of Guam. The Guam-based attack submarine, with 137 crew members aboard, ran aground about 4 p.m. Hawaii Standard Time while conducting submerged operations, according to Alyssa Batarla, a spokesperson for U.S. Pacific Fleet Public Affairs at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. The vessel was en route to Brisbane, Australia, for a routine port visit when the incident occurred, Batarla reported. Initial reports indicate that the submarine's hull is intact, and there are no reports of damage to the reactor plant, she said. Military and Coast Guard aircraft were en route to the site to monitor the situation and provide assistance. The vessel is currently on the surface in the western Pacific, returning under its own power to Guam. It is expected to arrive at its home port Jan. 10, Batarla said. USS San Francisco is one of three nuclear-powered submarines homeported in Guam, Batarla said." Now I have to wonder how fast were they going? what they hit? and how much damage was done? to have injured 20 guys, one critical. Darn I hate it when under-sea mountains move like that. LOL So glad I am not onboard.

socks: "I've been reading up on this some more ... The following is from one of the pages on 'Caretaker' Offenders .... parents are responsible for 60 percent of all crimes. Stepparents and parents’ boyfriends and girlfriends account for another 19 percent." "Males are considerably more likely than females (73 percent versus 27 percent) to be perpetrators." Wow. Among support groups for foster-families that we attend, the over-whelming majority of those children have been abused in some way. We hear of abuses from both male-adults, female-adults, and from other children. Not meaning to argue with you. :-) Do your numbers include all forms of abuse? Neglect: such as leaving dirty diapers on a child long enough that the child develops Attachement-Disorders? Or drug-usage by bio-parents to develop fetal-development issues like: crack-babies, or Fetal-Alcohol-Syndrome? Or are those numbers specifiv to sexual-abuse? "This gender difference holds true even among babysitter offenders, although males are much less likely than females to be babysitters. Biological fathers account for two-fifths (41 percent) of all offenders" "and stepfathers and parents’ boyfriends account for nearly one-fifth (18 percent)" May I point out that single-parents are predominantly female, so secondary-relationships and short-term relationships are going to mostly be men. If an adult is in the home, not-related to the child, but a part of a two-adult home; that adult is most likely to be a male. I think. I dont think that there is a huge percentage of single-men out there with children, who would have girl-freinds staying over. "Men account for 92 percent of caretaker sex assault, 67 percent of aggravated assault, 68 percent of simple assault, and 58 percent of kidnaping offenders." Wow. I wonder how much of this is adult-male to child-female rape, which often leads to physical wounds, thus gets reported more quickly. It is my understanding that in the cases of child-sexual-predators, the original abuse was not reported, as it left no physical marks. It does not 'show' until the child is mingled with younger children who are easier to over-power. In the support-group that we attend, we have both little boys and little girls who are sexual-predators. They dont always have any preferences to which sex they will abuse, it is more a matter of having an opportunity with a smaller child or a child without natural defenses [like in the case of our FAS teen]. "They also note that, as you state, even though men are less likely to be in a 'babysitter' caretaker role, their %'s of incidents seem to remain the same. And men account for 3/5ths of the total number of offenders." Wow, I had no idea. "Overall though, as a parent myself who's raised children and had them in many different family, school and private care situations my own interest is to the overall RISK at any time and how to handle it as much as the whether males or females are involved. There's evil in the world and evil wears many faces." I humbly agree. :-)

I seldom get PMs, which is why I had them on instant notification. So that I would not have to check them routinely. I could 'forget' about them, and they would notify me when there was something for me to see. My point was that, somewhere over the months, it seems to have 'lost' it's setting. I only wanted to remind others to check their settings. May God bless you. :-)

What The Hay: "... Personally speaking I feel there is something wrong with a male who is put directly in the charge and the care of children (regardless of what the gender of the child may be) with perhaps the exception of one who has been put in an administrative function - but definately not the direct care of children. _It's just wrong!_" I see. I have been a stay-at-home 'Mom', since I retired from the US Navy. For the past 3 years, I have had 5 children at home. Some of them have been in public school, some of them have been receiving a Homeschool education. I have bought them shoes, I have prepared meals [yes I cook], and I got three of them up to grade-level and back into public school [placed back into age-appropriate grade-levels]. [bonnie does clothes shopping and food shopping, as she is better in those areas. Bonnie is also the certified teacher, so she lays out each day’s curriculum for me to follow.] When they bleed I do the triage and either bandage or take them to the ER. I pull the ticks out of their hair, etc. So you say: “ _It's just wrong!_ " “The whole situation seems very unnatural to me since it is not the tendancy of most men to desire to function or serve as caregivers. Perhaps I am coming off sounding a bit chauvinistic, but it's just not in the male "genes" for men to want to function in that particular role - unless they already have genetic ties to the child, i.e. they are the father.” I see. Yes it does sound rather sexist. If I were to state “X is the role of all women, while Y is the role of all men”; I would get loads of grief. I was on a trip in Israel with a CES group once, and a group of the ladies were running down men and making very sexist remarks. When I commented that those were sexist remarks and that likewise I would hope that I would never make similar sexist remarks. They leaped all over me [figuratively], and I remained their enemy the remainder of the trip. Is it only because I am a federal employee? that I am held to a different standard. “However it cetainly makes me wonder if this case would have received the same attention had the perpetrator been female instead of male, or would this case have been "swept under the rug" if that been the situation?” True, the daily cases of child abuse don’t make it into the media at all. There must be some other twist to deem it ‘news worthy’. “Unfortunately cases of child abuse never receive the same amount of attention by the media unless the female perpetrator commits homicide or some other felony upon their victim.” True, the majority of child sexual abuse cases that I have been in some way involved with, were never big in the media. Whether they be male perpetrated, or female perpetrated. It just does not routinely get reported in Newspaper or TV, unless there is some other twist to it. “If "SEX" wasn't involved, I highly doubt many would care much about the issue, but that's rarely the case isn't it?” And your point is? [you sexist you] :-)

I used to have notices sent to me immediately whenever I received a private message. Thus I have not been in the habit of checking them, as I assumed that whenever I got a new one, I would recieve a notice. However I just did check and that 'option' was no longer selected. May I suggest that each and everyone here review their notification options. If nothing else, select to be notified when you get a PM. Thank you for your time.

Krysilis- “Galen...when you were in deep water...what was the atmospheric pressure that was maintained within the submarine? I doubt it was nearly as high as the pressure would have been on you had you been outside the sub.” Like I said, my boats generally kept things between 1 and 1.5 atm. We always had a couple pressure gauges that we re-calibrated on the surface, then while we were under we would always have some reference to be able to surface again. If the pressure inside the boat was a lot different from the outside air then opening hatches would be a problem [they would get stuck]. But the only time we really paid any attention to the actual pressure was when we were thinking about going up to the surface again, and at that time an effect would be made to regain 1 atm. Most of the time, the pressure would drift around depending on what we were doing. With an O2 generator running and bleeding off some O2 to the crew [the rest of the O2 went into tanks for later use], it would add a little pressure to the boat and maintain O2 at 15-18%. The CO2 scrubbers ran to extract CO2 and we ported it overboard along with the excess H2 from the O2 generators. So you have some stuff running to add pressure, while other stuff is running to lower pressure. But nobody really cares until it is time to resurface and open the hatches, or if we have a lot of smoke and we want to ventilate to get rid of the smoke [which happened a lot it seems]. The boats I served on [boomers] had no divers onboard. We were just there to maintain the missiles and keep ready to launch them into orbit, so that they could launch multiple warheads back down. Other boats had divers [fast attacks] and some of them carry mini-subs in a hanger mounted on top so the divers could go ‘traveling about’, and can do so daily if they need. Then we developed those ‘brown-water’ boats [old boomers converted to carry and deploy troops] now they could rapidly deploy troops from underwater [uSS James K. Polk and the USS Kamahamaha]. Then of course we have over stuff like the NR-1 that does other stuff with divers for research. Like I said, the greatest pressure that I have functioned in was at 400 feet, though it was only for a short period of time. All my boats went to depths of greater than 400 feet, and usually maintained something around 1 to 1.5 atm inside the boat [until we needed to surface or ventilate, when we made an effort to regain exactly 1 atm]. When we are on the surface and ventilating, preparing to go down, we do routinely ‘pressurize the boat’, meaning we continue sucking in air but we stop exhausting, to build up a little pressure just before we shut down the induction mast and dive. It kind of gives us just a little bit more air. Maybe it was a mental thing, but when you have to work to make your own air, getting that extra little bit of air for free was good. Boats with divers routinely cycle their escape trunks, allowing divers to come and go. Each time they cycle those trunks the pressure inside the boat goes up some. Until the next time they need to surface, when they make an effort to regain exactly 1 atm, to allow them to ventilate. Other vessels like the sea-labs would maintain an open diving hatch, so they would routinely maintain sea-pressure inside. But I have never served onboard one of those. Once while we were inport and crewmembers were bringing their families and girlfriends onboard for tours, we were lined up to ‘surface-ventilate’. [Which meant that we sucked in air via an induction mast and we left the hatches open to naturally exhaust] On cold nights the topside watches liked to stand in front of the open hatches, as warm air from inside would blast them and keep them warm. Anyway this time, we had shut the aft hatch [probably as we were sitting a little low in the water and did not like water rushing in through an open hatch]. So we were ‘surface-ventilating’ with only one hatch open, the control room hatch, and the crew was bringing family and girlfriends aboard for tours. It was a common thing for girlfriends to come down to visit the boat wearing a skirt or a ‘sun-dress’, while climbing down the 30 feet ladder into the control room their dresses would be blown up over their heads and they would need assistance finding the rungs of the ladder to continue working their way down into the boat. So it work out as a nice form of entertainment for the crew as well. Now the control room hatch was round and 33 inches in diameter. And one time the COB brought his wife down to the boat, she was kind of portly, and while stepped down the ladder, the usual thing happened. One sight of that and everyone in the control room turned away so as not to look. But she got stuck. She wedged herself into the 33 inch hatch ring and her extra rolls of flab sealed that hatch ring good and tight. When the boat began pressurizing. Many crewmen ran to the control room to see what had happened and render aid. During this the Cob’s wife had let go of the ladder and was swinging her feet, in an effort to work her body down through the hatch. But the pressure kept building, and our ears were popping, so we decided that the quickest path to relief was to push her back out. I was one of the guys that went up the ladder, to attempt to support one leg and push her back up. Fortunately the building pressure was on our side and eventually the pressure lifted her right up out of the hatch ring. :-)

GarthP2000: "Since when did lesbians sport beards?" Does that dis-qualify me? While serving on active-duty I had to keep shaving it off every few months [after the 1983 decision to get rid of beards in-port entirely]. Now it is finally growing out a bit. Just a couple inches below my nipples now. I am hoping to get it down to my belt. :-)

I have used the phrase: "WWJD?". I have even used it here on GS. I have used it in public. I generally use it while in debate with someone else who used it first, though. I routinely point that Jesus led a 'perfect' life as a jew, within a jewish culture, up holding every aspect of The Law. He taught mercy, love and forgiveness; but he taught this to crowds of jews holding dear to the Law. Jesus did not teach anyone to ignore The Law. To place a 1 A.D. Jew, holding firm to the body of The Law, into today's culture; even if he is trying to be full of grace and love, would still make him look terribly stuffy and puritanical today. Remember to Jesus, a gentile was considered a dog eating scraps off the floor what the master will throw to him. Jesus' ministry was to the Chosen People of God. Now the Risen Christ, that is a different matter entirely. But the entire body of text of Jesus' life and ministry dont really focus any on the relationship between Christ and the members of His body. The relationship between Christ and the Sons of God is only expressed through the Epistles. It is within this body of text that we see liberty and grace outside of The Law. The better question is: What Would Christ in You, have you do? WWCIYHYD?