[Rhodes22-list] Praise Jesus, the "evolutionists" are going to save us from the Republicans
Herb Parsons
hparsons at parsonsys.com
Tue Sep 9 03:11:58 EDT 2008
Great news. I got a dem to abstain. That's as good as half a vote. We'll
get this thing locked down yet!
Steven Alm wrote:
> Herb,
>
> Yep, I think he's a kook too.
>
> I might actually refuse to vote this time because there are no candidates
> who represent me. I'm sick of voting for the lesser of two evils.
>
> Slim
>
> On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 1:37 AM, Herb Parsons <hparsons at parsonsys.com> wrote:
>
>
>> Gee Steve, looks like your choices are going to be a bit slim.
>>
>> Biden's a practicing Roman Catholic. When asked about abortion, he said
>> it's a personal matter, but for him, he accepts the teachings of his
>> church. That he "accepts as a matter of faith that life begins at
>> conception". In other words, he should be equally disqualified as Palin,
>> since he would have to put aside his personal beliefs.
>>
>> Some of the beliefs that the Roman Catholic Church practices, teachings
>> which Biden said he accepts are:
>>
>> That God is the creator of everything, "of all that is seen and unseen".
>>
>> They believe in transubstantiation </wiki/Transubstantiation>, that the
>> communion bread and wine is miraculously converted, upon consecration by
>> the priest, into the actual body and blood of Jesus Christ.
>>
>> They believe in Apostolic Succession, meaning that the priests are
>> descendants of the original 12 apostles. This descendancy can be
>> obtained by the sacrament of ordination by an ordained bishop.
>>
>> I could go on, but I think even you get the point, besides, I would have
>> to go get my catechism books to remember it all.
>>
>> So Steve, does the above mean that Biden is a a "religious kook", and
>> that you cannot vote for him, or is HIS "kookiness" covered by a
>> hypocritical covering that he leans left?
>>
>>
>> Steven Alm wrote:
>>
>>> Todd,
>>>
>>> I'm an atheist and I think Palin's a religious kook. And you're right, I
>>> won't vote for a religious kook. I haven't studied Darwin very much (and
>>>
>> I
>>
>>> applaud your research and quotes) but I don't think that's the only
>>>
>> rebuke
>>
>>> to creationism. Since most of the species of plant and animal life on
>>>
>> this
>>
>>> earth are in fact extinct, I'd call that "unintelligent design."
>>>
>>> You said there are only two possibilities as to how life started. Are
>>>
>> you
>>
>>> sure? How do you know this? What I know is that all religions serve in
>>> answering three questions: Where did we come from, how do we live and
>>>
>> what
>>
>>> happens when we die? Myself, I've answered those questions to my own
>>> satisfaction and I don't need the church to tell me anything.
>>>
>>> Slim
>>>
>>> On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 5:32 PM, Todd Tavares <sprocket80 at mail.com>
>>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>> Slim, Wow! are you are going to vote for Obama because he is a Marxist
>>>> or not vote for McCain just because Palin is a religious extremist? :^D
>>>> Glad you mentioned carbon dating. Carbon has been proven by many
>>>> scientists to be a wholly inaccurate method of dating. I am far from
>>>> being a scientist...or a religious kook thinking the earth is only a
>>>> couple of thousand of years old, but there is just as much scientific
>>>> information out there to; while not proving creation is the truth,
>>>>
>> surely
>>
>>>> proves evolution is improbable if not impossible. You are/were an
>>>> educator and were taught evolution from a text book, like we all were.
>>>> Just because you read something in a text book does not make it truth.
>>>> http://www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com/ Maybe we could all stomach
>>>> creationism if we called it a theory too. After all that is what
>>>> evolution is...just an unproven theory. There are equally as many
>>>> scientists out there who believe they have proven evolution is myth. It
>>>> was not Darwin's brainstorm anyway. He thought he could further explain
>>>> a centuries old belief; that life arose from non life and everything
>>>> sprang from a common ancestor. Modern scientists say it was that first
>>>> amino acid or protein chain in the pool of "primordial ooze." I like
>>>>
>> how
>>
>>>> one Nobel prize winner (Biology 1967?) put it:
>>>>
>>>> "There are only two possibilities as to how life arose; one is
>>>> spontaneous generation arising to evolution, the other is a supernatural
>>>> creative act of God, there is no third possibility. Spontaneous
>>>> generation that life arose from non-living matter was scientifically
>>>> disproved 120 years ago by Louis Pasteur and others. That leaves us with
>>>> only one possible conclusion, that life arose as a creative act of God.
>>>>
>> I
>>
>>>> will not accept that philosophically because I do not want to believe in
>>>> God, therefore I choose to believe in that which I know is
>>>>
>> scientifically
>>
>>>> impossible, spontaneous generation arising to evolution."
>>>>
>>>> (Dr. George Wald, evolutionist, Professor Emeritus of Biology at the
>>>> University at Harvard, Nobel Prize winner in Biology.)
>>>>
>>>> But the most interesting fact is that even Darwin himself realized
>>>> evolution was not workable.
>>>>
>>>> "To suppose that the eye, with all its inimitable contrivances for
>>>> adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different
>>>> amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic
>>>> aberration, could have formed by natural selection, seems, I freely
>>>> confess, absurd in the highest degree possible." (Charles Darwin, "The
>>>> origin of species by means of natural selection")
>>>>
>>>> "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could
>>>> not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight
>>>> modifications, my theory would absolutely break down." (Charles Darwin,
>>>> "The Origin of Species")
>>>>
>>>> "Often a cold shudder has run through me, and I have asked myself
>>>>
>> whether
>>
>>>> I may have not devoted myself to a fantasy." (Charles Darwin, Life and
>>>> Letters, 1887, Vol. 2, p. 229)
>>>>
>>>> I could post a few hundred quotes from noted doctors and scientists to
>>>> try to "prove" evolution wrong or creation right. I could "do my
>>>> homework" as we say here on the list and cite actual findings, but that
>>>> is not necessary. Because to dismiss the possibility of God or some
>>>>
>> other
>>
>>>> Intelligent Designer makes it easier to accept our notions that it is ok
>>>> to be a homosexual (and not allow me a choice when the schools teach
>>>>
>> this
>>
>>>> gargage to my kids while denying the right to learn about the theory of
>>>> creation along with evolution) or that it should be a crime to kill a
>>>> tree, but ok to kill an unborn baby. Not to say everyone believing in
>>>> evolution is an athiest (or a Democrat), but you have made me see this
>>>>
>> as
>>
>>>> a hinge factor in how I will vote....real issues aside.
>>>>
>>>> Todd T
>>>>
>>>> Besides, it is not very PC to say we evolved (were "selected") from
>>>>
>> apes.
>>
>>>> We don't want any of the apes that were not selected to be made to feel
>>>> inferior.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "Steven Alm"
>>>> To: "The Rhodes 22 Email List"
>>>> Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Praise Jesus, the Republicans are going to
>>>> save us from the Republicans
>>>> Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2008 13:11:17 -0500
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Ahh, so the "tolerant" lefty has a litmus test for religious beliefs."
>>>>
>>>> Yes, I require that the candidates be sane, critical thinkers. Palin is
>>>> obviously not. I wouldn't say that if she were a Catholic or a Lutheran
>>>> but
>>>> here's a woman who wants to stare down the whole scientific community
>>>>
>> and
>>
>>>> deny things like carbon 14 dating and declare that the heavens and earth
>>>> are
>>>> only a few thousand years old. You didn't just call ME an extremist, did
>>>> you?
>>>>
>>>> Brad, you left out the part of Kroon saying that his parishioners should
>>>> pray for the completion of the pipeline because at the end of the world,
>>>> folks will flock to Alaska as their final refuge.
>>>>
>>>> I can't believe that was you quoting all that God stuff.
>>>>
>>>> Slim
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 12:18 PM, Steven Alm wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> "She's already demonstrated that she is fully capable of separating her
>>>>> personal beliefs from her duties."
>>>>>
>>>>> Wouldn't it be better if she didn't have to?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 6:18 AM, Herb Parsons wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Ahh, so the "tolerant" lefty has a litmus test for religious beliefs.
>>>>>> She's already demonstrated that she is fully capable of separating her
>>>>>> personal beliefs from her duties. She vetoed a bill that would have
>>>>>> denied benefits to gay couples.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But, you extremists keep it up, I'm sure you'll find (or make up)
>>>>>> SOMETHING on her.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Steven Alm wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> She's a creationist. Her Assembly of God stuff is a deal breaker for
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Religious extremism cannot be tolerated.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The most important legacy the president leaves is the appointment of
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>> the
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> supreme court.
>>>>>>> The next pres might appoint as many as three. If Sarabaracuda has
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>> her
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> way,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> say goodbye to Roe V. Wade and hello to back-ally coat hanger
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> abortions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Slim
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sun, Sep 7, 2008 at 6:14 PM, Herb Parsons
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think it's funny that the candidate that was considered as a
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>> running
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> mate for the Democratic choice a few years back, is now being
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>> touted as
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> "more of the same". Keep trying though, you guys may find something
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> that
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> works.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What exactly makes Palin a "religious kook", that fact that's she
>>>>>>>> religious? I think your colors are beginning to show.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> petelargo wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Ben, thanks for your post. As you may have noticed, there is no
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> dialogue
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> the right-wing extremists. You are wrong, end of discussion and
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>> your
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> an
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> idiot to boot.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> When John McCain won the nomination, Bush disappears overseas. At
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>> the
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> RNC,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> no Bush, no Cheney (and no mention of them). They know it's a
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>> failed
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>> administration. Where were the solutions. Once again, they are
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>> trying
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> to
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> frame the campaign as an ideology argument rather than an issues
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> discussion.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Today on Face the Nation, "Sis Cum Ba and WHA-LAA", McCain is now
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>> the
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> change
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> candidate and stated that he will end the incredible corruption in
>>>>>>>>> Washington and the failed policies. John McCain has re-defined a
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>> whole
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> new
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> level of flip-flopping on over two dozen key issues within the
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>> last
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> eight
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> years including his own authored bill that he was for and now
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>> against.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I couldn't give a poop about the experience argument of Palin vs
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Obama.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It's
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> a waste of time. The entire Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld-Rice-Rove, etc
>>>>>>>>> administration could be argued to be the most experienced
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> administration
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> the history of the White House. A huge amount of prior "executive
>>>>>>>>> experience". For the first time in recent politics the Republicans
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> had
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> power in the white house, judicial, house and senate. How was it
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>> for
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> you?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It's one thing to drive a tractor trailer up our butts, but when
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>> they
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> start
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> blowing on the horn while there're doing it, it's really gone too
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>> far.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>> A big thank you for the memories: the debt, the dead, the twisting
>>>>>>>>> intelligence to "sell" us a war on a country that did not attack
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>> us,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> good ol boy ineffectual cronyism, and finally the shredding of the
>>>>>>>>> constitution. With Palin we now we get to have another religious
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>> kook
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> to
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> satisfy the so-called conservative extremist religious right to
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> 'bridge'
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> them into this administration and get money.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Spending 5-10 billion dollars a month on Iraq and kissing chinese
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>> ass
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>> (borrowing the money) of the most Marxist suppressive government
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>> on
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> planet at this time is a conservative value?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Finally, the biggest hypocrisy of all . That these extremists
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>> actually
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> think
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> that they and the republicans are the vanguards of conservatism?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>> The
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> two
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> top key pillars of conservatism are less government and government
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> intrusion
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> and fiscal responsibility. The only administration that walked
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>> that
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> talk
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 50 years was a Democrat that left Bush a 500 billion dollar
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>> surplus.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> He
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> blew
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> threw that in one year and it was prior to 9-11. And there is no
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> greater
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> government intrusion that being told what you can or cannot do
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>> with or
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> put
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> into your body. Palin wants privacy for her family decisions, but
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>> she
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> wants
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> to legislate publicly what you should do with yours. No thanks.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Ben Cittadino-2 wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> My Dear Culture Warriors;
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So....are we having fun yet?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> First, I'd like to thank Richard and Slim for stepping up to join
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> the
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "Assault on the Citadel".
>>>>>>>>>> The bullets don't sting as much when the adversary's fire is
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> spread
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> out
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> among more than one target.
>>>>>>>>>> In the words first uttered by Gen. "Vinegar Joe" Stillwell,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> "illegitimi
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> non carborundum".
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> As for Tootle, Brad, and Herb, you guys crack me up. I posted
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> about
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> Obama
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> only because I saw Tootle's post that
>>>>>>>>>> suggested anybody supporting Obama was either a marxist, or a
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> farm
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> animal.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> What did he expect when he said that?
>>>>>>>>>> Herb, where was your outrage that Tootle would refer to some of
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> his
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> fellow
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "Rhodies" in such derogatry terms? Supporting Obama or McCain
>>>>>>>>>> may turn out to be right or wrong, but if we debate policy and
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> don't
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> engage in mere name-calling this "sailor's bar" could be an
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> interesting
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> place.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Richard's "geezer" remarks are defensible on several grounds.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> First,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> he
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> was provoked. Second, he was defending ME.
>>>>>>>>>> Third, it was funny. Calling someone a "marxist" as Tootle did is
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> several
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> magnitudes worse than gentle kidding of the
>>>>>>>>>> "old fart" kind. Surely you see the difference.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The positions I tried to lay out as reasons some people support
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> Obama
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> were
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> intended as an outline of ideology (as Slim noted),
>>>>>>>>>> not an argument supporting any position. For example, Herb, you
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> are
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> pro-life and will probably vote for McCain/Palin in part for that
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> reason.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I am pro-choice, pro-embryonic stem cell research and so I will
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> support
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Obama/Biden in part for that reason. It is not hyperbole to point
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> out
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> the policy differences that explain my choice. What I know for
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> sure
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> is
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> that marxism and "sheepiness" have nothing to do with it. I have
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> thought
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> about all of my positions on the issues I mentioned and am
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> completely
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> prepared to explain and justify them. In Brad's oft' repeated
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> mantra
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> I
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> know I have "done my homework".
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Enough for today. The games will be on soon.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Cheers!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Ben C. , s/v Susan Kay, Highlands, NJ
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> go
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> to
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>>>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>> to
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>> to
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
>>>>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go
>>>> to http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Be Yourself @ mail.com!
>>>> Choose From 200+ Email Addresses
>>>> Get a Free Account at www.mail.com
>>>>
>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
>>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> __________________________________________________
>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
>>>
>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> __________________________________________________
>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>
> __________________________________________________
> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to http://www.rhodes22.org/list
> __________________________________________________
>
>
>
More information about the Rhodes22-list
mailing list