OT - Royal Wedding

On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 08:55:04 -0400, Dave Smith
wrote:


Wow, fantastic! Was all that on a genecology web site or the regular
internet?

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.
 
"Nancy Young" wrote in news:4db75333
[email protected]:


You say potayto and I say pomme parmentier.

--

The Bible! Because all the works of science cannot equal the
wisdom of cattle-sacrificing primitives who thought every
animal species in the world lived within walking distance of
Noah's house.
 
Doug Freyburger wrote in
news:[email protected]:


You might think that but you would be wrong.

We use the terms to signify a long term relationship in a language
that has no specific words for that. I refuse to use the terms
"girlfriend" or the even more vomitous "my lady", or my POOSLQ.

In Qu?bec, I can refer to my wife as "ma conjointe" (my cojoined)
and there is in that no reference whatsoever to a piece of paper or
any ritualistic mumbojumbo. Much more civilized.

FWIW, the Canadian governments (federal and provincial) recognize
common law union (i.e. unmarried) as equivalent to married in all
respects.

--

The Bible! Because all the works of science cannot equal the
wisdom of cattle-sacrificing primitives who thought every
animal species in the world lived within walking distance of
Noah's house.
 
On May 1, 7:33?am, Michel Boucher wrote:

Marriage may be passe in Quebec,but not in the US.

Further, the effect of shacking up on success of a subsequent marriage
depends on the level of the commitment the couple had when they moved
in together, according to the most recent US data.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/series/sr_23/sr23_028.pdf

"The data show that those who live together after making plans to
marry or getting engaged have about the same chances of divorcing as
couples who never cohabited before marriage. But those who move in
together before making any clear decision to marry appear to have an
increased risk of divorce."
 
On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 11:45:23 +0200, ChattyCathy
wrote:


Maybe I watch the wrong channels (mainly HGTV, Cooking and Food
Network), so I haven't noticed a lot of chatter about the upcoming
nuptials although the BBC does have quite a bit of it now.

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.
 
spamtrap1888 wrote in
news:[email protected]
..com:


....showing which of two jurisdictions is more respectful of
personal lifestyle choices.

There was a time during the recent dark ages in Qu?bec when
couples had to show their marriage certificate to get a room at a
hotel. Those days died on (North American) Labour Day 1959.


Well, the easy way to resolve that problem is to never marry,
therefore no possibility of divorce. That speaks even more to
the commitment as you are not bound by anything but your
affection for each other. Besides, once you are past
reproductive age, there is no valid social reason to remain
together beyond mutual affection.

In crafting your witty response, you may wish to refer to my
previous comments about peer pressure pushing people into
marriage (parental pressure included in that, if that wasn't
clear for some reason).

--

The Bible! Because all the works of science cannot equal the
wisdom of cattle-sacrificing primitives who thought every
animal species in the world lived within walking distance of
Noah's house.
 
On 4/26/2011 2:13 PM, Nancy Young wrote:


Same here. I haven't paid attention to the hoopla but I will watch the
wedding, the same as I watched his parents get married. I was only a
couple of years younger than Diana and I thought it was all very exciting.
 
James Silverton wrote:


Right. I think they believe we're hanging on every word for 2 hours
a day. Of course they made reservations to send contingents over
the instant the date was announced.

I'm interested, it's fun to see them getting married, I'll watch the
wedding (not likely in real time!). I just haven't been interested in all
the minutia they've filled their broadcasts with.

nancy
 
On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 17:40:19 +1200, Miche wrote:

At least it's not a war or some disaster for a change.

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.
 
On 4/26/2011 2:52 PM, Nunya Bidnits wrote:

I'm already planning on being up most of the night for a work project,
and since I'll be working from home, I'll have the TV on. Since I will
be working late, I will work from home Friday. I just have to hope my
work doesn't suffer if I get distracted. lol (MS patching late night;
the app I am a SME for is picky about patching and rebooting)
 
Nancy2 wrote in
news:[email protected]
..com:


You were talking about percentages twenty or more years ago. What
I said was they were no longer valid, at least in civilized parts
of the world. I only referred to my relationship as an example but
I have many more.

--

The Bible! Because all the works of science cannot equal the
wisdom of cattle-sacrificing primitives who thought every
animal species in the world lived within walking distance of
Noah's house.
 
spamtrap1888 wrote in
news:[email protected]
..com:


They were never resolved then but they are now. Who said I'm
fighting anything? I'm only stating what has become a fact.
You're the one who takes exception with a view that clashes with
your own.


Well, your mental image would be wrong. But if we're going to play
that game, here is my mental image of you:

http://web.comhem.se/harryperonius/india/face/umbrella_man_beard.jp
g

--

The Bible! Because all the works of science cannot equal the
wisdom of cattle-sacrificing primitives who thought every
animal species in the world lived within walking distance of
Noah's house.
 
Janet wrote in
news:[email protected]:


Partner implies a formalized (ie notarized) arrangement between
business associates. Hardly the case when no such agreement has
been entered into. And moreover, I am not a capitalist so why
would I want to suggest that our relationship is a business
arrangement?


Yup. Our various private insurances (government health and
dental) are connected and cover us both to the full amount. Our
wills are made out to each other and will not be contested by our
children. We jointly own a house (in fact that was the only way
we could own the house because although she had more income, I
had more investment capital then than she did...I actually own
only 10% but that's because I am not paying it off...I only
provided the guarantee and the downpayment), our pensions are
recognized as being connected although at this point there is not
much in the way of interaction, and we are as a married couple
for the purposes of preparing tax reports. For the government to
consider us otherwise would be an affront to our Charter rights
as citizens. Btw, the same provisos apply for gay couples as
well.

So really, marriage is pointless. We did consider it when her
ex-husband finally forked over a divorce after 17 years of
separation, but realized it would change nothing.

--

The Bible! Because all the works of science cannot equal the
wisdom of cattle-sacrificing primitives who thought every
animal species in the world lived within walking distance of
Noah's house.
 
Back
Top