[Omitting heading to avoid redundancy...]

Right. I think I have possibly had enough of the "Feeling", "Listening to", and "Tasting" information. Maybe I'll revive it later, but all I've gotten for it is teasing (Larry) for my New-York-Times-style headings, so it is gone for now.

Now, on to more fun things:

I saw a duck in the subway today!! It was really, really cute. This girl was holding it, wrapped in a blanket, and it's so much cuter and fluffier than one would imagine ducks to be. It looked something like this, and it occurred to me that maybe we could have a duck for a pet instead of a dog, which is what my sister wants (the dog, that is), and which we're not allowed to have in the building. But then I went online and found out that most people keep ducks in their backyards, and that while there are people that keep ducks in apartments, it tends to be complicated: you need to have a constantly clean pool of water for them, and it tends to be difficult... so, no duck for me :-(

But, yes-- only in New York would you see a duck on the subway. And an even stranger part was that aside from my mom and me-- we were shamelessly staring at the duck and the girl holding it-- there was only one other girl that expressed any sort of interest in it. Everyone else just sat there, not even looking, as if they see ducks commuting to work every day.

Well, that's it for today, except for the following (unrelated) quote, a part of which I found when I was taking a typing test here (it's a cool site -- check it out!), and the rest of which I found here:

If for every rule there is an exception, then we have established that there is an exception to every rule.
If we accept "For every rule there is an exception" as a rule, then we must concede that there may not be an exception after all, since the rule states that there is always the possibility of exception, and if we follow it to its logical end we must agree that there can be an exception to the rule that for every rule there is an exception.

So that's it for now... Email me!

Natalie

Feeling: Amazed
Listening to: As usual, people talking in background in office
Tasting: Nothing

I just came across the topic of Harry Potter, and how Christians are against it because it's "pagan" and all that... and I was reading this quote from a group called Concerned Women for America, and their discussion of how Harry Potter shouldn't be read in school because it's anti-Christian. Somewhere in there, there may be a point about how public schools shouldn't be allowed to preach anti-religious sentiments (i.e., go against a certain religion - because that would be as bad as leaning towards a certain religion), but it's obscured by what these people are actually saying. I mean, I really can't believe these people actually believe in the stuff they're saying:

"...pagans are already overrunning the country, if the schools’ hostility to the Bible and all things Christian are any indication. Why should Christians be complacent while America's Christian heritage, including Christmas, is ejected from the public schools? Why should Islam be given identical recognition in all matters? There is no Islamic George Washington or John Adams. There is no religious freedom as we know it in countries dominated by Islam. Religious liberty is a Christian concept.

"Unless America’s Christian heritage is vigorously defended, all the while paganism and other religions are presented as acceptable and even superior, then it will be no wonder that Christians might wake up some day to find America an alien land."

Can you believe that people are actually saying this? I'm kind of speechless... I mean, they're saying that since religious liberty is a Christian concept (which, first of all, it's not: since when does Christianity have a heritage of religious acceptance? I mean, I'm pretty sure the only reason America has freedom of religion is because Christianity was so completely intolerant for so long) -- so because tolerance is a Christian concept, that means that we don't actually have to be tolerant? There's kind of this huge contradiction in there that just completely amazes me. I'm just still trying to figure out how this woman can talk about religious freedom and then, in the same breath, tell us that we shouldn't recognize Islamic people as having an equal say in what public schools teach.

Okay... rant over. But do reply and tell me what you think!

Natalie

References: This is from an editor's response to a letter written in response to an anti-Harry Potter article. To see it, go here. And there are some other vaguely valid points in the response, but they're completely overshadowed by these two paragarphs.

Feeling: Satisfied
Listening to: People talk in background at office
Tasting: Juicy Fruit

Quick celebratory post: I have made a comment feature available on my site!!!

Yes, congratulate me. Do it! Congratulate me by leaving me a comment!

Natalie

[previous post, continued]

Oh, yes, citing sources:

The press packet is here.

Natalie

Feeling: Tired
Listening to: People talk in background at office
Tasting: Juicy Fruit

So I was looking up stuff about earthquakes after seeing 10.5 this week - and I came across a press release from Washington (the state, not D.C.) about earthquakes and the movie. And under a heading titled "Don’t call 911 after an earthquake, unless you have a life-threatening emergency!", it said the following:

The most common call following an earthquake is, “I’d like to report an earthquake.”

Which I thought was really funny.

Email me if you thought this was funny, too.

Natalie