Need Bees Removed?
International
Beekeeping Forums
August 23, 2014, 01:39:41 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: 24/7 Ventrilo Voice chat -click for instructions and free software here
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar bee removal Login Register Chat(1)  

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Keep your hands off my rights and my guns!  (Read 12095 times)
luvin honey
Super Bee
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 1540

Location: Central WI


« Reply #120 on: December 21, 2012, 03:18:20 PM »

Because, what? The dictators of other nations are going to come us on foot, with guns? You who are afraid of your government, and will die over your right to have guns to fight your government, what do you think your government is going to come to you with? America has the largest defense in the world, by far. Your cache of guns will protect you from that, if they go rogue? Doesn't make any sense to me whatsoever.

Yes.

You can not win a war without "boots on the ground". That is a fact. If you want to occupy a country you must do it on foot.

Sure you can nuke a country and destroy it but you have to be on the ground to control it. Common sense says you don't completely destroy a country you want to take over because you lose all the benefits you were fighting for in the first place. Why would you want to start from scratch and rebuild infrastructure?

Where do I get these crazy ideas? What is my source? I was a US Army officer for enough years that I am the source. That is the belief and the practice of the US Army and that is the way war works. I don't know about this because I read it on the internet. I know it because I have done it.

You chose to ignore facts and make arguments using only feelings. You accused a disabled veteran of fearing his government and attempted to school me on the strength of the US military and apparently assumed I am a nut with a "cache of guns".

See what happens when you try to make arguments with no facts to back them up?
Rumings, I said "those who fear.' I have no idea if you do or not. And I'm not trying to school anyone. I might be falsely assuming that the sheer size of our military budget would cause us to have some military strenght. Is this incorrect? I don't have "feelings" about our govt attacking us as citizens, as to me it falls in the realm of fantasy. How the heck do you get tax dollars from dead people? Maybe I'm missing a crucial point here.
Logged

The pedigree of honey
Does not concern the bee;
A clover, any time, to him
Is aristocracy.
---Emily Dickinson
luvin honey
Super Bee
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 1540

Location: Central WI


« Reply #121 on: December 21, 2012, 03:24:27 PM »

As for your last comments, I have no idea why these discussions need to get so rude so fast. I've never organized a soccer fundraiser, so you have me there.

When you want to assume everything for me (including what I will or won't look up), what's the point of having a conversation. You can just have it for me. I'm familiar with guerilla tactics, as I believe that's probably why we are still in the Middle East.

Please tell me where I have ever suggested disarming. Please tell me, or is this the nonstop conservative belief that underlies every single conversation about guns. I'd happily live in a gun-free household, but I don't. I don't want a disarmed America, but I do want some of the things I've mentioned earlier in the thread. Please read them. And clearly, 3 seconds in a thread like this teaches me that not everyone is like me. It would lovely if you would stop being so condescending.

Again, thanks for being insulting, but I know exactly what Obama comment was referred to. It was hot news in the so-called liberal media. Bjornbee repeated that comment and took it as his own when he stated "Of course I am one they say "clings to their religion and guns""... You accuse me of being insulting. I truly didn't mean to be. I hate these types of conversations that devolve into hatefulness and don't do anything to help others understand other points of view. What a shame and what a waste.

I don't believe that individuals could fight our entire military, but if you do, then I will respectfully acknowledge that you may be right, having served in the military. I would request you at least attempt some civility in return. I'm honest to goodness too weary of these types of conversations.
Logged

The pedigree of honey
Does not concern the bee;
A clover, any time, to him
Is aristocracy.
---Emily Dickinson
BjornBee
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3773


Location: Lewisberry, PA


« Reply #122 on: December 21, 2012, 03:35:08 PM »

The reason we get to use terms like "fantasy" and "hypothetical", is that we are an armed country. Many countries were not armed and they paid the price from within by their own governments. There was nothing hypothetical of fantasy about what happened when citizens could not fight back.

You have Obama calling republicans "enemies". We have unions saying they should "take out" the opposition. And you have activists calling for obama to jail those that oppose him. And I am sure at least some on the left would agree. It does not take much in a church congregation or a political rally, to muster up the calls against another if your on the side that think they are in the right.

http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2012/12/14/harry-belafonte-msnbc-criticized-over-jailing-republicans-remarks/

In my opinion, there are more reason to have guns, then the false hope of safety and security of giving up one's right to defend yourself.

I bet many other normal rationale citizens of past conflicts never thought it would come to that. They thought they were above all that. they were too smart. Those sitting at the Olympics probably never thought the place would be blown up a few years later. Of course I never thought I would hear an American president say the vile and vindictive things I hear from this president.

You think civilizations last forever? You think this one will. You are living a pipe dream to assume that no evil will ever cross your path. Of course when you think it can never happen, you increase the odds that it will.
Logged

www.bjornapiaries.com
www.pennapic.org
Please Support "National Honey Bee Day"
Northern States Queen Breeders Assoc.  www.nsqba.com
luvin honey
Super Bee
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 1540

Location: Central WI


« Reply #123 on: December 21, 2012, 03:41:12 PM »

One more comment. I'm on another forum. When I mentioned on there my views on guns and violence, plus the fact that I live in a house with 16 guns, I was immediately cast as the crazy, irresponsible, violence-enabling person.

Here I'm accused of being on a much different end of the spectrum.

It makes me wonder if there is any middle ground left anymore, which is exactly where I reside.

ETA: Bjornbee, I've learned about the rise and fall of civilizations. Can't tell you how much I love (not) being told what I think and feel when you could simply ask. I believe America may be on its way down. I do not assume evil will never cross my path. I'm older than 12 years old and have lived in the world for a while. Choosing to believe there is more good than bad does not make me stupid, idiotic, enveloped in fantasy, mentally unstable, or even just ignorant. I've had the blessing of seeing far, FAR more good in people all my 38 years on the planet. I know evil exists. I know hatefulness exists. I experience enough of it right here.

I hate getting religious on a forum--too much room for misinterpretation--but I believe in a higher power. And I don't believe the persistence of my physical body/life is the most important thing happening. Civilizations will come and go. Evil and good will continue. And my main purpose in life is not to get too wrapped up in any of it.

Yes, I understand (as mentioned before) that any nation who was once a colony has a particular history of wanting to remain armed. I don't know how to have gun rights (which I believe in ) coexist with other rights (like those of my children to go to school without fear of being massacred), but I did list a lot of ideas earlier.

I don't know about the vile and vindictive comments from Obama. I haven't been following politics too closely, but feel free to show me some links and I'll read them.
Logged

The pedigree of honey
Does not concern the bee;
A clover, any time, to him
Is aristocracy.
---Emily Dickinson
S.Rummings
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 82

Location: Houtzdale, PA


WWW
« Reply #124 on: December 21, 2012, 03:45:20 PM »

luvin honey-
I don't intend to be rude either. I am just responding to some pretty wild claims that you are posting as fact.
I also never mentioned fighting our own military although that is one of the original intents behind the 2nd amendment.

Yes, individuals fight armies, inflict losses, and escape to do it again. It is happening right now. That individual would be difficult to take out with a cruise missile.

As far as the conversation devolving into hatefulness I hope you understand I am very far from hating you. We just disagree on a few things and believe it or not we probably agree on quite a few things as well.

I would also like to live in a world where people don't kill each other and guns are not necessary. This is not the world we live in but we are stuck with it. I will gladly give up all my guns... as long as everyone else does first.
Logged
luvin honey
Super Bee
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 1540

Location: Central WI


« Reply #125 on: December 21, 2012, 03:50:34 PM »

Thanks, s.rummings, I appreciate the kind words. I think I have been in too many forum arguments for too long and instead of getting thick skinned am getting thinner skinned.

I really wasn't aiming the "fight our govt" comment at you. I was responding to your comment about foreign invaders, and extending that thought into "those who" feel at risk from their own. Do you think (not arguing, genuinely wondering) that the 2nd amendment should ever be amended again to acknowledge that the weapons allowed when it was written, are far different from those manufactured today?

I'm genuinely interested in the views everyone offers here, but sometimes the insults fly (including from me, I'm sorry) and it gets hard to sort out the message from the emotion. But maybe that's just my problem.
Logged

The pedigree of honey
Does not concern the bee;
A clover, any time, to him
Is aristocracy.
---Emily Dickinson
Keith13
Super Bee
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1764


Location: Baton Rouge, LA


« Reply #126 on: December 21, 2012, 04:03:07 PM »

Thanks, s.rummings, I appreciate the kind words. I think I have been in too many forum arguments for too long and instead of getting thick skinned am getting thinner skinned.

I really wasn't aiming the "fight our govt" comment at you. I was responding to your comment about foreign invaders, and extending that thought into "those who" feel at risk from their own. Do you think (not arguing, genuinely wondering) that the 2nd amendment should ever be amended again to acknowledge that the weapons allowed when it was written, are far different from those manufactured today?

I'm genuinely interested in the views everyone offers here, but sometimes the insults fly (including from me, I'm sorry) and it gets hard to sort out the message from the emotion. But maybe that's just my problem.

I do not. Where would that end and what doors would that open? You could move on to the first amendment next and say the free speech when it was written is different now. I like my constitution just fine the way it is. The last thing I want with this incredibly divided country is for them to start rewriting the foundation of this country
Logged
BjornBee
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3773


Location: Lewisberry, PA


« Reply #127 on: December 21, 2012, 04:17:18 PM »

More than happy to back up what I say to help inform those lacking the details.

I already posted the urging of the president to lock up those that oppose him in the last post.
http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2012/12/14/harry-belafonte-msnbc-criticized-over-jailing-republicans-remarks/
Keep in mind that this was not some out of the way obscure interview. It was on MSNBC, the vile left wing attack news organization.

Here is the President calling the half that oppose him as the "enemy".
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2010/11/obama-i-shouldnt-have-used-the-word-enemies/1

Here is the president calling some as a group that clings to their guns and religion. As if either one is wrong.

http://blog.christianitytoday.com/ctliveblog/archives/2008/04/obama_they_clin.html

Let me know what other details you may want to know.

More than happy to point out what kind president we have.  grin
Logged

www.bjornapiaries.com
www.pennapic.org
Please Support "National Honey Bee Day"
Northern States Queen Breeders Assoc.  www.nsqba.com
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15080


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #128 on: December 21, 2012, 04:37:46 PM »

Quote
I don't have "feelings" about our govt attacking us as citizens, as to me it falls in the realm of fantasy. How the heck do you get tax dollars from dead people? Maybe I'm missing a crucial point here.


you are.  you are missing the entire history of the world.  more people, in modern history, have become slaves to their government through inaction and inattention, than through direct attacks from their government. while there are dictatorships installed after revolutions, those dictatorships were rarely the goal.  the more common way of becoming oppressed is through the invitation of the people.   Hitler, Castro, Chavez...etc.  revolution or election, what all of the totalitarian government have done in common, is to disarm the population.  why?  because a disarmed population is a compliant population.  disarmed they can't even be an aggravation.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/12/18/us-usa-shooting-obama-options-idUSBRE8BH04120121218

http://www.infowars.com/reuters-calls-for-obama-to-act-as-dictator-to-ban-guns/

and we have people who are advocating this very type of dictatorial action.  how many of them would willingly give this president the power to do as he pleases?
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
iddee
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 5980

Location: Randleman, NC


« Reply #129 on: December 21, 2012, 05:24:28 PM »

 ""Perhaps my head is in the sand,""

PERHAPS??  lau lau lau

So you are telling us that your family, with guns and ammo in the house, would sit quiet and let Chinese or other soldiers gun down your neighbors as they came down the street.  No wonder you side with the bummer. You sound like you want to see the USA die just like he does.
Logged

"Listen to the mustn'ts, child. Listen to the don'ts. Listen to the shouldn'ts, the impossibles, the won'ts. Listen to the never haves, then listen close to me . . . Anything can happen, child. Anything can be"

*Shel Silverstein*
BjornBee
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3773


Location: Lewisberry, PA


« Reply #130 on: December 21, 2012, 05:54:26 PM »

Ok...if were talking fantasy, then imagine this. The apes are democrates or government types. As they say "from the ministry of science". If this guy would of had a few full auto assault weapons, this whole scene could of turned out differently.
Take Your Stinkin' Paws Off Me You darn Dirty Ape!


The scene actually does look like a union gathering of thugs.  grin

I think those who want to keep guns should use the phrase "Get your stinking paws of me you darn dirty apes". It could be "Get your stinking paws off my guns you darn dirty apes!" Of course that would have someone crying "racist" I am sure.

Anyway....this would be one scenario that if humans had more assault weapons, this whole outcome could of been avoided.  Wink

Logged

www.bjornapiaries.com
www.pennapic.org
Please Support "National Honey Bee Day"
Northern States Queen Breeders Assoc.  www.nsqba.com
luvin honey
Super Bee
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 1540

Location: Central WI


« Reply #131 on: December 21, 2012, 07:27:57 PM »

""Perhaps my head is in the sand,""

PERHAPS??  lau lau lau

So you are telling us that your family, with guns and ammo in the house, would sit quiet and let Chinese or other soldiers gun down your neighbors as they came down the street.  No wonder you side with the bummer. You sound like you want to see the USA die just like he does.
I can always count on iddee to keep the conversation at a civil level.

Nobody can know what they'd do until the situation arises, but right now my religious and moral views would not allow me to kill another human being. You're giving me false scenarios, though. I could toss a bunch your way, but what would be the point. We could suppose this and suppose that until the cows come home. I'm amazed at the animosity towards someone desiring to NOT kill another human. Amazing.
Logged

The pedigree of honey
Does not concern the bee;
A clover, any time, to him
Is aristocracy.
---Emily Dickinson
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15080


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #132 on: December 21, 2012, 08:00:12 PM »

Quote
We could suppose this and suppose that until the cows come home.

it's called gaming situations.  we do it in the military and smart people do it in life.  if you don't think about what might happen, you will not have a chance of surviving what does happen.

it is pointed out as one of the main reasons that some people survive things like plane crashes....
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
iddee
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 5980

Location: Randleman, NC


« Reply #133 on: December 21, 2012, 08:42:32 PM »

Maybe if you had crawled through the jungles of 'nam with me you might have a different point of view on killing.

No, killing is not on my list of fun things to do, but neither is being killed.
Logged

"Listen to the mustn'ts, child. Listen to the don'ts. Listen to the shouldn'ts, the impossibles, the won'ts. Listen to the never haves, then listen close to me . . . Anything can happen, child. Anything can be"

*Shel Silverstein*
divemaster1963
Field Bee
***
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 572


Location: Gray, Ga. USA.

God Protect and watch over our sons and daughters.


« Reply #134 on: December 22, 2012, 12:01:23 AM »

. Do you think (not arguing, genuinely wondering) that the 2nd amendment should ever be amended again to acknowledge that the weapons allowed when it was written, are far different from those manufactured today?


I believe I can answer this question. the founders wrote the 2ND amendment With the knowledge of the weapons used during that time were the same as the weapons used by the then military at hand. so in seeing that would it not be the same as the 2ND amendment allowing the people access to the same weapons that are manufactured for the military? You can have the same weapons You are just required to register them and have them inspected.

John
Logged
divemaster1963
Field Bee
***
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 572


Location: Gray, Ga. USA.

God Protect and watch over our sons and daughters.


« Reply #135 on: December 22, 2012, 12:10:28 AM »

""Perhaps my head is in the sand,""

PERHAPS??  lau lau lau

So you are telling us that your family, with guns and ammo in the house, would sit quiet and let Chinese or other soldiers gun down your neighbors as they came down the street.  No wonder you side with the bummer. You sound like you want to see the USA die just like he does.
I can always count on iddee to keep the conversation at a civil level.

Nobody can know what they'd do until the situation arises, but right now my religious and moral views would not allow me to kill another human being. You're giving me false scenarios, though. I could toss a bunch your way, but what would be the point. We could suppose this and suppose that until the cows come home. I'm amazed at the animosity towards someone desiring to NOT kill another human. Amazing.

This is the stickler! The government in the White House now is using just that. WHAT IF? They are just striking will the iron is hot. in their words to get legislation pass that would benefit then in their supports eyes.

John
Logged
S.Rummings
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 82

Location: Houtzdale, PA


WWW
« Reply #136 on: December 22, 2012, 12:46:21 AM »

Do you think (not arguing, genuinely wondering) that the 2nd amendment should ever be amended again to acknowledge that the weapons allowed when it was written, are far different from those manufactured today?

So you are saying that the constitution was written in the time of black powder rifles so the 2nd amendment was not intended to allow private citizens to have what many call "assault weapons"? I believe that is what you are getting at.

Here are my thoughts:
In 1776 the rifles that everyone used for hunting were the rifles used by the military. If fact, many took their own rifle with them to fight the war. The technology was not what we have today but private citizens had weapons that were just as capable as the military. There was balance. At no time were private citizens restricted by law to muskets while only the military had the Kentucky Long Rifle for example.

Today, the US Army uses the M-16 and other countries use the AK-47 or something similar as a standard issue weapon. Both the full auto M-16A1 and the 3 round burst M-16A2 are heavily regulated and not normally allowed for private ownership. All fully automatic weapons are heavily regulated and just anyone can't get one without a federal license. The US Army moved away from full auto and went with rifles that would either fire 1 round per trigger pull or optionally could fire 3 rounds per trigger pull because full auto is incredibly inaccurate and leaves you out of ammo in seconds after missing your target.

An example rifle that is available to the general public is the AR-15. It looks like an M-16 but only fires 1 bullet at a time. Full auto & 3 round burst is not an option. All in all, the military & law enforcement may have a slight rate of fire advantage but I am going to go ahead and call it an even match.

Then like now there is a pretty even playing field between the average infantry soldier and a private citizen. Yes I am ignoring tanks, missiles, crew served weapons like .50 cal machine guns and an individual going head to head with a military unit would quickly be turned into a pink mist but I am talking 2nd amendment weapons.

As technology has increased over the years, better weapons are now in the hands of evil people. These people may be terrorists, criminals, foreign militaries or even the local police chief who just cracks some night and starts shooting up the town. The 2nd amendment was perfectly designed to allow the private individual to protect himself, his family, his town, and his country from these attackers. Should you be limited to single shot hunting rifles? Only if all the evil people above are also restricted and that can never be the case.

So I guess you are asking should the 2nd amendment allow military type weapons? It did when it was written and it should now. You have to be able to defend yourself against the guns that are out there. I don't think any changes need made.

Please note I left out machine guns, that I referred to as crew served weapons. That is not a weapon for an individual infantry soldier and beyond the capability for a single individual to properly maintain and deploy. I excluded tanks, missiles, grenades and all the things that gun rights supporters are always falsely accused of wanting because I do not believe the 2nd amendment intended to include these items.

Amendment II; Constitution of the United States of America:

    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

That’s pretty clear. The right is granted to The People, not to the State. In fact, the State is prohibited from infringing the right. What did it mean to be a “well regulated Militia”? Well, the Militia consisted of every able bodied man between the ages of 15 and 60 not inclusive. So, what did well regulated mean?

To regulate was to make regular, meaning, orderly, disciplined and quite predictable, as in, to regulate a clock. In the context of human beings, to regulate them is to bring a person or body of persons to order; in military terms, it would mean to become well trained and “regular” in the military and martial arts.

In the pre-Revolutionary period, in military parlance, regulation was near synonymous with training and drilling, with the goal of regulating or making regular. To this day, the term regular soldier is a military term that means, precisely, professional soldier. Not a conscript or draftee; not a militiaman; not a part-time soldier. All of these might become more regulated, but they could never or seldom hope to achieve the level of professionalism of the regular soldier unless and until they lived the life of a soldier full-time.

In pre-Revolutionary times, the most awesome and feared soldier on any potential field of battle was the red-coated British Regular; he was referred to as a Regular because of his utter predictability. He would not only exhibit good order in his marching, uniform and equipment, but he could be absolutely counted upon to not break ranks under fire. Any unit of Regulars that would be put into the field by the British could be expected to be a virtual killing machine, because of their extreme regulation. They would be referred to as a well regulated military unit.

So, in the language of the day, the authors of Amendment II intended the citizen-soldier – meaning, able bodied men aged between 15 and 60 to be well regulated, meaning, precisely, well trained in the use of military arms. I submit that one cannot become well trained in the use of military arms in the absence of military arms.  
Logged
S.Rummings
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 82

Location: Houtzdale, PA


WWW
« Reply #137 on: December 22, 2012, 01:50:44 AM »

It makes me wonder if there is any middle ground left anymore, which is exactly where I reside.

No, there isn't really any middle ground. Those who what guns banned want them all gone and they have stated this. Their published plan includes incremental reductions until they are completely outlawed. War has been declared on a long standing American way of life and you can't fight a war "a little" because the other side is coming full force. How serious do I believe the anti gunners are? Serious enough to find and convince a mentally ill person to shoot up a school so the result could be used for political gain. They would justify it as sacrificing a few now so they could save thousands later. The ends justify the means for these people. This is easily within the capability of the president to accomplish. This is probably impossible for you to see from the valley in the middle but stand on the mountaintop on either side and you will see clearly that this is either something you would do or that you could see the other side doing. Where do you see yourself standing when you pick a side?

Here are some other thoughts on the middle ground:

Revelation 3:15-16 I know your works: you are neither cold nor hot. Would that you were either cold or hot! So, because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth.  -- Jesus

or in case you aren't religious

Walk on road, hm? Walk left side, safe. Walk right side, safe. Walk middle, sooner or later get squish just like grape. Here, karate, same thing. Either you karate do "yes" or karate do "no." You karate do "guess so,"  just like grape. Understand?   -- Mr. Miyagi
Logged
luvin honey
Super Bee
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 1540

Location: Central WI


« Reply #138 on: December 22, 2012, 11:12:46 AM »

. Do you think (not arguing, genuinely wondering) that the 2nd amendment should ever be amended again to acknowledge that the weapons allowed when it was written, are far different from those manufactured today?


I believe I can answer this question. the founders wrote the 2ND amendment With the knowledge of the weapons used during that time were the same as the weapons used by the then military at hand. so in seeing that would it not be the same as the 2ND amendment allowing the people access to the same weapons that are manufactured for the military? You can have the same weapons You are just required to register them and have them inspected.

John
Exactly. So we either super arm the public in respect to the 2nd amendment or we acknowledge that perhaps we're in a different place now then we were then.
Logged

The pedigree of honey
Does not concern the bee;
A clover, any time, to him
Is aristocracy.
---Emily Dickinson
luvin honey
Super Bee
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 1540

Location: Central WI


« Reply #139 on: December 22, 2012, 11:14:27 AM »

Maybe if you had crawled through the jungles of 'nam with me you might have a different point of view on killing.

No, killing is not on my list of fun things to do, but neither is being killed.
So thankful I've never had to be at war.

But that's not the situation we find ourselves in now. So, another false argument.
Logged

The pedigree of honey
Does not concern the bee;
A clover, any time, to him
Is aristocracy.
---Emily Dickinson
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Beemaster's Beekeeping Ring
Previous | Home | Join | Random | Next
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines | Sitemap Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 1.178 seconds with 22 queries.

Google visited last this page August 11, 2014, 10:41:22 AM