08-28-2006, 09:52 PM
I'd say no as well, but the language regarding other species sounds a bit odd, unless they mean extra-terrestrials.
Well, I mean unless they're talking about hairless dogs...
And of course, aquatic mammals...
And one can't forget platypuses, I mean all of these make great spouses and are in need of direct benefits derived from achieving marital status.
OK, those responsible for that last bit of scathing humor have been sacked.
We're still in favor of a no, especially if there is another more detailed revision in process that addresses the odd language.
BTW, just because I'm poking a bit of fun it shouldn't be construed as a lack of respect for the original intent of the resolution, which I respect a great deal.
Well, I mean unless they're talking about hairless dogs...
And of course, aquatic mammals...
And one can't forget platypuses, I mean all of these make great spouses and are in need of direct benefits derived from achieving marital status.
OK, those responsible for that last bit of scathing humor have been sacked.
We're still in favor of a no, especially if there is another more detailed revision in process that addresses the odd language.
BTW, just because I'm poking a bit of fun it shouldn't be construed as a lack of respect for the original intent of the resolution, which I respect a great deal.