🚀 go-pugleaf

TarlaStar wrote:
> 
> mwdamick@unity.ncsu.edu (Matthew William Damick) wrote:
> 
> >[snip]
> 
{big old hairy snip, having to do with women keeping "birth name" or
taking husband's name at marriage}
> 
Just two quick points:

One, TarlaStar, although in some ways I agree with you, and you do make
some good points, there is one small thing you have forgotten.  Your
birth name was (in all likelihood) given to you by the man your mother
was married to (I am not saying "your father" simply to point out that
only the mother is always KNOWN, not that your mother's husband was not
your father), having given up her own "birth name", (you see the trend
here, I am sure).  Therefore, perhaps you should take on your mother's
"birth name", oops, there's that little problem again.  It's a long
chain you're bucking, but your heart is definitely in the right place. 
Maybe we should all go with made up names, or change to a matriarchal
structure, since there is, again, no doubt, ever, as to the mother. 
(and please, nobody get technical on adopted/abandoned babies)

Two, Demick, your mind is so obviously closed to any but your own
viewpoint that you are rather boring in your reiterations.  Maybe if you
tried looking outward and or forward, you would not have so much trouble
understanding (if not appreciating) other's opinions.  It is not so much
which opinion you hold that is ridiculous, but that you cannot sensibly
argue a point, but simply keep saying "that's the way it is".  Remember,
at one time, so was sleeping in a cave.

(btw, how did you make out on the seat up/seat down issue before that
first date?)