Guest guest Posted February 16, 2003 Report Share Posted February 16, 2003 Another syntactical quibble that adds nothing. We begin to see the pattern. It would have been, perhaps, more Quakerly to have addressed the substance of the question. Instead it's all a little word game, it seems. Interesting what is revealed. On Sunday, February 16, 2003, at 08:15 PM, (AT) (DOT) com wrote: >> Succeed in being a Quaker, as opposed to being a Baptist, a Hindu, or a >> Moslem, for instance. > > I don't know that " success " is the word I would use, was the point I was > trying to make. > The orthodox explanation is a crime: whoever made it, should have had his finger-prints taken. " --Charles Fort Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.