[Magdalen] Texas was / Re: EC v. ED of Ft. Worth

[Roland Orr]

Very comfortable!
Roland



On 21/10/2014 17:04, Jay Weigel wrote:
> Roland, it's because during her 13 1/2 hour filibuster (a remarkable feat
> in itself) against a restrictive anti-abortion law the Texas legislature
> was attempting to pass--and eventually did, but not on that occasion--she
> wore pink running shoes.
>
> On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 12:00 PM, Roland Orr <roland at orr55.org> wrote:
>
>> Wendy-pink-shoes - could she not wear blue shoes?
>> Any more info??
>> Roland
>> UK
>> who attended Ike's first election
>>
>>
>> On 21/10/2014 16:01, Lynn Ronkainen wrote:
>>
>>> (regarding different states)
>>>
>>> As a resident of TX, I am ever mindful that it is not easy to just 'up
>>> and move', when the state one lives in becomes an anathema to one's
>>> self...  It is near impossible to distance one's self from the governmental
>>> policies enshrined under our current governor of 14 years. I'm voting early
>>> (and I wish often <g>) this week but the possibility of changing leadership
>>> parties in this state, in this election cycle, is doubtful.
>>>
>>> Those who must be obeyed keep chanting that the 'majority' of Texans did
>>> this or that (voted this way or that way), but in fact only 18% of our
>>> population voted in the last general election! Our policies do not really
>>> represent the 'will' of the people, but sadly, I don't see it changing much
>>> either. It is my hope that as people rush here for jobs, and we do have
>>> them and that is happening, that they bring a different social
>>> consciousness with them and slowly turn things around.
>>>
>>> My real fear is that if the current Attorney General (second in command
>>> to governor) is elected governor, the same old, same old will just escalate
>>> here - the only problem is that our state government is truly a case of the
>>> Emperor's new state/new clothes, and I'm not sure how many more years it
>>> can sustain itself without substance, and without imploding.
>>>
>>> Wendy-pink-shoes is very probably not going to get elected, but I can
>>> hope. And vote.
>>>
>>> Lynn
>>>
>>>
>>> website: www.ichthysdesigns.com
>>>
>>> When I stand before God at the end of my life I would hope that I have
>>> not a single bit of talent left and could say, "I used everything You gave
>>> me." attributed to Erma Bombeck
>>>
>>> Thomas Merton writes, “People may spend their whole lives climbing the
>>> ladder of success only to find, once they reach the top, that the ladder is
>>> leaning against the wrong wall.”
>>>
>>> "What you seek is seeking you." - Rumi
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>> From: "Jay Weigel" <jay.weigel at gmail.com>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2014 8:58 AM
>>> To: <magdalen at herberthouse.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [Magdalen] EC v. ED of Ft. Worth
>>>
>>>   Um, Grace, that's the case in SC.
>>>> Sometimes I think the solution for Texas is to pull all our federal funds
>>>> and military bases, build a fence on the northern border, secede from
>>>> them,
>>>> and offer unconditional amnesty to all Texans wishing to be in the real
>>>> U.S. of A. /snark off
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 8:22 AM, Roy Murphy <roy.murphy at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>   The title of the case is odd from our point of view. It is TEC v. Jack
>>>>> Iker
>>>>> et al. I believe the titling of the case was changed by the Iker
>>>>> faction in
>>>>> the appeals process.
>>>>> On Oct 20, 2014 11:09 PM, "Grace Cangialosi" <gracecan at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm still confused. You said the conservatives 'left, wanting to take
>>>>>> everything' and the Supreme Court of Texas gave it back to them.
>>>>>> So, in other words, they got to take everything?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why is the Episcopal Church suing the Episcopal Diocese? Aren't they
>>>>> on
>>>>>> the same side? I would think the Episcopal Church or Diocese would be
>>>>> suing
>>>>>> the breakaway folks...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Oct 20, 2014, at 6:00 PM, "Lynn Ronkainen" <
>>>>> ichthys89 at comcast.net>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> The conservatives 'left' wanting to 'take everything'.... the
>>>>> SCourt > > of
>>>>>> TX gave it back to them... it's still not settled as you can see.
>>>>> The > TX
>>>>>> SCourt still fancies that TX is a Republic, IMNSHO...
>>>>>>> Lynn
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> website: www.ichthysdesigns.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When I stand before God at the end of my life I would hope that I >
>>>>>> have
>>>>>> not a single bit of talent left and could say, "I used everything You
>>>>> gave
>>>>>> me." attributed to Erma Bombeck
>>>>>>> Thomas Merton writes, "People may spend their whole lives climbing
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>> ladder of success only to find, once they reach the top, that the >
>>>>> ladder
>>>>> is
>>>>>> leaning against the wrong wall."
>>>>>>> "What you seek is seeking you." - Rumi
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> From: "Grace Cangialosi" <gracecan at gmail.com>
>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, October 20, 2014 4:54 PM
>>>>>>> To: <magdalen at herberthouse.org>
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Magdalen] EC v. ED of Ft. Worth
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So is this Episcopal Church vs. Episcopal Diocese? Which group are
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>> good guys?
>>>>>>>>> On Oct 20, 2014, at 5:26 PM, Roy Murphy <roy.murphy at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> The Episcopal church won in the state district court and the >
>>>>>>>> appeals
>>>>>> court
>>>>>>>>> but the TX Supreme Court ruled in favor of the former bishop of
>>>>> Ft.
>>>>>> Worth.
>>>>>>>>> TEC appealed to SCOTUS. The brief is not a bad argument. It has
>>>>> already
>>>>>>>>> gotten a few amicus curae briefs in support.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> SCOTUS hasn't yet decided whether to grant cert on the case. The
>>>>>> justices
>>>>>>>>> will discuss it on 12/31 and decide whether to hear the case, deny
>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> request they hear it or hold it over for another conference.
>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 20, 2014 12:26 PM, "Jay Weigel" <jay.weigel at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Huh? Details, please.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 12:03 PM, Roy Murphy > >>>>> <
>>>>> roy.murphy at gmail.com
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> The Supreme Court docket says the case was distributed for the
>>>>> 10/31
>>>>>>>>>>> conference. We could hear further news on 11/1. Either grant, >
>>>>>>>>>> deny
>>>>> or
>>>>>>>>>>> relist.
>>>>>