Very well put, Chapter 31. I am saddened by the thought of fellow Bradbury lovers being driven away from this site. I too hope they will reconsider. I'm glad to hear about the Ignore function on this board. Nard, you are too funny, trying it out on yourself! Of course, sometimes I think my students have pressed some kind of Ignore button for me!! Anyway, I am also bothered by postings on this site by those who occasionally come aboard just to shake things up. I am so often tempted to write some scathing reply, but knowing that they will most likely respond with some juvenile equivalent of, "Well you're a doo doo head," or something ten times worse, I just tune them out. It seems like if we all just ignore them, they eventually skulk away, probably to find another board to pester. A loud silence (how's that for an oxymoron?)is sometimes the best deterrent.

I, also, have just found that Philnic and Lake are leaving us. I hope it is only a temporary hiatus from the board. At the end of "Farewell Summer," Quartermaine and Doug--who have been bitter enemies--reconcile. The reconciliation is through love. It is interesting to me that Bradbury, while not an orthodox christian, seems to understand that what drives the world is not hatred or judgement or self-righteousness or petty anger; but love. When asked what the highest law is, Christ's answer is unambiguous . . . it is love. When Doug and Quartermaine reconcile at the end of the novel, the impetus of reconciliation is love. Perhaps, in time, we can all understand that and be reconciled and rejoin each other here in a gentlemanly discussion about a man who seems to "get" the idea of love better than many others. Interestingly, one of my other favorite books--Jonathan Livingston Seagull--love is also the central theme. The seagull, who seeks perfection in flight, finds that perfection is in love.

I have found, over the years on this board, that when we stick to the topic of Bradbury and his works and related topics, we do well. It is one thing to stray a bit, but this is really not meant to be a forum for politically sensitive perspectives--especially when the effort to stay tethered to Bradbury-related themes is lost.

While Christians have every right to speak to their beliefs, and have, even, a responsibility to do so, the mandate of Christianity calls for a focus on love and tolerance and sensitivity to the fellowship of the human species. We are all God's creation. I hope that, on this board, we can stay tied to Bradbury, and rooted in love and tolerance. It is not necessary to say everything that pops into our heads.

Philnic and Lake. We will miss you and hope you rejoin. To the others, let's focus on Bradbury a little more, shall we?

Ok, I remember briefly encountering this thread and its topic of abortion, and then I lost track of it and could not find it again. Today I find it has returned, as the topic seems to bring out enormous emotional responses from both sides of the issue. I am old enough to remember a time when most high schools had at least one "specialist", a person who would get a girl out of trouble for a price, and usually into a hospital because of the infection or bleeding that accompanied the "Procedure". We do not want to go back there for any reason. Then, the issue is what do we do with the children of rape or insest or another unwanted situation. Who will give the child love and raise it in a loving home, or will it become another hate-filled person looking for revenge?
I wrote the following some time ago and I still think it is a viable answer to both sides of this issue. Belly up and take on one of these "situational" children, give it love, and make the world a better place. If not ready for that, then stay out of other people's lives and mind your own business. We all pay for this situation, one way or another, in the cost of the revengeful on society through crime or violence. Maybe science is the answer, not abortion, just the easy access to the morning after pill, etc. If you so strongly object to that, sign up to take on an unwanted child, I will support you.

How about those who are opposed to any kind of abortion begin a campaign to make adoption easier for those who are willing to make a home for unwanted children. Maybe the reason for the long adoption process is that 1) the state is too over protective of the children, wanting to ensure a loving and economically viable situation for the child, and possibly has a vested interest in delaying the process to support the adoption bureaucracy, and 2) the prospective parents are just too choosy, unwilling to take just any child but wanting a certain model with certain characteristics. Kind of like genetic engineering isn't it?
How about a pre-qualified list of parents who want children, meet a set of minimum economic standards, and the desirous parents, or parent, then take the next child that comes up for adoption? That would be a loving method for all concerned. All unwanted kids find acceptable, in the economic sense, homes and society solves a big problem, by enabling those who have a place in their hearts for the love and attention needed to raise an adopted child to find one in need of adoption. The criteria for qualification might be set at a certain minimal economic level and that is all that would be required to be a prospective parent.
Some such will have to be established to ensure that ALL unwanted children find a place in this world. Since their numbers are certain to increase when, and if, abortion is again relegated to the back alleys. We should start that campaign early and fix the adoption process proactively.

That's the most sensible thing written here in a long time, patrask, to which I would add some kids are not only merely unwanted, but come with serious challenges even their biological parents, let alone adoptive ones, are unable to take on.

It is never the child's fault that it is unplanned, unwanted, or born into poverty or some "low quality" of life.
Is it.

Enough said on this, I believe on both sides, as it were.

Be of good cheer, though, boardies, Philnic has said he may return when the smoke clears.

Now, I'm wondering how our friend Biplane is faring in Florida!!!
I don't know if he or his friends or loved ones are in any of the four counties declared disaster areas?!?!

Biplane assures me he's still alive.

I'm sad that there is an ignore button. To me it means that someone is being left out, of the loop or the conversation or whatever. I know how I would feel if I found out that all of my posts were being ignored, sad, thats how. I don't want anybody left out. Everybody has a right to at least be heard here, even the hooligans, and just maybe one kid will read that first sentence of Dandelion Wine or Martian Chronicles and be hooked for life after seeing our zeal for those stories here. That alone is a worthy thing! I want to hear the good and the bad. You can't turn it off in the real world, that's what makes the good stuff especially shine. I'm not saying that its not warranted, just not for me. Phil Knox has apologized and that's enough for me. I've done plenty of sin in my life that I wish I could take back, all I can do is keep on getting better and learning from the past mistakes and at the same time, not beat myself up over it or blame others. I don't want him or anyone else to leave, period. The reason we are all here is first and foremost to LOVE everyone, next, here specifically, to honor a man we hold in the highest esteem, Ray Bradbury!

Ditto. Everybody should have a button that says, “Down With Buttons”.

And everyone should have a button that says, “Pogo For President In ‘08”.

But on a serious note (in B Flat I think), “No.44 In ‘08”. (See Mark Twain).

That's beautiful, rocket.

thanks, dandy! may the waters grow still after the pebble is tossed...

''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

Why do the streets always seem wider on Sunday?

''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

I dunno, robo-rocket, the ignore thingy seems like a GREAT idea to me. You are obviously a stronger, better person than I. I'm just not that tolerant and If I repeatedly offend and intimidate anyone, then please put me on your ignore list.

================================================

"Kind and giving, all the rest is treason."

The Ignore button is my television dial most of the time.

It's been about 60 years since TV was invented. Why is so much of what's on it total garbage?

dandelion, this is why-
http://www.terramedia.co.uk/documents/vast_wasteland.htm

Tho a variety of inventors contributed to the invention of TV, it is generally considered to have been invented in the later 1920's.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Phil Knox,

"It's been about 60 years since TV was invented. Why is so much of what's on it total garbage?"

Sadly, this can, in my opinion, be said of all the arts.

In a democracy, we get what the majority "votes" for.