| There is a trait which all popularity has in common. This is
the simple trait of moistness. People in general are drawn to
moistness. Look in the mirror. Are your lips or eyes perhaps
just a slight bit dry? Examine your ears closely. There seems
to be just a bit of chafing going on around those lobes, isn't
there? And how about that neglected tongue muscle that you just
can't help but take for granted? Isn't it beginning to look
like a partially damaged pastry that your mother wouldn't even
feed to the dog?
Dry is bad. Moist is good. Moistness can be in the skin, the
hair, the teeth... even in the very heart of an individual.
Some people are moist naturally, but others are normally dry
by nature. The moist people have it made. But what about the
dry ones...the ones who aren't naturally blessed? Is there any
hope of somehow becoming more...wet? Fortunately, there is an
easy and simple solution for many people. The saving grace of
moist towelettes has been granted by the Lord to give assistance
when and where the need exists. Almost anyone can come up with
an easy excuse to tuck away into the corner for a few seconds
to adjust.
It is impossible to wipe too much, for the more we wipe ourselves
with moistness the better we will be liked by others. Some of
the most successful kings and queens of Europe used literally
hundreds of towelettes each month. It's no wonder that hoards
of thousands of people flocked to hear them speak and to watch
them as they ate or shopped. All famous, successful people have
found some unique way to make their bodies and, in fact, their
personalities wetter. Moist towelettes are but one way of achieving
this goal. The important thing to remember is that wetter equals
better. Whether on the outside or on the inside, this is thing
that makes others want to touch us and become part of that big
circular garden shade of life.
The meeting for Saturday, the 17th of February 2007 was called
to order. There were two first-time guests, five returning guests,
and eight alumni present. Mr. Beusse was appointed critic.
In programs, we had three guest speakers. Dr. Clark, the Dean
of Grady College, advised the audience to “be cool,” among other
things.
Mr. Kent, a former Society President and lately of the Southeastern
Legal Foundation, argued that America should make English its
official language.
Dr. Rogers, of the Classics Department, asked what it meant
to be Demosthenian in the sense of Demosthenes.
Following was the Alumni Debate. Mr. Theiss, an alumnus, presented
BIR: Forced immunization is moral.
Respectfully submitted, John Henry Theiss.
Ms. Bell, an alumna, said that vaccines must remain the choice
of those who suffer their unintended consequences.
Mr. Van Meter, an alumnus, said that it is impossible to obey
the harms principle as defined in the resolution, since humans
make choices every day that intrude on the rights of others.
Ms. Malik argued that while the harms principle exists in
America, it may not exist in the countries onto which America
is forcing vaccination.
Mr. Furr, an alumnus, said that certain immunizations have
resulted in more harm than good, which makes them not moral.
Mr. Misztal, an alumnus, asked who would be violating the
harms principle under the resolution: the vaccine givers or
recipients?
A guest noted that in rural areas, there isn't ready access
to good healthcare, and that req uired immunizations would alleviate
this problem.
Mr. Weeks said that we must support the harms principle, and
thus the resolution.
Ms. Keyes-Blumer reminded us that some countries have undertaken
mass sterilization under the guise of vaccination, and that
the resolution discourages health education by assuming populations
don't understand infectious disease.
Mr. Vaudo said that there must be a way of vaccinating without
infringing on others' liberties.
Mr. Weiss the Greater argued that profit-driven pharmaceutical
companies were the main purveyors of forced vaccinations, and
that forcing a virus into one's body is akin to forcing one
to have an abortion.
A guest argued that vaccines risk illness.
Mr. Broach reminded us that he is a big fan of Darwinism,
and that stupid, unvaccinated people should die anyway.
Mr. Hansen said that, smallpox and polio aside, most viruses
require nearly everyone to be vaccinated in order for them to
be effective, an impractical solution.
Mr. Pearl stated that forced vaccinations aren't moral if
indirect harm is caused by upholding the harms principle in
resolution.
Mr. Duffy, an alumnus, said that the health of the nation
depends on vaccination.
Mr. Dutta said that the chamber should not impart judgment
onto other nations that don't choose forced vaccination.
The question was called, and failed 19 to 25 among members
and 1 to 5 among guests.
Mr. Theiss then rose, again, to present
BIR: Germany's Holocaust denial laws are
an encroachment on individual freedom of speech.
Respectfully submitted, John Henry Theiss.
Mr. Furr agreed, saying that lies are best negated by truth,
rather than brute force.
Mr. Addison disagreed, saying that the idea of freedom of
speech is repugnant, and that such freedom exists only within
the context of responsibility.
I argued that Germany is correct in trying to relegate the
Third Reich to the definite past, and that its policy on Holocaust
denial compares favorably to the Japanese position on the Rape
of Nanking, which is to say that it never happened.
Mr. Van Meter called Mr. Addison a fascist, and said that
Germany's law gives the appearance of doing a good thing without
changing minds.
Mr. Darsie reminded the chamber that the Society would not
have survived Nazism, and that given the nature of the atrocities,
the speech in question was one of the few that it should be
acceptable to ban.
Mr. Shoun stated that since anti-totalitarianism is in the
German constitution, the laws have an obligation to be upheld.
Mr. Weeks stated the obvious, that a state is sovereign and
has the right to make and enforce its own laws.
Mr. Broach compared the Nazis to the Confederates, and said
that in both cases the sons shouldn't be punished for the sins
of the fathers. But Mr. Broach, everybody knows that slavery
never happened.
Mr. Williamson argued that freedom of speech should be embraced.
Ms. Keyes-Blumer agreed with the resolution, giving counterexamples
where states forbid admitting prior atrocities.
Mr. Brettschneider said that jailing Holocaust deniers is
a good thing, because it gives them the chance to be the next
Hitler.
The question was called, and passed 16 to 10 among libertarian
hacks, and 3 to 0 among guests.
In the interests of academic rigor, but mainly because we
were all, in the words of one annoying friend from middle school,
“shwasted,” I now present the Cliffs Notes version of the remaining
seven hours of the meeting.
Mr. Furr presented
BIR: Those deemed likely to reoffend should
remain under civil confinement after the conclusion of their
prison terms.
Ms. Bell presented
BIR: Women should not be socially mandated
to remove the hair from their legs.
Ms. Brown then gave the historian's address, which nobody
really remembers, along with everything else about the meeting.
We impeached the president.
In New Business, Mr. Addison presented
BIR: My Wii is the most fun you can legally
have.
Mr. Hansen presented
BIR: The U.S. hegemony is dead. Long live
the Chinese Empire.
Mr. Theiss presented
BIR: Obama? Osama?
Mr. Sharp presented
BIR: I don't know what I'm talking about
and neither do you.
Mr. Frisch presented
BIR: Bitches are better than hoes.
Mr. O'Brien presented
BIR: To provide funding for underfunded
international programs, the United Nations should set up a casino
in international waters where countries can make bets on the
outcome of wars.
Mr. Beusse presented
BIR: The United States of America swings
the biggest phallus on the international scene, and that it
will stick said phallus into any international orifice.
Mr. Miller presented
BIR: Americans have a dangerous and perverse
sense of death.
Mr. Weiss presented
BIR: Intrasociety dating should be shunned
and the Society should not endorse such endeavors.
There were a few others, I think, but I can't read these damned
notes.
The meeting was adjourned at 6:45AM, subject to Mr. Beusse's
critic's report.
Respectfully submitted,
William D. Richards
|
University of Georgia 