(no subject)

Nine People Found Dead in Fresno Home

Police officers responding to a child custody dispute said they arrived at a home to find nine bodies stacked and intertwined in a pile of clothes, 10 coffins and a 57-year-old man they believe is responsible for the slaughter.

The victims were seven children ranging in age from 1 to 8, a 20-year-old woman and a 17-year-old girl. All were thought to be the children of Marcus Wesson, who surrendered to police Friday after walking out of the house covered in what appeared to be blood.

The grim scene caused even veteran officers to weep.

[...] [Police Chief Jerry] Dyer said the victims probably were Wesson's children. "There may have been some type of ritual involved," he said.

The police chief declined to say how they died, but the scene was so gruesome some of the first officers into the house were placed on administrative leave and were being counseled Friday night.

(no subject)

I ran across this post.

I have a lot of friends who take meds, and I work with someone who does, too. I have other friends who should take their meds, but went off of them intentionally. My sister, in fact, is bipolar, but doesn't take her meds. As someone who isn't on meds, I can't speak to what they do or how they affect you.

But I was struck by his reason: my taking medication is for the benefit of others not for myself. Do you agree with that line of reasoning?

(no subject)

This enlarged my understanding of the English language:

To condescend didn't always imply the same sentiment that we do to "lowering oneself". It was considered gracious for a royal, for instance, to condescend to treat a subject as an equal. Since people really did consider those people of higher rank or worth, in this respect lowering themselves to someone's else level was a compliment, not an insult.

However, in our democratic times lowering oneself has of course become pretty much a denigration of the other person's worth.

(found in this thread in wordoftheday)

Interesting test, despite my results.

Reverse Astrology

According to our analysis, you are a Pisces, Feb 19 to Mar 20. But you are certainly not a Leo, July 23 to Aug 22.
You claim to be a Pisces, and, as expected, the miraculous powers of astrology have proven themselves.

(stolen from renwick)

Not only am I a Pisces--I'm a stereotypical Pisces. :) My sister's on the cusp of Cancer and Leo; my personality really isn't like hers.

(no subject)

I just got back from watching Starsky and Hutch with my sister. That flick is funny.