Harry Demidavicius > wrote:
> On 09 Feb 2005 02:58:31 GMT, wrote:
>
> >Piedmont > wrote:
> >> JD wrote:
> >> > "F.G. Whitfurrows" > wrote in message
> >> > ...
> >> >
> >> >>Being a Reverend *and* a BBQ NG aquaintence, I'm more than a little
> >> >>offended
> >> >>at not having been asked to perform the ceremony. Hell, I'd a
> >> >>brought the beer for the blessing.<g>
> >> >
> >> Look in the phone book for a Unitarian-Universalist church, they'll
> >> marry anyone! You can search for local congragations at www.uua.org
> >
> >I've been to a Marriage performed by the Furry Footed Reverand. It was
> >sensitive, pithy and tuned to the wishes of the Nuptualees.
>
> Nuptualees? Can you parse that please, Nickolaichick . . .
>
Perhaps, Nuptialists, a Bride or Wife; and a Bridegroom or Husband, would
have been more correct. I meant 'those subjected to a nuptual', badhkin!

--
Nick. To help with tsunami relief, go to: http://usafreedomcorps.gov/


Thank a Veteran and Support Our Troops. You are not forgotten. Thanks ! ! !