t-t-t-t-t-taco t-t-t-t-t-t-time

I love the beans at Taco Time...the veggie burrito makes me purr.....

Yeah so...MG tickets are on sale at Ditch 1030 am Sat morning...im so gunna be there like a nerd to get them first thing...

I just read for over an hour in the tub...I am fucking loving THE RED TENT...thank u Maureen for that little gem...of course it helps that Ive been waiting for 3 yrs for Amy B to return my copy hahahahahha Good build up!
I must get my aunty pam to read it when im done...I think she will really dig it.

My kid is doing an oral report on political ideology....guess what she picked...out of all of them to pick from in the world....?? Try to guess...im so proud....she picked ANARCHY/ANARCHISM w/o even ONE iota of influence from me hahahahhaa MuHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA

I am loving my bed this week..I have my fav. mocha flannel sheet on and my foofy poofy animal skin blanket is like crawling into a warm bun fresh outta the oven...I snuggle in and sighhhhh a sigh of utter comfiness. What a gay topic.

Whats your opinion of this:

LONDON, England -- The European Court of Human Rights has ruled that a British woman has no right to use frozen embryos to have a baby without the consent of the man who provided the sperm.
The court upheld a UK law that says permission from both parents is needed at every stage of the in vitro fertilization (IVF) process, as well as for the storage and implantation of the fertilized eggs.
Natallie Evans, 34, underwent IVF in 2001 with her partner Howard Johnston ahead of ovarian cancer treatment which rendered her infertile.
The couple later split and he withdrew his consent for the embryos to be used, triggering a drawn-out legal battle.
Evans was defeated in the British courts and faced an order to destroy the embryos. With time running out for the use of her stored embryos, she turned to the European court, based in Strasbourg, France.
But on Tuesday judges backed the British law, effectively signaling the eventual destruction of the six embryos which held Evans's only hopes of having a child that is genetically hers.
Johnston argued he did not want the financial or emotional burden of being a father to a child he would not bring up.
Lawyers for Evans had said the British law, which requires both the man and women to give consent, infringes her human rights.
She said her right to privacy and family life and the embryo's right to life were being violated by Johnston's decision to withdraw his permission for use of his sperm. She also argued his attempt to block her having the baby was discriminatory.
The court said it sympathized Evans' plight, but ruled that Johnston's withdrawal of consent for the use of his sperm did not violate her right to family life as stipulated in Europe's human rights convention.
Evans said she would appeal to the human rights court's Grand Chamber -- a panel of 17 European judges -- and the court urged the British government to ensure the embryos are not destroyed while the appeal is considered.
Evans also begged Johnston to reconsider and let her use the embryos.
"Howard may feel it is too late for him to change his mind, but it is not. Howard, please think about it," she read from a prepared statement in London.
Johnston said he disliked the attention the case has brought and was relieved the court ruled in his favor.
"The key thing for me was just to be able to decide when and if I start a family. So, that's been the basis for it," he told journalists in Cheltenham, England, according to The Associated Press.
Copyright 2006 CNN. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Associated Press contributed to this report.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I think he is a shit 4 not letting her use her own eggs.
The debate is ONNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN! (thanks to Michaela for this story)