tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post3436276921670702204..comments2024-03-28T03:20:15.940-07:00Comments on Edward Feser: Adventures in the Old Atheism, Part II: SartreEdward Feserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13643921537838616224noreply@blogger.comBlogger63125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-20395361728939897362016-09-23T12:39:44.489-07:002016-09-23T12:39:44.489-07:00@Thursday: "No doubt though that Carrier, in ...@Thursday: "No doubt though that Carrier, in contrast to Sartre, is an offputting and sexually unattractive man."<br /><br />I know I'm late to this party, but that sentence brought me up short. I presume it's ironical:<br /><br />"Sartre was about five feet tall, and he had lost almost all the sight in his right eye when he was three; he dressed in oversized clothes, with no sense of fashion; his skin and teeth suggested an indifference to hygiene. He had the kind of aggressive male ugliness that can be charismatic, and he wisely refrained from disguising it. He simply ignored his body. He was also smart, generous, agreeable, ambitious, ardent, and very funny. [..] Words constituted his principal means of seduction: his physical approaches were on the order of groping in restaurants and grabbing kisses in taxis. With the publication of 'Letters to Sartre,' it was clear that, privately, he and Beauvoir held most of the people in their lives in varying degrees of contempt. They enjoyed, especially, recounting to each other the lies they were telling. [...] Sartre and Beauvoir liked to refer to their entourage as 'the Family,' and the recurring feature of their affairs is a kind of play incest. Their customary method was to adopt a very young woman as a protégée—to take her to movies and cafés, travel with her, help her with her education and career, support her financially. (Sartre wrote most of his plays in part to give women he was sleeping with something to do: they could be actresses.) For Sartre and Beauvoir, the feeling that they were, in effect, sleeping with their own children must, as with most taboos, have juiced up the erotic fun.[...] Sartre became infatuated with Olga and spent two years attempting to seduce her. He failed, but in 1937 he met her sister, Wanda, also beautiful, and even more at sea, and he managed, after two more years, to sleep with her. [...] Sartre eventually persuaded Bienenfeld, who had never slept with a man, to accompany him to a hotel, where, he suavely confided to her, he had taken another girl’s virginity the day before. The first encounter was unpleasant: Sartre had a mildly sadistic attitude toward sex. [...] Nathalie Sorokine, another student of Beauvoir’s...and Beauvoir became sexually involved while Beauvoir was still having her affair with Bienenfeld. ('I’ve a very keen taste for her body,' Beauvoir wrote to Sartre.) Sorokine, too, slept with Sartre and, with Beauvoir’s encouragement, with another lover of Beauvoir’s, Jacques-Laurent Bost. [...] He set his women up in apartments within ten minutes of his own and, every week, made what he called his 'medical rounds.' Each woman had specified hours allotted to spend with him. The women almost never saw each other; in many cases, they never knew about each other. But they all knew about Beauvoir, and Beauvoir was Sartre’s standing excuse: the Beaver wouldn’t like it; he had to spend more time with the Beaver"--Louis Menand, <a href="http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2005/09/26/stand-by-your-man" rel="nofollow">Stand By Your Man</a>laubadetristehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17742748003334437454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-69991412746235370882016-08-29T20:47:51.165-07:002016-08-29T20:47:51.165-07:00@ Step2,
America was not built on Wall Street. In...@ Step2,<br /><br />America was not built on Wall Street. In fact, Wall Street was British occupied territory for most of the war.<br /><br />Bush did betray not only his base but his father's own new deal with the world. Ask the SE Asian economic powers where their bailout was when their financial sectors collapsed? They were commanded on no subtle terms to suck it up. We made an exception for ourselves, of course. Because we are too big too fail, which is a psychotic lie. Rome is built on muscle, perseverance and the willingness and desire to see a better future for tomorrow.<br /><br />And frankly, Obama's homosexualization of the U.S armed forces is a total disgrace. Again it was George Bush's reliance on mercenary forces that made this possible; and also the fact so many other countries similarly sold out their armies to political correctness. <br /><br />North Americans were too proud and too free. We enjoyed the spoils of war and were spoiled by it. Now we face a crisis and all the factors are against us. Demographically we are doomed, like we already doomed Europe. Economically the impossible is made possible watching North American son and daughters working far more productively than their forebearers could ever imagine yet becoming poorer and poorer regardless. Smells like a scheme. Smells like theft.Timocratesnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-50964961713748177272016-08-27T12:09:45.619-07:002016-08-27T12:09:45.619-07:00Not to drag in D.B. Hart, but isn't this rathe...<i>Not to drag in D.B. Hart, but isn't this rather close to his description of the hipster Thomist?</i><br /><br />Hi Craig, yes, that's exactly what went through my mind as I wrote that... ;-)<br />Edward Feserhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13643921537838616224noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-81605545377639588212016-08-26T18:05:51.441-07:002016-08-26T18:05:51.441-07:00Let me disagree just a bit; I think Sartre has an ...Let me disagree just a bit; I think Sartre has an argument. I think Ed Feser did bring out the essentials of Sartre's argument in the OP, but here's a summary:<br /><br />Being in itself does not change, does not choose; it simply is what it is.<br />Being for itself is free to choose its own path; it defines itself.<br />God, for Sartre, is both at once: God is absolutely free in His choices, but He also is unchanging. Being perfect, He cannot deviate from His own perfection, no matter what He chooses.<br />However, both of those cannot be true of the same being at once. Therefore, God does not exist.<br />What humans want to be, at their deepest core, is the being that is both for itself and in itself. This is the "desire to be God." However, since this desire is inevitably frustrated, human life is essentially frustrating and meaningless.<br /><br />I don't agree with this argument, but at least it is an argument.<br /><br />By the way, I thought this was funny in the OP: "So pour some whiskey, put on a jazz LP, and light the cigarette of the hipster girl dressed in black reading Camus at the barstool next to you." Not to drag in D.B. Hart, but isn't this rather close to his description of the hipster Thomist?Craig Paynenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-40034654894206401612016-08-23T10:50:06.655-07:002016-08-23T10:50:06.655-07:00George LeSauvage said...
@Anon, 12:21 8/21:
...<br /><br />George LeSauvage said...<br /><br /> @Anon, 12:21 8/21:<br /><br /> 1. Does Sartre ever actually develop an argument, rather than assertion?"<br /><br /><br /><br />Of course not. If he did, it would not be French Philosophy. Call it critical description, and pretend to find it adequate.<br /><br />DNWnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-62930108411779954012016-08-23T10:46:29.827-07:002016-08-23T10:46:29.827-07:00By the way, that was a very good sketch of some of...<br /><br />By the way, that was a very good sketch of some of the central ideas of what we have come to call existentialism.<br /><br />It's apparent that either Feser has somehow found the time to read up on it, or that he remembers the content of his old introductory and intermediate philosophy classes with remarkable clarity.<br /><br />Any quibbles would be just that ... quibbles for the sake of quibbling.DNWnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-50520639079315359662016-08-23T07:52:54.967-07:002016-08-23T07:52:54.967-07:00@Timocrates
He foresaw it with the bail outs under...@Timocrates<br /><i>He foresaw it with the bail outs under Bush, in which he radically betrayed his conservative ideological base.</i><br /><br />Bush betrayed the conservative base by preventing a catastrophic collapse of the economy? I guess that seems right if your ideology is nihilism. Which isn’t to imply there wasn’t any pain involved in the lengthy recession that followed; and that pain was disgustingly shifted almost entirely upon Main Street rather than Wall Street. But letting the shadow banking system grind to a complete halt and pulling the regular banking system down with it would have had the same effect as setting off a nuke in NYC, it was that dangerous to national security. The recession was, for nearly all intents and purposes, nothing but a collapsing debt bubble. Even with government interventions here and abroad, the scope of the losses for the recession were officially estimated by the US Treasury at $19 trillion in 2011 dollars and unofficially estimated by world stock prices at $34 trillion globally in 2009 dollars. If people can’t figure out why losses in excess of US GDP are worthy of government intervention to stabilize the banking system then they are hopelessly ignorant about economics. Again, it is perfectly legitimate to be infuriated by the way Wall Street took advantage of the chaos they created, but from a government policy standpoint it would have been suicidal to let the financial system burn to the ground.<br /><br /><i>Trump isn't an egomaniac.</i><br /><br />Trump is a clinically acute example of egomania. Completely narcissistic, pinning tacky gold lettering of his name onto everything, working on his third trophy wife. It is difficult to think of any way he doesn’t clearly satisfy the qualities of egomania unless you are living in denial.<br /><br /><i>He's littered with vices, including pride, but his personality and ideology isn't such that would rob anyone of their freedom or dignity.</i><br /><br />Have you been awake at any point during this election cycle? Seriously, he seems to relish insulting entire demographic groups and tries, with limited success, to intimidate his critics and the media on a nearly constant basis. On blind faith alone I should trust that he will behave in office completely the opposite of the way he has been on the campaign trail? No, the volatile charlatan doesn’t deserve a single bit of faith. I tried to save the Republicans from themselves. I switched over to the Republican primary simply to vote for an authentic conservative (see how I connected the dots to existentialism there), but they instead chose the least qualified, most divisive, most obviously fake “conservative” imaginable as a way to give the middle finger to the establishment. Regarding liberty, Trump's convention speech made such grandiose promises for an immediate and dramatic reduction in crime it could only be realistically achieved by imposing martial law. Ironic considering how many of his supporters are the same conspiratorial dingbats who were convinced Jade Helm was going to impose martial law in Texas.<br /><br /><i>I mean Obama's palpable hatred of the U.S armed forces is without precedent…</i><br /><br />You only read that slander in the right wing media. Obama may be opposed to saber-rattling but that doesn’t mean he hates the armed forces, quite the contrary. Trump had to be shamed by the press into giving away the charity money he had raised specifically for the purpose of helping veterans.<br /><br /><i>This is why we conservatives tell you not to practice whore-like behaviour or homosexuality. Because we want you to be happy.</i><br /><br />Perhaps nominating a playboy who has bragged repeatedly about his fornication and adultery, and who previously admitted a creepy interest in his own daughter, isn’t the best messenger for family values advice.Step2noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-63845719199244681472016-08-23T00:07:39.742-07:002016-08-23T00:07:39.742-07:00Thursday, so is it a common view in Canada that Gh...<i>Thursday, so is it a common view in Canada that Ghomeshi was largely innocent.</i><br /><br />The mainstream view is that he wasn't positively exonerated, but the testimony of the witnesses was so obviously unreliable that there is no way he should have been convicted. The cross examination was devastating.<br /><br /><i>I don't know a lot about the incident but I have seen pieces that treat him as obviously guilty and that he got off through a technicality or the machinations of a sexist legal system. Are those pieces not representative?</i><br /><br />No. There are certainly lots of loud and crazy feminists who say things like that, but they are not the mainstream even in left leaning Canada.<br /><br />Anyway, why would anyone take the opinion of such deranged people seriously?Thursdayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13002311410445623799noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-84735411322382076122016-08-22T21:22:11.134-07:002016-08-22T21:22:11.134-07:00This is an "at my last breathe I take" m...This is an "at my last breathe I take" moment. We need a radically new Hollywood here in North America. We were and are the victors of WWII: those alive today should give us thanks. Those who do not, heap more coals on their worthless skulls.<br /><br />I have yet in my life met a contemporary liberal who can debate the issues. They are angry, emotional and frankly super dysfunctional. They know there is no rational excuse for being sexually stupid. Modern "liberals" prey on the young because they know they are ignorant and vulnerable. They want money and comfort: naturally enough. But who, then, will play the horse in Orwell's Animal Farm? Certainly not our opponents.<br /><br />A Pyramid scheme always plays out the same. The Pyramid collapses and those who built it are the shame of history.<br /><br />I know the founding fathers of my country were freemasons - i.e. sellouts - who were terrified of a Christian social order. I also know that they never dreamed of the horrors their children would be subjugated to for neglecting their duty to God. They were allowed the privilege of free and independent thought; their progeny, however, is denied it.<br /><br />Dear Liberals: Sex is great; however, love and truth are far better. They never cheat on you. Others will; however, those things will never abandon you. Or else how do you think people in the past survived torture and cruelty? Certainly not because of sexual favours. This is why we conservatives tell you not to practice whore-like behaviour or homosexuality. Because we want you to be happy. Timocratesnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-58386299769163942512016-08-22T17:13:23.248-07:002016-08-22T17:13:23.248-07:00@ Step2,
What is wrong with steak? And Noam Choms...@ Step2,<br /><br />What is wrong with steak? And Noam Chomsky actually predicted the rise of Trump not too long ago - during the Obama years - exactly because hard working people were radically neglected and financially exploited. He foresaw it with the bail outs under Bush, in which he radically betrayed his conservative ideological base. This is why Trump can and likely will steal the blue collar democrat vote, which is a serious threat to the Democrat establishment.<br /><br />Trump isn't an egomaniac. He's littered with vices, including pride, but his personality and ideology isn't such that would rob anyone of their freedom or dignity. He's at worse arrogant and annoying: he isn't an existential threat, however, to your way of life or your family or your Church. Gays don't have to worry about being treated like crap in his America; in Hillary's, Christians will be increasingly so. He's willful on the international stage. He wants to arbitrarily renegotiate trade deals - which, when I recall in my days in Canada was a serious concern from Canadians about signing NAFTA with America in the first place - to backpedal on the original benefits of the deal to the partners and keep it unilaterally beneficial to America. That's what he's talking about; and yeah, he isn't joking when he says such a policy will benefit America.<br /><br />But that's being screwed at the pump (for America's allies/trade partners). America is the gas station and in Trump's America, America's allies and trade partners will be hosed. But my pocket being fleeced is one kind of insult and injury; my dignity being robed from me is a far more serious one. Trump doesn't threaten anyone's rights: the Democrats are emos who will degrade us without end. I mean Obama's palpable hatred of the U.S armed forces is without precedent; to be sure, the increased reliance on effectively mercenary groups under the Bush ages made such disregard of the official, standing forces much more plausible.<br /><br />Look at modern China's culture. It's not even Chinese anymore. In fact, modern China doesn't even have a culture. That's the path the Democrats are offering to America... but don't worry, your abortions will be free. And maybe your check-ups at the doctor's office. It's not a coincidence that China is now pro-Hillary. Because China only cares about the pump and not human dignity. China's endorsement of Hillary says everything about the modern LGBTQ/Democrat ideology. Timocratesnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-76168889856242643132016-08-22T02:14:48.238-07:002016-08-22T02:14:48.238-07:00The irony of Step2 complaining about rhetoric...The irony of Step2 complaining about rhetoric...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-80618570341117109312016-08-22T01:18:44.846-07:002016-08-22T01:18:44.846-07:00Thursday, so is it a common view in Canada that Gh...Thursday, so is it a common view in Canada that Ghomeshi was largely innocent. I don't know a lot about the incident but I have seen pieces that treat him as obviously guilty and thathe got off through a technicality or the machinations of a sexist legal system. Are those pieces not representative?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-82669891463040061652016-08-21T19:51:12.621-07:002016-08-21T19:51:12.621-07:00All I am saying is that it fits a pattern that is ...<i>All I am saying is that it fits a pattern that is all too familiar.</i><br /><br />There are patterns and there are other patterns. I still wouldn't take everything that Carrier's accusers have said at face value. Up in Canada, we just went through a criminal trial where the douchey uber-feminist radio host Jian Ghomeshi was accused of physically abusing some of the women he dated. Under cross examination, his accusers turned out to range from extremely unreliable to blatantly lying.<br /><br />These are all crazy people, so judging who did what from our vantage point is irresponsible.Thursdayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13002311410445623799noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-75502303490691900182016-08-21T12:59:49.156-07:002016-08-21T12:59:49.156-07:00@Anon, 12:21 8/21:
1. Does Sartre ever actually d...@Anon, 12:21 8/21:<br /><br />1. <i><b>Does</b></i> Sartre ever actually develop an argument, rather than assertion?<br /><br />2. If any definable criterion of choice is, per se, inauthentic, then yes, that is what I take away from it. That is independent of what JPS may have acknowledged. <br /><br />3. Given his reluctance to put his cards on the table, no, I am not willing to put in the time on Sartre. And that goes also for all the explications I have looked at. This goes far beyond mere obscurity, as with Kant, for instance. The guy is clearly not doing what Aristotle and Aquinas did; not even trying. So I am left with the fundamental point that his demand for "authenticity" is one that cannot be met. And his notion of "freedom" is absurd.<br /><br />If someone can state, in clear and honest English some meaningful defense of JPS, I am willing to give it a hearing. (Though I am more likely to be preoccupied with other matters, as that probably will be sign that Christ is returning in glory.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-41115307015950301942016-08-21T12:22:55.826-07:002016-08-21T12:22:55.826-07:00Step 2, good to see you at your usual level of dee...<i>Step 2, good to see you at your usual level of deep and detailed analysis. Where is the irrelevant link though?</i><br /><br />I suppose you learned your rhetorical skills from Trump University. Sad!Step2noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-62938350203080089032016-08-21T12:21:27.075-07:002016-08-21T12:21:27.075-07:00Mr. Le Sauvage: perhaps your professor was the fra...Mr. Le Sauvage: perhaps your professor was the fraud? Have you looked into the scholarly literature on Sartre? Try, sometime, looking into it even if only from the English analytical viewpoint. You might be surprised.<br /><br />Where, by the way, in <i>Being and Nothingness</i>, does Sartre say or insinuate that "<i>all action is pointless and absurd</i>?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-84010200849291764452016-08-20T17:10:02.013-07:002016-08-20T17:10:02.013-07:00I am old enough to have caught the tail end of its...I am old enough to have caught the tail end of its real popularity and I confess existentialism never made the slightest sense to me. All action is pointless and absurd. Any actual criterion one uses to make a choice is a betrayal of "authenticity". Freedom involves rejecting all this, and apparently consists in following some mystical inward impulse, not influenced by that which is "other" - seemingly a word which means "anything and everything". (I can see no other way to understand it.) So, what does it mean to say we, in following Sartre, are in some sense achieving "freedom"? It would make more sense to call this being a slave to one's passions, but only if those passions were sufficiently inchoate to be called "authentic".<br /><br />I had a professor, long ago, who when someone cited Sartre in class, shook his head and said "Every profession has its frauds." He then defied anyone to come up with a single rationally developed argument from JPS. (I will grant that girls in black were often a strong lure into pretending to take this seriously.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-79608115565364858882016-08-20T15:04:15.519-07:002016-08-20T15:04:15.519-07:00Step 2, good to see you at your usual level of dee...Step 2, good to see you at your usual level of deep and detailed analysis. Where is the irrelevant link though?<br /><br />Also, if you hadn't mentioned steak (the other, I'm sure, is full of caviar), it would hard to see which of the two egomaniac candidates you had in mind. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-88518235917269384662016-08-20T12:04:58.724-07:002016-08-20T12:04:58.724-07:00Timocrates,
Egomania is social toxin.
Try to exp...Timocrates, <br /><i>Egomania is social toxin.</i><br /><br />Try to explain that to the supporters of the presidential nominee full of steak and ego. Otherwise, your political rant was fun to read but woefully misguided.Step2noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-65609272939389904422016-08-20T06:52:13.594-07:002016-08-20T06:52:13.594-07:00What shouldn't be overlooked is that despite a...What shouldn't be overlooked is that despite all the talk about "absurdity," "nausea," "worms," etc., Sartre seems to have been a fairly cheerful guy, unlike his perpetually dour companion.<br /><br />On another topic, from <i>BN</i>: the once-famous Sartrean "God project," that futile attempt of the For Itself to somehow fuse with the In Itself, maintaining thereby its anxious freedom while simultaneously obtaining what it takes to be the peace and quiet of matter (being in-itself). It formed an important part of so-called "existential psychoanalysis," which Sartre sketched out in his biographies (or whatever they may be called) of Genet and Flaubert.<br /><br />The Genet in particular, along with the account of the God Project in <i>BN</i> make clear how intensely God figured in the work of this famous atheist.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-65271552696026952682016-08-19T18:28:40.500-07:002016-08-19T18:28:40.500-07:00That should read:
*man or woman is going to party...That should read:<br /><br />*man or woman is going to party after hours with a studentElizabeth Gormleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14233587289334878913noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-32380228206869807002016-08-19T18:27:02.006-07:002016-08-19T18:27:02.006-07:00@Thursday
Searching around brought up a pretty ex...@Thursday<br /><br />Searching around brought up a pretty explicit charge from one Amy Frank here: <br />https://www.gofundme.com/AmyFrankFund?rcid=09a01418573611e69b8ebc764e04c5a7<br />And more about it here:<br />http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/28383/<br /><br />You'd be surprised by things a young woman student hears behind closed doors from a "mentor" who wouldn't dare express the same thoughts to another male acquaintance and it's not unusual for a predator to place his hand on a student's knee to take a quick assessment of how he will be received (not "enough" of an advance that he'll be called out on it). <br /><br />All I am saying is that it fits a pattern that is all too familiar. And, further, if a man is going to party after hours with a student he/she should probably bring a witness. At 40+ you're really asking to be misinterpreted when you start talking about your sex life. Carrier is either a complete dunce or has gotten away with this kind of behavior for so long that he thinks he's invincible. <br /><br />In any event, this all seems to be moving into a legal battle of he said/she said. I suspect this is a long way from being over. <br /><br />I do agree with you - after skimming his biography, that there does seem to be a lot of karma going down. <br />Elizabeth Gormleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14233587289334878913noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-28417146548777155632016-08-19T16:59:54.448-07:002016-08-19T16:59:54.448-07:00Not that I don't enjoy seeing people hoisted o...Not that I don't enjoy seeing people hoisted on their own PC petard.Thursdayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13002311410445623799noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-75235227477284890182016-08-19T16:57:03.490-07:002016-08-19T16:57:03.490-07:00There are very few specific descriptions of what C...There are very few specific descriptions of what Carrier did and I don't trust the interpretations of the kind of PC people who run these Skeptic things. I wouldn't trust a PC person to interpret the word "persistence," for example. About all anybody seems to agree on are that his advances, whatever they involved, were not well received. Knowing a bit about Carrier, that's not hard to believe. But I'd be wary of going further.Thursdayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13002311410445623799noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-77075843536058501762016-08-19T16:41:58.761-07:002016-08-19T16:41:58.761-07:00@Thursday
1. I wouldn't know how he "act...@Thursday<br /><br />1. I wouldn't know how he "actually is." <br />2. I know what "persistence" and "blunt language" are (No means yes, Get lost means take me I'm yours)<br />3. Explain Woody Allen.<br /><br />:)Elizabeth Gormleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14233587289334878913noreply@blogger.com