air bag injuries due to propellant chemicals

On Fri, 5 Nov 2004, Bill Putney wrote:

> God loves the sinner but hates the sin.

Lookit that, Bill Putney is God's mouthpiece!

But of course, God only hates the "sin" if the "sin" involves acting in
accordance with how God wired me up and loving another of the same gender.
If the "sin" (i.e., "abomination before the LORD") is wearing garments of
mixed fiber content, or a widower remarrying, or eating shellfish, or any
of the many other "abominations before the LORD" mentioned in The Bible,
those get a free pass from God -- just ask Bill.

It's really sad that for all our talk of how evolved we are, so many human
beings still choose not to use the brain God gave them, deferring instead
to what they're told God wants them to do. God doesn't love boys who still
have their whole penis. God cries if you eat a ham-and-cheese sandwich.
God wants morally-clean Americans to pass laws against icky women (100
years ago) icky brown people (50 years ago) icky gay people (today) --
says so right in The Bible. God wants Palestinians to blow themselves up
and kill people. God wants Israel to build settlements. On and on and on
and on, round and round and round we go.

I don't know for sure any more than you do, Bill, but I suspect when you
go to meet our maker, you're going to find out that you'd got it wrong.
Any kind of love is just fine, I suspect you'll be told; it's the hatred
you gotta avoid.

Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> "Daniel J. Stern" > wrote in message
> .umich.edu...
>
>>On Fri, 5 Nov 2004, linda wrote:
>>
>>
>>>i could say something about my two best friends being homosexual,
>>>and i could tell you about the two lesbians that are upstairs visiting
>>>my heterosexual son,
>>
>>...but it wouldn't make any difference, 'cause they and we are all -- wait
>>for it! -- human beings. I do wonder, though, how your alleged best
>>friends feel about your vote for a government that considers them less
>>than equal.
>
>
> Actually, Dan, I'd be more interested in how her best friends feel about her
> views that homosexuality is a "predilection".
>
> sexual orientation ain't a predilection, you don't have much choice in what
> gets you hot. It's 'hard' wired in.
>
> Ted
>
>

I think i replied to this, my thesaurus (you know, that big prehistoric
dinosaur :-) ) says that predilection is a predisposition. and i was
always taught that predisposition was HARD WIRED... Daniel, please
forgive if i misused the word.. i know that you and my friends did not
have a choice... as i said before, who wakes up one morning and decides
he wants to live a lifestyle that many ignorant people find wrong and
will hurt them due to their "hard wired" orientation....

lw

Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> "Daniel J. Stern" > wrote in message
> .umich.edu...
>
>>On Fri, 5 Nov 2004, linda wrote:
>>
>>
>>>i could say something about my two best friends being homosexual,
>>>and i could tell you about the two lesbians that are upstairs visiting
>>>my heterosexual son,
>>
>>...but it wouldn't make any difference, 'cause they and we are all -- wait
>>for it! -- human beings. I do wonder, though, how your alleged best
>>friends feel about your vote for a government that considers them less
>>than equal.
>
>
> Actually, Dan, I'd be more interested in how her best friends feel about her
> views that homosexuality is a "predilection".
>
> sexual orientation ain't a predilection, you don't have much choice in what
> gets you hot. It's 'hard' wired in.
>
> Ted
>
>

I think i replied to this, my thesaurus (you know, that big prehistoric
dinosaur :-) ) says that predilection is a predisposition. and i was
always taught that predisposition was HARD WIRED... Daniel, please
forgive if i misused the word.. i know that you and my friends did not
have a choice... as i said before, who wakes up one morning and decides
he wants to live a lifestyle that many ignorant people find wrong and
will hurt them due to their "hard wired" orientation....

lw

Dori A Schmetterling wrote:
> I think I found an error, which we could debate.. :-)
>
> "Quantities of dihydrogen monoxide have been found in almost every stream,
> lake, and reservoir in America today. "
>
> "Almost"?
>
> If a stream does not contain the stuff, is it still a stream...?...
>
> DAS

Actually, in my years of toxicology research, i was told that DHMO is
toxic in large enough quantities...

lw

Dori A Schmetterling wrote:
> I think I found an error, which we could debate.. :-)
>
> "Quantities of dihydrogen monoxide have been found in almost every stream,
> lake, and reservoir in America today. "
>
> "Almost"?
>
> If a stream does not contain the stuff, is it still a stream...?...
>
> DAS

Actually, in my years of toxicology research, i was told that DHMO is
toxic in large enough quantities...

lw

Daniel J. Stern wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Nov 2004, Bill Putney wrote:
>
>
>>God loves the sinner but hates the sin.
>
>
> Lookit that, Bill Putney is God's mouthpiece!
>
> But of course, God only hates the "sin" if the "sin" involves acting in
> accordance with how God wired me up and loving another of the same gender.
> If the "sin" (i.e., "abomination before the LORD") is wearing garments of
> mixed fiber content, or a widower remarrying, or eating shellfish, or any
> of the many other "abominations before the LORD" mentioned in The Bible,
> those get a free pass from God -- just ask Bill.
>
> It's really sad that for all our talk of how evolved we are, so many human
> beings still choose not to use the brain God gave them, deferring instead
> to what they're told God wants them to do. God doesn't love boys who still
> have their whole penis. God cries if you eat a ham-and-cheese sandwich.
> God wants morally-clean Americans to pass laws against icky women (100
> years ago) icky brown people (50 years ago) icky gay people (today) --
> says so right in The Bible. God wants Palestinians to blow themselves up
> and kill people. God wants Israel to build settlements. On and on and on
> and on, round and round and round we go.
>
> I don't know for sure any more than you do, Bill, but I suspect when you
> go to meet our maker, you're going to find out that you'd got it wrong.
> Any kind of love is just fine, I suspect you'll be told; it's the hatred
> you gotta avoid.
>


AMEN, Daniel.. i just cannot accept a God who would not let my best
friends into His arms.. my God does not work that way...

thanks you for putting my well intentioned thoughts into actual coherent
words.... God Bless you and your partner.. i wish you and him happiness
in all you do ....

Daniel J. Stern wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Nov 2004, Bill Putney wrote:
>
>
>>God loves the sinner but hates the sin.
>
>
> Lookit that, Bill Putney is God's mouthpiece!
>
> But of course, God only hates the "sin" if the "sin" involves acting in
> accordance with how God wired me up and loving another of the same gender.
> If the "sin" (i.e., "abomination before the LORD") is wearing garments of
> mixed fiber content, or a widower remarrying, or eating shellfish, or any
> of the many other "abominations before the LORD" mentioned in The Bible,
> those get a free pass from God -- just ask Bill.
>
> It's really sad that for all our talk of how evolved we are, so many human
> beings still choose not to use the brain God gave them, deferring instead
> to what they're told God wants them to do. God doesn't love boys who still
> have their whole penis. God cries if you eat a ham-and-cheese sandwich.
> God wants morally-clean Americans to pass laws against icky women (100
> years ago) icky brown people (50 years ago) icky gay people (today) --
> says so right in The Bible. God wants Palestinians to blow themselves up
> and kill people. God wants Israel to build settlements. On and on and on
> and on, round and round and round we go.
>
> I don't know for sure any more than you do, Bill, but I suspect when you
> go to meet our maker, you're going to find out that you'd got it wrong.
> Any kind of love is just fine, I suspect you'll be told; it's the hatred
> you gotta avoid.
>


AMEN, Daniel.. i just cannot accept a God who would not let my best
friends into His arms.. my God does not work that way...

thanks you for putting my well intentioned thoughts into actual coherent
words.... God Bless you and your partner.. i wish you and him happiness
in all you do ....

Daniel J. Stern wrote:

> On Fri, 5 Nov 2004, linda wrote:
>
>
>>Bill Putney wrote:
>
>
>>>a few posts back it looked like you were coming on to Daniel Stern.
>
>
>>i do not know Daniel Stern.. i am in a happy contented relationship that
>>is very rewarding. p.s. Daniel, if i were trying to come on to you,
>>believeme, you and everyone here would know it...:-)
>
>
> *ROFL*
>
> Oh, man. this is too, too funny on so many different levels that I'm not
> even sure where to begin. It's Usenet Kabuki Theatre at its finest. Linda
> has just learnt about airbag propellants and usenet, combines the two and
> makes her first posts. Daniel responds to Linda with info. Bill uses the
> old DHMO gag on Linda, who swallows it. Linda's never heard of Daniel
> before, but picks up on Daniel's mention of headlamps and -- having just
> learnt about Usenet -- offers her assistance with headlamp research.
> Daniel politely declines Linda's offer, but Bill sees it as Linda coming
> on to Daniel. Daniel doesn't see it as a come-on, because Daniel's a
> member of the Homosexual Menace To Society who, in his committed
> relationship with his other half of more than four years, works busily on
> a daily basis to tear up the social fabric in accordance with Bill's
> politics. Meanwhile, back on Usenet, Linda's amused and a little
> embarrassed by Bill's perception, and takes great (but, as it turns out,
> unnecessary) pains to assure Daniel she wasn't coming on to him. Daniel
> chortles and wonders why everything's always about sex with heterosexuals
> like Bill.
>
> This episode of Usenet Kabuki was brought to you by your Plymouth-DeSoto
> dealer, the number "3" and the letter "Q". Tune in next week for another
> exciting episode!
>
> -DS
>


My God Daniel!! No one will ever respond to one of your posts again!
It may "TURN" us too, with your wicked ways. Just corresponding will
make us make irrational choices! |>)))))))

This has been good amusement though.

I still think that properly implemented air-bag system, just like
properly implemented DRLs, save lives. No question that a lap/shoulder
belt that is actually buckled and adjusted does the first part of the job.

My favourite "safety" devices were the "passive" belt systems that GM
and Ford used. The belts attached to the door for GM that got in the
way every time you tried to get into or out of the car, but still had
the standard buckle system so that you could override it if you didn't
want to wear them. And the Ford motorized shoulder belt that still
required you to reach down and buckle the lap belt or decapitate yourself!

Priceless!

Dan

Daniel J. Stern wrote:

> On Fri, 5 Nov 2004, linda wrote:
>
>
>>Bill Putney wrote:
>
>
>>>a few posts back it looked like you were coming on to Daniel Stern.
>
>
>>i do not know Daniel Stern.. i am in a happy contented relationship that
>>is very rewarding. p.s. Daniel, if i were trying to come on to you,
>>believeme, you and everyone here would know it...:-)
>
>
> *ROFL*
>
> Oh, man. this is too, too funny on so many different levels that I'm not
> even sure where to begin. It's Usenet Kabuki Theatre at its finest. Linda
> has just learnt about airbag propellants and usenet, combines the two and
> makes her first posts. Daniel responds to Linda with info. Bill uses the
> old DHMO gag on Linda, who swallows it. Linda's never heard of Daniel
> before, but picks up on Daniel's mention of headlamps and -- having just
> learnt about Usenet -- offers her assistance with headlamp research.
> Daniel politely declines Linda's offer, but Bill sees it as Linda coming
> on to Daniel. Daniel doesn't see it as a come-on, because Daniel's a
> member of the Homosexual Menace To Society who, in his committed
> relationship with his other half of more than four years, works busily on
> a daily basis to tear up the social fabric in accordance with Bill's
> politics. Meanwhile, back on Usenet, Linda's amused and a little
> embarrassed by Bill's perception, and takes great (but, as it turns out,
> unnecessary) pains to assure Daniel she wasn't coming on to him. Daniel
> chortles and wonders why everything's always about sex with heterosexuals
> like Bill.
>
> This episode of Usenet Kabuki was brought to you by your Plymouth-DeSoto
> dealer, the number "3" and the letter "Q". Tune in next week for another
> exciting episode!
>
> -DS
>


My God Daniel!! No one will ever respond to one of your posts again!
It may "TURN" us too, with your wicked ways. Just corresponding will
make us make irrational choices! |>)))))))

This has been good amusement though.

I still think that properly implemented air-bag system, just like
properly implemented DRLs, save lives. No question that a lap/shoulder
belt that is actually buckled and adjusted does the first part of the job.

My favourite "safety" devices were the "passive" belt systems that GM
and Ford used. The belts attached to the door for GM that got in the
way every time you tried to get into or out of the car, but still had
the standard buckle system so that you could override it if you didn't
want to wear them. And the Ford motorized shoulder belt that still
required you to reach down and buckle the lap belt or decapitate yourself!

Priceless!

Dan

Matthew, i am sorry, i got so into getting off the subject i actually
came to learn about.. .can you email me about your experience? i am
just researching, i am not litigating anything.. i just want to know...
i care.. believe it or not... i have been accused of being, well you
read david's emails... i may be a newbie in all senses of the word and
the worlds cruelties, but i am not uncaring like some i have seen and i
am not blind and do not believe everything i have been told...

if you don't want to share your experience with me in more detail, i
understand.. you are always free to email me directly at home...

linda


Matthew Russotto wrote:
> In article >,
> Dori A Schmetterling > wrote:
>
>>In case you are referrng to leaks while just driving along, there aren't
>>any.
>>
>>As regards gas poisoning on air bag deployment, I am not aware of any
>>reports, nor of any long-term effects. Could be that the survivors are so
>>grateful to be alive that they don't care about a brief respiratory
>>annoyance, which they might not notice anyway if they are otherwise injured.
>
>
> _I_ sure as hell noticed it. It was pretty bad, even given the open
> area of my Miata. And the airbag did me no good, contacting only my
> right arm (scraping it) while my seat belt kept the rest of my body
> from contacting it.
>
>
>>Certainly air bags have given rise to new types of injury, or at least
>>changed the injury profile in car accidents. Two 'common' ones are whiplash
>>and skin burn (from the bag fabric rubbing against skin).. and so? Give me
>>these any day...
>
>
> Against nothing at all? Why?