Appendix A

Don’t Use Big Words
In promulgating your esoteric cogitations, or articulating your superficial sentimentations and amicable, philosophical or psychological observations, beware of platitudinous ponderosity. Let your conversational communications possess a classified conciseness, a compact comprehensibleness, coalescent consistency, and a concatenated cogency. Eschew all conglomerations of flatulent garrulity, jejune babblement and asinine affectations. Let your extemporaneous descantings and unpremeditated expatiations have intelligibility and veracious rhodomonted or thrasonical bombast. Sedulously avoid all polysyllabic profundity, pompous prolixity, psittaceous vacuity, ventriloquent verbosity, and vaniloquent vapidity. Shun double entendres, prurient jocosity and pestiferous profanity, obscurant or apparent.In other words, talk plainly, briefly, naturally, sensibly and purely. Keep from slang, don’t put on airs, say what you mean, mean what you say and DON’T USE BIG WORDS.

Appendix B

The Modern Hiawatha
He killed the noble Mudjokivis. Of the skin he made him mittens, Made them with the fur side inside, Made them with the skin side outside, He, to get the warm side inside, Put the inside skin side outside, He to get the cold side outside, Put the warm side fur side inside. That’s why he put the fur side inside, Why he put the skin side outside, Why he turned them inside outside.

Appendix C

OH LORD, IT’S HARD TO BE HUMBLE “Back a few months ago, I was headlinin’ at a great big nightclub, And they put me up a coupla’ days early in what they called “the Star Suite.”Now here I am…headlinin’ in one of the biggest nightclubs in the country andI wake up at 8 o’clock in the morning in this Star Suite all by myself.Awwwwww. Yeah that’s what I said…Awwwwww.  But I did what I’ve always done to cheer myself up. I picked up my guitar. I sat down and wrote me a little song. Now this is how it feels to be alone, at the top of the hill and trying to figure out why.”

(Chorus}Oh Lord it’s hard to be humble when you’re perfect in every way.I can’t wait to look in the mirror, ’cause I get better lookin’ each day.To know me is to love me, I must be a hell of a man.Oh Lord it’s hard to be humble, but I’m doing the best that I can.

Verse 1-I used to have a girlfriend, but I guess she just couldn’t compete,With all of those love-starved women who keep clamoring at my feet.Well, I prob’ly could find me another, but I guess they’re all in awe of me.Who cares, I never get lonesome ’cause I treasure my own company.(Chorus)

Verse 2-I guess you could say I’m a loner, a cowboy outlaw tough and proud.Oh I could have lots of friends if I wanna, but then I wouldn’t stand out in a crowd.Some folks say that I’m egotistical. Hell, I don’t even know what that means.I guess it has something to do with the way, that I fill out my skin-tight blue jeans.(Chorus)

Appendix D

Chicago Bears Fight Song
BEAR DOWN CHICAGO BEARSMAKE EVERY PLAY CLEAR THE WAY TO VICTORY,BEAR DOWN CHICAGO BEARSPUT UP A FIGHT WITH A MIGHT SO FEARLESSLY,
WE’LL NEVER FORGET THE WAY YOU THRILLED THE NATION,WITH YOUR T FORMATION
BEAR DOWN CHICAGO BEARS,AND LET ‘EM KNOW WHY YOU’REWEARING THE CROWN.YOU’RE THE PRIDE AND JOY OF ILLINOIS.CHICAGO BEARS , BEAR DOWN!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Appendix E
Our Lady of the Highway
Our Lady of the Highway be my companion from my setting out till my return. Clothe me with your invisible protection. Keep me from all dangers of collision, fire, and explosion, from every sort of bodily harm. Finally, having preserved me from all these evils and especially from sin, guide me to our heavenly home.

Appendix F

DRAFTA RESOLUTION OF THE PEOPLE’S COMMITTEE* TO AMEND THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO INCLUDE THE WORDS    “IN GOD WE TRUST”
Whereas, there are increasing attempts at removing GOD from such traditional and patriotic symbols as our currency, the Pledge of Allegiance, public buildings, prayer in school, etc. on Constitutional grounds; and
Whereas, if efforts to equate the recognition of GOD with the “establishment” clause in the first amendment of the Constitution are successful, it will make our government, not just secular, but  godless and atheistic, a belief held by very few of our citizens at the expense of the overwhelming majority; and
Whereas, our founding fathers made frequent reference to GOD, CREATOR and similar words in various documents such as the Declaration of Independence, the Federalist Papers, and other related documents of their time that support the fact that they believed in and placed their faith in a Supreme Being that they called GOD; and
Whereas, the first paragraph of the Constitution of the United States of America states that one of the purposes of the Constitution is to “secure the Blessings of Liberty” an obvious reference to the only source of blessings, a Supreme Being; and
Whereas, Article VII of the Constitution makes a seemingly casual reference to the “Year of the Lord”, it nevertheless indicates that the authors of the Constitution clearly recognized the existence of a Lord or Supreme Being; and
Whereas, the language in the first amendment to the Constitution that states “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, …” (the “establishment clause”) is usually the grounds for our government to be a secular one,  but it clearly does not preclude the recognition of GOD; and
Whereas, the belief in a Supreme Being or GOD (i.e. Deism or Theism) does not in itself constitute a religion anymore than the belief that there may or may not be a supreme being (i.e., Agnosticism) or that there is no GOD (i.e. Atheism) is a religion; and
Whereas, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Zorach v. Clauson, among others, although not a case directly on point, “We are a religious people whose institutions presuppose a Supreme Being.”; and
Whereas, we have a long tradition of using the Bible (the word of GOD) as a symbolic foundation on which oaths are made; and
Whereas, we have, since 1864, used the words “In God We Trust” on our official currency; and
Whereas, in1956 congress made “In God We Trust” our official national motto; and
Whereas, the constitutions of all fifty states make reference to GOD;  now therefore,
Be it Resolved: That we the undersigned, or on attached listing, American citizens and members of the People’s Committee to amend the Constitution of the United States of America petition the Congress to initiate an amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America that simply states “IN GOD WE TRUST.”
*This is a non-partisan and non-religious committee

Appendix G

WHEN DOES HUMAN LIFE BEGIN?
There has been a lot written about “When does human life begin?”. After reading much about this I just became more convinced than ever, that no one really knows, probably because no one can really define what Life is. It is a conundrum.  I believe that almost everyone would agree that if Human Life begins at conception, then it would be wrong to kill a fetus. There are many people who believe that life begins someplace in between conception and birth (e.g. when there is a viable fetus, etc.). However, the first question in determining “When Does Human Life Begin?” is, Does Life Begin at Conception? To find an answer for how to deal with this question I must turn to my college courses on logic and statistics (refreshed by some articles on the internet). I am sure most of you studied the same subject-about type I and II errors.
Applying those principles to when life begins consider this.
1. The null (negative) hypothesis is that “Life does not begin at conception”. I understand that a null hypothesis is usually a negative and, of course, it is impossible to prove a negative.
A type I error would be rejecting the hypothesis that “Life does not begin at conception” when in fact it is true that “Life does not begin at conception”.
A type II error would be accepting the hypothesis that “Life does not begin at conception” when in fact it is false that “Life does not begin at conception” (i.e. Life does begin at conception).
2. Now considering the fact that we humans cannot prove the hypothesis, which type of error causes the greatest or least harm? Logic, and the following example, tells me that the type I error causes the least harm.
Following the type I error scenario the worst result is that we would cause a child to be born into a potentially unwanted situation (e.g. disabled, abusive parent, etc.) and at best into a loving adoptive life leading to a normal existence.
Following the type II error scenario, the worst result is that the child would not be born (some would say the child would be killed) and the best result is that the mother and would be child are spared the potential agony/difficulties that would come with childbirth.
3. Putting the above argument in more simple terms, consider these two cases. In one case we allow abortions because we believe life does not begin at conception. Now assume it is true that life does not begin at conception. Then abortion is simply a medical procedure that removes some unwanted issue (type I error). Now assume it is false that life does not begin at conception (i.e. Life does begin at conception). Then abortion kills the baby (type II error).
In another case we do not allow abortions because we believe life does begin at conception. Now assume that it is true that life does not begin at conception. Then we have saved a life and allowed a baby to be born (type I error). Now assume it is false that life does not begin at conception. Then we have allowed a baby to be born when it is unwanted by at least some people and does cause problems of varying degrees to those people including possibly the baby (type II error).
4. All of the above excuses the situation where the mother’s life is at definite risk and the medical procedure needed to save her life results in the fetus dying. Thus the principle of double effect is applied.
_______ Justice Blackmun, writing for the 5-4 majority in Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S.113, 162 and 159 held that the unborn child was not a “person”, but did not offer any reasonable proof of this finding. Instead and inexplicitly he stated, “…those trained in the respective disciplines of medicine, philosophy and theology are unable to arrive at any consensus…”.  As noted above, the best work I have found on this point is by Maureen L. Condic, Senior Fellow, Westchester Institute for Ethics & the Human Person, Associate Professor of Neurobiology and Anatomy at the University of Utah School of Medicine. Her work was published as “When Does Human Life Begin” in 2008. She reports that after extensive clinical research they have proved that all the genes and cells found in humans after birth are present in the fetus at the moment of conception. She thus concludes that human life must begin at conception.  I have tried to find rebuttals to her work, but have found none.