Re: >^..^< The cats on Candlemas 2008

In article <alep75xbd5.ln2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
Nate Edel <archmage@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>David Friedman <ddfr@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>  archmage@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 (Nate Edel) wrote:
>> > Accepting for the sake of argument a hypothetical Christian God who
DID give
>> > everyone life, how is it anything but an unsolicited gift, and as
such,
>> > without obligation?  Or alternatively, wouldn't the only obligation
be, if
>> > you disliked the preconditions, to return it to the sender?
>>
>> There's a Millay poem on this subject. She's on God's side.
>
>Any recollections as to the title or how to track it down?
>
>I'm not terribly worried about it for sake of argument, but never having
>read Millay it seems a decent op****tunity to check her work out.

Here's the one probably referred to:

http://plagiarist.com/poetry/7416/

But I like this one better; it's called "Lines for a
Grave-Stone":

Man alive, that mournst thy lot,
Desiring what thou hast not got,
Money, beauty, love, what not, 

Deeming it blesseder to be
A rotted man than live to see
So rude a sky as covers thee, 

Deeming thyself of all unblest
And wretched souls the wretchedest,
Longing to die and be at rest: 

Know that however grim the fate
That sent thee forth to meditate
Upon my enviable state, 

Here lieth one that would resign
Gladly his lot to shoulder thine.
Give me thy coat; get into mine. 


Dorothy J. Heydt
Albany, California
djheydt@[EMAIL PROTECTED]