From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

This is a well done article and is a good funny read. If you read this article and then read Lawyers then you will see that merging this article with that one could mutate into a big crap explosion. I don't think that a merger will help at all, considering the differences in the articles and such. Personally, I find Lawyers inferior and if it is Highlited on the main page (I'd like others to see it, wouldn't you?) then a merger afterwords would make it entirely different. If you want you could discuss this with me further on my/this talk page.--Witt E, 22:23, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

edit Summary of today's edits and moves

I moved the "Lawyers" article to HowTo:Become a Lawyer as that article is a how-to article. (It was a two part move, as I accidentally first moved it to "HowTo:Become" as I hit the enter key too soon by mistake.) I then made Lawyers namespace into a redirect page that redirects to Lawyer. I edited both articles so that they have references to the other: The How To has the reference at the top, while the Lawyer article has the reference in the "see also" section. I removed the merge template on both articles as both articles are, IMHO, worth having: one as an article on lawyers generally, and the other as an article on how to become a laywer. --Ogopogo +S (TALK) 12:49, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Ah, nice work there, perhaps in a few weeks I'll put this back up for feature, the merge template was a turn-off for some--Witt E, 04:20, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

edit 10 year olds trying to be funny

== Not sure if the big JEWISH PENIS thing was on purpose or not, if it was on purpose I don't get it...

You don't know what the purpose of a Jewish penis is (or any penis, for that matter?)


I will attempt to answer this burning question; “Can a female attorney be called ‘Esquire’?”

Actually, in retrospect, given today’s horrific socio-weather, the term has become a bit antiquated, as all gender and likewise race, has gone neutral. If, however, you insist, I suppose it would be just as correct, and perhaps grammatically safer, to address the lawyer in correspondence as Mr., Mrs. or Ms. as you see or otherwise sense, or omit if uncomfortable, and follow the name with a bland descriptor, such as; “Attorney at Law.” Your decision, but before proceeding in haste, note, The Constitution of the United States, in Article, I Section 9, Clause 8 states; “No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States…” Inasmuch, the term should never used in verbal greetings or as an introductory title as part of one’s name, and rarely, except in private perhaps, does someone describe themselves using the term “Esquire.” So, since titles are not permitted in the United States by way of law, the term “Esquire” would be indicative of occupation rather than social status, and therefore applies equally to anyone in the occupation regardless of sometimes perceived gender. Anyhow, culturally at present, it is strongly advised to endeavor to use terms that are mutually exclusive whenever confronted with the situation, thusly avoiding misunderstandings and/or uncomfortable settings, which is obviously what Thomas Jefferson was politely thinking when he stood and sayeth for all, please wit:

“Under the law of nature, all men are born free, every one comes into the world with a right to his own person, which includes the liberty of moving and using it at his own will. This is what is called personal liberty, and is given him by the Author of nature, because necessary for his own sustenance.” –Thomas Jefferson


Personal tools