"Fatherhood and Stephen Christopher Harris..."

Early in our relationship, Stephen revealed to me his desire to be a father… and although this is problematic when you’re gay, it’s not impossible.

He knew at that time that I had adopted and raised a son on my own. My son, Marvin had gotten married the summer before I met Stephen. As I listened to Stephen talk about wanting to know the joys of fatherhood as we lay in bed on a crisp fall morning, I knew that I too wanted to again know the happiness of being called father and the joy of loving and raising a child. When I finally spoke to what he was saying, I told Stephen of all the ways his dream could come true… I said we could adopt a child. I told him he could also be a biological father if he wanted that as there were many women willing to be surrogate mothers for gay couples. I went on to tell him of my own struggles in being a single parent to an adopted son and how much easier and more joyful I thought the experience could be for two.

As we talked about this, I marveled at the gentleness of his tone and how he seemed to be in deep reflective thought about what we were discussing. As I gazed into his eyes, I could see they were becoming heavy with wet tears which were about to fall. When I asked Stephen what was wrong, he told me he was thinking about his own child. He had never before spoken of a child and I was in shocked silence while waiting to understand what he meant… He went on to explain about a woman from his past that he’d gotten pregnant. He said she aborted his child when he refused to marry her. He said he’d been wracked with guilt about it ever since, and he said he wondered if God would forgive him for allowing his child to die.

As I softly stroked Stephen’s cheek and brow, I shared with him more details about my own marriage and desire to have children. I told him how well I understood what he was feeling and my thoughts about how I believed God viewed what had happened to his unborn child. As we lay in each other’s arms, a tear or two fell from our both of our eyes as I comforted him and assured him that together, we’d have children of our own to love and to love us. Finally, he began to smile as he looked into my eyes saying, “Yes, we’ll have children, I love you, Christopher…” That was late in October of 2006, just before we decided we’d get married.

Thursday, Stephen called me for the fourth time this week and we talked for a while… He again asked me for my forgiveness of his wrongdoing and even asked for me to show him mercy… As I listened to him talk about being a “broken man” and of conversations he says he has recently had with God, I was remembering that chilly October morning almost three years ago. Although I thought to remind him of his promises to love me always and that we’d have children someday, I didn’t, I just listened and wondered in my mind if he remembered.

Today at work, as I was thinking about these things, I remembered something that occurred on Sunday, July 29, 2008. Stephen had promised to call me early that evening, but didn’t… Around 7 p.m. I sent him a text message expressing my disappointment and my hope that all was well with him in Charlotte. I told him I was “waiting by the phone” for his call. At 7:40 his reply came: “Ok dear, I am in class.” I wondered about that, as he’d not told me he was taking any classes and I wondered what kind of class he could take on a Sunday evening. Around 9:30 he finally called. I asked him how his class went thinking he’d tell me what type of class he was taking. He said, “It went well.” and he said nothing more about it. I realized that there was no point in asking more, because although I didn’t know why, I could somehow tell he was going to lie to me about it.

When it came to Stephen Christopher Harris and secrets, I had learned to accept that this was simply his way and because I loved him, although it was very hard to do, I simply let it be… That day, I forgave his keeping of another secret as I had so many others... Secrets, lies and deceptions from Stephen were nothing new to me. I ended our call that night as I always did with my renewed declaration of true love for him and the promise of my abiding faith in his heart. In December 2008, his secret was revealed to me when I discovered what class it was that he’d taken.

I talked about this in part today with a client… My client and I were talking about “house husbands” and I told her of how when I was in Charlotte with Stephen, I’d clean the “Dream House” every day from top to bottom. I told her of how I’d vacuum the carpets at the end of the day after doing the laundry, and cleaning the bathrooms and other housework and then not walk on them so that they’d be pristine for the arrival of my “beloved one.” I wanted things to be so perfect that his footsteps would be the only ones he’d see when he looked about him when he came home from work each day. I talked about how I’d also worked hard to make the “Dream House” a home by painting, fixing and repairing things, buying decorations, plants, lamps, shades etc. And as I was speaking of this, it reminded me of a day in December last year when I decided to unpack some boxes that were in the closet in the study. One of the boxes had school papers of Stephen’s in it… As I looked through the papers, there was a certificate of completion from a state mandated parenting class for potential foster and adoptive parents. Looking at it, I took note of the date and I realized that that was the class he’d been in that Sunday evening in July.

Although, Stephen’s was the only certificate in the box, I nevertheless knew without knowing that he’d not taken that class alone. In my mind’s eye, I clearly saw Stephen and Alonza in class together. And at the time, I was deeply hurt to know yet again that another of the promises he’d made to me was being kept with someone else. After thinking about what I’d just learned, I put the certificate away in one of the kitchen cabinets, knowing at some point, I would ask him about it. Then I faithfully cleaned the house and cooked his dinner. Later, as I did every day, I turned on the outside lights at dusk and I sat near the door on the hardwood floor (so as not to leave any impressions on the freshly vacuumed carpet) to wait for his arrival. I greeted him at the door with, “I love you, Dearest” and I didn’t mention what I then knew about the class he’d taken.

It was several weeks later, after our mutual suicide attempt on December 10th that I finally took the certificate from the cabinet one day and I asked him about the parenting class. Before I showed him the certificate, I asked Stephen if he remembered the many times we’d talked of having children. He said he remembered. I asked him if that was still a promise he was going to keep… After a lengthy silence, he finally said he didn’t know. I showed him the certificate and I asked him why he’d taken that class. At first his face was awash with the very familiar look of fear that overcomes him when he’s confronted with the truth. Then he said he had considered adopting a child, but decided not to for fear that the child might prey on the other neighborhood children if he had been molested himself. I reminded him of that Sunday in July and I asked why he’d not told me about it… He was silent until I asked, “Who did you take the class with?” At first, a shocked look flashed across his face and then he put on his most innocent look as I saw his mouth poised in an all too familiar stance as he prepared to tell me another lie. Before he began to spin his tale, I said, “You took the class with Alonza didn’t you?” The innocent look on Stephen’s face faded away like snow on a summer sidewalk. He said nothing, but his now guilty look said everything. I didn’t say anything more to him that evening until we went to bed, when I said, “Good night, Stephen, I love you, Dear.”

As I drifted off to sleep in his arms that night, I was thinking about how much it hurt to acknowledge that another promise had been broken, and another dream was now deferred and perhaps lost forever. Yet I still loved him, and I believed that somehow, someday, he’d keep his promises and we’d know the happiness he promised would be ours. As I listened to him over the phone on Thursday, almost sounding as if he were in tears, I again wondered why there is no truth in Stephen Christopher Harris... "Fatherhood would suit him well, if he could only learn to tell the truth. "

“Fear Eats the Soul”

"In The News Today..."

Brad Pitt: "I don't care if my child is gay"
By Ramsey Dehani • August 6, 2009 - 17:05

Hollywood star Brad Pitt has said that he doesn't care if any of his children are gay, saying: "I hope I teach my kids to be who they really are".

In an interview with Parade magazine, Pitt, 45, said having a gay child wouldn't bother him "one bit".

“Would it bother me if a child of mine turns out to be gay? No, not one bit. I want my kids to live the lives they want to live. I want them to be fulfilled. I hope I teach my kids to be who they really are,” he said.

Pitt, who has six children with partner Angelina Jolie, including three who were adopted, also defended the couple's decision not to get married, saying they won't do it until "it's legal for everyone else".

“When someone asked me why Angie and I don’t get married, I replied, ‘Maybe we’ll get married when it’s legal for everyone else."

He continued: "I stand by that, although I took a lot of flak for saying it - hate mail from religious groups.”

"I believe everyone should have the same rights," he continued. "They say gay marriage ruins families and hurts kids. Well, I've had the privilege of seeing my gay friends being parents and watching their kids grow up in a loving environment".

The actor said that his views stem from his position that all people should have equality.

In September 2008, the star made a $100,000 donation to the campaign against Proposition 8, which banned gay marriage in California.

"It's Not So Funny..."

Still, at least we're not invisible anymore...

"In The News Today..."

Corvino: Robert George’s Reality

By John Corvino, columnist, 365gay.com
08.07.2009 9:00am EDT

Robert George’s recent piece in the Wall Street Journal, “Gay Marriage, Democracy, and the Courts,” contains both sense and nonsense-but more of the latter.

George, a Princeton professor of jurisprudence and founder of the American Principles Project, is a preeminent conservative scholar. In the op-ed, he considers the federal lawsuit challenging California’s Proposition 8 and claims that a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in favor of marriage equality would be “disastrous,” constituting a “judicial usurpation” of popular authority and inflaming the culture wars beyond repair.

First, the good points: George is quite right to insist that the Court’s role is to interpret the Constitution, not to make policy. He’s also right to argue that marriage law has been, and should be, tied closely to the needs of children. And he exhibits a refreshing “don’t panic” attitude, asserting that “democracy is working”-although by democracy, he seems to mean only voter referenda, and not our more complex representative system, with its various checks and balances. On the latter, broader understanding, I’d agree that “democracy is working:” in the last year, five additional states have embraced marriage equality.

But the misunderstandings in George’s piece are legion.

(1) George provides a lengthy analogy with the 1973 Supreme Court decision Roe v. Wade, which recognized abortion rights. But while this analogy may be relevant to the culture-war angle, it says absolutely nothing about the legal merits-since rather different issues were at stake in Roe.

What’s more, it’s not even clear how relevant it is to the culture-war angle. Most abortion opponents believe that abortion involves large-scale killing of innocent babies. Compare that to Adam and Steve setting up house in the suburbs. Whatever your view of homosexuality, there’s no comparison in terms of moral urgency.

(2) George also considers-and summarily rejects-an analogy with the 1967 Loving v. Virginia. He writes,

“The definition of marriage was not at stake in Loving. Everyone agreed that interracial marriages were marriages. Racists just wanted to ban them as part of the evil regime of white supremacy that the equal protection clause was designed to destroy.”

Seriously? Perhaps “everyone agreed” that they were marriages in some sense-as one could say equally about same-sex marriages-but they certainly didn’t agree that they were valid marriages. When the Loving trial court judge declared, “The fact that [God] separated the races shows that he did not intend the races to mix,” he expressed the widespread view that interracial marriage violated a divinely ordained natural order.

George’s reference to the “evil regime of white supremacy” is also telling. In order to undermine any analogy between racial prejudice and homophobia, right-wingers often paint all those who opposed interracial-marriage as angry KKK types. But most opponents of miscegenation sincerely believed that the Bible condemns it, that it’s unnatural, and that it’s bad for children. In other words, they cited the same “respectable” reasons as modern-day marriage-equality opponents.

That these two groups cite the same reasons doesn’t show that their arguments are equally bad or their motives equally flawed. It does show, however, that religious conviction doesn’t secure a free pass for discrimination, and that friendly, well-intentioned folks can nevertheless be guilty of bigotry.

(3) George, a noted natural-law theorist, asserts that marriage “takes its distinctive character” from bodily unions of the procreative kind. By “procreative kind,” George doesn’t mean that procreation must be intended, or even possible-oddly, sterile heterosexuals can have sex “of the procreative kind” on George’s view. He means penis-in-vagina. According to George,

“This explains why our law has historically permitted annulment of marriage for non-consummation, but not for infertility; and why acts of sodomy, even between legally wed spouses, have never been recognized as consummating marriages.”

“Historically” is the key word here-as in “not any more.” There’s a reason consummation laws have been almost universally discarded (and were seldom invoked when present). Such laws reflected, not the law’s majestic correspondence with Catholic natural-law doctrine, but an outdated mixture of concerns about male lineage and female purity.

(4) Finally, George asserts the standard false dilemma: Either accept the traditional natural-law understanding of marriage, or else have no principled basis for any marriage regulation:

“If marriage is redefined, its connection to organic bodily union-and thus to procreation-will be undermined. It will increasingly be understood as an emotional union for the sake of adult satisfaction that is served by mutually agreeable sexual play. But there is no reason that primarily emotional unions like friendships should be permanent, exclusive, limited to two, or legally regulated at all. Thus, there will remain no principled basis for upholding marital norms like monogamy.”

No principled basis? How about the fact that polygamy-which historically is far more common than monogamy-is highly correlated with a variety of social ills? Or that the stability provided by long-term romantic pair-bonding is good for individuals and society-far more profoundly than typical “friendships”? Or that the state legally regulates important contracts of all sorts, and the commitment to “for better or worse, ’til death do us part” is a pretty important contract? Here as elsewhere, George seems incapable of recognizing any principles beyond those prescribed by a narrow natural-law theory.

Ultimately, the trouble with George is that his theory-which is supposed to be rooted in “nature”-is in fact divorced from reality. The reality is that gay people exist, fall in love, pair off, settle down, and build lives together-sometimes with children, often without. When we do, we seek the same legal protection for our relationships that other Americans take for granted. If the denial of such protections is not an appropriate subject for judicial scrutiny, I’m not sure what is.

*****

John Corvino, Ph.D. is an author, speaker, and philosophy professor at Wayne State University in Detroit.

For over seventeen years he has traveled the country speaking on homosexuality and ethics. His writing has been featured in regional and national periodicals, at the online Independent Gay Forum, and in numerous scholarly anthologies. His column “The Gay Moralist” appears Fridays on 365gay.com.

For more about John Corvino, or to see clips from his “What’s Morally Wrong with Homosexuality?” DVD, visit http://www.johncorvino.com/.

"Same Gender Loving People - No. 113"

"The day I watched my dads get married, I knew we were a real family..."


Positive images of people like me... The truth of the matter is that we all need to see people like ourselves. So everyday, I'll post a photo, drawing or some other artwork that depicts Same Gender Loving People as what we are... Only Human.

"In The News Today..."

Openly Gay Pugh Appeals to Wide Swath of Voters

David Josar / The Detroit News
Thursday, August 6, 2009


Detroit --When Charles Pugh tried to pump $20 of gas Wednesday morning he was interrupted every two minutes by another well-wisher congratulating him for his top showing in the City Council primary.

"I was truly humbled," said Pugh, 38, a former broadcaster and the first openly gay candidate to win a major election in Detroit.

"I know there were people who didn't vote for me because I was gay ... but I think people looked at me to see who I was as a complete person and where I was on the issues and that's what made the difference."

Pugh was one of 18 candidates to advance to the Nov. 3 primary for the nine-member council. His early success, some say, could thrust the city into the national spotlight in a very different way than a parade of scandals had over the last four years.

"This city has had the worst PR of any city in the world and now this will be very good news," said Ferndale Mayor Craig Covey, who is also gay. "Detroit is going to be seen as a place that can be tolerant and progressive."

In his campaign literature, during candidate rallies and in debates, there was no reference to Pugh's sexual orientation.

Yet on radio shows or television segments, he has talked candidly about his romantic relationships. "I am absolutely gay and been open about it," he said. "But that's not what I'm running on."

Members of the gay community Wednesday used words like "thrilling," "exciting" and "amazing" to describe Pugh's victory, where he won with 59,560 votes and 8.9 percent of the vote. Coming in second was City Council President Kenneth Cockrel Jr. with 49,657.

National reporters have been calling leading gay-rights organizations in the region for weeks to find out what the city's embrace of Pugh means.

Some Detroit churches have historically sermonized that homosexuality was a sin, but Pugh got the backing of both the AME Ministerial Alliance and the Council of Baptist Pastors.

"We've been getting calls from the New York Times and others from across the country for months," said Alicia Skillman, executive director of the Triangle Foundation, a statewide civil rights, advocacy and anti-violence organization for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people. "We're very happy for Charles. I think this is showing that the region is not so afraid anymore. They are saying he's a gay man and he's my friend and that's OK."

Dale Morgan, 53, a longtime Palmer Park resident and business owner, said he did not campaign or provide financial support to Pugh, but soon will.

"Maybe there really is an enlightenment going on in this city," said Morgan, who recalls trying to buy a house 20 years ago with a partner, but being turned down by the bank because they were a same-sex couple. "We are surprised he did so well, and so happy."

Backing Pugh was a simple choice for the Council of Baptist Ministers, said the Rev. Lonnie Peek, a spokesman.

"He was young and energetic, and he had good ideas," said Peek, adding that sexual orientation "never came up."

"He's just the right person to bring about change. He did great."

Historically, black communities discourage the expression of gay identity and will stigmatize or harass gay people in the community, said Kevin Mumford, a University of Iowa professor whose book "Interzones" examines race and sexuality in 20th century America.

But, he suggests, black communities, like Detroit, may be more willing to embrace a gay candidate because they are keenly aware of discrimination.

"On the level of civil rights and fairness, it may be that black politicians and the black electorate are more aware of the injustices of bias than the general population," he said.

For the most part, Pugh said his sexual identity was not an issue during the campaign -- except for one council candidate he refused to identify.

That woman, who did not get enough votes to advance to the general election, told people, including Pugh's barber, she had first-hand knowledge that police had been called to investigate allegations involving Pugh's conduct with young men, a charge Pugh said has no validity.

"I confronted her and told her if this were true, why she didn't go to the police," he said. "I am still considering a lawsuit against her."

Still, Pugh said, there is a fear by gay people that they will be ostracized based on their sexuality.

"These things still happen. There are people who would much rather remain silent," he said.

"Friends and Lovers..."

Stephen Christopher Harris and His Lover

"Cotidie damnatur qui semper timet..."

"Fear Eats the Soul"

"Vanity, Thy Name is Stephen..."

"They that observe lying vanities forsake their own mercy." - Jonah 2:8 (KJV)

"Remove far from me vanity and lies: give me neither poverty nor riches; feed me with food convenient for me..." - Proverbs 30:8 (KJV)

“A man must have a good deal of vanity who believes, and a good deal of boldness who affirms, that all the doctrines he holds are true, and all he rejects are false.” - Benjamin Franklin

Earlier today, I was thinking about Stephen Christopher Harris... Specifically, about his vain nature. Stephen is concerned with appearances; that the facade he projects is a lie means nothing to him. There are many symptoms of his vanity that I could point to, but one of the most telling and obvious that I first discovered was his fascination with cosmetic, beauty and pharmaceutical preparations.

I once said to Stephen, "All the pills, capsules, tablets, vitamins, potions, lotions, ointments, creams and salves in the world will never cure what ails you... the problem with you is not on the surface, it's not even physical... but deep within, your soul is afflicted by your lies."

He literally has at least a hundred creams, lotions, soaps, ointments, acid peels and other skin preparations that he uses routinely. He has creams and medications in bags and boxes, they line every shelf of entire closets. He takes vitamins and supplements by the handful, enough to choke a normal man. He preens in every mirror he sees, and he regularly attends "Gay Church..." He goes to the gym to perform his ceaseless ritual of worshiping his own body and those of other men.

Last November, I learned just how deeply centered his vanity went when I discovered that he'd actively tried to enlarge his penis... When we were moving back to the "Dream House," while packing, I found he had a well worn vacuum pump enlarger... Hidden with it was a strange looking apparatus that I couldn't imagine. Although I didn't know what it was, I knew by the context of the other items he'd hid with it that it was something to do with the penis. Curiosity and wanting to know what it could be possessed me; this is what I discovered it was:

Despite what's said in the video, I think Stephen's use of this device resulted in his general impotence.

And yet, even after I discovered this curious side of him, I realized that this is perhaps the least serious evidence of the shallow, self-centered vanity of Stephen Christopher Harris. As the truth of him was revealed to me, my love for him blinded me to the reality of what I should have been able to so clearly see... "Stephen Christopher Harris loves no one, not even himself."

"Fear Eats the Soul"

"Same Gender Loving People - No. 112"

"Love Makes Everything Fun..."


Positive images of people like me... The truth of the matter is that we all need to see people like ourselves. So everyday, I'll post a photo, drawing or some other artwork that depicts Same Gender Loving People as what we are... Only Human.

"The Truth Today..."

"Kindness"

Kindness is the act or the state of being kind and marked by charitable behaviour, marked by mild disposition, pleasantness, tenderness and concern for others. Kindness is considered to be one of the Knightly Virtues, and is a recognized value in many cultures and religions (see ethics in religion). It is considered to be one of the seven virtues, specifically the one of the Seven Contrary Virtues (direct opposites of the seven deadly sins) that is the direct opposite to envy.

The Talmud claims that "deeds of kindness are equal in weight to all the commandments." Paul of Tarsus defines love as being "patient and kind..." (I Corinthians).

In Buddhism, one of the Ten Perfections (Paramitas) is Mettā, which is usually translated into English as "loving-kindness". Tenzin Gyatso, 14th Dalai Lama wrote "my religion is kindness" and authored a book entitled "Kindness, Clarity, and Insight". Confucius urges his followers to "recompense kindness with kindness."

According to book two of Aristotle's "Rhetoric" it is one of the emotions (see list of emotions), which is defined as being "helpfulness towards some one in need, not in return for anything, nor for the advantage of the helper himself, but for that of the person helped".

One of the four caryatids on the Wallace fountains in Paris represents kindness.

In a study of 37 cultures around the world, 16000 subjects were asked about their most desired traits in a mate. For both sexes, the first preference was kindness (the second was intelligence).

Philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche argued that kindness and love are the "most curative herbs and agents in human intercourse".

*****

Again, though he would demand this of others, Stephen Christopher Harris knows nothing of this in himself... Stephen Christopher Harris is not kind.



Re: Why

Monday, August 3, 2009 9:16 AM

From: "Stephen Harris" "sch1004@yahoo.com"

To: "Christopher Flournoy"

Will you be kind to me when I call?

"Fear Eats the Soul"

"The Truth Today..."

People are interested...

I guess inquiring minds still want to know.

"This is Stephen Christopher Harris" has been viewed more than 1200 times in the last 10 days.

Visitors have come from all over the world:

United States

Canada

Germany

India

Russia

Mexico

Greece

Italy

Romania

Albania

Taiwan

Spain

Thailand

"Fear Eats the Soul"

"The Truth Tonight..."

Re: Why

Saturday, August 1, 2009 4:45 PM

From: "Stephen Christopher Harris" sch1004@yahoo.com

To: "Christopher Flournoy"

Can we talk about it... Have a civil discussion, please.

Sent from my iPhone

*****

Stephen Christopher Harris is still talking about things he knows nothing about...

"CIVILITY"

As a young schoolboy in Virginia, George Washington took his first steps toward greatness by copying out by hand a list of 110 'Rules of Civility & Decent Behavior in Company and Conversation.' Based on a 16th-century set of precepts compiled for young gentlemen by Jesuit instructors, the Rules of Civility were one of the earliest and most powerful forces to shape America's first president, says historian Richard Brookhiser.

Most of the rules are concerned with details of etiquette, offering pointers on such issues as how to dress, walk, eat in public and address one's superiors. But in the introduction to the newly published Rules of Civility: The 110 Precepts That Guided Our First President in War and Peace, Brookhiser warns against dismissing the maxims as "mere" etiquette. "The rules address moral issues, but they address them indirectly," Brookhiser writes. "They seek to form the inner man (or boy) by shaping the outer."

Brookhiser says the advice the rules offer, though often outlandish in detail, is still applicable in our day and age: "Maybe they can work on us in our century as the Jesuits intended them to work in theirs — indirectly — by putting us in a more ambitious frame of mind."

The Rules of Civility & Decent Behavior in Company and Conversation

(For ease of reading, punctuation and spelling have been modernized.)

1. Every action done in company ought to be with some sign of respect to those that are present.

2. When in company, put not your hands to any part of the body not usually discovered.

3. Show nothing to your friend that may affright him.

4. In the presence of others, sing not to yourself with a humming voice, or drum with your fingers or feet.

5. If you cough, sneeze, sigh or yawn, do it not loud but privately, and speak not in your yawning, but put your handkerchief or hand before your face and turn aside.

6. Sleep not when others speak, sit not when others stand, speak not when you should hold your peace, walk not on when others stop.

7. Put not off your clothes in the presence of others, nor go out of your chamber half dressed.

8. At play and attire, it's good manners to give place to the last comer, and affect not to speak louder than ordinary.

9. Spit not into the fire, nor stoop low before it; neither put your hands into the flames to warm them, nor set your feet upon the fire, especially if there be meat before it.

10. When you sit down, keep your feet firm and even, without putting one on the other or crossing them.

11. Shift not yourself in the sight of others, nor gnaw your nails.

12. Shake not the head, feet, or legs; roll not the eyes; lift not one eyebrow higher than the other, wry not the mouth, and bedew no man's face with your spittle by approaching too near him when you speak.

13. Kill no vermin, or fleas, lice, ticks, etc. in the sight of others; if you see any filth or thick spittle put your foot dexterously upon it; if it be upon the clothes of your companions, put it off privately, and if it be upon your own clothes, return thanks to him who puts it off.

14. Turn not your back to others, especially in speaking; jog not the table or desk on which another reads or writes; lean not upon anyone.

15. Keep your nails clean and short, also your hands and teeth clean, yet without showing any great concern for them.

16. Do not puff up the cheeks, loll not out the tongue with the hands or beard, thrust out the lips or bite them, or keep the lips too open or too close.

17. Be no flatterer, neither play with any that delight not to be played withal.

18. Read no letter, books, or papers in company, but when there is a necessity for the doing of it, you must ask leave; come not near the books or writtings of another so as to read them unless desired, or give your opinion of them unasked. Also look not nigh when another is writing a letter.

19. Let your countenance be pleasant but in serious matters somewhat grave.

20. The gestures of the body must be suited to the discourse you are upon.

21. Reproach none for the infirmities of nature, nor delight to put them that have in mind of thereof.

22. Show not yourself glad at the misfortune of another though he were your enemy.

23. When you see a crime punished, you may be inwardly pleased; but always show pity to the suffering offender.

24. Do not laugh too loud or too much at any public spectacle.

25. Superfluous compliments and all affectation of ceremonies are to be avoided, yet where due they are not to be neglected.

26. In putting off your hat to persons of distinction, as noblemen, justices, churchmen, etc., make a reverence, bowing more or less according to the custom of the better bred, and quality of the persons. Among your equals expect not always that they should begin with you first, but to pull off the hat when there is no need is affectation. In the manner of saluting and resaluting in words, keep to the most usual custom.

27. 'Tis ill manners to bid one more eminent than yourself be covered, as well as not to do it to whom it is due. Likewise he that makes too much haste to put on his hat does not well, yet he ought to put it on at the first, or at most the second time of being asked. Now what is herein spoken, of qualification in behavior in saluting, ought also to be observed in taking of place and sitting down, for ceremonies without bounds are troublesome.

28. If any one come to speak to you while you are are sitting stand up, though he be your inferior, and when you present seats, let it be to everyone according to his degree.

29. When you meet with one of greater quality than yourself, stop and retire, especially if it be at a door or any straight place, to give way for him to pass.

30. In walking, the highest place in most countries seems to be on the right hand; therefore, place yourself on the left of him whom you desire to honor. But if three walk together the middest place is the most honorable; the wall is usally given to the most worthy if two walk together.

31. If anyone far surpasses others, either in age, estate, or merit, yet would give place to a meaner than himself in his own lodging or elsewhere, the one ought not to except it. So he on the other part should not use much earnestness nor offer it above once or twice.

32. To one that is your equal, or not much inferior, you are to give the chief place in your lodging, and he to whom it is offered ought at the first to refuse it, but at the second to accept though not without acknowledging his own unworthiness.

33. They that are in dignity or in office have in all places precedency, but whilst they are young, they ought to respect those that are their equals in birth or other qualities, though they have no public charge.

34. It is good manners to prefer them to whom we speak before ourselves, especially if they be above us, with whom in no sort we ought to begin.

35. Let your discourse with men of business be short and comprehensive.

36. Artificers and persons of low degree ought not to use many ceremonies to lords or others of high degree, but respect and highly honor then, and those of high degree ought to treat them with affability and courtesy, without arrogance.

37. In speaking to men of quality do not lean nor look them full in the face, nor approach too near them at left. Keep a full pace from them.

38. In visiting the sick, do not presently play the physician if you be not knowing therein.

39. In writing or speaking, give to every person his due title according to his degree and the custom of the place.

40. Strive not with your superior in argument, but always submit your judgment to others with modesty.

41. Undertake not to teach your equal in the art himself professes; it savors of arrogancy.

42. Let your ceremonies in courtesy be proper to the dignity of his place with whom you converse, for it is absurd to act the same with a clown and a prince.

43. Do not express joy before one sick in pain, for that contrary passion will aggravate his misery.

44. When a man does all he can, though it succeed not well, blame not him that did it.

45. Being to advise or reprehend any one, consider whether it ought to be in public or in private, and presently or at some other time; in what terms to do it; and in reproving show no signs of cholor but do it with all sweetness and mildness.

46. Take all admonitions thankfully in what time or place soever given, but afterwards not being culpable take a time and place convenient to let him know it that gave them.

47. Mock not nor jest at any thing of importance. Break no jests that are sharp, biting, and if you deliver any thing witty and pleasant, abstain from laughing thereat yourself.

48. Wherein you reprove another be unblameable yourself, for example is more prevalent than precepts.

49. Use no reproachful language against any one; neither curse nor revile.

50. Be not hasty to believe flying reports to the disparagement of any.

51. Wear not your clothes foul, or ripped, or dusty, but see they be brushed once every day at least and take heed that you approach not to any uncleaness.

52. In your apparel be modest and endeavor to accommodate nature, rather than to procure admiration; keep to the fashion of your equals, such as are civil and orderly with respect to time and places.

53. Run not in the streets, neither go too slowly, nor with mouth open; go not shaking of arms, nor upon the toes, kick not the earth with your feet, go not upon the toes, nor in a dancing fashion.

54. Play not the peacock, looking every where about you, to see if you be well decked, if your shoes fit well, if your stockings sit neatly and clothes handsomely.

55. Eat not in the streets, nor in the house, out of season.

56. Associate yourself with men of good quality if you esteem your own reputation; for 'tis better to be alone than in bad company.

57. In walking up and down in a house, only with one in company if he be greater than yourself, at the first give him the right hand and stop not till he does and be not the first that turns, and when you do turn let it be with your face towards him; if he be a man of great quality walk not with him cheek by jowl but somewhat behind him, but yet in such a manner that he may easily speak to you.

58. Let your conversation be without malice or envy, for 'tis a sign of a tractable and commendable nature, and in all causes of passion permit reason to govern.

59. Never express anything unbecoming, nor act against the rules moral before your inferiors.

60. Be not immodest in urging your friends to discover a secret.

61. Utter not base and frivolous things among grave and learned men, nor very difficult questions or subjects among the ignorant, or things hard to be believed; stuff not your discourse with sentences among your betters nor equals.

62. Speak not of doleful things in a time of mirth or at the table; speak not of melancholy things as death and wounds, and if others mention them, change if you can the discourse. Tell not your dreams, but to your intimate friend.

63. A man ought not to value himself of his achievements or rare qualities of wit; much less of his riches, virtue or kindred.

64. Break not a jest where none take pleasure in mirth; laugh not aloud, nor at all without occasion; deride no man's misfortune though there seem to be some cause.

65. Speak not injurious words neither in jest nor earnest; scoff at none although they give occasion.

66. Be not froward but friendly and courteous, the first to salute, hear and answer; and be not pensive when it's a time to converse.

67. Detract not from others, neither be excessive in commanding.

68. Go not thither, where you know not whether you shall be welcome or not; give not advice without being asked, and when desired do it briefly.

69. If two contend together take not the part of either unconstrained, and be not obstinate in your own opinion. In things indifferent be of the major side.

70. Reprehend not the imperfections of others, for that belongs to parents, masters and superiors.

71. Gaze not on the marks or blemishes of others and ask not how they came. What you may speak in secret to your friend, deliver not before others.

72. Speak not in an unknown tongue in company but in your own language and that as those of quality do and not as the vulgar. Sublime matters treat seriously.

73. Think before you speak, pronounce not imperfectly, nor bring out your words too hastily, but orderly and distinctly.

74. When another speaks, be attentive yourself and disturb not the audience. If any hesitate in his words, help him not nor prompt him without desired. Interrupt him not, nor answer him till his speech be ended.

75. In the midst of discourse ask not of what one treats, but if you perceive any stop because of your coming, you may well entreat him gently to proceed. If a person of quality comes in while you're conversing, it's handsome to repeat what was said before.

76. While you are talking, point not with your finger at him of whom you discourse, nor approach too near him to whom you talk, especially to his face.

77. Treat with men at fit times about business and whisper not in the company of others.

78. Make no comparisons and if any of the company be commended for any brave act of virtue, commend not another for the same.

79. Be not apt to relate news if you know not the truth thereof. In discoursing of things you have heard, name not your author. Always a secret discover not.

80. Be not tedious in discourse or in reading unless you find the company pleased therewith.

81. Be not curious to know the affairs of others, neither approach those that speak in private.

82. Undertake not what you cannot perform but be careful to keep your promise.

83. When you deliver a matter do it without passion and with discretion, however mean the person be you do it to.

84. When your superiors talk to anybody hearken not, neither speak nor laugh.

85. In company of those of higher quality than yourself, speak not 'til you are asked a question, then stand upright, put off your hat and answer in few words.

86. In disputes, be not so desirous to overcome as not to give liberty to each one to deliver his opinion and submit to the judgment of the major part, especially if they are judges of the dispute.

87. Let your carriage be such as becomes a man grave, settled and attentive to that which is spoken. Contradict not at every turn what others say.

88. Be not tedious in discourse, make not many digressions, nor repeat often the same manner of discourse.

89. Speak not evil of the absent, for it is unjust.

90. Being set at meat scratch not, neither spit, cough or blow your nose except there's a necessity for it.

91. Make no show of taking great delight in your victuals. Feed not with greediness. Eat your bread with a knife. Lean not on the table, neither find fault with what you eat.

92. Take no salt or cut bread with your knife greasy.

93. Entertaining anyone at table it is decent to present him with meat. Undertake not to help others undesired by the master.

94. If you soak bread in the sauce, let it be no more than what you put in your mouth at a time, and blow not your broth at table but stay 'til it cools of itself.

95. Put not your meat to your mouth with your knife in your hand; neither spit forth the stones of any fruit pie upon a dish nor cast anything under the table.

96. It's unbecoming to heap much to one's mea. Keep your fingers clean and when foul wipe them on a corner of your table napkin.

97. Put not another bite into your mouth 'til the former be swallowed. Let not your morsels be too big for the jowls.

98. Drink not nor talk with your mouth full; neither gaze about you while you are drinking.

99. Drink not too leisurely nor yet too hastily. Before and after drinking wipe your lips. Breathe not then or ever with too great a noise, for it is uncivil.

100. Cleanse not your teeth with the tablecloth, napkin, fork or knife, but if others do it, let it be done with a pick tooth.

101. Rinse not your mouth in the presence of others.

102. It is out of use to call upon the company often to eat. Nor need you drink to others every time you drink.

103. In company of your betters be not longer in eating than they are. Lay not your arm but only your hand upon the table.

104. It belongs to the chiefest in company to unfold his napkin and fall to meat first. But he ought then to begin in time and to dispatch with dexterity that the slowest may have time allowed him.
105. Be not angry at table whatever happens and if you have reason to be so, show it not but on a cheerful countenance especially if there be strangers, for good humor makes one dish of meat a feast.

106. Set not yourself at the upper of the table but if it be your due, or that the master of the house will have it so. Contend not, lest you should trouble the company.

107. If others talk at table be attentive, but talk not with meat in your mouth.

108. When you speak of God or His attributes, let it be seriously and with reverence. Honor and obey your natural parents although they be poor.

109. Let your recreations be manful not sinful.

110. Labor to keep alive in your breast that little spark of celestial fire called conscience.

*****

Stephen needs to particularly learn those which I've highlighted...

"Fear Eats the Soul"