I've always liked the term "well-fed", which is a nice euphemism for "fat".

It isn't a euphemism for fat, it just means well nourished as in "has access to adequate amounts of food and eats regular meals." At least that's always been my understanding.

Well-dressed I've never seen, but I think Connie's right that it means meeting a baseline level for access to shelter and clothing.

The school would be within its rights to admit ONLY Orthodox Jews.

But then how would you define Orthodox? By observance, or by what synagogue they belonged to, or something else?

(I think I can argue about five different sides of this issue, and I haven't yet figured out which one I think makes the most sense.)

But then how would you define Orthodox? By observance, or by what synagogue they belonged to, or something else?

Either could work. The point is it can't be on the basis of ancestory. Note that admission to the synagogue can be on any basis you want. But if you are running a school, admission has to be based on what the person admitted believes or does, not what their parents believe or did. Don't see this as overwhelming hardship for the school.

The school would be within its rights to admit ONLY Orthodox Jews.

But then how would you define Orthodox? By observance, or by what synagogue they belonged to, or something else?

I think that the court's contention is that the religious determination is based on race. But, it's kind of not. As I understand it, Jewish heritage is based on the religion of the mother. If she has converted to Judaism (i.e. her mother was not Jewish), then she is not Orthodox (but can her children EVER be Orthodox, or can you be Orthodox if your mother converted to Judaism and you were raised Orthodox? Oy.)

Am I way off base?

That he works for the HHGttG?

Oh good, not just me.

Converts can be Orthodox. I was told when I converted that my conversion would be recognized by the Orthodox Union even though it was done through a Reform synagogue, and that my children would be recognized as Jewish.

I think that the court's contention is that the religious determination is based on race. But, it's kind of not. As I understand it, Jewish heritage is based on the religion of the mother. If she has converted to Judaism (i.e. her mother was not Jewish), then she is not Orthodox (but can her children EVER be Orthodox, or can you be Orthodox if your mother converted to Judaism and you were raised Orthodox? Oy.)

If the mother converted to Judaism in an Orthodox ceremony, then she and her children are Jewish. The issue in this case was that the boy's mother had converted in a Progressive ceremony (the UK has different denominations than the US -- this could be roughly equivalent to either Reform or Conservative here). If she had converted in an Orthodox ceremony, then the kids would be Jewish by Orthodox law. If they'd had the kids converted in an Orthodox ceremony when they were little (I know a few families who did this), then the kids would be Jewish by Orthodox law.

But if you are running a school, admission has to be based on what the person admitted believes or does, not what their parents believe or did.

But we're talking about 11-year-old kids here. For the most part, what the kid does is almost entirely based on what the parent does. At that age, I went to Hebrew school and synagogue and Jewish summer camp because my parents told me to. The summer camp was negotiable, but synagogue and Hebrew school were never presented as options any more than regular school was.

Who'd he go to lunch with ita? We often use lunches for meet and greets with various people when we're bringing a new person on so it wouldn't particularly ping me.

Given it was my (and his new) boss that kept reminding me he wasn't here by coming back to look for him, that wasn't it. He showed up some time in the past hour, but I really feel like not everyone gets first week or two new job paranoia the way I do.

Uh, she says posting on b.org. But I didn't start until week 3, until after I noticed the last new guy reading his yahoo mail.

Well-dressed I've never seen, but I think Connie's right that it means meeting a baseline level for access to shelter and clothing.

I've seen it a lot--the docs I work for see lots of people with multiple problems, including PTSD, Alzheimer's, and all sorts of dementia and mental/emotional degenerative issues, so comment on the patient's well-dressedness is pretty standard. Do the shoes match? How about the socks? Are the things that button and tie and snap done up right? Are the clothes basically clean? Hair brushed? Teeth clean? Is there any sign that the patient isn't able to manage basic dressing/grooming tasks unaided, or that the patient thinks s/he looks just fine but actually looks deeply wrong?

In other news, I want to nuke one of our clinic's new temps from orbit. Is that okay, just this once? Could I at least strangle her with my bare hands, please?