[FlunkyNoMo]

<FONT face="courier new, courier, mono">It appears we have some cross-over topics.
In the thread "enacting clause" I typed in the definition of 'natural'. There are also definitions of 'person', 'individual'...etc.
In short, natural=idiot. It's all part of the word games they play when writing the codes.
If a word is used in the codes that is outside of the "common use" definition it must be defined within the code definitions. If you read the code without reading the definitions section <U>first</U> (one of the first sections), one may be misled&by&an understanding of what the words mean in "<U>daily usage</U>" and not the&meaning as defined within that particular code.
I could use the word "earth" to describe the "sky", if I defined it as such within a contract. i.e. The earth's the limit when it comes to the word games policymakers play!!(Notice, I didn't call them <U>lawmakers</U>.)
"Common usage" is the definition in a Webster's, not the way it is used in our daily lives. Who the heck is this Webster guy anyhow?</FONT>


<FONT face="courier new, courier, mono"> FNM
</FONT>