Wednesday, November 4, 2009
posted by Spencerblog at
Gil,I have absolutely no issue with Democrats being on county council. Do you think Rev Collins would give it another shot in two years?
Don't know. But my advice would be to go the way Linder did after running and losing for county council. Get some political experience somewhere at the local level. Or, you know, change his registration to Republican.
Change his registration to Republican? Does that come with a free lobotomy as part of the GOP health plan or does that cost extra?Keith could win as a state legislator. His wife is a force of nature in her own right and should run for office as well.
I'm probably old-fashioned, but it just doesn't feel right to me that a minister drives a Mercedes. A man of God should not have such interest in material things.They seem like nice people, but their car choice raises questions to me.
Jakey- What kind of car do you think he should drive? If he drove some eco-car, you'd be calling him a tree-hugger.
Hey Steve and Jake, I'm probably old fashioned too but does Shank-A-Nonymous sound like a 29-year-old female Aries to you?
Maybe the one who puts out for a burger
free lobotomy? what kind of dumb schmuck are you? shall we discuss the wonderful city of philadelphia where mindless 'yelow' dogs know only to pull one lever every election day? "Do what thy ward leader commands then complain later"
Nice story Gil. A little politics, a little human interest, and just enough infomation to get Jake back up on his soap box, to explore the art of being petty. Jake seems to think the good reverend is a hypocrite. Well of course he is Jake. All christians are hypocrits. Here's the deal Jake. You f up, and god forgives you. You know the drill. It's the poor agnostics and athiests that have to bear the burden of personal responsibility. So maybe Saint Jake can cut the good reverend some slack here. After all Jake, you think Billy Graham gets chaufered around in a Hyundai? You think the Pope Mobile was made by Kia?
A Nonymous is a wuss. It is amazing that we are the ones that need or have had labotomies, yet all of the major metropolitan centers in the country are run by really really smart liberals, yet thy are in the tank financially. Lets also not forget the freak show that is ocurring in Washington either, cause those brilliant libs are ruining this country at a rate far faster than anything Bush did.C. Scott Shields, Esquirewww.cscottshields.com
Bob,"All Christians are hypocrites"? Are you in some kind of contest with anon-she-ano to see who is the biggest horse's butt?All due respect to Reverend Collin's ministry, but I doubt even he thinks he has comparable stature and security concerns to Billy Graham and the Pope.I don't want my minister or any minister to be driving an expensive car and demonstrating too much concern for material things. I don't think that would be an uncommon sentiment.If somehow that simple, honest statement strikes you as hypocritical, then feel free to label me as you see fit. But don't destroy what minute credibility you might possibly enjoy by making such a sad and prejudicial blanket statement about all Christians.By the way, weren't you the guy who made the impassioned argument regarding the absolute need for hate speech laws? Now that's hypocritical.
Jake - I was arguing for the validity of hate "crime" laws, not hate "speech" laws. But I'm not surprised that you are trying to twist things around. Hey Jake! Wouldn't that be bearing false witness? Now if you consider yourself to be a christian, that would be an act of hypocrisy wouldn't it Jake?
Bob,Anon-she-ano must be so proud of his/her protege. Choosing to quibble over semantics rather than defending your sad and prejudicial statement is page one in the condescending liberal playbook.I have faith that you are a better man than the blogging persona who wrote that "All Christians are hypocrites".On balance, Reverend Collins efforts are worthy. His Mercedes sends a troubling message, especially in a financially distressed community. Thoughtful people should have no problem understanding that cautionary observation.
Jake - I'm not impressed nor surprised at your reaction. When someone calls you on the carpet for your attempt at spin, you call it quibbling over semantics. When someone catches you saying something really stupid (your "surrounded with clutter" remark comes to mind), it becomes self deprecating humor. When you get caught in a lie- is it misspeak? So, I'll try to make this real easy for you. From the gospel of Matthew 'An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.' But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also." So what would you do if I popped you in your right eye Jake? Would you give give me a shot at the left or would you fight back?You see where I'm going with this Jake? More than likely you'd either run away or fight back, but there's no way you would turn the other cheek. Why? Because it's stupid. Because you don't really believe this is the right thing to do, even though christ tells you that it is. Lets face it Jake. It's bad advice. Now we could take that to a much higher level. 9/11. I'm sure you know a lot of christians. Take a poll and see how many say we should have turned the other cheek after 9/11. This is just one example, but therein lies the hypocrisy. Get it Jake? This isn't hate speech. I'm not saying that all christians are bad people. I'm just saying that it's almost impossible to be christian without to some degree being hypocritical. Jake, I have faith that you are a better man than the blogging persona who calls other bloggers childish names, and who lies about the positions of other bloggers (semantics?)simply to make a point or win an argument. GOD! Thats so not christ like!
Bob, if you punch me in either eye I would quickly kick your ass- plain and simple! Christ does not command us to be pacifists
Jakey- From the Jewish perspective, the Christians are all misguided in their thinking Jesus was the Messiah. Here's what doesn't make sense to me: Jesus not only knew how he would die, but actually shaped events to bring it about. Isn't this what we now call "suicide by police"?And isn't suicide a sin?Bob- I think Jakey is worst than his blogger persona, and tones it down here.
Scott - AKA Pro Christ Pro Gun. Thanks for making my point! You are the perfect example of christian hypocricy. You obviously don't believe in turning the other cheek, and you have made a conscious decission to ignore the teachings of Jesus when those teachings conflict with your real beliefs. Jake - See, Scott gets it.
Bob- You Da Man! It's amazing how you got "Pro Christ" to abandon "turn the other cheek" so easily.In his world, gun-toting-Jesus would probably take real-Jesus out hunting, shoot him in the face, and get him to apologize for being in the line of fire. These CINO's (Christians in name only) make me want to root for the lions at the coliseum.
Yesterday was a tough day for us sports fans in Happy Valley, followed by a worse night for the whole nation in Washington, D.C. Thank God for the company of my fellow hypocrites in church this morning.It looks like Bob and Anon-she-ano spent the weekend holed up in their basements writing sweet nothings to each other. Sorry to have let my real life interfere with your emotional keyboard stroking.Bob, let me try to help you out. Unlike liberals, Christians do not think we have all the answers. We readily admit that we are imperfect beings, striving to make ourselves and our world better. I, for one, do not suffer fools gladly and I am trying my best to be more patient with your ilk. The good mayor, Scott, admits difficulty in turning the other cheek, as do I. Our honesty reflects our humanity, not that the biblical message is inherently wrong or "stupid".Do you think that Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr are "stupid" and "hypocrites" for their celebrated pacifism? Your own fearless leader, Obama, spoke of peace and disarmament at the U.N. Surely he cannot be thought of as "stupid" or a "hypocrite" or they will kick you out of the celebrity cult worshipers.Bob, You have spoken against prejudice and intolerance, yet you are quick to label the American majority of Christians as "hypocrites". If you're are for hate crime legislation, but against hate speech legislation, then I congratulate you for being half right, but question your failure to practice what you preach.Don't worry your pointed head about "calling me on the carpet", as if you ever could. This blogging exercise doesn't pay the bills, bring me together with my family, or get me to heaven. It's simply leisure. Your smarmy search for "gotcha" retorts simply demonstrate the ongoing limitations of your intellectual arguments.Consistent with those intellectual limitations, I will try to refrain from subtle sarcasm like my clutter comment, so you won't get your knickers in a bunch over some potential "stupid" post.Gee Bob, come to think of it, if I'm "stupid" like Jesus, Gandhi, and Martin Luther King, Jr, then I ought to be grateful for the great heights to which you've elevated me.
Jake - I'm not feelin the love!Listen here Jake. I don't suffer pompous conservatives gladly, but you're kind of special, so I'll make an exception. You say "The good mayor, Scott, admits difficulty in turning the other cheek, as do I. Our honesty reflects our humanity, not that the biblical message is inherently wrong or "stupid"."What BS. Come on Jake. It's not that you have a hard time living up to "turning the other cheek". You don't BELIEVE in always turning the other cheek. But hey. I'm going to give you a chance to prove me wrong. Was President Bush right to go after, and try to kill Bin-Laden after 9/11, or should he have turned the other cheek? Jake, if you tell me that Bush did the wrong thing, I'll retract my statement about you being a hypocrite. But if you honestly believe Bush did the right thing by going after Bin-Laden, then you'll have to concede my point.BTW Jake- It's a real stretch to insinuate that calling someone a hypocrite is hate speach. But then that brings us back to why I responded to your initial post. Your tendency to take a minor observation (the good rev's car) and turn it into an issue. I hope you wear your American flag lapel pin when you post here.
Jake,"Christians do not think we have all the answers."Really? You seem to on Creationism vs Evolution. Gay rights. Abortion. Birth control. What's your point about pacifism and hypocrisy? Ghandhi (non-Christian) and King (Christian) are celebrated for their pacifism. They practiced what they preached. Why would you even mention them and hypocrisy together?Scott, on the other hand, is claiming that Christ didn't ask for us to be pacifists. Scott doesn't merely "admit difficulty in turning the other cheek", he flatly rejects it. That's the hypocrisy with his bragging about being a Christian.There's more to being a Christian that wearing a cross and attending church and preaching what you don't practice.I agree with one thing you said: The blogging exercise is not going to get you into heaven.
Bob:Are suggesting that Roosevelt was wrong for getting us into WWII?C. Scott Shields, Esquire
Actually Scott, the Japanese got us into WWII. But that's not to say FDR didn't have a hankering.
Gil:I agree with you, but Bob suggests that Bush was wrong for going after the Taliban following 9/11. Does he think that FDR was wrong for not turning the other cheek after Pearl Harbor? Does Bob think it is wrong for a police officer or another citizen to shoot another person in self defense? C. Scott Shields, Esquire
I'm sure he'll let you know.
Scott - Earth to Scott! Come in Scott! Are you paying attention here? Scott, I'm saying that Bush did do the right thing by going after Bin-Laden. I'm saying that I agree with YOU Scott. That I don't buy into that "turn the other cheek" christian BS. But them I'm an agnostic.Off subject- Remember the night you were ribbibg me about liberal artists painting flowers, and I told you about the Quaker girls that model for us? Check out this weeks City Paper. Theres a pic in there of my favorite model. Gil - Dont you read these posts? Help Scott out with this one.A Non - Do you believe this? LOL
Bob, It's amazing how Scott and Gil can't even get the right analogy. Going after the Taliban was supported by the evidence. Going into Iraq was not. It distracted us, and allowed the Taliban and al Queda to regroup.
A Non - Not to mention the on the job training in Iraq.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
Create a Link
View my complete profile
Subscribe toPosts [Atom]