Gardening Grandma
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:39:46 GMT -5
Posts: 17,962
|
Post by Gardening Grandma on Sept 3, 2017 19:33:48 GMT -5
I wish I knew if that service was attended just by hurricane victims or not. I do agree it would have been better not to ask for donations. I think it would be safe to assume thatnot all the hurricane victims seeking shelter in Olsteen's mega church share his religion. So they would have, literally, been a captive audience. "You want a roof over your head for a few days? Listen to this sermon"
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Sept 3, 2017 20:09:32 GMT -5
Ok Tenn How much has the Clinton Foundation Donated? See reply #281. That means you couldn't find anything either!
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 64,598
|
Post by Tennesseer on Sept 3, 2017 20:31:41 GMT -5
That means you couldn't find anything either! I didn't bother looking because it is immaterial. She isn't the president. How about you confirm trump has completed the donation and the money came out of his own pocket and not the trump Foundation. In the mean time, there is this: White House Walks Back Trump Pledge to Donate $1 Million of ‘Personal Money’ to Harvey ReliefDonald Trump is extremely well-known for his tendency to bend (or break) the truth, particularly when it comes to portraying himself in the most favorable light possible. While there are virtually limitless examples of this, one particularly vile demonstration of his propensity to lie is his exaggerations and fabrications of how charitable he supposedly is to various causes. The case du jour of this predictable behavior is his pledge to donate $1 million to the Harvey relief effort. On Thursday, White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders told reporters that President Trump would donate $1 million of his “personal money” to Hurricane Harvey victims. But on Friday, her story had changed and she said she wasn’t so sure. When asked whether the money would be coming from the president himself or from his foundation, in typical Trump administration fashion, she dodged giving an answer by saying that she hadn’t “had the chance” to confer with the president about that yet, despite having already made an announcement about the supposed charitable donation the day before White House Walks Back Trump Pledge to Donate $1 Million of ‘Personal Money’ to Harvey Relief .
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Sept 3, 2017 21:38:03 GMT -5
The record was set in a thread about a college frat house with a banner that read "Parents drop your freshmen daughters off here." My argument, in a nutshell, was that no woman with even a grain of sense would enter such a house come party night. Ah. Because they should be safe even if they walk in there drunk and naked? And telling young women to pay attention to their surroundings is victim blaming and perpetuating the rape culture? Am I close?
Never mind. That's a whole other thread, evidently! I probably read it but I don't recall what I did yesterday, so I must have forgotten.
I sympathize with wxyz not because I particularly approve of his handling of the situation but because YMAM has a long-established habit of "swarming" individuals with contrary opinions. If members reach the point of speaking over a contrarian, making jokes, accusing him/her of trolling, talking about him/her as though he isn't there--all of which have happened in this thread--it's safe to say the contrarian is being swarmed. Also, 11 vs. 1 is a sure sign of the same. It's not a problem that can be litigated away. The only solution is to have members recognize a swarm and ask themselves whether they're piling on to enrich a discussion or to score cheap shots. I'm 99% certain this is the behaviour wxyz is referring to in his posts. I'm not saying he shouldn't be taken to task for his opinions, but YMAM would be a more pleasant, liberal message board if members checked to see how much flak a contrarian is taking before piling on. As I said earlier, two on one is plenty. If certain contentions haven't been addressed, they can always be addressed later when the discussion has cooled down. In the great wide Internet, swarming occurs on both sides. Swarming on YMAM is exclusively left-on-right because there are fewer right-leaning posters, they post much less often, and there are rarely more than 2-3 in any given thread, much less 11 or 26. Ergo reciprocity isn't a strong incentive for change. Any change would have to be motivated by an earnest desire to eschew the mob and show quarter to the other side.
|
|
irishpad
Well-Known Member
Joined: Aug 14, 2012 20:42:01 GMT -5
Posts: 1,182
|
Post by irishpad on Sept 3, 2017 22:38:04 GMT -5
Just curious. Where is the amazing Clinton Foundation? You know, when I give to a particular charity which has a particular stated purpose, I expect them to use my donations for the purpose stated. I give to American Cancer Society: I expect the monies to be used for cancer research and treatment. I give to my local church: To be used for the stated purposes of the church to form it's members in the faith (including the children), pastoral care of it's members, support of outreach programs and stated intend of giving 10% of donations to other organizations that service the wider community. I give to CCHD which has a stated purpose of grass roots level community development. I give to CRS which has a stated purpose of giving emergency relief to those hit by human or natural disasters. If my donation to the American Cancer Society was used to buy bottled water for hurricane victims, I would not be happy about that. If my donation to CRS went instead to cancer research, I would not be happy about that. So your question about the Clinton Foundation. This I found on their web page: "The majority of the Clinton Foundation’s charitable work is performed and implemented by our staff and partners on the ground. We operate programs around the world that have a significant impact in a wide range of issue areas, including economic development, climate change, health and wellness, and participation of girls and women. In cases where we support others in their own philanthropic endeavors, the money is used to convene these partners to develop their programs and commitments, rather than directly implement projects." So if you engage some reading comprehension, you will see that their stated purpose does not involve direct relief work. Donors to the foundation know that and would not expect their donations to go to that purpose. Their stated purpose does involve convening and organizing the good works of various groups. In regards to their response to Hurricane Harvey, they are fulfilling that purpose. medium.com/clintonfoundation/the-response-to-hurricane-harvey-by-members-of-the-clinton-foundation-community-ways-to-support-d93449f31d61
|
|
Lizard Queen
Senior Associate
103/2024
Joined: Jan 17, 2011 22:19:13 GMT -5
Posts: 14,659
|
Post by Lizard Queen on Sept 3, 2017 23:34:11 GMT -5
Tell ya what, if I end up leaving this message board, it would probably be due to this smug attitude displayed in these type of side conversations with members who obviosly feel they are so above the fray. You know what other message boards do? They make sure threads stay on topic. Instead, we quickly devolve from interesting conversations, to wars about political sides that were never part of the topic at hand. I understand volunteers don't want to waste the time and energy for that, but then this is the result. And it's boring. And now I'm off topic as well, and it pushes out the posters who really want to keep talking about the OP, and I'm sorry about that.
|
|
irishpad
Well-Known Member
Joined: Aug 14, 2012 20:42:01 GMT -5
Posts: 1,182
|
Post by irishpad on Sept 3, 2017 23:59:46 GMT -5
Sorry Lizard Queen , that I contributed to taking this thread off focus. Concerning Joel Osteen's response. It certainly could have been better. I do agree though with an earlier post (I couldn't find it on a quick look) that after he was receiving the negative response to his first actions, he should have simply apologized, acknowledge his first response wasn't great and move on from there. I was involved in the largest community evacuation prior to Katrina en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1997_Red_River_flood . In my town of 9,000 people, only 8 of the 2400 homes were not flooded. The wider community of about 60,000 people had to be evacuated, most of us for at least a month, some for several months. I was out sandbagging up until two hour before the waters broke through the dikes and we had to evacuate. The decisions made in those first hours and days after the dikes broke, were not always great. But we moved on, trying the make the next best decision when it came along. That's what I would encourage Joel to do.... make the next best decision when it comes along.
|
|
Lizard Queen
Senior Associate
103/2024
Joined: Jan 17, 2011 22:19:13 GMT -5
Posts: 14,659
|
Post by Lizard Queen on Sept 4, 2017 8:20:42 GMT -5
Sorry Lizard Queen, that I contributed to taking this thread off focus. Concerning Joel Osteen's response. It certainly could have been better. I do agree though with an earlier post (I couldn't find it on a quick look) that after he was receiving the negative response to his first actions, he should have simply apologized, acknowledge his first response wasn't great and move on from there. I was involved in the largest community evacuation prior to Katrina en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1997_Red_River_flood . In my town of 9,000 people, only 8 of the 2400 hundred homes were not flooded. The wider community of about 60,000 people had to be evacuated, most of us for at least a month, some for several months. I was out sandbagging up until two hour before the waters broke through the dikes and we had to evacuate. The decisions made in those first hours and days after the dikes broke, were not always great. But we moved on, trying the make the next best decision when it came along. That's what I would encourage Joel to do.... make the next best decision when it comes along. Oh no, I felt you were getting it back closer to topic, at least. I was referring to the focus switching to the board and certain posters. It went off track starting with that. Instead of blaming the political makeup of the board, we could have had tighter moderation and avoided the ugliness. Sorry you had to deal with this kind of flooding. Thank you for bringing your perspective.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,912
|
Post by zibazinski on Sept 4, 2017 8:23:26 GMT -5
Well, we always get to deal with the protected ones.
|
|
giramomma
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Feb 3, 2011 11:25:27 GMT -5
Posts: 22,167
|
Post by giramomma on Sept 4, 2017 8:28:10 GMT -5
When we were at mass yesterday, I thought of this thread.
Our priest's homily was about folks standing up and saying something when they see an injustice.
IMVHO, this is exactly what Swamp did, to start, and others did to follow up.
Our priest did not add any qualifers. To his statement. It was really that simple.
It wasn't "Only stand up and say something if you are Christian and the other party is not." Or some version of "only stand up and speak out if you feel like are in the right and the other person is in the wrong and the other person is different than you because of (race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, etc) ."
No. It was "Stand up when you see an injustice. Open up your mouth and say something."
|
|
Lizard Queen
Senior Associate
103/2024
Joined: Jan 17, 2011 22:19:13 GMT -5
Posts: 14,659
|
Post by Lizard Queen on Sept 4, 2017 8:50:40 GMT -5
I don't go to church that often, but in the last few services that I attended, the homilies were about not worrying about every detail, but doing as much as you could and God would take care of the rest. That's why so many of the excuses people have offered here don't fly for me--not for a church claiming to be Christian.
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on Sept 4, 2017 10:00:53 GMT -5
Ah. Because they should be safe even if they walk in there drunk and naked? And telling young women to pay attention to their surroundings is victim blaming and perpetuating the rape culture? Am I close?
Never mind. That's a whole other thread, evidently! I probably read it but I don't recall what I did yesterday, so I must have forgotten.
I sympathize with wxyz not because I particularly approve of his handling of the situation but because YMAM has a long-established habit of "swarming" individuals with contrary opinions. If members reach the point of speaking over a contrarian, making jokes, accusing him/her of trolling, talking about him/her as though he isn't there--all of which have happened in this thread--it's safe to say the contrarian is being swarmed. Also, 11 vs. 1 is a sure sign of the same. It's not a problem that can be litigated away. The only solution is to have members recognize a swarm and ask themselves whether they're piling on to enrich a discussion or to score cheap shots. I'm 99% certain this is the behaviour wxyz is referring to in his posts. I'm not saying he shouldn't be taken to task for his opinions, but YMAM would be a more pleasant, liberal message board if members checked to see how much flak a contrarian is taking before piling on. As I said earlier, two on one is plenty. If certain contentions haven't been addressed, they can always be addressed later when the discussion has cooled down. In the great wide Internet, swarming occurs on both sides. Swarming on YMAM is exclusively left-on-right because there are fewer right-leaning posters, they post much less often, and there are rarely more than 2-3 in any given thread, much less 11 or 26. Ergo reciprocity isn't a strong incentive for change. Any change would have to be motivated by an earnest desire to eschew the mob and show quarter to the other side. I also sympathize because I know first hand that posting opinions that aren't mainstream around here can cause people to pile on. Wxyz does ask for some of it with his deletions and his "this is my last post" stuff. While he has every right to do so, it gives the swarm something to criticize when they run out of other material.
Everyone likes to have their say, Virgil. If someone makes a post and 5 disagree with it, 5 people are probably going to say so even if it's some stupid post like "he's an asshole". Five people may feel the need to say "he's an asshole" just so that the whole board world knows they think so. I admit that I don't consider who else agrees with me or even that someone else has posted pretty much the same thing I feel. I still post because this is a message board and that's what people do.
It's helpful, if one feels overwhelmed, to pick out one or two posters on the opposing side to address and ignore the others. One can usually find a couple of posters who are actually interested in discussion and not cheap shots (which you as an admin could delete if you feel that's all they are). Pick out those posters who seem to have actually educated themselves on the current subject and don't appear to be here because they are mad at the world and want to take it out on people here. I've actually learned a lot that way.
I don't think you'll find all that many people here who care whether or not posting is a pleasant experience for all people. Some maybe, but not many. That doesn't make them bad people - it's just not why they are here - to make things pleasant for others. It's certainly not why I'm here. You have to have a thick skin to hang in here. I'm not disagreeing with what you say - just saying that I think you are hoping for a lot.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,912
|
Post by zibazinski on Sept 4, 2017 10:07:34 GMT -5
Hopefully this place is where they vent their anger and hatred not in the real world.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,572
|
Post by tallguy on Sept 4, 2017 10:29:46 GMT -5
"Mean girls": you're piling on wxyz 11 to 1. Nowhere near my record of 26 to 1, but still: let the poor man put his hands up between blows. Appoint one or two spokesmen among you to wield the bats, and the rest go get your jackets dry cleaned or something. 2 on 1 is good enough. On the face of it, 26 (or 11) to 1 seems unfair. However, one has to take into consideration who the 26 (or 11) are and who the 1 is. Sometimes, the gap isn't as significant as it appeared to be at first glance.
True. If I were the one I would still be favored. I still remember one time in high school, working on the yearbook. There was a disagreement about the spelling of In memoriam, with a couple of other students against me. Eventually, the entire class piled on, most of them just going along with the growing crowd and not knowing at all what they were talking about. They finally asked a teacher, who agreed with them. I went and found a teacher who actually knew the answer and agreed with me. The leader of the opposition kind of laughed and said, "I hate you, xxxxx!" I laughed and said, "I know." It doesn't matter how many people are against me if I know I'm right. Standing alone is not a problem. I'm still standing, and that is far better than bowing out and letting ignorance win.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,912
|
Post by zibazinski on Sept 4, 2017 10:41:00 GMT -5
Easy to say when you're on the side that's popular
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,572
|
Post by tallguy on Sept 4, 2017 10:48:48 GMT -5
Easy to say when you're on the side that's popular Reading comprehension failed you? I was the one. Against the 26. Didn't matter. I'm never the one here because none of my opinions are bat-sh** crazy or downright stupid. Unlike some others.
|
|
chiver78
Administrator
Current Events Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:04:45 GMT -5
Posts: 39,514
|
Post by chiver78 on Sept 4, 2017 10:49:21 GMT -5
so much for getting back on topic...
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,912
|
Post by zibazinski on Sept 4, 2017 10:50:03 GMT -5
Easy to say when you're on the side that's popular Reading comprehension failed you? I was the one. Against the 26. Didn't matter. I'm never the one here because none of my opinions are bat-sh** crazy or downright stupid. Unlike some others. I mean the present day. Right here right now
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,572
|
Post by tallguy on Sept 4, 2017 10:53:34 GMT -5
Still wouldn't make a difference. If someone is not willing to stand up for what they believe is right, no matter how many people are against them, they should probably find another place to play.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,912
|
Post by zibazinski on Sept 4, 2017 11:02:49 GMT -5
Thanks for your advice
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on Sept 4, 2017 11:16:27 GMT -5
On the face of it, 26 (or 11) to 1 seems unfair. However, one has to take into consideration who the 26 (or 11) are and who the 1 is. Sometimes, the gap isn't as significant as it appeared to be at first glance.
True. If I were the one I would still be favored. I still remember one time in high school, working on the yearbook. There was a disagreement about the spelling of In memoriam, with a couple of other students against me. Eventually, the entire class piled on, most of them just going along with the growing crowd and not knowing at all what they were talking about. They finally asked a teacher, who agreed with them. I went and found a teacher who actually knew the answer and agreed with me. The leader of the opposition kind of laughed and said, "I hate you, xxxxx!" I laughed and said, "I know." It doesn't matter how many people are against me if I know I'm right. Standing alone is not a problem. I'm still standing, and that is far better than bowing out and letting ignorance win. Exactly.
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on Sept 4, 2017 11:21:00 GMT -5
so much for getting back on topic... This thread went off topic the minute posters starting taking cheap shots at wxyz. Just because you don't like the most current off ramp doesn't excuse the rest of them. You are an admin. Delete it if you are so inclined.
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Sept 4, 2017 12:03:24 GMT -5
"Hysterical" is the word I would use to describe most of the out of control posters on this thread but I would be accused of sexism if I used that word when talking about a bunch of women. So I will not. I think wxyz fired the first shot....
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on Sept 4, 2017 13:01:38 GMT -5
"Hysterical" is the word I would use to describe most of the out of control posters on this thread but I would be accused of sexism if I used that word when talking about a bunch of women. So I will not. I think wxyz fired the first shot.... Yeah.....no. You conveniently decided not to quote the post that was in response to. Typical around here. He was far from the first one firing shots at someone. And it doesn't matter who fired the first shot and I shouldn't have posted a starting point like I did. What I was responding to is this thread went way off the rails before Chiver decided to scold when it took a turn she didn't like.
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Sept 4, 2017 13:24:31 GMT -5
I think wxyz fired the first shot.... Yeah.....no. You conveniently decided not to quote the post that was in response to. Typical around here. He was far from the first one firing shots at someone. And it doesn't matter who fired the first shot and I shouldn't have posted a starting point like I did. What I was responding to is this thread went way off the rails before Chiver decided to scold when it took a turn she didn't like. He had the choice not to respond.....especially since he had not been involved in the thread for the previous 5 pages. Afterwards, he went on his rant. IMO....other than a few sidebars, this thread has been pretty much on topic. But if you think about it, the topic is broad enough that it encompasses quite a few topics. Hypocrisy in religion. Social media needing to shame someone into action (and if you thing about it, this has been remarkably effective...e.g. the nurse in Utah who was arrested standing up for her patient's rights). Helping those in need when you have resources they don't. etc.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,912
|
Post by zibazinski on Sept 4, 2017 13:32:56 GMT -5
Those who feel there are hypocrites among us and those that are religious will still feel that way. There's something about being a cheerful giver. If it's forced, it's meaningless but of course those that do the forcing enjoy that. Much better to praise the places that do so willingly than trash those that don't.
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on Sept 4, 2017 13:38:06 GMT -5
Yeah.....no. You conveniently decided not to quote the post that was in response to. Typical around here. He was far from the first one firing shots at someone. And it doesn't matter who fired the first shot and I shouldn't have posted a starting point like I did. What I was responding to is this thread went way off the rails before Chiver decided to scold when it took a turn she didn't like. He had the choice not to respond.....especially since he had not been involved in the thread for the previous 5 pages. Afterwards, he went on his rant. IMO....other than a few sidebars, this thread has been pretty much on topic. But if you think about it, the topic is broad enough that it encompasses quite a few topics. Hypocrisy in religion. Social media needing to shame someone into action (and if you thing about it, this has been remarkably effective...e.g. the nurse in Utah who was arrested standing up for her patient's rights). Helping those in need when you have resources they don't. etc. Everyone has a choice whether to respond/post or not. I agree the topic is broad. Judging Christianity by the actions of a few is as stupid as judging all Muslims by the actions of a few. When people go on their "religion" rants, somebody is probably going to say so and they have as much right to do it as anyone else. Anybody who doesn't agree with them...ya'll jump on like stink on shit. Sorry if people don't like others pointing that out, but I'm not cowed by the herd.
While you are right and the topic is broad, the topic isn't about insulting others. Once that happened (and I don't care who started it and already said I made a mistake in posting a starting point), others have no right to whine when other off ramps are chosen. Well, they have a right. They just look silly exercising it. I have the right to point that out and I don't care who likes it or doesn't like it.
I don't care for the guy. I don't care for the Westboro loonies. I don't agree that he was "shamed" into anything. If he hadn't wanted to do what he did do, he simply wouldn't have. I don't think he cares one whit what people like you and me think. It's not like he's going to lose his congregation or his millions over this. The people that fill those "needs" for him are on his side.
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Sept 4, 2017 14:04:03 GMT -5
I don't care for the guy. I don't care for the Westboro loonies. I don't agree that he was "shamed" into anything. If he hadn't wanted to do what he did do, he simply wouldn't have. I don't think he cares one whit what people like you and me think. It's not like he's going to lose his congregation or his millions over this. The people that fill those "needs" for him are on his side.
I guess I'll have to disagree with you then. He wasn't 'shamed' in the classical sense, but he saw his actions could affect his bottom financial line with regards to his congregation. And I DO think he cares what the public's perception of him is.
Otherwise, why would he have done a 180? He could have just as easily kept his church closed. And why prevaricate? The church was flooded (it wasn't). Houston didn't ask for help (Houston didn't ask the furniture store, smaller churches or mosques for help either). He could have just kept silent.
A smarter move would have been to apologize rather than lie, ask for forgiveness and do the right thing. A smarter move would have been to NOT pass the collection plate during a service while homeless were being sheltered.
It is hard to know if he is just tone deaf, or truly believes that what he did was really right. I don't know which bothers me more, and I have to wonder how his congregation feels about his actions. After all, they take their cues from him.
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on Sept 4, 2017 14:18:40 GMT -5
You could be right, The Walk of the Penguin Mich. We'll see, I guess. If it's me and I were truly ashamed about how the leader of my congregation behaved, doing a 180 wouldn't cut it for me. I don't know why he did what he did or made the decisions he made. I'm pretty sure there is more to it than what is in the press, but I don't know. We'll see how much damage it does. Simple attendance at services (over the long haul) will tell us.
I don't know if he feels what he did was right or wrong. I do think he has to know that he's in the public eye and his actions were going to be placed under a microscope. He'd have to be stupid (which he's not) to think otherwise. He must have had reasons - right or wrong - but I have no idea what they were.
An apology is an indication that you did something wrong. I highly doubt you'll hear that from him unless there are a lot of "buts" following it.
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Sept 4, 2017 14:23:11 GMT -5
Yeah.....no. You conveniently decided not to quote the post that was in response to. Typical around here. He was far from the first one firing shots at someone. And it doesn't matter who fired the first shot and I shouldn't have posted a starting point like I did. What I was responding to is this thread went way off the rails before Chiver decided to scold when it took a turn she didn't like. He had the choice not to respond.....especially since he had not been involved in the thread for the previous 5 pages. Afterwards, he went on his rant. IMO....other than a few sidebars, this thread has been pretty much on topic. But if you think about it, the topic is broad enough that it encompasses quite a few topics. Hypocrisy in religion. Social media needing to shame someone into action (and if you thing about it, this has been remarkably effective...e.g. the nurse in Utah who was arrested standing up for her patient's rights). Helping those in need when you have resources they don't. etc. ^^This^^ We were discussing hypocrisy in religion and wxyz went on a spittle-spewing rant, insulting all of us. Don't dish it out if you can't take it.
|
|