Several young Jewish kids were attacked by ten angry poorly educated Christians (yes, their religion is relevant as is their lack of education; you’ll see why) on the subway the other day. The Jewish kids were returning from a Chanukah celebration and were carrying a menorah. The Christian guys (one of whom has a Myspace page depicting him holding a gun to his girlfriend’s head; what a riot) wished the Jewish kids a Merry Christmas. Apparently they thought they were being sarcastic and were under the impression the Jewish kids would feel duly insulted. Instead the Jewish kids wished them a happy Chanukah right back. The Christians took offense, angrily declaring that the Jews had killed their Savior (see, that’s where the religion is relevant) on Chanukah (that’s where the lack of education is relevant) and that the Jewish kids were going to go straight to hëll. Apparently endeavoring to give them a preview, one of them spat on one of the Jewish kids. The Jewish kid calmly declared intent to, like Jesus, turn the other cheek. Whereupon the Christian guys attacked.
And who stepped in to intervene? A Muslim guy, who got two black eyes for his trouble.
Fortunately police were present at the next stop to arrest the attackers, one of whom was already slated to begin a six month jail stay in January for beating up a black guy in 2005.
No word from the MTA as to where hate crimes and assaults rank in desireability in comparison to pole dancers.
PAD
• 
As a born Southerner who has lived around rednecks and white trash for large portions of his life…
As a born Midwesterner who has also lived around rednecks and white trash for larger potions of my life… I have to agree with Jerry 100%.
But, I suppose one Manhattan Jew outweighs the views and opinions of two folks from other parts of the country, so Lingster, I guess you can continue to claim you’re right.
And here’s some definitions for you, courtesy of UrbanDictionary.com:
redneck
redneck
(1900 up, 387 down)
Mildly offensive term for a lower class white person from the southeastern states of the USA. Derives from someone who spent a lot of time on manual labour outside and so received a “red neck” from the sun.”
See: Jeff Foxworthy. The man knows rednecks.
white trash
white trash
(1575 up, 171 down)
Slang term for white people that usually live in a trailer park. With low incomes that spend their tax returns on things like big screen TV’s instead of clothes for their kids. These people tend to be mouthy and fight frequently. Generally these people are uneducated and have little concern for personal hygiene. To see these people at their best watch Jerry Springer.
YOU are the only person drawing a religious connotation from the word “redneck”, so please stop trying to force your own mind-warping definitions to words on the rest of us.
“As I said, I’m not a Christian but I have read the New Testament and the Quran. The New Testament is probably the most important and humane text written by man prior to the Enlightenment. The Quran, on the other hand, is the collected ramblings of a paranoid schizophrenic sociopath. Only someone ignorant of both would equate the two.”
Well, it seems pretty obvious to me that there is more violence done in Islam’s name today than in Christianity’s. I don’t know whether this has anything to do with the content of their respective holy texts, though.
Anyway, what sometimes scares me about Christians isn’t anything related to physical violence, but the view that many of them seem to hold that it’s okay to cram Christian values down everyone’s throats, perhaps due to the belief that everyone should be a Christian.
I suppose that means Islamists are Klingons, while Christians are the Borg.
Craig J. Reis:
And here’s some definitions for you, courtesy of UrbanDictionary.com…
Oh, it’s UrbanDictionary. Must be authoritative. Here’s an excerpt from the “white trash” Wikipedia entry, which is at least a little bit more reliable:
A related stereotype is that of the redneck, although they differ considerably. A rural middle-class person may proudly characterize himself as a redneck (for example, the comedian Jeff Foxworthy uses his redneck persona as part of his act), but might be genuinely offended if called white trash, which is a more pejorative, geographically different term.
And backs up my point.
PAD:
You are wrong. You are drowning in wrongness. Monumentally wrong.
Then why is the term “Jewish redneck” so funny that dozens of people – presumably Jews – have set up humor pages on the web making sport of what they seem to think are generally exclusive concepts? Are they all wrong, too?
Regardless of who you married and how you’re raising your daughter, the obvious anger in this post suggests you have an issue with Christians. (Perhaps it’s merely because you associate churchgoers with political conservatism?) Your anger was similarly misdirected in your pole dancing post. In that one you mocked a MTA flack for using a common and entirely appropriate figure of speech. In this one you are unusually focused on the religious identities of people in an altercation, rather than on the individuals themselves.
And by the way – it turns out the ringleader of the hooligans is neither Catholic or Christian. His father is a lapsed Catholic and his deceased mother was Jewish. So if someone is monumentally wrong here, it’s you. Because as I pointed out above, Christianity isn’t genetic.
It’s curious to me that you have so much anger. The first time I came to your blog was when you vented your rage at the comic con guys up in New England, against whom you ascribed sorts dark motives. Later on you accepted their re-invitation and admitted that they’re not such bad guys. All the while in that altercation I was saying “give them the benefit of the doubt,” which caused you to focus your rage on me.
You can use your blog to vent your rage to your little fan club here – that’s your right. And if you don’t want me to post comments here, then I’ll leave. But I have a blog with a vastly larger readership than this one and I can post there all I like, about whatever I like. So you can have me inside the tent pìššìņg out, or outside the tent pìššìņg in. Your choice.
” Just saying it’s wrong don’t make it so, Jerry.”
And Just your saying that you’re right doesn’t make it so, Lingster. You’ve trotted out some Bizarro World definition of “redneck” and “white trash” that outside of the inhabitants of Planet Lingster has ever heard of and it’s required of everybody else to prove to you hat their understanding of the word is correct? Uhmmm… No. If I came in here one day and stated that some friends and I were talking about how the phrase “a dark cloud over his head” was actually a racist phrase meant to disparage blacks, it would be up to me to legitimately prove that statement. I wouldn’t be able to because, just like your assertion about “white trash” being some Jewish insult slang for Christians, it’s horse$&!^.
You made the charge and it’s on your shoulders to find a legitimate source or ten to back it or to support your definition of the term. If you can’t, then maybe you should consider the idea that maybe, just maybe, the concept is fifteen pounds of manure in a five pound bag.
” And it doesn’t matter WHO she was directing it at – she ran over a bunch of people after screaming what she considered to be an ethnic epithet and flying into a drunken rage.”
Except it does matter who it was aimed at and by whom it was aimed. We had a spoiled little rich girl yelling at some poor working stiff. I’ve been around tons of spoiled little rich girls in my time. I spent four years living down in the Tampa Bay area and met quite a few. The Christian ones called any working stiff, my Christian raised self included, poor white trash when they didn’t get their way right then and there or just because all the time because they thought it was some huge insult rather then an indicator of their own ignorance. The fact that she thought that she was better then some lowly bouncer is far more likely to show her stuck up attitude and spoiled nature then it is any religious hatred. You’re really stretching the concept well past the breaking point to try and make it fit this notion of yours.
” You went out of your way to repeatedly describe the bad guys as Christians because, I suspect, you believe Christians are bad people.”
Uhmmm… Yeah… Sure. Despite years of writings in fiction and editorial pieces that say pretty much the opposite of that idea and Peter’s well documented (by him on this very site I might add) present family life, you’ve added 2+2 and gotten 12.
I was raised a Christian. So were most of the posters on this thread. How is it that none of us see the offense here other than the fact that there isn’t one. Yeah, my personal opinion is that the thugs’ religion was irrelevant when compared to their ignorance and that they would have found an excuse to hate and act like thugs even without the religious excuse. I even posted as much above. But even there, Peter addresses that as well to some degree.
Peter didn’t just describe the assailants as Christians, he described them as “poorly educated Christians” and underscored that fact by pointing out their belief that the Jewish people killed Jesus on Chanukah. Came off to me that he was pointing out more the ignorance of thugs and the irony, in this age of “all Muslims are bad” type of press, that a Muslim was the only witness to this attack who acted to defend the Jewish fellows. But you’ve got the Bizarro World take on things.
Lingster, you’re coming off, whether you mean to or not, as an idiot with an axe to grind. Seriously, you’re making up definitions for words that no one else subscribes to, you’ve declared attacks against Christianity where none exist and you’ve made accusations about Peter’s motives and personal life that simply do not stand up to reasonable scrutiny or documented facts. I mean at best you’re coming off as a Bizarro World version of Don Quixote attacking windmills while claiming them to be dragons that need slaying and at worst you’re simply coming off as a nut.
” Oh, it’s UrbanDictionary. Must be authoritative. Here’s an excerpt from the “white trash” Wikipedia entry, which is at least a little bit more reliable: A related stereotype is that of the redneck, although they differ considerably. A rural middle-class person may proudly characterize himself as a redneck (for example, the comedian Jeff Foxworthy uses his redneck persona as part of his act), but might be genuinely offended if called white trash, which is a more pejorative, geographically different term.
And backs up my point.”
1) Calling wikipedia reliable is somewhat shaky at best.
2) No, it doesn’t back your point at all. No one here is claiming that “white trash” isn’t insulting. Nor is there anyone here claiming that a self described redneck wouldn’t find the term insulting. However, everyone here is claiming that your idea of “white trash” being an insulting term for “gentiles” by Jews. Your point isn’t supported at all by that definition.
Thank you, play again.
That’s…
However, everyone here is claiming that your idea of “white trash” being an insulting term for “gentiles” by Jews is full of it.
Jerry wrote: Lingster, you’re coming off, whether you mean to or not, as an idiot with an axe to grind.
I live on Long Island, so I saw this whole subway attack story on my local news stations and in our local papers; and I can tell you that the media referred to the attackers as “Christian.” I distinctly recall them doing so, and thinking “Aw crap. Just what we (Christians of all flavors) need.”
So unless you are about to rant against the media as well, this looks more and more like a personal attack on PAD.
“And by the way – it turns out the ringleader of the hooligans is neither Catholic or Christian.”
Well, on Planet Lingster, it’s an obvious sign that someone who sports a tattoo of Jesus on his arm and then displays that tattoo before attacking someone for being a part of the religion that murdered his savior just doesn’t consider himself Christian in any way, shape or form. No, it’s well known fact that members of the Ifa faith are far more likely to act in such a manner then anyone who believes themselves to be of a Christian based belief system.
Do you ever get to a point where you realize that you jumped into something without thinking it out, crammed both feet deep into your mouth and admit error or do you just keep clutching at straws and stretching points until you’ve painted a giant neon sign on your forehead that reads “IDIOT” for all to see? No? Kinda figured that.
You so funny. Done with you now.
“I distinctly recall them doing so, and thinking “Aw crap. Just what we (Christians of all flavors) need.” “
Except, that’s not even a thought that merits any real worry. As I (and others here including Peter have expressed in their own way as well) it’s really not the religion as much as it is the person. Christianity didn’t attack those kids. They were assaulted by dim witted thugs. Islam didn’t attack us on 9/11. Homicidal (and suicidal) madman flew those planes into the towers. No one with more then a couple of IQ points is going to accuse a religion of the crime unless they have an agenda or an axe to grind.
Well, on Planet Lingster, it’s an obvious sign that someone who sports a tattoo of Jesus on his arm and then displays that tattoo before attacking someone for being a part of the religion that murdered his savior just doesn’t consider himself Christian in any way, shape or form.
The ringleader is a guy named Joseph Jirovec Jr. His father is a lapsed Catholic. His deceased mother was Jewish. He has not been reported to have any religious tattoo (that was another guy), but it has been reported that he was not raised religiously. In the past he has been charged with assault against some African-American guys. Google it.
As I suggested above, it looks like he’s just an áššhølë.
I actually didn’t want to raise the curtain on this earlier because, hilarious as it may be that PAD has been raging for naught, I was hoping to learn more about PAD’s anger toward Christians via this thread.
PAD has not been forthcoming, so I suppose it’s fair at this point to explain that he was wrong, drowning in wrongness, monumentally wrong, etc. From the beginning he fell hook, line and sinker for a line of bull put out by professional grievance groups.
Heh.
So, the fact that it wasn’t the “leader” of the group of idiots who attacked Jews for killing Jesus on Chanukah and killing their savior who sported the Jesus tattoo backs your nutty “white trash” definition and “Peter hates Christians” claim… How?
“The ringleader is a guy named Joseph Jirovec Jr. His father is a lapsed Catholic. His deceased mother was Jewish. He has not been reported to have any religious tattoo (that was another guy), but it has been reported that he was not raised religiously. In the past he has been charged with assault against some African-American guys. Google it.
As I suggested above, it looks like he’s just an áššhølë.
I actually didn’t want to raise the curtain on this earlier because, hilarious as it may be that PAD has been raging for naught, I was hoping to learn more about PAD’s anger toward Christians via this thread.”
Raise the curtain on what? His name? Read that well before now. The fact that he’s going to jail for assaulting a black man back in 2005? Read that in PAD’s thread header. Read that his mom was Jewish? Tim Lynch posed that back at December 12, 2007 01:46 PM. PAD’s “hatred” of Christians? Only in your own mind.
Seriously, you’re a nut with an axe to grind. Just say so and get it over with. But your being a nut with an axe to grind really does limit the usefulness of talking to you. Bored now. Have fun.
Lingster, do you really not see that your arguments aren’t making anyone agree with you about anything? PAD obviously has nothing against Christians, he’s backed that up so many ways that it’s getting kinda silly.
PAD showed a perfectly reasonable explanation for why he referred to them as Christians. You quoted Wikipedia defining white trash as exactly what PAD said it was with none of the Christian definition that you claimed, then you said that it backs up your point!
Do you really believe any of this, or are you just arguing to see how long people will continue responding to you?
Regardless of who you married and how you’re raising your daughter, the obvious anger in this post suggests you have an issue with Christians.
I do not respond well to slurs. Particularly slurs related to my family.
But I have a blog with a vastly larger readership than this one and I can post there all I like, about whatever I like. So you can have me inside the tent pìššìņg out, or outside the tent pìššìņg in. Your choice.
Nor do I respond well to threats. You are cordially invited to pìšš øff.
You are now shrouded. What that means is that you are dead to me. A non-person. You do not exist save for the entertainment of others on the board, and if they ignored you as well, that would please me greatly.
PAD
PAD:
Nor do I respond well to threats.
Apparently you don’t respond well to much except fawning adulation.
You are cordially invited to pìšš øff.
I will not darken your comment thread again. Adios.
Lingster: “But I have a blog with a vastly larger readership than this one…”
No, you don’t. Your blog has only a tiny fraction of the comments — and commenters — that there are here. There’s no shame in that (my blog’s audience is quite small), unless you’re stupid enough to claim that you’re more popular than you are. Which you did. Oops.
Lingster: “So you can have me inside the tent pìššìņg out, or outside the tent pìššìņg in. Your choice.”
Translation: You’re getting attention here that you can’t get elsewhere, and you crave that something fierce. You’re clearly running out of gas, though, and like the petulant child you are you’ve decided to throw a tantrum.
Problem is, we can see through you. No amount of additional invective that you can (and probably will) hurl will change that.
Anyway, you may count me among those to whom you are now “dead,” a non-entity, non-existent. Good day.
So this whole thing was some dopey kind of getback for his feelings being hurt over the comic-con incident? The guy’s been waiting for some chance to jump ugly and THIS was the best he could come up with. Bizarre.
You know, Bill, he may actually have a pretty large readership. It’s a site devoted to She-Hulk and has lots of nice pictures of her bøøbš, along with forum topics like JENNIFER WALTERS BØØB GROW and JUGGERNAUT SEX. You can get a lot of hits with stuff like that.
Very very few of this multitude of readers seem to have any need to leave comments, which is…well. There you are.
Buh bye, Lingster!
So this whole thing was some dopey kind of getback for his feelings being hurt over the comic-con incident? The guy’s been waiting for some chance to jump ugly and THIS was the best he could come up with. Bizarre.
What’s interesting is that his behavior on this thread was exactly the same as on the previous: He started off with making statements that were demonstrably untrue. When called on it, he shifted away from them, declaring them to be unimportant even though they were the underpinnings of his previous statements. He did not discuss what I wrote, but rather the inferences he drew from them, depending entirely on what he believed I was actually thinking rather than saying. He made broad comments about how I should exert caution lest the well of public opinion be poisoned against me while touting the alleged importance of his own web presence…because apparently my world will come to an end if conventions stop inviting me or Lingster writes negative reviews of “She-Hulk.” His blog has a “vastly larger readership.” Like I give a dámņ. Thousands of people slow down on the Long Island Expressway to look at an overturned truck or roadkill. Doesn’t mean they get anything useful out of doing so.
PAD
Problem is, we can see through you. No amount of additional invective that you can (and probably will) hurl will change that.
Guaranteed he’s now going to surface on other boards and declare, “Peter David disliked what I had to say and told me to ‘pìšš øff.'” Without, of course, bothering to mention that I was playing off his threat about pìššìņg in or outside of the tent (certainly a no-win scenario since, in either case, the tent winds up smelling like piss.) And others will then bounce their heads like bobble dolls and say, “Yeah, I always heard he was mean.”
That’s just how it works. You can make yourself crazy if you let it get to you.
PAD
“Yeah, I always heard he was mean.”
yeah, YEAH! You are the guy who demands 3 hotel rooms filled with pork rinds at any convention he attends!
😉
On a more serious note (don’t looked so shocked, I DO occasionally have serious thoughts…)
Well, it seems pretty obvious to me that there is more violence done in Islam’s name today than in Christianity’s. I don’t know whether this has anything to do with the content of their respective holy texts, though.
Rene… I would STRONGLY dispute this. Regardless of the ACTUAL motivations for the war versus terror, I’d say us Christians (and yes, I know not everyone in the Military is Christian, but it’d be hard to argue against the fact that a vast majority of them are) are doing a fine job of killing Muslims (again I know not everyone killed have been Muslims, so cut me some slack) in Iraq and Afghanistan.
http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/iraq/iraqdeaths.html
vs.
http://icasualties.org/oif/US_chart.aspx
I will not darken your comment thread again.
Hey… It does seem a good deal brighter in here now.
Jerry wrote: Except, that’s not even a thought that merits any real worry. As I (and others here including Peter have expressed in their own way as well) it’s really not the religion as much as it is the person. Christianity didn’t attack those kids.
I agree that for most sane folks don’t see the thugs as true representatives of Christianity. My main concern is those nitwits who aren’t very bright.
There has been some local concerns with destruction/desecration of religious symbols – not to mention an already hot debate about lawn ornaments in a nearby condominium complex. My “Oh crap” reaction was more like a “lets not give these folks more inspiration or excuses.”
Rene –
I don’t know whether this has anything to do with the content of their respective holy texts, though.
It doesn’t. Christianity may not be a religion of violence right now, but that certainly doesn’t excuse their history: Crusades, Inquisition, and so on. All waged under the same holy texts that are still in use.
Lingster –
Craig J. Reis:
Well, I’m taking this as proof that you’re a troll. Congratulations, jáçkášš.
And backs up my point.
It doesn’t back up anything. UrbanDictionary’s definitions are far more accurate; for one, they’re not sterilized for content as with Wikipedia.
Regardless of who you married and how you’re raising your daughter, the obvious anger in this post suggests you have an issue with Christians.
Holy @#$%! You’re off your @#$% rocker!
But I have a blog with a vastly larger readership than this one and I can post there all I like, about whatever I like.
What you have are serious issues that need to be worked out. First and foremost, an issue with maturity.
(Lingster) “Regardless of who you married and how you’re raising your daughter, the obvious anger in this post suggests you have an issue with Christians.”
(PAD) “I do not respond well to slurs. Particularly slurs related to my family.”
While it is true that Lingster has established himself as a paranoic who writes his own dictionary as he goes along, the particular statement at which PAD was outraged is not a slur. Lingster draws whatever conclusions he chooses about the fact that Mrs. David is a Catholic and her child is being raised as a Catholic (I would read some degree of tolerance for Catholics from that, but that’s just me), but the text PAD quoted did not impugn either of them for being Catholic or PAD for being a Jew. Other things Lingster has written demonstrate a hatred of Islam (this is not quite unique to him…) and some lesser degree of distaste for Judaism (neither is this quite unique to him). Lingster’s attitude to Christianity is more difficult to pinpoint: He loves the texts obsessively, but finds no factual basis for the religion. That’s not something likely to make friends among either the devout or the radical atheists – It’s not easy to discern just where he finds his friends.
As for the second part of PAD’s quotation of Lingster, I have no quarrel: Lingster threatens to piss into the tent, and PAD correctly tells him to pìšš øff. His suspicion that this exchange will be repeated out of context is probably correct. As for the first part, there are many slurs – against Muslims, Jews and PAD specifically – to be found in Lingster’s rants: PAD just happened to select one of the few parts of Lingster’s posts that isn’t such.
Jeffrey Frawley: “While it is true that Lingster has established himself as a paranoic who writes his own dictionary as he goes along, the particular statement at which PAD was outraged is not a slur.”
There is a time and a place for this kind of debate, and this isn’t it. I’m not PAD. His thoughts and emotions are his own. But were I in his shoes, I’d need a little time to cool off before I’d be open to this kind of nitpicking… if I’d be open to it at all (and I probably wouldn’t).
People find this kind of arguing for the sake of arguing to be annoying… and with good reason. You would be well-served to learn to look past your own obsessions and develop a bit of empathy.
Conveniently, all in this very thread:
It doesn’t help that you and your frequent commenters present yourselves as severe people who consider “do I need to admit I’m wrong to this person?” rather than “am I wrong?” in admitting an error.
Just for the record, I checked: Lingster’s website clocks in a little over three thousand visitors in the past month
For the month of November, this site has had over thirty thousand.
PAD
Go figure. Lingster goes away, and another little troll shows up to continue trying to ruin everybody’s day.
Will Internet wonders never cease.
And PAD, never let simple facts get in the way of a bad argument. 😉
The idea that any category of people should be hated for “killing Christ” makes absolutely no sense to me. The core teaching of the Christian faith is that the ultimate purpose of Jesus Christ’s existence was to serve as a blood sacrifice in order to atone for the sins of mankind, thus sparing humans the fate of an automatic eternity in hëll. So anger over Christ’s execution implies that it was a BAD thing that he died… except if he hadn’t died, he wouldn’t have been able to fulfill his destiny, and mankind would have been denied their avenue for escaping eternal dámņáŧìøņ… I’m sorry, WHAT was the anti-semites’ point again…?
– Frank
Thank you for demonstrating what I was referring to, big guy. It’s a wonder anyone feels the need to challenge anything I say.
Million Monkey Output Indistinguishable From Mike Leung’s Posts
Dec. 22, 2007
By Bill Myers
Mathmetical theoreticians at M.I.T. recently wrapped up an ambitious experiment involving a million monkeys banging away at the keyboards of a million PCs for the last five years. The goal was to determine whether any of those monkeys would, at random, write “Hamlet.” Instead, the experiment produced an even more stunning result.
“Before the five years was up, each of the monkeys began typing screeds that were identical to those of an Internet jáçkášš we’ve identified as Mike Leung,” said lead researcher Bert Smith.
The researchers selected monkeys from the wild that had had no exposure to civilization, and kept them sequestered in cages with no Internet access, nor any contact with humans other than the researchers. Yet the results were the same across the board: each of the monkeys, within three years at most, began typing nonsense that matched, word-for-word, the postings of Internet crazy Mike Leung at PeterDavid.net.
Said Smith, “I’m not sure what the exact implications of this experiment are. But I’m sure that I don’t ever want to meet this guy, Mike Leung. Clearly his thoughts are no different than those of crap-flinging, lesser-evolved primates.”
If you believe my posts are unguided, it’s a wonder you feel the need to challenge anything I say. The most generous adjective for declaring war on unguided phenomena seems to be “stupid.”
Bill Myers – When PAD says he responds badly to slurs, he is a big enough boy to know whether there is a slur. He is
1. a grown man
2. a professional writer
3. probably fairly bright,
so he doesn’t need you to protect his delicate sensibilities. This professional writer took “Regardless of who you married and how you’re raising your daughter, the obvious anger in this post suggests you have an issue with Christians” as a slur. (Just check: That’s the quotation he selected to accompany his declaration that he doesn’t respond well to slurs. There are other quotations he could have cited which would better merit that, but let’s let him choose his own texts, just like a grown up.) Where is the slur? His wife and daughter are Catholics, apparently: Saying so is not a slur. Lingster thinks he hates Christians: That’s probably not true, but my conception of a slur is something else.
Jeffrey: I’m afraid I’m not prepared to argue unless you pay.
He accused me of being religiously intolerant. That is a slur. My wife and youngest daughter are Christian. The inference to be drawn is that I harbor a resentment toward them because of that. That involves my family.
I strongly suggest this line of discussion not be pursued.
PAD
Frank Stone: “The idea that any category of people should be hated for ‘killing Christ’ makes absolutely no sense to me.”
Probably because you’re a thinking, reasonable person. Purveyors of hate, not so much.
Maybe you should offer to pay them, like the way you offered Jeffrey to think for compensation.
It’s a wonder anyone feels the need to challenge anything I say.
Mike, going after you is like kicking the homeless guy who’s sleeping in the park: it just isn’t a challenge at all when the target is completely unable to defend themselves.
Better luck next time.
“Maybe you should offer to pay them, like the way you offered Jeffrey to think for compensation.”
Perhaps I’m guilty of being more cute than clear. I quoted that line (paraphrased, actually, but whatever) from Monty Python’s “Argument Clinic” sketch because that’s the point in the sketch where the argument’s over (until the guy pays for another five minutes, anyway). It was my way of saying that this is arguing for the sake of arguing… and I want no part of it.
In fact, I so want no part of it that I’m not only done commenting in this thread, I’m done reading it. Want to take some potshots at me? Open season. Have a party.
Thank you for denying your ridicule was based on any challenge to what I’ve said here. You are simply someone whose need to ridicule people isn’t founded to any fidelity to the truth. That isn’t my problem.
Perhaps if I had your experiences I too would be full of hate like you.
PAD: After your wife had already contributed a post to this string, you were the one who brought her and your daughter up as proof you have no anti-Christian bias – not Lingster to make whatever point he was trying to make. You are understandably angry when your family is drawn into arguments here, and I have no intention of criticising either your wife or any of your daughters – but when you are the one to bring them up it is dishonest to pretend it’s some new outrage.
Bill Myers – I did miss the Monty Python reference. It’s interesting that you felt the need to protect PAD from bad old me. I give him the respect of thinking he’s a grown man capable of defending himself verbally.
Jeffrey, I believe it was I who brought up Peter’s marriage as a retort to Mushroomer who made the first accusation of some anti-Christian bias on PAD’s part (Mushroomer then vanished and his argument was taken up by Lingster).
And while I think it’s pretty obvious that, given the ample evidence of love and affection that PAD has for his family, the accusation of anti-Christian feelings is stupid beyond all belief, I am very sorry I brought it up. One forgets how low some people are willing to sink to keep from admitting an error.
(PAD) “To be specific, by the way, my wife and daughter are Catholic.”
No, Bill Mulligan – you’re off the hook. Lingster responded to what PAD said (and also what the misfiring neurons in his right lobe were telling him), rather than your comments. While I disagree with most of what Lingster says and believes, “Regardless of who you’re married to and how you’re raising your daughter” is a direct response to PAD’s proclamation of to whom he he is married and how he’s raising his daughter: PAD brought those two apparently sacrosanct persons into the conversation, but didn’t like it that Lingster remembered that fact. If we are to leave those two alone, PAD is unwise to phrase his arguments “Oh yeah…well my wife __________, and not only that, my daughter ___________.
Warned you.
We’re done.
PAD