Wednesday, June 21, 2006

Like a broken record

This guy, this guy and these guys explain why subsidizing Downtown redevelopment is a bad idea. I think I'm close to having said all I'm going to say on the subject. At least until I decide to say something else.

In other news, the church in which I grew up seems to have struck a reasonable compromise on the question of ordaining homosexuals. When I say reasonable, I mean that I agree with it; clearly, it rankles some.


Blogger Jonathan Barnes said...

Now gay hypocrites can wear the cloth, just like their straight hypocrite brothers.

1:03 AM

Blogger Jonathan Potts said...

So all clergy are hypocrites?

11:21 AM

Blogger Sean McDaniel said...

hey, I'm an atheist. but i don't think that all clergy are hypocrits. that's harsh. it's kind of like saying that rich high school kids are more promiscuous than poor high school kids...oh wait, you believe that one too, JB.

those are pretty broad strokes.

11:22 AM

Blogger Jonathan Barnes said...

I didn't say all preachers are hypocrites.
Do you believe that NO preachers are hypocrites? Or that no GAY preachers will be hypocrites? Are gays somehow holier than straights?
Ever read this Bible passage:
"There is none [but God] that is holy. No, not one."
Which means everyone is a hypocrite. Sorry you didn't realize that.

5:36 PM

Blogger Jonathan Barnes said...

Sean, if you want to make up things that I "said," why don't you just compose some original piece of writing?
Oh, I forgot--you can't write anything that's not a reaction to something someone else wrote.
Or we could meet and you could tell me face-to-face why you are misrepresenting me.

5:46 PM

Blogger Sean McDaniel said...

look, my first take on your original response was that all clergy are hypocrites.

seriously,JB, J. Potts had the same reaction...but no umbrage at his read on that? or is he bigger than you?

as for the quip about rich kids being promiscuous...i'll admit it. i got it wrong. what you really said was that girls at "certain" big suburban schools (re: mt. lebanon) were more promiscuous than the girls at smaller schools (northgate) ...or as you put it back in april (and i hope you asked first before you put it back in april):

"I say this because I was a teenager a little over twenty years ago, and back then I was well aware of how sexually permissive some girls were at certain large suburban schools around Pittsburgh. I didn’t initially learn of this licentiousness through my school; I went to Northgate through ninth grade, and the school was so small that hardcore promiscuity on the part of female students was rare. When I went to Kiski School, a private boys boarding school filled with kids from some of these large suburban school districts, I learned of the promiscuity that even back then was rampant in some of those larger schools."

sound familiar? but please excuse me if i inferred that big = slutty and rich and small = 99.9% pure and working class.

anyway, tell me now if i'm misreading your invite to a mano a mano set-to as being a bit intimidating. i might be small but i'm not stupid! big guys like you don't scare me. come on, put up your dukes and fight for freedom of speech and tolerance. and yes, i fight the way i argue (ie, low blows, sucker punches, backstabbing, etc.)

by the way, hypocrites are everywhere. just look in the mirror, boy!

J. Potts, please accept my apologies for this bitch fight on your site. i will engage JB here no mas — even if he does get the last word.

7:37 PM

Blogger Jonathan Potts said...

Let's just try to stay on topic.

7:44 PM


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home