Hello!
The comments on this profile are unclaimed and thus are unverified.
Do they belong to you? Claim these comments.
Jay
Is this you? Claim Profile »
5 months ago
in Big Stick + Viper Pit = Unnecessary Trouble on ETC: Everyday Thoughts Collected
In the future I would appreciate you not indirectly promoting their blog by mentioning it here in the comments on my blog. Also, again, the topic of this blog post has nothing to do with them.
I totally understand if this post wasn't in relation to that post. Thanks for the clarification. I suppose the timing just made it seem like it. However, I don't think mentioning them is necessarily "promoting" them, just like you mentioning Fred Phelps doesn't "promote" Fred Phelps. I'll do as you wish, though.
I totally understand if this post wasn't in relation to that post. Thanks for the clarification. I suppose the timing just made it seem like it. However, I don't think mentioning them is necessarily "promoting" them, just like you mentioning Fred Phelps doesn't "promote" Fred Phelps. I'll do as you wish, though.
1 reply
5 months ago
in Big Stick + Viper Pit = Unnecessary Trouble on ETC: Everyday Thoughts Collected
You're right that personal attacks go nowhere when it comes to Internet communication, but if you're referring to the recent XGW article (and I have a sneaking suspicion that you are), then I don't really see how that was exactly personal. Even people who are more-or-less on your side of this issue, like myself and Peter Ould, noticed a shift between the recent blog post in question and some of your earlier writings. Peter actually wrote a post about it, which was actually pretty similar to the XGW one in its tone, in my opinion.
The fact is, when a blogger puts themself out there, and they have a collection of writing that people can look back upon, read, and compare to their new stuff, folks are going to do that and hold them accountable. It happens to me all the time on my blog, because my opinions have shifted back-and-forth over the years. When it happens, I don't consider it bashing, but just pointing out things that I haven't exactly explained. Usually, if someone tries to bring up something from a few years ago in a negative light, I try to just calmly explain what's changed since then. It does nothing to get upset. They have a right to notice discrepencies, and even to get mad about them if it appears I'm bearing a false witness, and I have an obligation to explain myself.
The fact is, when a blogger puts themself out there, and they have a collection of writing that people can look back upon, read, and compare to their new stuff, folks are going to do that and hold them accountable. It happens to me all the time on my blog, because my opinions have shifted back-and-forth over the years. When it happens, I don't consider it bashing, but just pointing out things that I haven't exactly explained. Usually, if someone tries to bring up something from a few years ago in a negative light, I try to just calmly explain what's changed since then. It does nothing to get upset. They have a right to notice discrepencies, and even to get mad about them if it appears I'm bearing a false witness, and I have an obligation to explain myself.
2 replies
Randy
Actually I wasn't thinking about them at all with regard to this post. It was born out of a completely different circumstance ... honest.
I don't know if you are implying that what you would do is how I should relate to them but ... if you are ... you really don't know the half of it. I have dealt with them (and their predecessor) for 12 years, stopped communicating with them two plus years ago and owe them nothing. They will not determine what I talk about or frame my life for me. Their only intent is to malign, confuse and undermine the work of Exodus.
After trying a myriad of times to "explain" I finally learned that nothing is ever good enough for them and they will twist anything because the obvious intent is to undermine testimonies like mine ... not understand or support us.
In the future I would appreciate you not indirectly promoting their blog by mentioning it here in the comments on my blog. Also, again, the topic of this blog post has nothing to do with them.
I don't know if you are implying that what you would do is how I should relate to them but ... if you are ... you really don't know the half of it. I have dealt with them (and their predecessor) for 12 years, stopped communicating with them two plus years ago and owe them nothing. They will not determine what I talk about or frame my life for me. Their only intent is to malign, confuse and undermine the work of Exodus.
After trying a myriad of times to "explain" I finally learned that nothing is ever good enough for them and they will twist anything because the obvious intent is to undermine testimonies like mine ... not understand or support us.
In the future I would appreciate you not indirectly promoting their blog by mentioning it here in the comments on my blog. Also, again, the topic of this blog post has nothing to do with them.
Randy
Also, I don't mind clarifying any perceived discrepancies but I would like for someone to be respectful and simply ask me instead of trying to twist it into a public double bind and more blog fodder.
People can send that type of feedback through the Ask It Basket Form all the while keeping this policy in mind.
People can send that type of feedback through the Ask It Basket Form all the while keeping this policy in mind.
5 months ago
in Do Real Mean Wear Pink? - Ask It Basket on ETC: Everyday Thoughts Collected
It's always important to remember how culture-infused ideas of stereotypical masculinity and femininity are (as opposed to Biblical models, which have more to do with one's role rather than one's outward appearances). Even when it comes to non-verbal communication and posture (let alone fashion), what is considered masculine or feminine changes from culture to culture. So, we might consider Pink Man #2 to be masculine because he seems to have the kind of posture that we expect from the typical American male (not to mention he's wearing standard casual business attire, just in a different color), but Pink Man #3 to be less masculine because of his posture and the cut of his clothes, which seem to have a bit more European vibe to me (which many Americans tend to subconsciously see as "less masculine" for some reason).
So while we may think that style communicates a lot I think we have to remember that the presumptions we reach are based more in what the culture we happen to live in (which could just have easily been any other culture) dictate. I certainly wouldn't want to be judged based on my posture or voice or even clothes (though I tend to have no style whatsoever), but if I did run across the kind of person who would judge me that way, I'm not sure I'd want to be their friend to start with.
Oh, and pink is irrelevant to me, anyway. Huzzah for color-blindness!
So while we may think that style communicates a lot I think we have to remember that the presumptions we reach are based more in what the culture we happen to live in (which could just have easily been any other culture) dictate. I certainly wouldn't want to be judged based on my posture or voice or even clothes (though I tend to have no style whatsoever), but if I did run across the kind of person who would judge me that way, I'm not sure I'd want to be their friend to start with.
Oh, and pink is irrelevant to me, anyway. Huzzah for color-blindness!
1 reply
Randy
That's some very good insight Jay. Thanks for adding them and I didn't know you were color blind. I have an uncle who is color blind.
7 months ago
in Of Christianists & Fascism: A Sign of Things to Come? on ETC: Everyday Thoughts Collected
I think there's quite a bit of heavy-handed tactics on both sides. It really depends on location and socioeconomic status. For example, I know many gay men and woman in the rural and suburban South. Almost none of them would ask for their rights at the expense of religious freedom, and those that I have a chance to talk to personally are rather moderate and do not support the heavy-handed tactics of activists out in California.
I suppose this is similar to how I've never supported the tactics of people like Pat Robertson, even though we're both conservative Christians. The "little guy" often has no say in what the "big guys" of his or her demographic do. Unfortunately, by calling myself a conservative Christian people are going to assume I like Pat Robertson, and by calling themselves homosexual people are going to assume these individuals support such high-profile militant tactics. It's very often true; but that's what assumptions are.
It would be nice to have a solution on a large scale, but I think the only real way to go about change is if Christians and LGBT individuals both spend time talking with one another, befriending one another, listening to what the other really has to say, being calm in emotion and slow to anger, and first and foremost, not making assumptions based on demographic.
I suppose this is similar to how I've never supported the tactics of people like Pat Robertson, even though we're both conservative Christians. The "little guy" often has no say in what the "big guys" of his or her demographic do. Unfortunately, by calling myself a conservative Christian people are going to assume I like Pat Robertson, and by calling themselves homosexual people are going to assume these individuals support such high-profile militant tactics. It's very often true; but that's what assumptions are.
It would be nice to have a solution on a large scale, but I think the only real way to go about change is if Christians and LGBT individuals both spend time talking with one another, befriending one another, listening to what the other really has to say, being calm in emotion and slow to anger, and first and foremost, not making assumptions based on demographic.
2 replies
Jay
Minor correction. At the bottom of my second paragraph I meant to say, "It's very often untrue," instead of "true."
Pianomankugie
I agree, the best way to go about change is the path of truth and grace. Don't compromise grace, and don't compromise truth. Requires being relaxed and being diligent, being secure enough in who we are so as not to be threatened by the perceived "other". I smile to think some people are puzzled by me because I don't fit into their nice little box. If only they understood that temptation is not an identity. I'm no longer threatened by those from both sides who have judged me as a hypocrite because I don't fit into either side. Hopefully many others will continue to also reach that place of Rest In Him and abide there. HE is not ashamed to call me his brother, a fact which continues to blow my mind.
7 months ago
in It’s a Blizzard on ETC: Everyday Thoughts Collected
Don't get me wrong. I love warm weather. But it's been in the 30s all day today. There wasn't a cloud in the sky and everything was bathed in a very bright, almost merciless winter light. Everything seemed very clean and fresh, and it was so nice to see everyone walking around in their coats and scarfs and hats. I'm actually liking cold weather this year... just not the fact that I constantly have the sniffles.
1 reply
Randy
Shhhhhh... don't tell anyone but ... I secretly like the cooler air. This is just my yearly opportunity to whine about having to deal with arctic blasts. For some reason I find it entertaining.
7 months ago
in http://randythomas.org/2008/11/13/h8-against-prop-8/ on ETC: Everyday Thoughts Collected
Good points all around, especially your comment on Malkin's blog. Although, seriously, could you just go ahead and say Tammy Bruce is a lesbian (which is what she calls herself) instead of saying that she has "embraced a lesbian identity"? That whole "identity" thing just seems a little condescending to me. She's a woman who is attracted to and has sex with other women. She's a lesbian. It's like saying I've "embraced a student identity" because I go to college. It's not an identity. It's a label that describes what I do.
1 reply
Mensley
Hey, maybe that's just how Randy was raised to say it. ;-p
7 months ago
in Letter From A Christian in 2012 - Focus Action Letter on ETC: Everyday Thoughts Collected
There are scoutmasters of the opposite sex in Boy Scouts. The first one, Catherine Pollard, died two years ago. Here's the link: http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1P2-2796791.html
I also remember another one, Lillian Morris, was a contestant on my favorite TV show, Survivor. I'm sure there have been many, many others.
So... pwnd? ;-)
I also remember another one, Lillian Morris, was a contestant on my favorite TV show, Survivor. I'm sure there have been many, many others.
So... pwnd? ;-)
1 reply
B.T.Carolus
Interesting. I didn't know that.
8 months ago
in Of Gay Activists, “Rights” and Common Ground? on ETC: Everyday Thoughts Collected
I suppose this is why I am more-or-less politically apathetic (I mean, unless a pro-life Libertarian comes into power I'll never have a President or Senator who will represent even a majority of my views). I care little about legalities. I think people should be free to set up whatever sort of situation they wish in terms of benefits, etc. (Chaplian Chas and Randy are making interesting points about this in the comment thread below this one).
I guess any battle really needs to be fought on the front of changing attitudes before anything else. That's primarily where my heart always is. I could care less about the law unless it is bringing people to the Kingdom (and the only laws I get passionate for are pro-life ones, because that protects unborn children who could eventually be a part of that Kingdom).
Christians need to change their attitudes in how they relate to gays (this is a Biblical mandate for them), and many gays need to change their attitudes in how they relate to Christians (this is simply a good idea for them, since compromise is more feasible than total acceptance). I don't know how we can go about changing these attitudes, but on both sides, it's where the battle needs to be first. My biggest fear is that both sides will see a legal victory as the end of their endeavors.
Oh, and I am glad you supported the Supreme Court's decision to make homosexual behavior legal. I didn't think you would have supported that. Guess that shows what they say about assumptions is true... :)
I guess any battle really needs to be fought on the front of changing attitudes before anything else. That's primarily where my heart always is. I could care less about the law unless it is bringing people to the Kingdom (and the only laws I get passionate for are pro-life ones, because that protects unborn children who could eventually be a part of that Kingdom).
Christians need to change their attitudes in how they relate to gays (this is a Biblical mandate for them), and many gays need to change their attitudes in how they relate to Christians (this is simply a good idea for them, since compromise is more feasible than total acceptance). I don't know how we can go about changing these attitudes, but on both sides, it's where the battle needs to be first. My biggest fear is that both sides will see a legal victory as the end of their endeavors.
Oh, and I am glad you supported the Supreme Court's decision to make homosexual behavior legal. I didn't think you would have supported that. Guess that shows what they say about assumptions is true... :)
1 reply
B.T.Carolus
Anti-sodomy laws just seemed so much like Big Brother to me (and I don't mean Randy's iPhone). They're impossible to fairly enforce, short of putting surveillance equipment in people's bedrooms. It's illegal to have sex period in public already, and I don't t really see the need to penalize certain types of sexual behavior more than others. Not to mention there's been major disagreement, ever since anti-buggery laws in England, over whether they should apply to straights and gays, or just gays (and what about Lesbians, anyway?), and what types of sex sodomy actually means (ie, it's been interpreted to cover blow jobs and male on male hand jobs at times). At the end of the day they're just a legal way of being overly mean to gay men, and I'm not a big fan of that.
Anyway, I actually pretty much agree with you on the concept of 'Let people make their own arrangements.' I think if the two of us were talking face to face, we'd be surprised on how similar our views on most things are.
Anyway, I actually pretty much agree with you on the concept of 'Let people make their own arrangements.' I think if the two of us were talking face to face, we'd be surprised on how similar our views on most things are.
8 months ago
in Of Gay Activists, “Rights” and Common Ground? on ETC: Everyday Thoughts Collected
That's why I said this wasn't about rights, but about attitudes. Do you think that if sexuality was something one could see as easily as skin color or gender, that gays might also be denied education, voting rights, equal pay, etc. in some parts of the country? I think they could, which is why a lot of people in backwoods areas tend to stay in the closet for a long time. And some people never get the means to get out of those areas, so they stay in the closet forever. It's not freedom if someone feels they have to hide in order to get by.
No one denies Christians in Middle Eastern countries the rights to education, voting rights, equal pay, etc. However, that's because no one admits to being a Christian. I'm not saying that the struggles are the same (Christians in the Middle East have it way worse, by far). But the concept is similar. You can say that gays have it easy because in large parts it is still taboo. People aren't out because they fear the consequences... And trust me, people do get fired, their property does get vandalized, they do get beaten and mocked. Except for the firing issue, these don't exactly fall under civil rights, but they do represent attitudes that need to change... Not in places like California or New York, but in all</> parts of the country.
No one denies Christians in Middle Eastern countries the rights to education, voting rights, equal pay, etc. However, that's because no one admits to being a Christian. I'm not saying that the struggles are the same (Christians in the Middle East have it way worse, by far). But the concept is similar. You can say that gays have it easy because in large parts it is still taboo. People aren't out because they fear the consequences... And trust me, people do get fired, their property does get vandalized, they do get beaten and mocked. Except for the firing issue, these don't exactly fall under civil rights, but they do represent attitudes that need to change... Not in places like California or New York, but in all</> parts of the country.
1 reply
B.T.Carolus
In some Middle Eastern countries it's illegal to be a Christian or to convert to Christianity. Nobody admits to it because they would be executed if they did (and people have been thrown in jail and killed because of it). That is a clear legally based violation of human rights, as well as a clear incentive to stay inside the religious closet. On the other hand, there is no law that makes it illegal to be gay in this country. There is now no law preventing homosexual behavior, and those that did exist have been struck down by the supreme court, something I support.
The fact that private individuals choose to discriminate against gays is also, as you admit, not a violation of human rights. It is something that should be able to be remedied by legal action, and that is increasingly the case. And you're right, the attitudes of those private citizens should change. But it's still not a civil or human rights issue.
And therein lies the problem. We now have people standing on street corners in places like Hollywood, Westwood, and Long Beach (three of the most desirable neighborhoods/areas in LA) holding up signs that say things like "In California chickens have more rights than me." This is patently untrue and completely ridiculous (At least I've never seen a gay man trapped in a cage, awaiting slaughter to be served up as coq au vin). It's also ironic, because the guys holding up those signs probably voted for prop 2 (which was apparently the chicken rights amendment). Then you have people like Melissa Etheridge (and a lot of average people on the ten o'clock news) complaining about how this is exactly the same as taxation without representation. Again patently false and ridiculous. She got to go down to her polling place and vote on prop 8, just like everybody else. Just because you didn't get the outcome you wanted, doesn't mean you didn't get to vote in the election, which is what that phrase means. And it also doesn't mean that you get to decide not to file income taxes, which is still considered tax evasion and is punishable by both fines and jail time.
At the end of the day we have a group of people trying to expropriate the language and moral authority of civil rights, for an issue that is not a matter of civil rights. If the protesters in Long Beach want to go to Wyoming to change attitudes about the treatment of gays, more power to them. But right now that's not what they're doing.
The fact that private individuals choose to discriminate against gays is also, as you admit, not a violation of human rights. It is something that should be able to be remedied by legal action, and that is increasingly the case. And you're right, the attitudes of those private citizens should change. But it's still not a civil or human rights issue.
And therein lies the problem. We now have people standing on street corners in places like Hollywood, Westwood, and Long Beach (three of the most desirable neighborhoods/areas in LA) holding up signs that say things like "In California chickens have more rights than me." This is patently untrue and completely ridiculous (At least I've never seen a gay man trapped in a cage, awaiting slaughter to be served up as coq au vin). It's also ironic, because the guys holding up those signs probably voted for prop 2 (which was apparently the chicken rights amendment). Then you have people like Melissa Etheridge (and a lot of average people on the ten o'clock news) complaining about how this is exactly the same as taxation without representation. Again patently false and ridiculous. She got to go down to her polling place and vote on prop 8, just like everybody else. Just because you didn't get the outcome you wanted, doesn't mean you didn't get to vote in the election, which is what that phrase means. And it also doesn't mean that you get to decide not to file income taxes, which is still considered tax evasion and is punishable by both fines and jail time.
At the end of the day we have a group of people trying to expropriate the language and moral authority of civil rights, for an issue that is not a matter of civil rights. If the protesters in Long Beach want to go to Wyoming to change attitudes about the treatment of gays, more power to them. But right now that's not what they're doing.
8 months ago
in Of Gay Activists, “Rights” and Common Ground? on ETC: Everyday Thoughts Collected
I don't know if using people like Melissa Etheridge is a good example. Remember that there were very wealthy and popular black American entertainers and entrepreneurs before the Civil Rights movement. Their wealth and status offered them extra security that the poorer and more provincial people did not have.
The same can be said for gay men and women. Not everyone is able to move to San Francisco or Malibu or Manhattan. Not everyone even really wants to. Some people actually want to stay in small-town Arkansas, Kansas, Utah, Wyoming -- You know, the places where they were born, where they have family, where they have built their lives. Not everyone comes into the money that allows them to get away, and even if they do it seems rather wrong to tell them to move, doesn't it?
We didn't tell the black Americans in the South to just move up North during the 1960s. We knew that they deserved to live free wherever they chose to be. The same goes for gay men and women. I'm not talking about marriage or civil unions. It's just that when it comes to persecution and attitudes, well... A middle class gay schoolteacher in small-town Wyoming deserves to be just as loved, respected, and protected as a wealthy lesbian rock star in California. I'm not sure we're at that point yet.
The same can be said for gay men and women. Not everyone is able to move to San Francisco or Malibu or Manhattan. Not everyone even really wants to. Some people actually want to stay in small-town Arkansas, Kansas, Utah, Wyoming -- You know, the places where they were born, where they have family, where they have built their lives. Not everyone comes into the money that allows them to get away, and even if they do it seems rather wrong to tell them to move, doesn't it?
We didn't tell the black Americans in the South to just move up North during the 1960s. We knew that they deserved to live free wherever they chose to be. The same goes for gay men and women. I'm not talking about marriage or civil unions. It's just that when it comes to persecution and attitudes, well... A middle class gay schoolteacher in small-town Wyoming deserves to be just as loved, respected, and protected as a wealthy lesbian rock star in California. I'm not sure we're at that point yet.
1 reply
B.T.Carolus
The gay rights activists who keep claiming that their civil rights are being abused are not complaining about the fact that school teachers in Wyoming aren't being loved and respected, they're saying that the entire population of gays in America is being denied basic civil rights.
While it is true that there were some African American performers that were successful before the civil rights movement, they never had anything even approaching somebody like Ellen. The discrimination against black performers before the '60s has been incredible, including black performers who had to perform in blackface, in order to pretend to be white pretending to be black, and black performers who performed in whiteface in order to get jobs. And, although there were a very few individuals who managed to become successful, the vast majority of African-Americans pre-civil rights were severely economically and socially disadvantaged (not just in the south, either, check out the Pulitzer prize winning photograph of 1976, which was taken in Boston).
The Gay community in America, on the other hand, tends to be just as well off, or better, than the rest of their fellow Americans. Although none on us will, I'm sure, dispute that gay individuals have been discriminated against, there have never been laws in place denying education, voting rights, equal pay, use of public spaces/amenities, or allowing people to systematically forbid access to restaurants, laundromats, etc. And although wealthy gay celebrities are the easiest to point out because they're celebrities, and therefore well known, there also are many, many well off, well paid non-celebrity members of the gay community. Like the people who attend the White Party, Circuit Queens in general, and the guy who wrote "The Cost of Being Gay" a couple of months ago in the Advocate (apparently $55 Gap jeans are beneath him as a gay man). And the obligatory gay man or couple who is always featured in Elle Decor, along with their recently redecorated mansion or swanky New York apartment. These are of course extreme examples. But in 1960, I'm pretty sure you could not have found any black journalist declaring that equivalent-to-the-time-period clothing was beneath him as a black man because it just cost too little. You also wouldn't find the Black equivalent to the portion of the middle class that also happens to be gay, and that shops at the Gap and Eddie Bauer (I'm actually referring to a specific person there) quite happily and with no strain on their pocket books.
While it is true that there were some African American performers that were successful before the civil rights movement, they never had anything even approaching somebody like Ellen. The discrimination against black performers before the '60s has been incredible, including black performers who had to perform in blackface, in order to pretend to be white pretending to be black, and black performers who performed in whiteface in order to get jobs. And, although there were a very few individuals who managed to become successful, the vast majority of African-Americans pre-civil rights were severely economically and socially disadvantaged (not just in the south, either, check out the Pulitzer prize winning photograph of 1976, which was taken in Boston).
The Gay community in America, on the other hand, tends to be just as well off, or better, than the rest of their fellow Americans. Although none on us will, I'm sure, dispute that gay individuals have been discriminated against, there have never been laws in place denying education, voting rights, equal pay, use of public spaces/amenities, or allowing people to systematically forbid access to restaurants, laundromats, etc. And although wealthy gay celebrities are the easiest to point out because they're celebrities, and therefore well known, there also are many, many well off, well paid non-celebrity members of the gay community. Like the people who attend the White Party, Circuit Queens in general, and the guy who wrote "The Cost of Being Gay" a couple of months ago in the Advocate (apparently $55 Gap jeans are beneath him as a gay man). And the obligatory gay man or couple who is always featured in Elle Decor, along with their recently redecorated mansion or swanky New York apartment. These are of course extreme examples. But in 1960, I'm pretty sure you could not have found any black journalist declaring that equivalent-to-the-time-period clothing was beneath him as a black man because it just cost too little. You also wouldn't find the Black equivalent to the portion of the middle class that also happens to be gay, and that shops at the Gap and Eddie Bauer (I'm actually referring to a specific person there) quite happily and with no strain on their pocket books.
8 months ago
in War Against Whining … A Revolution Now! on ETC: Everyday Thoughts Collected
1. Grateful to have 70-degree-weather in November.
2. Grateful to have not just one but now two beautiful nieces.
3. Grateful to have a weekend to myself.
4. Grateful that Marcus got voted off "Survivor" last night (Best. Episode. Ever!)
5. Grateful to be done with my internship at a local high school (though I'm a little sad too.)
6. Grateful to have the friends that I have.
7. Grateful that my ex still keeps in touch, and asks that I pray for him when times are tough.
8. Grateful that God is using me to challenge people's perceptions (via the blog and real life.)
9. Grateful for milk and chocolate-chip cookies.
10. Grateful to God, for so many different things, but most of all Grace.
2. Grateful to have not just one but now two beautiful nieces.
3. Grateful to have a weekend to myself.
4. Grateful that Marcus got voted off "Survivor" last night (Best. Episode. Ever!)
5. Grateful to be done with my internship at a local high school (though I'm a little sad too.)
6. Grateful to have the friends that I have.
7. Grateful that my ex still keeps in touch, and asks that I pray for him when times are tough.
8. Grateful that God is using me to challenge people's perceptions (via the blog and real life.)
9. Grateful for milk and chocolate-chip cookies.
10. Grateful to God, for so many different things, but most of all Grace.
1 reply
Randy
1. I can relate with empathy ::: doors open :::
2. I've got three :)
3. alone time is good I pray you have quality solitude.
5-6. Good friends great memories
7. ok
8. Is that true or your own perception? ::: grin :::
9. chocolate chip cookies awesome ... chocolate chip cookies and milk ... awesomer.
10. Amen.
2. I've got three :)
3. alone time is good I pray you have quality solitude.
5-6. Good friends great memories
7. ok
8. Is that true or your own perception? ::: grin :::
9. chocolate chip cookies awesome ... chocolate chip cookies and milk ... awesomer.
10. Amen.
8 months ago
in No Gloating Zone - A Weird Mix of Emotions on ETC: Everyday Thoughts Collected
The attorney general of California said that the approximate 18,000 same-sex marriages will remain valid. Their validity can be legally challenged, but I really hope Christians in California at least have the compassion not to challenge them now that Proposition 8 has passed.
2 replies
8 months ago
in Letter From A Christian in 2012 - Focus Action Letter on ETC: Everyday Thoughts Collected
Well, I really don't comment on things I agree about unless I have an additional point to make that I view to be worthwhile to a given discussion (and this goes for pretty much all blogs). That's probably why it looks like I'm out to highlight disagreements. I'm really not. I just don't see any reason to put down a "great post!" comment unless I have something to add or a question to ask.
It's hard for me to be friendly online. I usually stick to trying to be professional and plainspoken. I suppose this can sound a little cold and condescending, so I see Brady's point. It's simply not my intention, and I don't really know how to take a more conversational approach to this, though I'm sure it would be beneficial.
And yeah, Ellie, I think Randy and I do agree on most things (at least the essentials of the Christian faith, and even about what is and isn't godly sexuality). My disagreements with him are more about public policy or ideas about the current state of culture. Whatever personality or intellectual conflicts we might have are secondary to the fact that we're both brothers in Christ and are unified by our belief in Him.
It's hard for me to be friendly online. I usually stick to trying to be professional and plainspoken. I suppose this can sound a little cold and condescending, so I see Brady's point. It's simply not my intention, and I don't really know how to take a more conversational approach to this, though I'm sure it would be beneficial.
And yeah, Ellie, I think Randy and I do agree on most things (at least the essentials of the Christian faith, and even about what is and isn't godly sexuality). My disagreements with him are more about public policy or ideas about the current state of culture. Whatever personality or intellectual conflicts we might have are secondary to the fact that we're both brothers in Christ and are unified by our belief in Him.
1 reply
Randy
Agreed.
Whatever personality or intellectual conflicts we might have are secondary to the fact that we're both brothers in Christ and are unified by our belief in Him.
Agreed.
And for further clarification, I haven't even read their post so it doesn't register to me as a big deal. I have gotten two emails and your comment so ... I answered one email as a blogpost before this one but seriously ... it was done in my mind after that.
Also, moderator note ... if you want to make quotes look pretty :) you can do the html tags of blockquote /blockquote of course adding the < and the > on the front and back ends of those tags. It will use the native formatting to that blog. I figured since you know how to do the italics you might be able to pick up this as well. Not that you have too but thought you might find it helpful. It works on almost every blog I ever comment on.