12 Baptist Convention May Come To Cincinnati
I would not trust this group to commit to anything. I would want an ironclad contract with a huge cancellation fee. If this pans out, it is a valley size crack in the boycott.
Thursday, April 24, 2003
Local Police Chief Arrested On Sex Charges
Two questions come to mind:
1. How stupid does a cop have to be to try something like trying to meet a 15-year-old girl for sex? You might think he has heard of the numerous local cases of police officers pretending to be teenaged girls online. I wonder how well he was at solving crimes, if he is dense enough to try and pull off one of more idiotic crimes to try and commit.
2. How does a 26-year-old police officer rise to the rank of chief? Is he the only police officer? Or is Elmwood Place the size of Mayberry?
AP Version, WCPO version
Two questions come to mind:
1. How stupid does a cop have to be to try something like trying to meet a 15-year-old girl for sex? You might think he has heard of the numerous local cases of police officers pretending to be teenaged girls online. I wonder how well he was at solving crimes, if he is dense enough to try and pull off one of more idiotic crimes to try and commit.
2. How does a 26-year-old police officer rise to the rank of chief? Is he the only police officer? Or is Elmwood Place the size of Mayberry?
AP Version, WCPO version
Heberle School and Lead Paint
The Heberle students moved to new site all because of one child's blood level. Is that an over reaction? Could it be any better timed? Less than two weeks from now the voters will be deciding on a bond issue to upgrade and build new schools. I will happily play the role of conspiracy theorist, but no one can deny that the timing could not have been better.
The Heberle students moved to new site all because of one child's blood level. Is that an over reaction? Could it be any better timed? Less than two weeks from now the voters will be deciding on a bond issue to upgrade and build new schools. I will happily play the role of conspiracy theorist, but no one can deny that the timing could not have been better.
Wednesday, April 23, 2003
Cincinnati Post: Museum looting: Coalition failed
I have not seen anyone attacking the Post for not blindly supporting the War Plan that was supposed to have worked without a flaw. Where is Cunningham's comedy act? Where is Darryl Park's heartless drivel? Where is the outrage at the FOX News engineer who allegedly stole Iraqi paintings, all be they bad ones from Saddam's son's palace. I could only help but think of the Simpson's Episode called "The Curse of the Flying Hellfish". I wonder who was part of the tontine? Geraldo, Hannity, & Ollie?
I have not seen anyone attacking the Post for not blindly supporting the War Plan that was supposed to have worked without a flaw. Where is Cunningham's comedy act? Where is Darryl Park's heartless drivel? Where is the outrage at the FOX News engineer who allegedly stole Iraqi paintings, all be they bad ones from Saddam's son's palace. I could only help but think of the Simpson's Episode called "The Curse of the Flying Hellfish". I wonder who was part of the tontine? Geraldo, Hannity, & Ollie?
CITY BEAT has a series of boycott related articles this week in what can only be described as a boycott themed edition. I will try and have some comments on Kathy Wilson's column, John Fox's Editorial, and the Trifecta's Cover Story later this week. I am torn though on the meaning of the cover photo. I hope you catch its play on recent events. It is very good picture and the symbolism is excellent. I guess much like the Iraq War, the good guys and bad guys are only clear to those who need to have clear sides. I hope that is what they meant, and they are not suggesting the city should be "liberated" via the boycott, via force.
BRONSON: Church ducks gay marriage
Why is Peter Bronson afraid of gay marriage? How will two men or two women getting married hurt Peter? It contradicts his religion, that much we know. Peter can be bigoted towards gays, that is his right. What he can't do is use the government to do it. Why do Peter and his fellow theocrats want to prevent gay marriage? I am repeating myself, but I can't find a logical reason for anyone to care who gets married. When Mr. Bronson sarcastically writes "And Moses cameth down from the mountaintop with the 10 Suggestions ...'' I guess I have to just sit here and laugh. If Peter eats Brats or Metts or most hotdogs I wonder how he rationalizes this? Is not eating pork a suggestion? If it is, then I guess the ban on homosexuality is merely a suggestion. I hope Peter "Mr. consistency" Bronson will be supporting the Anti-Pork Products Act and call for the jailing of the Rib’s King.
Why is Peter Bronson afraid of gay marriage? How will two men or two women getting married hurt Peter? It contradicts his religion, that much we know. Peter can be bigoted towards gays, that is his right. What he can't do is use the government to do it. Why do Peter and his fellow theocrats want to prevent gay marriage? I am repeating myself, but I can't find a logical reason for anyone to care who gets married. When Mr. Bronson sarcastically writes "And Moses cameth down from the mountaintop with the 10 Suggestions ...'' I guess I have to just sit here and laugh. If Peter eats Brats or Metts or most hotdogs I wonder how he rationalizes this? Is not eating pork a suggestion? If it is, then I guess the ban on homosexuality is merely a suggestion. I hope Peter "Mr. consistency" Bronson will be supporting the Anti-Pork Products Act and call for the jailing of the Rib’s King.
Tuesday, April 22, 2003
Morally Relative Conservatives
Sen. Rick Santorum has been bitching about liberal moral relativism. He does not understand what moral relativism means. What it means is that one believes each individual determines his or her own morals. They do not rely on others to decide what is right and wrong. The individual then lives up to their morals on their own terms. Conservatives like Santorum think moral relativism means that those who don't do what their religion commands can't possibly act on their own accord, without the fear of “hell” to keep them in line. Furthermore they think that without this fear the individual changes their morals to fit each situation, meaning killing one man today is bad, but tomorrow it may be good. That is of course bullshit. I have my own morals. I think I keep to my morals far better than most so called “Christians,” yet I have no religion. I do not need fear of “hell” to keep me in line. My fear of disappointing my family and friends, coupled with the penal code keep me in line.
Santorum in the AP interview condemned homosexuality, and specifically homosexual sex. He does this presumably because his religion says it is a "sin." Santorum then is practicing the moral relativism he condemns. I say this assuming that Santorum does not follow every law written in the bible, for instance
These are but a few "laws" from the bible. Why are these not followed? I would bet Santorum eats pork, collects loans more than 7 years old, supports our laws which outlaw Kingly rule, does not kill adulterers, and collects interest on any loans he makes. He however has selectively chosen homosexuality as something he will be against, but not these other "laws." It appears that following the word of "God" is a relative term to conservatives like Mr. Santorum. Some religious laws are just out of date I guess, or not profitable enough. I hope Phil Heimlich, Peter Bronson, Tom Brinkman, and the CCV take note.
Paul McDorman's letter in today's Enquirer seemed to paint him in the same boat as Mr. Santorum on a certain level. Atheists and agnostics don't need your religion or anyone's to be "moral."
Sen. Rick Santorum has been bitching about liberal moral relativism. He does not understand what moral relativism means. What it means is that one believes each individual determines his or her own morals. They do not rely on others to decide what is right and wrong. The individual then lives up to their morals on their own terms. Conservatives like Santorum think moral relativism means that those who don't do what their religion commands can't possibly act on their own accord, without the fear of “hell” to keep them in line. Furthermore they think that without this fear the individual changes their morals to fit each situation, meaning killing one man today is bad, but tomorrow it may be good. That is of course bullshit. I have my own morals. I think I keep to my morals far better than most so called “Christians,” yet I have no religion. I do not need fear of “hell” to keep me in line. My fear of disappointing my family and friends, coupled with the penal code keep me in line.
Santorum in the AP interview condemned homosexuality, and specifically homosexual sex. He does this presumably because his religion says it is a "sin." Santorum then is practicing the moral relativism he condemns. I say this assuming that Santorum does not follow every law written in the bible, for instance
- No eating pork: Deuteronomy 14:8
- At the end of every seven years every creditor shall cancel loans made:
Deuteronomy 15:1-2 - Set up a King to rule over you that the Lord your God chooses: Deuteronomy
17:14-15 - Death penalty for Adultery: Deuteronomy 22:22
- Only foreigners can be charged interest:
Deuteronomy 23:19-20
These are but a few "laws" from the bible. Why are these not followed? I would bet Santorum eats pork, collects loans more than 7 years old, supports our laws which outlaw Kingly rule, does not kill adulterers, and collects interest on any loans he makes. He however has selectively chosen homosexuality as something he will be against, but not these other "laws." It appears that following the word of "God" is a relative term to conservatives like Mr. Santorum. Some religious laws are just out of date I guess, or not profitable enough. I hope Phil Heimlich, Peter Bronson, Tom Brinkman, and the CCV take note.
Paul McDorman's letter in today's Enquirer seemed to paint him in the same boat as Mr. Santorum on a certain level. Atheists and agnostics don't need your religion or anyone's to be "moral."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)