Hooray, Hooray, Hooray!
 

Didja see ELF's latest $20M fire? Cool, huh?

(Let's not speak intemperately. We all have our pet assholes.)

Did Anyone Attend?
 

Sadly, I missed this. A democratic operative on the radio lamented that Californians could approve a recall with 51% of the vote (meaning that 49% of the voters wanted to keep Gray Davis), but that Larry Flynt could win the governorshp with 6% of the vote on the recall ballot. It was the best news I heard all day. I think Larry Flynt would make a far more entertaining governor than Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Mixed Messages
 

I'm sorry I misinterpreted you.

Not being Episcopal, I'm not sure whether they've ever had a situation where a bishop-elect was violating church tenets. If not, then it's a different situation.

I agree but, having been part of a bitter vote over the role of women in church leadership (I'm for it, just so you know), I understand the desperation they must have felt. And desperation makes even Christians more susceptible to sinful behavior.

I guess I take the position that nominating someone for church leadership whose lifestyle is defined as a sin by church tenets is per se unfair. If you disagree with church doctrine then tackle the issue head on or leave and find a denomination that is more in line with your beliefs, but don't do an end run around it. But my church background is in denominations founded by people who left or were kicked out of the state church of Sweden for flouting official positions so that influences my thoughts.

Hooray, Hooray, Hooray!
 

What's your point? You think I would support that? Of course not. Nor would I support animal rights activists blowing up a lab, nor antiabortionists killing doctors, nor gay rights advocates faking signatures to get an anti-gay law recalled. I may be rare in this, but I apply my views on this equally. I don't consider one group superior to another if it engages in things such as this, and lord knows burning something to make an environmental point is not only absurd, it could result in deaths of innocent people never mind the loss of property. Criminal, disgusting, really there are no words to express how I feel about things like that.

No matter what you are attempting to accomplish going directly against the very things you espouse, and behaving in a way that actively sullies (or risks harming innocent people or property) what you are trying to accomplish sucks, to put it plainly.

Edited to say sometimes I think I am one of the few people I know who left law school more naive then when I entered it, in terms of how I apply my philosophy of things to the world. Such is life. Hell, righteous indignation is fun.


On a more interesting subject I saw Tomb Raider 2, and in fact the water does get quite nippy in the beginning.

Mixed Messages
 

Happens to the best of us, we all have our pet issues and sometimes read them into things. I am enjoying our conversation, however, I think probably I've bored enough people and harping on gay issues gets tiresome even to me. I'd be happy to discuss it more off board with you though.

Reality TV Update & Spoilers
 

The winner may not have deserved the derision he received, but it was to be expected. His material falls into two categories (1) not funny, and (2) hack/derivative. Comics hate both with a passion. That's why Dave Mordahl was so well-liked by the other comics (and also why he lost to Dat Phan weeks ago.) Dave's stuff was original and off beat, but it's rare when that stuff gets mainstream success. Margaret Cho should sue Dat Phan for royalties.

Having said that, I still want a co-exec producer credit if any of my sitcom scenarios (Long Duc Dong 2K3 or Toshiro from Revenge of the Nerds 2003) are developed.

Hooray, Hooray, Hooray!
 

My point is that I am too used to people moving on to encompass conservative thought in their morality play ("Look at those intolerant people who aren't willing to let others choose their own course!") and so reacted too quickly when that wasn't what you said. Sorry. But, if you ever have that thought again, and think that it is validly targeted at right-wingers, think of that last post, and the Bilmore that you once knew, and cleanse your thoughts.

((Edited to delete a line that I decided wasn't fair.)

Hooray, Hooray, Hooray!
 

Oh no problem, this seems to be my day for confusing people. I'll file it for future use under B, for both Bilmore and Bullshit.

Darn you edited it and now my Bullshit line just seems mean. But I'm leaving it, because it made me laugh, of course insomnia does that.

Mixed Messages
 

Let me state at the outset that I am not an expert on Episcopalian ("E") doctrine. But I believe that the whole point of the recent nominating convention and the debate surrounding Bishop Robinson's confirmation has been that there is in fact NO consensus within the E church on these issues. One of the reasons that Es have been able to move forward in this area, unlike the Roman Catholic Church, is that there is no single head of the E church who interprets scripture and tells the larger body of congregants what they should believe on these issues. Rather, there is a meeting every ten years (the Anglican Conference), at which a group of delegates meet and debate these issues. As I understand it, even the decisions made at the Anglican Conference may not be "binding," as some Es consider them to be advisory in nature. Thus, as I understand it, the group that confirmed Bishop Robinson was free to do so without violating church doctrine.

Does that mean that there might be a schism? It is possible. But one was predicted before, in the 19th century, when there was a similar lack of consensus regarding the morality of owning slaves. No formal schism actually occured, though different factions of the E church took different positions on the issue.

As for whether the debate should have been about the larger issue, instead of this one man, it was, until David Lewis (writer of yesterday's e-mail) chose to smear Robinson by claiming that he lacked appropriate boundaries and had "harrassed" Lewis by touching him inappropriately (on the arm and back, in front of witnesses), rather than debate the merits.

Finally, would I feel as happy if they had elected an adulterer? No. But then, I don't equate adultery (a broken promise both to one's spouse and to god, if married in a church) with homosexuality.

Reality TV Update & Spoilers
 

MORE SPOILERS FOR LAST COMIC STANDING



Ah, say it ain't so. I have no idea what that he did in the house to be so reviled by the other comics, but the guy was simply the least funny, most annoying person in the group, based on the bits we saw on the show.

Runaway Slave
 

Originally posted by ias 39

Originally posted by bilmore

Don't laugh, it's a fine addition to slave's training regimen. Given his propensity for hooking up and his aversion to marriage, he could be slipped a mickey and awaken shackled to the altar.

http://www.sonkajarvi.fi/ylasavo/son...ElemFormat=gif

men & women & women
 

I am late here but I have one question.

1Isnt Austintacious a guy? (and if so, why is he asking?)


edited to remove a question that was answered

men & women & women
 

So happy you feel that way. Abbatrim, are you in?

Hooray, Hooray, Hooray!
 

This is why, for the life of me, I cannot understand how anyone can be Catholic in the twenty first century except for misogynists, homophobes, people afraid that death equals rotting in a hole in the ground and thats it, people who are oppressed by society, and utter morons.

This might explain why the catholic guy dumped me. Like I am gonna raise my kids in that tradition of hatred and exclusion?

Reality TV Update & Spoilers
 

SPOILERS






















While I missed one or two of the early episodes that set p the hate fest, it appears to me that people hated him for the same reason people hate the guy who starts outlining the first week of law school and does his reading every day. He fucking works so hard and the fact that he might be successful makes you feel threatened that you arent doing enough. Thats my theory and I am sticking with it. They wanted him gone to prove that workingso hard doesnt guarantee results. Like hwo we are so thrilled that these studying freaks get the Cs. It justifies our hedonistic lazy asses.

May I just applaud myself on how much better I was than whoever Lester's odds source is? I was so right on. Clearly I could be doing something much cooler based on my pure understanding of the American psyche and outstanding observatino skills. What do these bookmakers make anyway?

BB4- is there anyway Dana won't go? Its a shame bc I want that hideous bulldog freshman fifteen pig gonzo and she is the best way . I dont see how Dana can stay, but I hope she gets a spot on the jury. But man is she ugly.

Cupid= this show runs again tonight, right? Tuesdsay night is a clusterfuck of outstnading schlock. I have a huge crush on Laura and am bummed to be missing this. Lisa's total resemblance to Coureney Cox is a little offputting though and I cant figure out what is wrong with the face of the other chick. She just looks disgfigured.

BoyMeetsBoy- missed this for the most part. I still have a huge crush on Dan and am really hoping he is straight. I think his oscillating on the manfriend in NYC is my best hope, though his highlights tell me there is no hope. Does thies run again per chance?