1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Finally, Christians are beginning to see the problems ...

Discussion in 'Anything goes' started by dog428, Jul 31, 2006.

  1. alleyallen

    alleyallen Guest

    And I never claimed he was calling me petty. Go back and read it. He was referencing the pastor, claiming the pastor was implying homosexuality or abortion are "petty sexual issues," when that's clearly not what the pastor was saying.
  2. Shifty Squid

    Shifty Squid Member

    Now did alley misunderstand what I was saying? This thread is becoming a major clusterfuck.

    I was agreeing with you, alley. That's why I addressed it to JackS, as in ...

    "JackS - alley never called you petty ..."

    JackS was the one who seemed to think you called him petty, alley. I didn't understand where he got that, nor where he got much of anything he was saying in this thread.

    Mildly ironic. In lamenting all the misconceptions in this thread, I actually created a post that was misunderstood just as badly as everything else, probably by my own fault. My apologies, alley, if it was unclear who I was addressing it to.
  3. alleyallen

    alleyallen Guest

    Nope squidly ... my bad. I went back and read it again. READ IT CLEARLY STUPID <hitting self in head>
  4. JR

    JR Well-Known Member

    Well, no you can't argue that because you're talking about a ridiculous hypothetical. But nice try.

    No one is "pro abortion" but some people are "pro-choice".

    And if the position that "abortion is murder" makes you sleep more soundly, go with it. Just don't foist it on the rest of us.
  5. JR

    JR Well-Known Member

  6. No, but Christians who focus on sexual issues -- about which JC said, you know, nothing -- and not on social justice, on which he said a lot, can be called "petty" according to the Gosepls, I'd say.
  7. JackS

    JackS Member

    In my book, abortion is a social justice issue, not a sexual issue.

    And regarding the "chronic miscomprehension" above, I never thought Alley called me petty.  But if Boyd specified the sexual issues the writer listed, then he (Boyd) did.  Even according to Alley's hair splitting translation.

    I don't know how the heck it's so clear to people here that Boyd didn't specify all those issues as petty.  There's no way you can tell that from the story.
  8. Ace

    Ace Well-Known Member

    Yet you are assuming from the story that he did. And there's the rub.
  9. alleyallen

    alleyallen Guest

    Hmm ... this is a journalism board, and most of us have at one time or another conducted an interview over the phone. I'm satisfied this guy wasn't calling the problems petty. You're not. So give the guy a call and do a story. Otherwise, what's the point of arguing it.

    And I agreed with your central point ... people can leave the church for any reason they want. I'm just not so hip on them doing so for social reasons as opposed to religious reasons. And the two are very different, I'm afraid to say.
  10. JackS

    JackS Member

    Yeah, I guess I'm giving the writer the benefit of the doubt when maybe I shouldn't be.
  11. Ace

    Ace Well-Known Member

    If I were the editor, I definitely would have asked the writer about lumping all those things together.
  12. JackS

    JackS Member

    Just today Chuck Colson attacked the exact same passage I did. I'm wondering if this will prompt a clarification from Boyd or he will be satisfied with how the writer expressed his position.

Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page