A couple of years ago when I started the Friday Night Free For All, it was a Friday night and I was bored. Nothing much was happening online and I was looking for conversation. So I posted an, does anyone feel like chatting? comment and Murray responded and the rest is history.
Over the years, I've seen the FNFFA develop into a chat for regulars. Every once in a while I'd put out the call for new commenters, and occasionally someone I'd never seen commenting before would pop in. This was good.
I had been hoping that the chat could attract people from the other side of the political divide as well, but it seemed the ambiance was just too "right-wing" to make the others feel comfortable. But that seems to be changing now and this too is good.
When it comes down to it, the FNFFA is where you leave your politics and weapons at the door and engage in a Friday night chat with others whom you may not like normally or may attack on sight (via comments) if given half a chance.
Think of it like that Christmas on the front line during WWI where the Germans and the British downed weapons and celebrated Christmas together for (was it a day or two?) before resuming blowing each other up afterwards.
If you don't like someone that is present at the Friday Night Free For All, you have 3 options.
1. Don't enter the chat.
2. Chat, but don't engage with the person you don't like (requires self-control).
3. Chat and engage in a friendly manner (requires self-control and charity).
If you can't abide by the rules set out, you will first be warned and then your comments will be deleted. I don't care who you are and if I like you or not. I will be completely impartial when it comes to ensuring the FNFFA stays friendly, even if it's through gritted teeth.
That is all.
Over the years, I've seen the FNFFA develop into a chat for regulars. Every once in a while I'd put out the call for new commenters, and occasionally someone I'd never seen commenting before would pop in. This was good.
I had been hoping that the chat could attract people from the other side of the political divide as well, but it seemed the ambiance was just too "right-wing" to make the others feel comfortable. But that seems to be changing now and this too is good.
When it comes down to it, the FNFFA is where you leave your politics and weapons at the door and engage in a Friday night chat with others whom you may not like normally or may attack on sight (via comments) if given half a chance.
Think of it like that Christmas on the front line during WWI where the Germans and the British downed weapons and celebrated Christmas together for (was it a day or two?) before resuming blowing each other up afterwards.
If you don't like someone that is present at the Friday Night Free For All, you have 3 options.
1. Don't enter the chat.
2. Chat, but don't engage with the person you don't like (requires self-control).
3. Chat and engage in a friendly manner (requires self-control and charity).
If you can't abide by the rules set out, you will first be warned and then your comments will be deleted. I don't care who you are and if I like you or not. I will be completely impartial when it comes to ensuring the FNFFA stays friendly, even if it's through gritted teeth.
That is all.
Well, I pulled my head in. (also through gritted teeth) and it was much harder to do than I expected.
ReplyDeletePerhaps the days of civil discourse between left and right really are over?
But at least good manners may win out in FFFFA.
Hi Lucyna, hi KG. If it's gonna be a hassle then I'll stop turning up on Friday's. I do actually like talking with you folk without the baggage but if it really is that hard to bear me I'm happy to disappear, I may have mistaken polite charity for some kind of real friendliness and if I have I'm sorry. Oh and KG, you may (to your horror I'm sure) find out our views on things non-political are not that far apart. Anyway, it's your space Lucyna, and if you don't want me here then I'm happy not to turn up. You can email me at mickyporton[]hotmail.com to let me know if that's the case (I'd appreciate being told off-blog as it's a little less humiliating).
ReplyDeleteDear Lucyna,
ReplyDeleteI am glad you have posted this regrading the heated Friday night free for all . I take this opportunity to offer my sincere apologies for my offensive rhetoric .
Irritatingly factors that lead to my offending is another matter all together. I will refrain from such future profanity on your blog .
Kind regards
Peter Burns
d4j
Robinson: "I may have mistaken polite charity for some kind of real friendliness and if I have I'm sorry.."
ReplyDeleteRobinson, good manners and restraint aren't "charity".
I wasn't being hypocritical either--although I regard the ideology of the left as pure evil I was perfectly happy to engage in a conversation about old cars and was enjoying it as well.
OK? ;-)
The really irritating thing about all this is, I'm sure we could sit around a table with a few wines and beers and have a great social argument, even if it changed nobody's mind.
ReplyDeleteThis medium makes that much, much harder to do.
Robinson, you are welcome to keep coming. This would have happened sooner or later - you're just part of the test case. If you're up for it!
ReplyDeleteKG, I agree about the sitting around the table. I have friends that are pure Green - I get on fine with them, but we can have heated discussions.
The blog leaves out vocal tone and body language, through which we do most of our communicating. It's very difficult to put all that into words in a way that is understood.
Peter, thanks!
Thanks Lucyna, I figure if anyone is robust enough to be a guinea pig it's me! And yes KG I think we probably could have a goodhearted row over a few beers but in the meantime I'll just stick to the occasional fnffa.
ReplyDeleteI figure there are many other threads and blogs to fight the good fight, but there are very few "neutral territory" places in the NZ blogosphere, such as the intent behind the FNFFA, where we can just kick back and have a chat.
ReplyDeleteMaybe it will work, maybe not. But I like the idea of giving it a go.
I don't see the need for it on any thread.
ReplyDeleteI shut down one today after accusations of paedophilia appeared - nothing to do with the topic at hand just meaningless ad hominum.
Robinson blog threads that only permit one point of view would be boring and a waste of time. Keep coming back - be prepared to have your ideas challenged and to challenge the ideas of others - that is the whole point surely.
the personal stuff is a pain in the ass and ruins good debates on these threads.
Andrei, I agree. I have generally found it too hard to police as where do you draw the line?
ReplyDeleteThough, from time to time I have deleted comments that have gone just too far (and that's on my internal barometer, so I can't really give a concrete description of what too far is). I don't know if people see them or not - I don't think I even give warnings now.
Andrei, thank you for shutting this mornings thread down, as I am not a paedophile .
ReplyDeleteI have been called that by so many different people on the Internet is it about time I thought about unplugging the computer and taking it to the tip . I'll let the vipers carry on biting below the belt .
Nobody would dare call me a paedophile if they knew me in real life . Once again thank you .
I noticed that thread Andrei. It is a shame, because the post deserved more conversation, but in the end, received very little.
ReplyDeleteI suspect that casual readers may get quite confused when they see some-one react quite strongly to relatively mild comments, not realizing that some of these conversations span many different posts, across several blogs.
Sorry all, but I cannot agree with this. I see that many here think this is an issue of merely being civil on a special occasion to those on the opposite side of the political fence. Lucyna likens it to Christmas on the front line. Its not the same at all.
ReplyDeleteThe soldiers who participated in such cease fires were far different people to the kind of political opponent we are fighting today. They had a sense of honour. Each side fought each other according to a common code. They showed each other respect as soldiers. There's really no comparison to the kind of honourable conduct that occurred during those Christmases on the front line, and the vicious hate driven war that is being waged on Conservatives in New Zealand today by the amoral totalitarian left.
There's two points to be made here. One relates to the conduct of activists such as the person using the pseudonym Robinson, and the other relates to the political objectives of NZ's hard left.
In relation to the second point, what the left want is to exterminate all other points of view from the political landscape. That is the objective they are working towards.
Its one they've been working on for some time, and they have succeeded in NZ (perhaps because of its relatively isolated geography), much better than they ever thought they would. The ideas and values that Conservatives hold dear have been attacked so successfully, they're virtually non existent today, or exist in such watered down format they're barely recognisable. Christians, once highly influential in our society have been so successfully marginalised they could quite easily be labeled an endangered species. Generally speaking, their creatures to be scorned and vilified.
Why has this happened and how has it happened? What was the successful strategy that the left used to remove Conservatives and Christian Conservatives from the political equation? There's many a reason for the left's success, but a significant factor has been the use of political correctness, that methodology where certain ideas and speech are considered unacceptable. They've actually made it a general perception amongst the populace that any ideas associated with the right are evil. Many people in NZ can only use the phrase "right wing" in a pejorative sense. The end game is the complete extermination of right wing thinkers and right wing ideas from the political landscape.
That's how they did it, but there's one more factor. The real reason for the success of their strategy. They did it because you allowed them to do it. They bluffed you. You went along with their strategy. You played the part exactly the way they wanted you to. You acquiesced. You prostrated yourselves. You shamefully slunk away. You kept quiet. You allowed yourselves to be dominated. You let them win.
By "them" of course, I mean people with the same political ideas as Robinson. Here's where we get to the primary issue. Robinson and his ilk are not honourable soldiers fighting to a common code with the right. They are cowardly dishonourable vermin who will do and say anything to make the political battlefield barren of any force but their own. You want a world war two comparison Lucyna, try this. would the veterans from the Burma railroad want to make merry with their prison guards? would the Jews who survived Belsen want to shake the hand of the monsters who sent their wives and children to the gas chambers? Hang on, Robinson has never done anything like this I hear you remark.
That's true of course, but that's not the issue. I'm using an extreme case to magnify the point. In spite of what he professes here, Robinson has no honour. He has no morals. He has no decency. He is a hate and envy driven psychopath who wants to take away your right to protest. He wants to take away the fruits of your labour. He wants to confiscate your property. He wants to take your children from your care. He wants to deprive them of an education. He wants to pervert the democratic system (that the soldiers you refer to Lucyna fought and died to preserve) so that eventually, there's only ever one party to vote for. He wants to subject you to a one world socialist government. Then, he turns up on your chat session on Friday night and professes to be a good old boy who desires your friendship. ..and like the lame browbeaten force you have become after decades of intimidation, you meekly accept this evil charlatan into your midst.
So in the end, the river keeps flowing in the same direction. Robinson and his hate driven totalitarians keep winning, and you Lucyna keep losing. Robinson smirks and lies and cheats his way around the internet and elsewhere in the political sphere, working hard at eliminating the ideas you hold dear, and you continue to acquiesce to the stinking deceitful and cowardly force he represents.
Not me. I want change. I'm going to make that damn river flow uphill. I'm going to do it because I believe it can be done. With your help or with out it. I will do it. ...and as part of that intent, I'll never share the point of view that one should shake hands and accept these totalitarians as friends when they suggest I should. I want to confront them. They must be named for the evil force they are. They must be publicly shamed. They must be called what they are. We must retake the ground we have lost. I want to drag the Conservative forces back from the margins and into the mainstream again. It won't happen as long as you Lucyna, and other Conservatives, continue to view such people as Robinson as worthy of benevolence and charity.
So have your little Friday night get together with your friend Robinson. I won't be there. Just don't dare complain to me about the state of Conservative politics in NZ. You're only getting what you've begged for.
What redbaiter said.
ReplyDeleteI have stopped participating of late because your new pet leftie is participating and pretending to play nice. This left wing nutjob has stalked me all over the blogs and has thrown the most vile and disgusting comments at me personally. Plus he is mocking your blog on others he visits while posting on the fnfff.
I see where you are coming from Redbaiter. I think you make one mistake in your assessment however.
ReplyDeleteJust because we display a certain degree of Christian charity, doesn't mean we are not fighting.
I think you are wrong to believe we are "begging" for this. There may be many conservatives too busy raising their families and doing their jobs to notice, but you are not fairly describing us bloggers here at NZ Conservative.
Just because we choose to throw the doors of the church open to all, doesn't mean we are not going to fight hard for our rights - rights that I agree, are stripped away as governments get bigger and the left get leftier.
Why not consider this as "We will fight them, but we will not become like them"?
And whilst you may have a good understanding of the "enemy", I have to figure on being able to argue our position and exchange ideas, in the hope we can effect peaceful change.
Specifically, regarding Robinson - I haven't read his blog resume in full, so I'll have to reserve judgment.
"Just because we display a certain degree of Christian charity, doesn't mean we are not fighting."
ReplyDeleteYou might be doing what *you* consider to be "fighting". The reality is you're losing. You've been losing for decades. You're still losing. Because you are almost totally cowed by the left. There's no way, if you were truly fighting, you'd be extending any civility to scum like Robinson. That stinking lowlife bastard, if he were in his place, and you were possessed of the nerve to make the judgement that is necessary, would never have the damn gall to dare show up here. Bill is right. He is publically scorning you, and you're kissing his arse.
"in the hope we can effect peaceful change."
ReplyDeleteThat's the strategy that's serving the people of Tibet so well right? Bring on the Dalai Lama. He'll show us how to beat the bastards back.
The end game is the complete extermination of right wing thinkers and right wing ideas from the political landscape.
ReplyDeleteButummm....that's what we want to do to them too! I do anyway.
I have no idea about Robinson's behaviour elsewhere. Will go look.
ReplyDeleteI'd point out, RedB that the attitude you have towards the Left is the policy at Crusader Rabbit--no lefty is given an inch or even a hearing there. Over at CR we're at war and make no bones about it.
Don't for one minute mistake civility on my part when visiting somebody else's blog and abiding by their rules for acquiescence to the left.
I've been fighting this war for too long and on too many fronts to even consider being anything but "the smiler with the knife beneath the cloak".
Personally, I think if you have to advertise a set of rules for the people who lack even the slightest respect for your blog, the concept's knackered. Here's another well Redbaiter's poisoned.
ReplyDeleteAnd no, I'm not interested in a flame war, RB - your opinion on this comment lacks all interest for me.
Rules psycho , haha , you really irk me , do rules work for politicians ?
ReplyDeleteOne man alone can be pretty dumb sometimes , but for real bona fide stupidity, there ain't nothing that can beat the Liarbore Party teamwork . As an ex soldier , I believe blood will be spilled before KKKlarKKK is removed from office and I suggest many people should harden up .War is inevitable as the corruption has gone too far .
"And no, I'm not interested in a flame war, RB - your opinion on this comment lacks all interest for me."
ReplyDeleteYeah that's right Milt, you just can't help the misrepresentation can you? Its a "flame war". Its "hate speech". You're "not interested", even though you started a thread on the issue at No Minister. If my opinion was of "no interest", you wouldn't even bother with a comment on it.
Milt, you have no self respect at all you pathetic shallow self serving liar. I dunno why the rest of the people on this site and No Minister put up with your artifice, false allegations and deceit. You're just another duplicitous leftist, and on here and No Minister, just another Trojan horse.
Redbaiter, the battle is not external - it's internal. Yes, the left has won because it's been allowed to win, but the way to lose absolutely is to become like the enemy you despise.
ReplyDeleteI am fully aware of the evil human beings are capable of. Because my Grandfather fought in the 1920-21 Polish-Soviet war, during WW2 his entire family were considered "enemies of communism" and shipped off to the gulags in Siberia. Half the family were deliberately starved to death in Khazakstan on their way out during the Polish "amnesty". My Grandfather and 2 uncles went onto fight in WW2 under the banner of Polish army in Exile successfully took Monte Cassino, before being sold out to the Soviets by the allies. Hence my mother got to grow up in Communist Poland, while my Dad and Grandfather and uncles had to come here because the gulags awaited had they returned to Poland.
The history is very unpleasant. I have made it a priority to research it and understand just exactly what happened there.
I have come to understand that the enemy is not external - it is internal. The battle is within. Evil only wins because you let and then you have to physically fight it - by that point you have already lost.
I suggest to you that the only person you have power over is yourself. If you master yourself, you will become infinitely more influential that you are now.
You mention the decline of Christianity. However, the world was won for Christ not by arguments but by sanctity: "What you are speaks so loud I can hardly hear what you say."
That applies to everyone, not just to Robinson, but to you as well. How you act speaks far louder than words.
"Evil only wins because you let and then you have to physically fight it - by that point you have already lost."
ReplyDeleteSo what's your view on the Normandy landings, June 6th 1944?
You need to be more explicit as to what type of answer you are looking for.
ReplyDeleteRedbaiter
ReplyDeleteYou are right in that this is a battle. It is a war between ideologies and philosophies. I however think you are wrong in your strategy.
To win this war you need to convince the centre and soft-left that your arguments are correct. Your hate filled abusive diatribes do little to convince that you are anything but an extremist with no constructive role to play.
"Your hate filled abusive diatribes do little to convince that you are anything but an extremist with no constructive role to play."
ReplyDeleteThanks for that obviously objective opinion. I'll take it with the grain of salt it's worth.
Hey all, interesting thread this (RB - I hadn't realised I was so evil!) I've gotta admit I've been quite agressive in other threads but have generally held by the rule of not personalising the debate until someone starts in on me. Then it's open slather.
ReplyDeleteHere I try to suck it up and stay respectful. Oh and I've no interest in "taking your children away from your care" or any other such hyperbolic nonsense. My politics are not even that hard-left which is why I can appreciate social-conservative views, what I don't appreciate is bullying - I've called lefties to account for it (Barnsley, if he is honest, will attest to that) and I've goaded and attacked righties for it.
If you look at other threads I've commented on you will find this to be the case. That said I'm sick of having to justify my views (I find that it encourages narcissism and adds little to any debate). So I'll stop. I'm not gonna turn up on Friday night as I have a social engagement so that at least should offer Redbaiter some respite.
Actually, now I come to think of it RB, I could post my intentions regarding attending fnffa earlier in the week so you could either comment safe in the knowledge I won't be there or make the decision to avoid the site if I am. I think that would make things easier for everyone - especially as I only turn up every few weeks. Is this a satisfactory compromise for you, RB?
I fear some of you may be a little psychotic.
ReplyDeleteA quick question - how many of you are actually directly involved in politics? I ask because you seem willing to slit each others throats over it, yet I wonder how many of you can actually directly impact what it is you seem so passionate about.
How many of you write to your MP, make submissions on bills being put before parliament etc? Or do you simply choose your side then thrash it out in the blogging world and feel you've done your bit to defend your side?
I'm no saint, but the political blogging fraternity in NZ becomes more and more amusing all the time with its left vs right warfare.
"write to an MP" = 400 reply letters, "submissions on being put parliament " - countless . The best one was when I asked Sue Bradford a question and she walked out of the room . Or was it when Tim Barnett was pretending to hear submissions laughed at me and Muriel Newman was visibly shaken after I delivered my submission regarding the Care of Children Bill ?? All wasted exercises in futility !!
ReplyDeleteRobinsod , you are a double standard gutter filth insult to the internet. You back stab me on the sewer sub standard and that other insane kiwikiwiblogsnog, but won't allow my comments . Cowards are always gutless wimps !! And, servant please don't insult my intelligence as a paper trail from a stupid - retard government could easily wallpaper a three bedroom house and the garage .
Good the NZ Conservative is getting noticed eh ? I mean too say - what you doing here otherwise .
I say whip it ; whip it good !!
"I mean too say - what you doing here otherwise ."
ReplyDeleteI'm here because Lucyna comments on mine. Thus I think it respectful to read her contributions (which I enjoy).
And I would never seek to insult your intelligence, that would only lead you to direct one of your filthy comments at me... and I have no interest in dealing with such a thing. :)
No, Servant no "filthy comments " matey just the truth . You asked if anybody blogging on here was political . I answered yes and I did not suggest anything offensive towards you . I am standing for a political party in next years election and I must lift my game to lure the voter as the revival of the Holy Spirit wants in at the Beehive . I hope the good man upstairs fast tracks this process , however I'm fully versed with the rather frustrating cliche' "In his time ." I don't make a habit of bagging other Christians , however I have yet learn holding my tongue when confronted by evil snakes. I have a way with words that can send the hardest nut running away in tears , just ask anybody on the receiving end . Even I feel for them , but what the hell , no friends in the spiritual wars .
ReplyDeleteCheers dude - Jesus rocks
:)
ReplyDeleteWhich party are you standing for?
Republic of New Zealand Party .
ReplyDelete5 ways forward
1. A constitution ; equal rights in law
2.Direct Democracy ;government as it should be .
3. Family restored ;for mum dad & the kids .
4. Centrenomics ;working together better
5. Greenpak ; sustaining our growth .
This vision is no less than we deserve so arguing it will be a piece of cake .
"I have a way with words that can send the hardest nut running away in tears , just ask anybody on the receiving end . Even I feel for them , but what the hell , no friends in the spiritual wars ."
ReplyDeleteWhat an uplifting vision of Christianity you portray, D4J...
Well, yes, it is mean of me to keep prodding you about it, but here's the problem: you consistently blather on about Jesus without seeming to have the slightest idea what the bloke was actually on about. The pedant in me finds it difficult to ignore.
ReplyDeleteLook psycho milt I have had more than enough of you , look you are the biggest coward on the internet .
ReplyDeleteI am in the phone book - give a me a ring as you need help you weirdo creep . Failing that go get help you sleaze pus ball .
You are the biggest back stabbing coward on the Internet . What a disgrace to all men .
What? You mean, it's annoying to have some idiot constantly trolling a comments thread you're interested in with personal abuse? Any lightbulbs switching on for you yet?
ReplyDeleteDear psycho milt - the lightbulb is on full beam .The EFB makes things happen fast now . Please listen to News Talk ZB tomorrow morning to hear how Fathers alienated from their children feel at Christmas time.
ReplyDeletePersonal abuse , please milt you attacked me from day one at Sir Humps. We go back a fair way and tune in as you might be pleasantly surprised ?
Nothing like desperation to inspire inspiration, but you need a heart to understand that . By the way milt what is your real psycho name ? Cheers big ears - Peter Burns
Now Dad, if I'd wanted people who Google my name to discover I waste inordinate amounts of time talking shite on the internet, I wouldn't have troubled myself to come up with a pseudonym.
ReplyDeleteI've presumed far too much on Zen and Lucyna's goodwill as it is - how about we make a deal? There'll be nothing more from me ever about your religion, I think I've made my point. In return, how about you don't troll my posts?
Nice try Walter Milt Psych , however to enter into a agreeable contract with a totally anonymous creep on the internet is bit like George Bush laughing at Miss Klark about a free trade deal . Wonder where Peter is going at Christmas time ?
ReplyDeleteNo deal coward no name . Can you play tiddlywinks , your turn , come on you socialist suckhole slimeball (SSS).
End of comment for me and your blog as I will cc this to your blog snog . Sorry team for the extended commentary .
Apologies, NZ Conservative bloggers - shouldn't have pursued this here. Will avoid feeding your trolls in future.
ReplyDeleteHi Lucyna, just discovered your site. Gosh, what a lovely advertisement you and your chums are for right-wing christianity (funny, my priest calls that an "oxy-moron" whaever that is) - do tell, where can I sign up for the National Party and the Catholic church?
ReplyDeleteHi Pat. Did your Priest also tell you not to be hasty with your judgments? I'd be interested to hear why you think Lucyna is acting inappropriately.
ReplyDeleteHi Zen. Yes, he did. That's why I thought long and carefully before deciding that the loving and compassionate expressions of pure christian love expressed by your supporters above are just the sort of thing that Jesus himself would approve of. Just like the hitting little children, cutting the benefits of the poorest and giving more money to the rich that the National Party works so hard for. Oh yes, do let me join, please.
ReplyDeleteGod bless,
Pat
Well Pat, we obviously have all sorts of supporters; a mix of sinners and saints. Are just the "bad ones" ours are they? I know I'm not perfect, and it helps me realise that it is easy to lapse. Maybe what you are seeing here is another aspect of Christian Love - the capacity to forgive.
ReplyDeleteYour characterization of complex issues is a little biased I think.
A parent might believe in physical discipline, but if they are loving and patient, may find that there is little need for it. It can be hard for such a parent to understand why they are lumped in with genuine cases of excessive violence and abuse. It can be hard to understand why a smack is the same as being hit by a plank of wood, and yet, this seems to be the sophistication of the position some people take. I find it counter-productive in such an important topic.
Cutting benefits is another simplistic attack if you do not grant your "enemy" may have a little more compassion than you credit. For me, I believe a certain amount of welfare is necessary, but I think we are all called upon to help more directly than many do; help our extended families, help our neighbours, help in our community. Welfare (in some cases) can be like an excuse for people not to try, and an excuse for those that have, not to care. Why are you so against debating these limits and seeing how we could increase direct participation?
As for the National Party stuff - I have never voted for them, and I'm pretty sure Lucyna never has either. You can expect us to be fairly critical of National should they win the next election.
"Oh yes, do let me join"
Your comments are welcome. The sarcasm isn't necessary.
Peace be with you.
Zen
Pat, it's completely unreasonable to blame bloggers for loose units among their commenters (among whom I include me, to my embarrassment, on this thread). I "support" this site through reading and commenting, while hardly ever agreeing with the views expressed on it. That's because it's written by intelligent and eloquent people with a relatively unusual viewpoint and a willingness to debate that viewpoint without rancour. If you look past the occasional scrap in a comments thread between people who really are old enough to know better, you'll note the blog authors aren't ever short of compassion.
ReplyDeleteAh, "complex issues". Sorry Zen, that'll be where I went wrong, wasn't too good at school. Missed the bits in the gospels and Mother Theresa's book about wood versus hand whacking, cutting benefits to make them try harder and make others give more etc.
ReplyDeleteTell you what, I'm on foodbank next week, will give your theory a whirl and cut the parcels in half (drive wasn't as good this year, guess which church gives us the least zen?)
Sarcasm? Sorry, (left at 14) is that like calling someone simple or biased zen?
Yours in compassion,
Pat
You have misunderstood "my theory" Pat. I wouldn't be cutting food parcels in half. In fact, doing food parcels to help out people is a great thing, and it's exactly this kind of charity that is so important to counter the impersonal action of the government, which may not provide enough support to people in real need. But you aren't really serious, are you? You seem very angry.
ReplyDeleteI'm guessing the answer you want to your question is "The Catholic Church gives you the least of all Churches that happen to give you something."
Does that reinforce your opinion then?
So who is "us" anyway?
Hope the food bank goes well for you.
Merry Christmas.
Yes zen, completely misunderstood you, sorry zen, we're actually peas in a pod, you and I.
ReplyDeleteI surely agree that "the government may not supply enough to people in real need" and look forward to seeing you pressure them (and the tory party,even though you dont vote for them) into raising benefits and taking the load of us geriatric volunteers.
Another misunderstanding though - in two comments you've called me simple, biased, not serious and angry. No worries zen, I'm a tough old christian rooster and forgave you straight away, but a bit strange on a site like this eh what? You're not a christian then?
Just wondering.
Yours in fraternal communion,
Pat
Hi Pat. Well, where do I start?
ReplyDeleteI have not called you simple or biased; I said that "Your characterization of complex issues is a little biased I think."
When you imply that I am a child beater, and that I am only interested in cutting benefits (and I read in the sarcastic tone of your email with comments like "let me join" after denigrating myself, Lucyna and other commenters) and "giving more money to the rich" (which I have never advocated) then I think it a fair assessment that you are presenting your point of view in an argumentative way, and a simplistic way. That does not mean I think you are simple.
If I have taken the wrong impression, that seems no different than you taking the wrong impression and accusing me of bad behaviour. Except you are saying I am not acting like a Christian and you are.
Mote, plank, eye and all that stuff Pat.
Secondly, bad news Pat. We are in agreement here: "the government may not supply enough to people in real need" but not necessarily here: and look forward to seeing you pressure them ... into raising benefits and taking the load of us geriatric volunteers.
I am not sure a blanket raising of benefits would solve the problem Pat. Maybe it would be more efficient to help by paying volunteers? Maybe it would be more efficient to ensure free fruit for school children? Maybe it would be more effective to exempt senior citizens from rates? Maybe it would be more efficient to raise salaries for nursing staff by 30%? Maybe it would be more efficient to fund community programs that increased contact with the elderly, and helped them get out more?
I'm not going to try to answer this question in one go, but to be honest with you, I don't think just handing over benefit money to all and sundry is going to make the difference. So I probably will not be campaigning for that.
Finally, to answer your question, no I'm not actually a Christian in the true definition of the word, and therefore also not a Catholic. However, I am researching this and studying the Catholic faith at the moment.
I see many positive things in the Catholic faith, and it is both inspirational and aspirational to strive to live in accordance with its/her tenets.
So I guess we'll see.
Fair enough zen, no hard feelings, thought you were a sunday saint tory as we call them. All the best with the catechism, but just as a suggestion, do the practical work too eh? The nurses and fruit stuff is good, but believe me it's dough ray me most of our people need -you'll soon find this out zen! That's why I hate the tories - whoops not hate (ten hail Maries!) just disagree with their view as you say, wait'll you get grown men and kids crying in front of you, you'll get a bit brassed off too)
ReplyDeleteOr you're pretty clued up, we've got a joker that does WINZ stuff for them - does more good than 10 foodbanks.
I reckon Michael Joseph Savage is the best christian I've ever seen, he sat in this very room in 1938 zen, and I reckon Helen's trying to be just as good but is up against the big money and the papers just like he was. Rosary every night for you Helen, and prayer to saint Jude for Mr Key!
Dominus vobiscum zen,
Pat
Thanks for that comment Pat.
ReplyDeleteEt cum spiritu tuo
Zen.
Pat, I'm guessing from your comments that you think Socialism and Christianity are compatible?
ReplyDeleteIf so, you might want to read a previous post of mine regarding the incompatibility of the two.