Just a few Insensitive, Politically Incorrect, Offensive Questions
First some caveats (for you Clemson people, caveat is a three-syllable word that means warning, caution, pre-emptive explanation). I just want to toss out a few provocative questions that are admittedly insensitive and politically incorrect. I’m not a hater. I just like to make people think. Even when it ticks them/you off. And a request: If you leave a comment, please don’t take yourself too seriously.
- Why do celebrities with ungodly lives and messages and “products” have funerals with sermons and songs that talk about God?
- If an enigmatic trans-ethnicized pedophile COULDN’T sing or dance, would his funeral still draw thousands – including Hollywood glitterati?
- If electing conservatives is the key to “saving America” why (after 8 years of Bush) is abortion still legal? And gay marriage still gaining traction in some states? And Al Franken a senator?
- If we were missionaries in a foreign ungodly nation, would our first thought be to fix their politics? Or advance God’s kingdom?
- Are hard-core right-wingers the real misogynists? Really? Google media coverage of Sarah Palin and get back to me on that.
- Why is Mark Sanford an unforgivable adulterous lying pig … and Steve McNair just a flawed football hero? And Lance Armstrong … John McCain … Jeff Gordon … etc. (unfortunately etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. .etc .etc. …)
- Why isn’t there such a word as “adulteraphobe?”
- And polygaphobe for those who raided the Texas polygamist compound a little over a year ago?
- Are those who would deny a guy the right to marry his llama bestialaphobes?
- If the new amorality is that any consenting adult should be able to do whatever he/she/it wants with whomever as long as it doesn’t victimize whoever else, why can’t someone marry everybody at the family reunion? Incestaphobic?
- Is it OK for some people to oppose the death penalty, but rejoice that the Gaffney serial killer got fatally ventilated by police?
- Did PETA really oppose the President swatting a fly? Seriously?
- Have you ever noticed that quite a few open-minded, tolerant friends tend to be very intolerant of contrary opinions?
Just sayin’
Unfortunately, all of this, in my view, is due to convenience. We don’t want anyone or anything to make us feel bad about something we do or how we feel so we justify it in some way. Guess what? It aint gonna work that way in the end. The Bible says what it says and I firmly believe that will be the measuring stick. We are either followers or not. Ok, done and I just stepped from the podium!
“Did PETA really oppose the President swatting a fly? Seriously?” — Yes. There wouldn’t have been such an uproar if he didn’t show such joy at killing a creature. Kill a creature + show joy = PETA outraged.
“Is it OK for some people to oppose the death penalty, but rejoice that the Gaffney serial killer got fatally ventilated by police?” — No. Just like it’s odd that a pro-lifer is for the death penalty, and those “darn liberal” pro-choicers are against the death penalty. That’s the stereotype anyway.
“If electing conservatives is the key to “saving America” why (after 8 years of Bush) is abortion still legal? And gay marriage still gaining traction in some states? And Al Franken a senator?” —- That’s an important question. Sure, one can say that Bush did alot to curb abortion. But it still exists. It didn’t disappear for 8 years to only return January 20th.
And mention supreme court judges. Many have said that abortion is not against the Constitution. It’s not. It doesn’t define what a life is, when life begins, etc., so abortion is not against it. Neither is the banning of abortion against it, and they’ve said that too. If a state wishes to allow it, or ban it, they can, under the Constitution.
And it’s kinda hard to stop gay marriage when one of their own informed us all to not tap our feet in the men’s room.
And it’s also the whole Family Values thing. In recent history, because it’s now popular to bring up Clinton again. But you have Sanford’s affair at the limelight. The gay senator in Montana (i think). You can’t preach “abstinance only” sex education when your highschool teenager is having a kid out of wedlock (Palin).
“Why do celebrities with ungodly lives and messages and “products” have funerals with sermons and songs that talk about God?” — Well, we don’t really know if they repented in their last days, now do we?
So Billy Mays had a divorce. Guess that means my father isn’t deserving of a funeral with sermons about God.
And…
“If an enigmatic trans-ethnicized pedophile COULDN’T sing or dance, would his funeral still draw thousands – including Hollywood glitterati?” ——– I’ll spell it for you. A C Q U I T T E D
Oh and to add.
“And a request: If you leave a comment, please don’t take yourself too seriously.”
How can we do that though? From your own blog, the Death of the Icons…
“Tragically, he will also be remembered as the freak who paid $20,000,000 to buy his way out of conviction for child molestation.”
It already shows your biased. Regardless of the fact that he was acquitted, you bring up the other fact that he’ll be remembered for this also. Yes, he will be, sadly. But you also use the word “freak”. What warrants the use of that word to describe that man? You say it’s not based in hate, yet you resort to name-calling.
So then, how can we not act too seriously? Do you not take the blog posts seriously?
You can’t have it both ways. You may think you can, but a blog only works if there’s two things, the blogger, and the reader. Without either, there’s no blog, there’s just a guy posting thoughts online, or a bunch of people not looking at a website.
So either you take yourself seriously when you call people “freaks”, or you don’t. And if you don’t, then what else on this blog do you not take seriously? Or is that left to our interpretation?
Well, well, well. Where to begin? My post was written tongue-in-cheek (for the most part). And that’s why I was trying to avert a “comment war” by suggesting that we not take ourselves too seriously. I actually said that Jacko would be remembered by some as a freak. I suspect that even those who knew and loved him most would understand that label. But those – and some others – are fair questions, Nick. Here are some others:
* Ever heard a member of PETA get outraged about abortion?
* Is it really legit to judge Palin but not Jackson?
* Is it easier to spell A-C-Q-U-I-T-T-E-D or O-J?
I honestly don’t hate anybody. I wish I hated being a smart aleck. It would keep me out of trouble. Thanks for being man enough to call me out when you disagree. And Go Sox!