View Single Post
  #35  
Old 05-14-2014, 01:39 PM
MissBrattified's Avatar
MissBrattified MissBrattified is offline
Administrator


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,829
Re: Harold Hoffman attacks Jim Kilgore

Quote:
Originally Posted by Charnock View Post
This is a defense.
No, it's related to the fact that I always look at both sides of an issue. Two wrongs never make a right. The response to wrong has to be done in a way that maintains integrity and stays above the fray.

Quote:
It's also an attack on the person who posted this thread, accompanied by your patented and condescending eye roll.
It was the coffee cup that was dubbed condescending.

Quote:
HH's comments were not "mistakes" in the sense that he accidentally, and without thought, slipped.
I didn't say they were accidental. Sometimes people say things on purpose that they regret later because they don't think through the consequences. The fact that he parsed it doesn't mean he didn't regret it later--but obviously that's a hypothetical and I have no way of knowing if he regrets anything.

Quote:
He stated that he knew those comments were being taped, and didn't care.

That's something far more insidious than "poor taste."
Then why did you call it "poor taste" at the very least? Why is your summation fine but my almost exact same summation bad?

Quote:
This is what you do, Bratti. You immediately attack the poster rather than the content and in such a way as to make yourself appear above the conversation.

It's an old schtick.
Actually, I don't. I do call a spade a spade and if you respond to wrong with wrong, I will call you out on it. You and others don't like that because you want it to be one sided. You want to rake people over the coals for their attitudes, lack of self-control, meanness, vindictiveness, etc., WHILE you are being mean, vindictive and having an attitude. I have a lot of respect for people who address issues respectfully. If I had the time (which I don't), I could go back and find multiple threads where I have participated in discussing serious issues with church leadership, organizations, etc., without attacking the poster for bringing it up. I don't have a problem with issues being raised and I don't have a problem with this thread being posted. Never have. If I did, I wouldn't participate in this forum, and I wouldn't comment on similar threads on Facebook. I'm not scared of issues.

I don't feel respect for people who address issues without integrity and self-control, e.g., I won't give your complaints any weight. If someone screams at me in anger and I scream right back, I'm just as wrong. If someone cusses me and I cuss back at them, I'm just as guilty. Etc. If you're going to call out people on their mess, you'd better be squeaky clean, or you're no better than them. IMO, the reason you feel comfortable being disrespectful and rude is because you have devalued certain groups of people (UPCers/conservative Apostolics) and given yourself permission to do so. Giving yourself permission to be ugly and rude because you think negatively about someone's values or belief system doesn't mean it's okay in God's eyes.
__________________
"God, send me anywhere, only go with me. Lay any burden on me, only sustain me. And sever any tie in my heart except the tie that binds my heart to Yours."
--David Livingstone


"To see no being, not God’s or any, but you also go thither,
To see no possession but you may possess it—enjoying all without labor or purchase—
abstracting the feast, yet not abstracting one particle of it;…."

--Walt Whitman, Leaves of Grass, Song of the Open Road

Last edited by MissBrattified; 05-14-2014 at 04:35 PM.
Reply With Quote