tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post5579869429953285212..comments2024-03-21T04:02:46.799-07:00Comments on Little Catholic Bubble: Reminders about sufferingLeila@LittleCatholicBubblehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.comBlogger154125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-69488746524456887522012-11-13T07:39:32.057-07:002012-11-13T07:39:32.057-07:00Leila
Are there over a billion people in the world...Leila<br />Are there over a billion people in the world who do not believe in god?<br />And how many don't believe in heaven or hell?<br />So you saying where we end up for eternity should be in the front of our minds is an unfair statement. It is true for you, but not for all.<br />What saddens me most is that it makes the implication that the only reason one should be "moral" is so that they get to heaven.<br /><br />We disagree about marriage. <br />I don't believe marriage predates man. You do.<br />I don't believe that marriage binds men to their children and wives. You do.<br />I don't believe two persons of the same sex marrying redefines the word. You do.<br />I definitely do not think me wanting governmental recognition of my marriage is over stepping my bounds. You do.<br />Who is right? <br /><br />FYI on the use of the word normal. There is no such thing as normal. There are majorities, but that doesn't make them normal. We have a tendency to think that if a majority holds similiar traits then that is normal. Doesn't make it so.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-87476545111875843132012-11-13T07:10:27.285-07:002012-11-13T07:10:27.285-07:00Nubby
Thank you.
I too apologize for any offenses ...Nubby<br />Thank you.<br />I too apologize for any offenses toward others.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-10598758308196117672012-11-13T07:08:23.765-07:002012-11-13T07:08:23.765-07:00Manda,
I didn't meant to imply you thought I w...Manda,<br />I didn't meant to imply you thought I would not get in to heaven. I just wanted to let you know I will be there. :o)<br /><br />I personally do not think that churches need to marry anyone who asks. They have their rules, if you want to be married in a church you should have to follow their rules. To me it's that simple.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-9644963892246109132012-11-12T23:52:12.512-07:002012-11-12T23:52:12.512-07:00Johanne, those quote are great, but put them in th...Johanne, those quote are great, but put them in the context of everything else those men wrote. <br /><br />And Madison is right: When the government starts meddling in my religion and with my conscience, it (the government) ceases to be pure. <br /><br />As for the wall, it's been breached by the government. It needs to stop telling me to violate my religion, and it needs to stop forcing Catholics to submit to its will.<br /><br />Madison:<br />"Before any man can be considered as a member of Civil Society, he must be considered as a subject of the Governour of the Universe…"<br /><br />"We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We have staked the future of all of our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind for self-government; upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God."<br /><br />"The belief in God all powerful wise and good, is so essential to the moral order of the world and to the happiness of man, that arguments which enforce it cannot be drawn from too many sources nor adapted with too much solicitude to the different characters and capacities to be impressed with it."<br /><br />I am interested to know if any of the other folks at the hospital know that the US bishops are so worried about the HHS mandate that they are suing the federal government and that they organized over a week of prayers/adoration/fasting nationwide. <br /><br />If not, they really are out of touch, and I cannot understand it.<br /><br />Leila@LittleCatholicBubblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-35301451901352930332012-11-12T23:18:23.747-07:002012-11-12T23:18:23.747-07:00I will ask the other chaplains about it--or perhap...I will ask the other chaplains about it--or perhaps some of the Sisters in administration.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-16147940823014590822012-11-12T23:17:12.327-07:002012-11-12T23:17:12.327-07:00"Practical distinction between Religion and C..."Practical distinction between Religion and Civil Government is essential to the purity of both, and as guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States."<br />—James Madison<br /><br /><br />"I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should “make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” thus building a wall of separation between Church & State."<br />—Thomas Jefferson<br /><br />Religion & Government will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together"<br />—James MadisonAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-66300048940048055262012-11-12T23:10:24.675-07:002012-11-12T23:10:24.675-07:00The Chaplain is going to be very surprised when he...The Chaplain is going to be very surprised when he starts to witness the civil disobedience. <br /><br />http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/we-will-defy-obamas-birth-control-mandate-says-new-nebraska-bishop<br /><br />Honestly, I would direct the chaplain to the USCCB's website, where there is plenty of info on the HHS mandate and the Church's response (the bishops are suing the US government):<br /><br />http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/religious-liberty/hhs-mandate/hhs-mandate-articles-and-news-releases.cfm<br />Leila@LittleCatholicBubblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-49254211278681065452012-11-12T23:06:13.791-07:002012-11-12T23:06:13.791-07:00Johanne, I can only reply in shock that the chapla...Johanne, I can only reply in shock that the chaplain is <i>unbelievably ignorant</i>, to a degree that leaves me breathless. I have no words. Perhaps he should check in with his bishop, but then again, it depends on the diocese. Even though every last bishop has condemned the HHS mandate, some of the bishops are still quite "liberal" for lack of a better word. Do you mind my asking which diocese you are in?<br /><br />As for God not being part of politics. Have you been on tour of D.C.? Have you seen the monuments, the documents, down the to etched marble in the Capitol Rotunda that says, "In God We Trust"? Where are you getting the idea that God is not to be in a political platform or in the public square? It is a very, very new idea, not found in any historical America that I can see. God has always been everywhere in public life, for over two centuries now.<br /><br />"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." -- John Adams<br /><br /><i>s/he is less cumbersome than "he or she."</i><br /><br />Honestly, I find that worse. I bristle at it. It actually insults my intelligence that someone thinks I as a woman can't understand that "he" is the generic. Women are just not that stupid. We are really quite smart. Sorry, huge pet peeve of mine.Leila@LittleCatholicBubblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-43339720600422496412012-11-12T22:57:03.435-07:002012-11-12T22:57:03.435-07:00Leila
s/he is less cumbersome than "he or she...Leila<br />s/he is less cumbersome than "he or she."<br /><br />@Manda--does the concept of separation of church and state not mean anything to you? Do you see that it's not even appropriate for a political party to have "God" in their platform? I'm not saying we shouldn't want "godly" people in office but I don't think religion has any place in a party platform. And I know many many many religious people who voted for Obama!<br /><br />@Sharon--I guess I don't have the energy for a discussion now. Perhaps later. I find it almost impossible to discuss many issues here because our premises are very different. And on this blog it always comes down to "this is an objective truth because it came from God"--and even though I don't agree with that at all, there is no basis to continue a discussion. How can one disagree with someone who insists their view is objectively true and it came from God? Also, there is such deep, rampant,and entirely unfair misrepresentation of "liberals" on this blog and it really hurts my heart-- but I feel helpless to do anything about it. One of the reasons I stay on this blog (and others) is because I don't want to do that in return. I don't want to make gross generalization about people who disagree with me--I want to know what they actually believe and what they are actually like.<br /><br />And as a general point of interest: I volunteer in a large Catholic hospital. Today I asked the head chaplain how the HHS mandate was going to affect the hospital. He said "the what?" I explained what the HHS mandate was. He had never heard of it. Then I said that I'd heard from many Catholics that the mandate will result in Catholic institutions (like hospitals) closing down. He said "it's amazing how those rumors get spread."<br /><br />What to make of that? As I've said, from the outside looking in the discussion of who is really Catholic and who isn't; and the discussion of the HHS mandate being a catastrophic disaster for Catholics while the Catholic chaplain at this large hospital has never heard of it. It is really confusing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-33728049390339880942012-11-12T22:06:44.759-07:002012-11-12T22:06:44.759-07:00No, no worries! It was a worthy conversation to ha...No, no worries! It was a worthy conversation to have. I am glad we did. I am also thrilled that you got your implant and I would love to hear more about that if you have a chance! I can only imagine what that is like! I went to public high school with a girl (beautiful redhead, cheerleader, smart) who was profoundly deaf. She was a lip reader, and I know she struggled in may ways to fit in. I caught up with her on facebook two decades later and found out that she has had a cochlear implant, too! Amazing!<br /><br />Leila@LittleCatholicBubblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-29405461467339457382012-11-12T21:58:56.448-07:002012-11-12T21:58:56.448-07:00Oh Leila, I really wasn't trying to attack you...Oh Leila, I really wasn't trying to attack you. I was just trying to explain. Like I said, it is an emotional topic. I know you are a nice person if I didn't think you were a nice person I never would've said a word.<br /><br />I do understand your exasperation with the fact the "acceptable" word always changes. It is very frustrating and it can be exhausting to keep up with. I just wanted to explain there was a reason why it changes and a reason why it matters to some people. <br /><br />Yes, typical will go out of style someday too. The language changes with the progression of the idea. <br /><br />Just so you know, I have a cochlear implant too. In fact I got it in April this year after spending over a year arguing with our insurance company. I am so sorry your friend had such a hard time but I'm glad she prevailed. She has given her son the world, she really has. it is amazing technology. Last I heard, they are working to moving the technology to the eyes so they can help the blind.<br /><br />So yes, I know about the war. The Deaf Community is not my biggest fan. For the old guard (those who attacked your friends) I am everything they hate. Luckily they are the old guard and that attitude is dying. For the most part the DC are good folks. They are just a bit protective and take themselves a little too seriously. <br /><br />But I am so sorry if you feel like I attacked you because I really didn't mean it that way. It was just meant to be an explanation. I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings. <br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-74806354507354270842012-11-12T21:30:26.221-07:002012-11-12T21:30:26.221-07:00StarFireKK, I appreciate it, I really do. And yes,...StarFireKK, I appreciate it, I really do. And yes, I know there is a whole conversation about things going on in the disabled culture (I honestly thought we really aren't supposed to use the word "disabled", either?). My dear friends have a deaf son who uses hearing aids (cochlear implant, now, I believe), and they have had to pay <i>many tens of thousands of dollars out of pocket</i> for hearing correction for their son, because the dominant deaf community is so opposed to the label or understanding that deafness is a "defect" or "disorder" to be corrected that they have convinced the insurance/medical community that any hearing devices (even cures!) are "elective" because to cover treatment and restore hearing would somehow imply that there is something wrong with being deaf!I am sure you are familiar with the "war" on this subject. I cannot tell you how much consternation and struggle this has caused my friends (the mother can hardly talk about it), and all they wanted was to help their son hear (he is doing very well now, in middle school, and can hear). It's seems sooooooo political to me, sadly. I don't get it. I have had horrible eyesight since I was in fourth grade, and no one would say that bad eyesight was wonderful, or that it should not be corrected if it could be.<br /><br />Again, I fear I have opened a whole new can of worms, but I really have watched my friends suffer in so many ways because they, also, are not politically correct, and they just want to raise their son in the way they believe is best, without being penalized (financially, it's over the top) and vilified (the things that have been said to my friends because they wanted their son to hear are beyond the pale).<br /><br />Anyway, I guess I am trying to understand, but is it so terrible if I don't completely buy in? Is it okay if I refrain from using words like "normal" and switch to "typical", but think that it's sort of futile in the end, since that won't be acceptable soon, either? <br /><br />You may just have to forgive me on this one, for not fully understanding. But I promise, I do not use words that are deemed "offensive" if I know that they will hurt someone. Even if I think sometimes it's silly and too much PC, I am still (believe it or not) a nice person who wants people to feel comfortable around me. It may not seem that way on this blog sometimes (I have to be blunt dealing with a host of folks on a host of topics), but in real life, I do speak with a level of political correctness.<br /><br />Heck, as an English major it tears at every fiber of my being to write "he or she" instead of just the generic "he" (which everyone used to understand as meaning "he or she"!), but I do it so as not to come off as "sexist". Well, I don't always do it, but depending on my audience, I do.<br /><br />Again, thanks for explaining it, truly. It's your experience, it's your understanding, and I won't pretend to know what it's like.Leila@LittleCatholicBubblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-2550696754473516622012-11-12T20:54:55.933-07:002012-11-12T20:54:55.933-07:00That's why there is a reaction against the wor...<br />That's why there is a reaction against the word normal. Because it reflects the idea disable children to should strive to be normal and blend in as much as possible. It is a silly attitude because the disable children know they aren't normal. They know they are working harder and struggling. They also know that the struggle is not being acknowledged. That turns out two types of people. <br /><br />Those like me who say "Why don't you go walk off a cliff?"(we tend to develop MASSIVE authority issues) and others who never, ever, ever want to rock the boat. Neither attitude is especially healthy or well-adjusted. So to combat that they try to stop referring to kids as normal and abnormal. I know you don't think it does, but it really does help.<br /><br />So when you were told not to use normal and Nubby to not use midget- it wasn't meant as a character attack on either of you. It was meant to educate you on what those words mean and the viewpoints behind them.<br /><br />It isn't about a line and it isn't about being sensitive. Both you and Nubby walked into a much bigger conversation than you realized and the people involved were trying to give you some guidance. So it is a bit funny you are complaining you don't know where the line is or what is acceptable....because you both took it as a personal attack when you were told. <br /><br />Open conversations about disabilities are relatively new. For hundred of years, if we were lucky if we were locked up and forgotten about. If we were unlucky we were murdered. I think that is one of the reason we speak under the table. I think the other is dealing with a disability is a emotional minefield and sometimes it helps to be able to speak indirectly about the topic. <br /><br />I really wouldn't have said anything but if you are going to advocate for disable children you should be aware there is a larger conversation going on. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-38768495798717840862012-11-12T20:54:02.262-07:002012-11-12T20:54:02.262-07:00Leila,
I promised myself I would stay out of thi...Leila, <br /><br />I promised myself I would stay out of this but here I go again. I guess I don't learn very well. <br /><br />What you have to understand is when you start talking about the language and the labels surrounding the disable it is a bit like walking into a funeral. Everyone is emotional, not everyone is going to be rational and unless you know the players very well there is lot of subtext you are going to miss. <br /><br />There is a culture and etiquette involved that you aren't going to know and you just have to learn by going through. Everyone understands 90% of the use of the words isn't intended to offend...but that's not really what they care about.<br /><br />When you start talking about labels- you start talking about self-identity, culture-identity, societal reactions to the disable and the role of the disable in society. It gets very complicated. You have to learn what the terms mean and you have to learn how and when to use them. <br /><br />When I was in high school I referred to myself as hearing impaired. I was quickly told by the lady who was talking to me "Oh sweetie, no one is impaired. No one is impaired. It is hard of hearing." Now did I really make a mistake when I referred to myself? No not really. But the two terms reflect different attitudes. Impaired- implies I need to be fixed, hard of hearing- means I have trouble hearing, but I am not broken. There is subtext involved. The two terms indicate a progression of an idea and attitude in our society. At the time, I thought the correction was very silly but now I understand why she did it. She wasn't saying I was insulting myself- she was voicing and advocating for a change.<br /><br />Why is "normal" becoming out of vogue? That's also a shift in attitudes and views about the disable. <br /><br />When I was in school the American with Disabilities act didn't really come into play until High School. It was passed many years before but no one really know what to do with it. So when I was young I grew up in the "old" system. I was rewarded for blending in.<br /><br />When I was in school it was preferable for me to behave as much like the other children as I could. That meant I had to struggle to hear my teacher, lip-reading, scanning the text as fast as I could and watching my classmates for any non-verbal clues they might dropped. So long as I preformed average or better this was the desirable way to teach me. (Did you know a number of medical studies show the brain of a person with hearing problems or who lip-reads works five times harder than a person with normal hearing during the same conversation? That's a lot of brain power to focus on something other than learning the material.)<br /> <br />Now I could have used an FM system or another aid that would allowed the teacher's voice to go into my hearing aid. That would've allowed me to relax and focus on learning rather than keeping up. But it also would've highlight the fact I was different. At the time- that was not desirable so I wasn't given the option. I preformed "too well" to use the assistant living device.<br /><br />Con'tAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-84070952790105516862012-11-12T15:28:42.913-07:002012-11-12T15:28:42.913-07:00Bill Bannon....I agree with your bringing up the c...Bill Bannon....I agree with your bringing up the cost of the Bush War as an example of something totally unjust...but, did you notice? Bush was not even mentioned during this election cycle (by the Republicans). Romney is not Bush.maryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05613163382453563548noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-11568956401199479062012-11-12T14:58:23.658-07:002012-11-12T14:58:23.658-07:00Dennis, it's hard to express the extent to whi...Dennis, it's hard to express the extent to which some of us are truly bewildered by the changes in what words are or are not acceptable. It's very hard to constantly keep it straight. <br /><br />For example… I do a lot of advocacy for special needs orphans (including those with dwarfism -- I have been advocating for Oliver for almost a year now, and have been joined in my efforts by an LP family whom I love dearly). During my advocacy for all the orphans, I once used the words 'cognitively normal' when describing a child with CP. I was gently told, privately, that some folks are offended by the word "normal" and I should use "typical" instead. I was bewildered, but of course I complied. Now, I have no doubt that when a few years pass, the word "typical" will also be seen as offensive, and we will have to move to another word (not sure which words will be left?). Bottom line, it is bewildering. It seems like we are all walking on minefields trying not to offend, but never knowing when we will unknowingly do so. <br /><br />My solution would be to tell everyone not to be so sensitive and to give folks the benefit of the doubt. I understand that not everyone agrees with my solution, and that's fine. <br /><br />I think Nubby's response with "giant" was truly a sign of bewilderment more than a snarky remark. We truly don't know where to step sometimes.<br /><br />And some of the frustration at PC in general is that Americans are not longer offended by sin, but we have an incredibly heightened sense of offense at words that were never meant to harm and that were said with no malice. <br /><br />To give a big example, we can speak the truth of Christianity today, and where it once was entirely respected, it's now seen as "hate speech". But yet actual sin, even mortal sin, has been embraced and is being celebrated openly.<br /><br />Some days I feel like Alice down a rabbit hole, and maybe that is where Nubby was coming from, too. Again, I could be wrong, but I think bewilderment is the key here.<br /><br />Leila@LittleCatholicBubblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-14187936423919181422012-11-12T14:42:51.853-07:002012-11-12T14:42:51.853-07:00"Marriage is a pre-political institution spri..."Marriage is a pre-political institution springing from human nature itself."<br /><br />Marriage cannot just be redefined one day because two men want their romance to be sanctioned by the state. The state has no vested interest in men's romance, or lesbians, either. Marriage is the building block of society because of its procreative nature. It's because of children. Marriage binds men to their families, to their wives and to the children they create. <br /><br />Whatever you want to say about gay unions, their sexual "union" (and yes, sex is key to marriage) cannot ever produce a child. It is not supposed to. It is not meant to. No children come from the sexual "union" of man and man or woman and woman. It's biologically not possible. Homosexual unions are not the foundation of any society.<br /><br />Marriage is the foundation of society, because it begets families. Families are the primal, they are what societies are built on. <br /><br />We mess with the foundations of society to our own peril, and mostly to the peril of the children, who have the right to be born to their married mother and father.<br /><br />Say what you will about gay "unions", they are fundamentally different from a union of a man and a woman. Fundamentally. In their essence. <br /><br />You are free to do what you want in your romantic life, Alan. But when you want to redefine words and institutions to make them something they have never been and never could be, then that's a step too far. Marriage is not ours to redefine at will.Leila@LittleCatholicBubblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-76966483970715426902012-11-12T14:32:05.865-07:002012-11-12T14:32:05.865-07:00That was in response to Alan's comment: "...That was in response to Alan's comment: "As for heaven or hell I really don't give it much thought."Leila@LittleCatholicBubblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-8053579231050269382012-11-12T14:31:27.949-07:002012-11-12T14:31:27.949-07:00Where we will spend eternity should be at the fore...Where we will spend eternity should be at the forefront of all our minds. This life is a blink of an eye and will soon be a memory. Eternity will never end. I want to live in the heart of the Trinity, where every one of us was made to live. God asks all of us for our "yes". He loves us infinitely (so deeply that His only Beloved Son willingly went to a torturous death on a Cross that we might be saved), and that love demands a response back -- a response of total self-giving love. Leila@LittleCatholicBubblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-42068083891575328262012-11-12T13:34:43.068-07:002012-11-12T13:34:43.068-07:00Dennis, I wasn't mocking. Have I ever been ve...Dennis, I wasn't mocking. Have I ever been verbally attacked, you bet. Have I ever had jokes thrown at me, who hasn't? I'm not minimizing anyone's experience.<br /><br />Had I said "small minded", would that have been okay? And the giant comment was applicable in my mind, because I'm trying to discern where or when the line is drawn; how and why. That's all.<br /><br />In any case, allow me this opportunity to once again offer humble apologies. I'm sorry for being an ass.<br /><br />Dennis, Starfire, alan, whomever else, apologies. <br />Nubbyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15972118374098863290noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-8888948990811810082012-11-12T13:14:16.863-07:002012-11-12T13:14:16.863-07:00Alan, I don't look at you as disordered, but w...Alan, I don't look at you as disordered, but while we are on the subject I look at myself as disordered, and by extension of that I believe the entire human race is disordered. If we were not, we would be perfect. Nobody is perfect, Alan. Sometimes when I am upset I will go downstairs and pull a carton of ice cream from the freezer and I will just start eating out of it by the spoonful, and then I'll open the pantry and start scouring the items for something to console me with before I realize I am not even hungry. This is disordered. <br /><br />I don't want to have a say in your life, Alan. (I do believe that I am supposed to love you, and the definition of love as I understand it is to desire your ultimate good---so for me to desire your ultimate good, that is, the good of your soul, I would have to secretly oppose your lifestyle choices and wish for you to change them. But I will love you regardless and allow your free will. You will do what you choose. My kids don't always do what I want, and they will face consequences, but I love them regardless and desire their ultimate good.) <br /><br />My opposition to gay marriage as law has to do with the fact that I do not want the state telling my Church that She must grant sacraments of marriage to those She views as not being permitted to marry in the first place. Do you see? Once gay marriage is the law of the land, it becomes hate speech to oppose it. I fear sanctions and taxes, and persecutions of my Church and Her members. That is all. If I knew that the civil unions would always be done without anyone deciding they wanted the Church to recognize it as legitimate and that they would never pursue their cause for the "greater good of homosexuals everywhere" and hurt my Church in the process I would not openly oppose it.<br /><br />I simply asked if you believed in Heaven or an afterlife because I was curious about your response to God. I would never pretend to know if you were going to Heaven or Hell. That is not for me to decide.Mandahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01347616073655350336noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-16287358522209954872012-11-12T13:04:42.928-07:002012-11-12T13:04:42.928-07:00You know, Leila, when I'm at a loss for words,...You know, Leila, when I'm at a loss for words, because I had no idea something I had said hurt an entire group of people, the first thing that has never come to mind, is, make a tongue-in-cheek joke to minimize the persons feelings whom I upset.<br /><br />Her "gracious" apology, became in my mind, moot, when she minimized the feelings of the dwarfism community by making an outlandish comparison, mocking the importance and validty of my attempt to educate her. But I have no desire to argue intent here, Leila. I was just trying to educate. Michellehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17154610944382899942noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-36172932225423302162012-11-12T12:57:41.586-07:002012-11-12T12:57:41.586-07:00Manda
Thank you for your response. Know that I am ...Manda<br />Thank you for your response. Know that I am not offended in the least by your beliefs about homosexuality, nor do I think they are intended as hateful. I do understand your belief, and although I believe it to be wrong I know where it comes from.<br />I am gay and I think there is nothing wrong with that. I am not disordered, my mind is not disordered, my love is not disordered. I view it as the same as yours. I know you disagree.<br /><br />What I dislike is that you (and not you personally, but you as in the those who disagree with me) seem to think you should have some say in that part of my life. Like you don't want me violating your religous rights I don't want others violating what is my right (or priviledge or what ever word you chose to use) to marry whom I want because it doesn't fit with your idea of marriage or the world. We hurt no one. We affect no one. I hope you understand that.<br /><br />As for heaven or hell I really don't give it much thought. If heaven exists I have no doubt in my mind I will get there a lot quicker than some of the so called religious. <br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-85314720454033608572012-11-12T12:54:16.769-07:002012-11-12T12:54:16.769-07:00Thank you. Thank you. Michellehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17154610944382899942noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-48914823050412257392012-11-12T12:49:53.352-07:002012-11-12T12:49:53.352-07:00Nubby, I did not respond to your comment regarding...Nubby, I did not respond to your comment regarding using the term "giant", as I felt it was antagonistic and rhetorical. Comparing being “somewhat tall” and asking if you should find offense at McDonalds for using the slogan “super-size” to my daughters marginalized disability, is at best, petty. <br /><br />You are free to use language as you see fit, but to continually insinuate that using the term midget in any context, is not insulting and is only "my feelings" being hurt, is incorrect and does not recognize the tens of thousands of people with dwarfism, who have been marginalized as a minority for far too long.<br /><br />There are a multitude of other terms you could have chosen to describe someone of limited intelligence. You chose to use a phrase that is not only archaic, but insults a group of people, who have tried, for centuries, to be treated as equal. I highly doubt you have felt marginalized or have not been offered a job because of your condition as a “somewhat tall” person, but my daughter has. I’m pretty sure no one has shouted slurs from cars as they drove by, or has taken a photo of you, while laughing, and uploaded it to a hate website because of your “somewhat tall” condition, but my daughter has. However, I don’t want to assume, so please, correct me if I’m wrong. <br /><br />Using the term mental midget, is hurtful and degrading to an entire group of individuals. I am merely educating and sharing this information. The decision to continually use the term, is completely up to you.<br />Michellehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17154610944382899942noreply@blogger.com