Posts by Andrew Paul Wood
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I think that's what the charm of it is. A natural meandering on tangents among amazingly intelligent and worldly people. I don't imagine Russell feels too slighted.
-
Earlier even. "modern warfare" was largely invented by Oliver Comwell and his roundheads.
-
Too much forensic porn like CSI and Bones on telly I'd say.
-
Or, at the very least, why not ask the obvious question: "why did God personally intervene to save just this one guy, while leaving his faultless classmates to their fates?"
And the traditional response is that it is impossible for a human being to know the divine plan, and is required to have faith instead. The kid's response was typical of the Evangelical style - as opposed to the more traditional "be humble and give thanks". One shouldn't tar all Christians with the same brush (lapsed Catholic agnostic myself)
-
One does, I suspect, have a choice as to whether one grieves for Mark Sainsbury in prime time or not though.
-
I'm personally not particularly grossed out by that - it's the tendency to use this horrible tragedy as an evangelical platform that gets my hackles up - even if it isn't intentional on their part. However, I consider it a universal right to discuss my personal reaction in a public forum without accusations of bothering the god-baiters.
-
And did the media really have to drag this out into a week-long fetish. If it were any more morbid it would practically be victorian.
-
Nausiating though it is, the Elim parents are doctrinally correct, with the book of Job as the model. Christianity recognises a personal God, ergo every individual Christian is significant in the universe, ego it's all about them.
-
I find that if I go straight to an institution's marketing/PR department rather than through the curators, most of the red tape regarding picture copyright evaporates rather quickly.
It's a lot more of a nightmare if you are trying to extract anything from a family trust - they tend to be extremely money driven (the M_____'s spring to mind). -
I'm not calling him a radical, I am calling him to task (and not for the first time) for very bizzare statements given in the national media without much, if any, context - and him not being held accountable despite being the head of a major department at a major university. There has been no debate - which I find a little ironic given Canterbury and the whole Joel Hayward incident.
And yes Michael Laws froths at the mouth, and quite often the other orriface as well.
I particularly blanche when the media is so lazy that in most stories they rarely canvas more than one prominent Maori opinion as if all Maori were part of some vast gestalt Borg-like collective that all thought the same way.
I like strong perspectives as much as the next person, but I reserve the right to call them out on it when I think there is Lepetomainesque ventriloquism going on.