I am against f-locking on principle...

...but look what happens. I make a complaint about the unfair effect of certain very stupid FA rules. A polemic blows up. A group of people who have nothing to do with me begin, for the sake of what passes among them for amusement, to vilify me in distant fora which I do not bother reading. Suddenly there is the invasion of the Huns: ignorant individuals who know nothing about me and who I know nothing about invade my LJ to make their ignorant points and indulge their lynch-law instincts, and then have the nerve to complain if I ban them. The morons don't even realize that they are being manipulated. Well, I still am against f-locking. I will go on leaving all my entries open to comment - a principle is worth nothing if you are not disposed to suffer a little unpleasantness for it. But I also will make full use of my faculty for deleting entries and banning people, and, if necessary, for reporting them to their IP. Freedom to read and comment does not mean freedom to stomp all over me and expect me to smile and take it.

More ugly noises...

Among American columnists, two of those I have the highest regard for are Alexander Cockburn and Pat Buchanan. Not that I agree with much of what they say: ( Read more... )

A reconciliation

Something has happened which I really did not hope for, and as it is at the bottom of a post page, it might not be noticed. Therefore I make this post especially to report it. I just received the following post:

this is NM posting.

A rather late response since I've been reflecting on this.

Do I condemn calling all Italians mafia? Of course.

And that'd be a quick response. But as I said, I've been thinking further through this. Racism is not the only thing the Church condemns. It also condemns a lack of charity and it asks us to turn the other cheek. These are things in which I totally fail most of the time. It's so easy to forget that one is even asked to do this. Mea culpa. Mea maxima culpa.

Thinking along these lines, I remembered this from Holy Scripture.

Matthew 5:22 But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, 'You fool!' will be liable to the hell of fire.

and turning to the Catechism,

Paragraph 1825 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church Christ died out of love for us, while we were still "enemies." The Lord asks us to love as he does, even our enemies, to make ourselves the neighbor of those farthest away, and to love children and the poor as Christ himself.

The Apostle Paul has given an incomparable depiction of charity: "charity is patient and kind, charity is not jealous or boastful; it is not arrogant or rude. Charity does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice at wrong, but rejoices in the right. Charity bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things."

-------------------------------------------------------------

So, no, I don't appreciate the things you've said, and I utterly disagree with you on a number of things. But I think I should try to keep the above in mind, and will try to behave accordingly. No more insults from this quarter. I've deleted the I_Hate_FPB_Club, which was meant to be a joke when you said such a club existed, but was very uncharitable.

I hope you take this in the spirit that it is meant, and I'll pray for you and your intentions.

NM
(Reply to this)(Thread)


fpb
2005-01-25 20:37 (link) Select
Comment Posted Successfully
I will. And I may say that I appreciate this very much. Considering what might be called our joint past, what you have done is remarkable, and I not only thank you, I congratulate you.

Incidentally, I have removed Narcissa Malfoy's name from the Banned list.

As expected...

...this year's Oscar nominations are a bit of a travesty. There have been three movies this year that have absolutely dominated the landscape, of which everyone had something to say, and they are, in the following order, FAHRENHEIT 9/11, THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST, and THE INCREDIBLES. And the way they have been treated is almost in reverse order. THE INCREDIBLES has been given a decent four nominations, but has been kept in the animation ghetto - surely a nomination for Best Feature Film was in order, especially since its other heavyweight nomination was for Best Original Screenplay. THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST has received three nominations in minor categories: cinematography (meaning it may be a piece of drek, but it is nicely shot), make-up, and music. But indubitably the big loser is Michael Moore, who did not pick up a single nomination. Given how Hollywood feels about the current President, this is beyond incredible. The only way I can make sense of it is that hubris undid him. He made sure that he would not be nominated in the Documentary section, feeling, no doubt, that his film was a big enough event to compete for Best Film; and as a result, it seems that (barring Special Jury Prizes or the like), the favourite film of all Bush-haters will have to be content with its Cannes Pame d'Or. I'm not sure what this means, apart of course from the everlasting ability of Academy voters to make monkeys of pundits and predictors, but I think one thing is certain: this will be remembered as one of those years where the wrong guys won.