I like Christina. While I do not endorse every thing she has to say, (I am not as enthusiastic about plants and pets as she is, for example) she strikes me as being somebody who is sincere, industrious, intelligent, considerate and is honest enough to speak her mind and is refreshingly free of hypocrisy. Further, she has the courtesy to respond in full to comments addressed to her and does so with clarity and reasoning. Would that more people possessed those qualities.
Boadicea's Chariot 
Seconded.
None of us are perfect, Sipu, but I think Mrs Osborne would be disappointed no mention was made of her somewhat misanthropic tendencies to which she cheerfully admits.
Minty I object to your comment “None of us are perfect” I am and I can tell you it is very hard to live with myself because of this.
We are all individuals and we all have our own opinion, if we all agreed how boring would life be (Stepford wives). We all aspire to better and some of us manage it through hard work others inherit it and act complete twats (Prince Harry is an example).
Just accept everyone for what they are, as for Cob she says it as it is, I think if we ever met it would be interesting because I tend to call a spade a spade and tell people direct to their face what I think.
But that’s part of being perfect. 😉
Objection noted, Rick. 😉
Minty 🙂 😉
Fascinating that our most outspoken and extreme colleagues claim to be non-atheists. I’d be interested to know how they square their social attitudes with their presumably Christian claims.
PS I’m flattered, I think, that you tag this post as you do.
Thirded
OZ
I believe that the colleagues to whom you refer will only have to explain their “social attitudes” to a higher authority than yourself, Janus.
Well quite, Sheona.
I assume you are perhaps referring to Boadicea? Heaven only knows what she will make of all this! 😉
Speaking as the ‘higher authority’ here 🙂 – I was a little concerned about the two posts – but left both up in the interests of ‘debate’ on matters of Social Conscience. I see that the earlier post has been withdrawn – the author’s prerogative – which I uphold vigorously!
As to any other higher authority taking issue with people’s ‘Social Attitudes’ – I tend to be of the opinion that ‘The Lord helps those who help themselves’… Good sound Protestant principles which underpin the notion (discussed elsewhere) that people should take responsibility for themselves and their own actions and should not expect the rest of the world to pay for them. On that score, I have far more sympathy with ‘my’ taxpaying money going to support the Paraplegic Olympics than the more publicly supported ‘Norman’ Olympics.
Along with Rick, I can only rejoice that we are all different – and that this site includes people with a wide range of opinions. Vive la Difference!
Boadicea good evening.
Bugrit (TB). I obviously missed something, due to succumbing to my Protestant work ethic and clocking in this morning.
Could somebody please fill me in as to why the “publicly supported ‘Norman’ Olympics” were not British?
Good evening, Mr Mackie.
I would if I could but I can’t. I’m not sure how the Olympics figure in this at all, but maybe I missed something too. 😦
And worth being very proud of, for the avoidance of doubt,
Oops! I meant to write normal.
I was using the Olympics (both) to illustrate my point that I am far happier supporting those who have overcome great personal difficulties than those who, in my opinion, have not. 🙂
Fourfed. Forthed. Fourtheded. Whatever.
I like her poetry.
Boa, I deleted my ‘silly label’ post because it clearly caused offence to you – for which I apologise. However it strikes me as a bit odd that while it’s OK to sing authors’ praises ‘ad hominem’ when one agrees, it is verboten to point our inadequacies ‘ad hominem’ when one doesn’t. I really do get offended by the ‘I’m all right, Jack’ brigade when they represent a social conscience as some kind of political disease.
Ricksrant, you say, “We all aspire to better and some of us manage it through hard work others inherit it and act complete twats (Prince Harry is an example).”
May I point out that Harry probably meets Sipu’s criteria above, “sincere, industrious, intelligent, considerate and is honest enough to speak (his)mind and is refreshingly free of hypocrisy”.
He is however still a twat. I rest my case. 😉
Thank you sipu and friends.
Janus – I take it you read my comment regarding being a Communist, a Fascist and an Anarchist within an hour.My point was that one should not really be offended by being labelled – especially when one has to own up to being whatever it is one is being called. I was delighted that I’d upset the Fascists, the Communists and all the rest by not agreeing with whatever it was they were saying!
No offence taken 🙂
Boa, thank you. But please don’t interpret my flea-bites as my reaction to being offended. I merely point out that some self-labelled god-fearing folk seem to leave their sermons at home when they venture into the real world. I won’t label it hypocrisy, just irrational behaviour practised by the arrogant well-heeled.
The trouble with social consciences is that they are pretty meaningless if the actions are not there to match. I am thinking of, though by no means exclusively, Elizabeth Murdoch who felt so sorry for Prince Harry. Nevertheless she had to print his pictures in the Sun.
Matthew 23:27
King James Version (KJV)
Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men’s bones, and of all uncleanness.
Jesus said some pretty wise things, don’t you think, Janus?