aefenglommung (aefenglommung) wrote,
aefenglommung
aefenglommung

Snark attack

I got climbed all over today over on the methodism community. There was a thread that had petered out concerning the Judicial Council reversing Bishop Kammerer's decisions of law and reinstating the Virginia pastor who got railroaded out of his appointment. Naturally, most of the folks were a-twitter about the horror of the Judicial Council recognizing that the decision about when and under what circumstances to admit persons to membership in The UMC is within the pastor's discretion.

Much high-mindedness and moral outrage. And me, pointing out that the case wasn't actually about homosexuality, but about how the pastor's rights had been trampled. Well, as I say, the comments had petered out, and that was fine. We all had had our say.

Comes now a lady at me with a "Shame on you" opener. Well, she got small change out of me. I tried to be reasonable, but she was into grand denunciation. So I told her that there's an old courtroom maxim, "When you've got the facts on your side, argue the facts; when the facts are against you, argue the law." And then I asked (rhetorically), whaddya do when both the facts and the law are against you? The answer: I guess you make speeches to the galleries.

Really, do these people ever actually read what you say before replying? I feel bad about being snarky, but then what I felt like saying was a lot worse. Part of me says, Don't go there. God has called us to peace. The other part of me says, After thirty years of pastoral ministry, I'll be hanged before I'll be run out of a "Methodism" site by ideology-driven wackoids chanting slogans at me.

There. I'm better now.

Move along; nothing to see.

Thank you.
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 4 comments