From: parr@acs.ucalgary.ca (Charles Parr)
Newsgroups: alt.peeves
Subject: Re: Pained Whale?
Keywords: elephant, HE, m203
Date: 15 Oct 92 15:01:09 GMT
Organization: The University of Calgary, Alberta

In article <1992Oct14.233133.1572@igor.tamri.com> donb@igor.tamri.com (Don Baldwin) writes:
>In article <92Oct14.135658.28951@acs.ucalgary.ca> parr@acs.ucalgary.ca (Charles
>Parr), with some help from his mommy, writes:
>>>Name's Scott.  If you're going to do nothing but incessantly bitch,
>>>at least spell my name right.
>>
>>That, Scotty-Wotty, was likely a mistake. That's okay though,
>>Scotto, I'm sure none of us here would do something as childish
>>as play name games with you, Scot. In fact, Scooter, one suspects
>>this little slip, this revelation that it bothers you to have
>>your name defaced, won't come back to haunt you at all. That make
>>you feel better, Scottles?
>
>For god's safe, this isn't alt.kids.playground.insults.  This is alt.peeves.
>We welcome well thought-out laments about the problems you encounter in
>life, and well-written flames.  

Listen up Baldwin, because we'll be having a test later.

Whilst you are no doubt worshipped in the rarified circles of literary
criticism, your opinion means *shit* to me. Now that we have that
basic assumption clearly defined, perhaps we can be returning
to the task at hand?

> If you can't do any better that the stuff you just posted,
>please do us the favor of pissing off without saying anything more...
>otherwise, we'll be forced to see if a gravel enema will help you.

Help me what, Don? I don't spout my peeves from my anal orifice
(I know, but soon even you will learn to talk out your mouth,
rather than dribbling out your sphincter), so I doubt the 
vigorous cleansing action would do me any good at all.

>>Is it just me, or are there others who think that if you're gonna
>>genuflect to some spook, you really ought to feel a little more
>>involved? Some faith perhaps? A little fervour? Some bible-
>>smashing, witch-burning, proselytising, sweating, revival tent
>>style RELIGION!!!!!!
>
>Son, you've been watching entirely too much TV.  Do you really believe
>that the intensity with which you embrace your beliefs increases their
>validity?  Surely if that were the case, Charles Manson would be running
>of the United States now (though, come to think of it, he might be better
>than the lot we've had to choose from, lately).

I bet I'm not alone in wondering how you could have failed to 
understand my peeve, Baldwin, but I'll spell it out for you
one more time. The reference was to how spineless yuppie-spawn
pick their churches and religions out of convenience, rather
than faith. This constitutes *hypocrisy*, Baldwin, and it
peeves me quite a bit.

I don't agree with religious fanatics, most of the time. And 
I certainly don't permit them to dictate to me, but I have
respect for sincerity of belief. 

>So take a little advice from one who's been around for a while:  pop a
>valium or drink a couple glasses of wine, and play a couple games of
>Naked Twister with someone who you like.  You'll learn more about life
>that way than by running around and trying to emulate the Fundies.

I'm assuming you were taking your own advice during posting?
Seeing as you managed to miss the entire fucking point, and
obviously failed to reference any clues while typing, I'm
going to assumme you were somehow distracted.

Regards, Charles

-- 
Within the span of the last few weeks I have heard elements of
separate threads which, in that they have been conjoined in time,
struck together to form a new chord within my hollow and echoing
gourd. --Unknown net.person