|
|
Post by steckdad on Oct 8, 2008 22:02:16 GMT -6
the skit did not portray any particular group. thus the shoe fits comment....pastor is pointing out there are some unchristian like behaviors being displayed(in his experience) with the third high school drama and some other scenarios he presented. your example is a bit over the top btw.... I saw plenty of poor behavior over the years going way back to the meeting at Still regarding whether to build a 7th middle school or a high school. Some people within the WVHS attendance area behaved in a completely inappropriate manner. I was absolutely shocked. One guy stood up and screamed that he wouldn't build another Taj Mahal. I was sitting near these people and they had hate spewing from every pore - and directly squarely at south Naperville. Fast forward to just a few months ago when the lady from Young stood up and called others racists. Quite frankly, I'm tired of this nonsense. It destroys any sense of community and coming together. I think many people from other sections of the district need to take a LONG hard look in the mirror - and leave us alone. a. I know nothing about the 7th MS/high school debate and was posting regarding a pastor's sermon. b. all you can do conduct yourself in an adult manner. you cannot control other people. c. I have yet to get an answer on where all this hatred from other parts of the district towards south naperville is coming from? |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Oct 8, 2008 22:06:45 GMT -6
c. I have yet to get an answer on where all this hatred from other parts of the district towards south naperville is coming from? Are you asking the why? If so, ask the source. If you are asking for examples, then just watch things such as the public comment from the April 14th SB meeting or read the many LTEs around that time. |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Oct 8, 2008 22:16:25 GMT -6
c. I have yet to get an answer on where all this hatred from other parts of the district towards south naperville is coming from? Are you asking the why? If so, ask the source. If you are asking for examples, then just watch things such as the public comment from the April 14th SB meeting or read the many LTEs around that time. which compared to the Sun blogs were tepid -- also comments in the local papers, about eltists and rascists...and a particular self proclaimed anti FUD web site. |
|
|
|
Post by steckdad on Oct 8, 2008 22:18:29 GMT -6
maybe you can start a board to criticize local churches and pastors next  all kidding aside, we just look at it differently. hopefully not everyone that attends the church is always on the defense or looking to be offended and can look at themselves and say "I would never act like that" or maybe they saw a little(or a lot) of the skit in themselves and react accordingly.... I don't think anyone is above critcism or praise do you ? Especially when they step outside what one expects at church. As I said before I do not expect my pastor to speak openly about politics of any kind- 1. I'm not there for that, 2. separation of church and state is important. When someone tells me that our school site was the 'will of God' as happened here I find it obnoxiously wrong -- when a pastor starts deciding how people should react to specifics on a 3rd HS site - I question who exactly these coffees were with that passed along this issue. maybe it's just me -- I was offended once by my church when I was younger and raised the issue. I sat thru a 20 minute sermon telling me how disrespectful it was that teenagers wore jeans to chruch. I was hurt - as I volunteered at the church, was part of scouts etc. -- So I went to see the pastor and asked him if it was more important what pants one had on, or the fact that someone was there as part of their faith, while other well dressed people never attended ? We had a long discussion - and a very good one I thought. We spoke often for years after that -- sorry I do not give a pass because of who they are...however I do respect their devotion...that's not the part that concerns me. Once again, you hear what you want to hear. I thought the pastor was using current events to shed light on certain attitudes he has observed....he was not coaching people on how to react to the 204 situation, but how to treat their "neighbor" One thing you learn from attending a christian church for 20 years is that no subject is taboo. also, separation of church and state does NOT apply to a sermon.... I do agree on your jeans scenario,(although I was never allowed to wear them in church) and as a lot of old school pastors retired, that train of thought has went away for the most part..... |
|
|
|
Post by steckdad on Oct 8, 2008 22:21:31 GMT -6
c. I have yet to get an answer on where all this hatred from other parts of the district towards south naperville is coming from? Are you asking the why? If so, ask the source. If you are asking for examples, then just watch things such as the public comment from the April 14th SB meeting or read the many LTEs around that time. so south naperville have been innocent bystanders being picked on by the rest of the district for years for no reason whatsoever? I am not kidding here, you know I have only been in the district for a year and a half.....I think the question is legit.... |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Oct 8, 2008 22:37:19 GMT -6
I don't think anyone is above critcism or praise do you ? Especially when they step outside what one expects at church. As I said before I do not expect my pastor to speak openly about politics of any kind- 1. I'm not there for that, 2. separation of church and state is important. When someone tells me that our school site was the 'will of God' as happened here I find it obnoxiously wrong -- when a pastor starts deciding how people should react to specifics on a 3rd HS site - I question who exactly these coffees were with that passed along this issue. maybe it's just me -- I was offended once by my church when I was younger and raised the issue. I sat thru a 20 minute sermon telling me how disrespectful it was that teenagers wore jeans to chruch. I was hurt - as I volunteered at the church, was part of scouts etc. -- So I went to see the pastor and asked him if it was more important what pants one had on, or the fact that someone was there as part of their faith, while other well dressed people never attended ? We had a long discussion - and a very good one I thought. We spoke often for years after that -- sorry I do not give a pass because of who they are...however I do respect their devotion...that's not the part that concerns me. Once again, you hear what you want to hear. I thought the pastor was using current events to shed light on certain attitudes he has observed....he was not coaching people on how to react to the 204 situation, but how to treat their "neighbor" One thing you learn from attending a christian church for 20 years is that no subject is taboo. also, separation of church and state does NOT apply to a sermon.... I do agree on your jeans scenario,(although I was never allowed to wear them in church) and as a lot of old school pastors retired, that train of thought has went away for the most part..... "The prohibition against partisan activity by charitable groups was enacted by Congress in 1954, and the statute has been upheld in the courts. In three cases, courts have concluded it does not violate the Constitution's free speech clause, according to Robert Tuttle, professor of law and religion at George Washington University in Washington. " It's a fine line to walk when one is preaching from the pulpit- as they are a representative of he church at that point. Does the entire church support the 3rd high school issue and the politics that go with it ? Not only is it walking the fine line legally, why risk polarizing ones church community over a non church issue ? He said he lives in the 'church world' - 204 is not a part of the church world. I still believe it's inappropriate at best. If it was my church I would be talking to them. In my 50+ years of attending Catholic churches - I have yet to hear a direct political stance from the pulpit -( now I don't remember sermons from around when JFK was running but that would have been the time for them). Again, not my church so I don't want to make a huge issue out of it, I'd be more upset if it was my parish. I , like most relioious people I try and cut churches as much slack as possible, but there are groups out there who would not be anywhere near as generous. Also my read on that sermon is quite different than yours. That's the risk that was taken when you step outside the church world however - I am willing to bet not all the parishioners heard it the same either. |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Oct 8, 2008 22:52:59 GMT -6
Are you asking the why? If so, ask the source. If you are asking for examples, then just watch things such as the public comment from the April 14th SB meeting or read the many LTEs around that time. so south naperville have been innocent bystanders being picked on by the rest of the district for years for no reason whatsoever? I am not kidding here, you know I have only been in the district for a year and a half.....I think the question is legit.... Again, here we go with the stereotypes. One can pick out obnoxious people from any neighborhood; yet in LTE after LTE and public comment after public comment they are portrayed as 'the neighborhood' being like that. If I adopted the train of thought that 'one/few bad apples spoiling the bunch' then I would have to conclude that all other PTA presidents in D204 hate the south part of Naperville; due to the direct words spoken and LTE written by 2 in particular. Again, you can do the name matching from the LTEs calling people racist elitists as well as the names of the people making public comment at the SB meetings last spring.... they are/were PTA presidents. Do the other PTA presidents deserve to be painted in their same stroke? No, of course they don't and I think it would be both stupid and irresponsible to attempt to do so; especially as a church skit. Let's look back at your question, and I'll come at it from another angle by assuming 100% that there is merit as you allude to. "so south naperville have been innocent bystanders being picked on by the rest of the district for years for no reason whatsoever?" If they are not 'innocent bystanders' as you allude to the possibility by your 'legit' question do they need to be mocked in a church with regards to a school district issue? Again, we circle back to: This mockery is Christ's example? By their own words: "...the stereotypes are so exaggerated..." |
|
we4
Junior
Girls Can't Do What?
Posts: 245
|
Post by we4 on Oct 9, 2008 7:17:19 GMT -6
In a response from Wheatland Salem, I was told that "I believe that the skit did lose something via the podcast. The skit was actually live and if you would have been here, I think you would have been very amused by the extreme behavior of the parents (in body language as well as words) in the skit...in other words, the stereotypes are so exaggerated...nobody behaves like that and we all know it." Everyone can take the explanation as they may. Out of curiosity, who penned that response? See PM |
|
|
|
Post by steckdad on Oct 9, 2008 18:23:46 GMT -6
Arch, DOC......I see both your sides. I am not discounting them, just sharing another viewpoint....let me ask you both a question...
Is there a distinct possibility that once you heard the skit, it pretty much didn't matter what was said after?
|
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Oct 9, 2008 18:49:21 GMT -6
Arch, DOC......I see both your sides. I am not discounting them, just sharing another viewpoint....let me ask you both a question... Is there a distinct possibility that once you heard the skit, it pretty much didn't matter what was said after? I appreciate your viewpoint - so not discounting yours either. and yes, once someone starts with a mockery, and then gets involved in local political posturing -- the message afterwards has been lost for me- true statement |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Oct 9, 2008 22:14:00 GMT -6
Arch, DOC......I see both your sides. I am not discounting them, just sharing another viewpoint....let me ask you both a question... Is there a distinct possibility that once you heard the skit, it pretty much didn't matter what was said after? I listened afterward, and commented on the 'being obedient' undertone as well which was something else entirely. I'll be honest though, it did get categorized much the same as Dr D pulling numbers and 'facts' out of his *ahem* in several board meetings and some fact checking later showed that they are not to be trusted. Now that trust issue comes up with everything that comes from him; with good reason. (I'm sure you've noticed the avatar lately). There's now a similar distrust in the exercise of good judgment with regards to the Pastor in my mind because of the skit. Like w/ Dr. D, I try to keep an open mind each time, but unfortunately it doesn't always pan out in good light. |
|
|
|
Post by jftb on Oct 10, 2008 15:55:57 GMT -6
Steck Dad, I'll simply say that of course a pastor can draw upon whatever experiences he/she deems relevant, but it just seems to me that this particular experience is one that is best LEFT ALONE. The District needs time to heal, and scratching fresh wounds does nothing to accomplish that. While the core of the message was good, it seems as if the pastor could have reached the same point in a way that didn't drag this up all over again.
I did find interesting the note from Metzger today making a plea for volunteers. It's nice in a way that he's trying to reach out to our district parents again..that he remembers that some of us do exist.....but it's also hard to forget being told to sit down and shut up. The Christian value of forgiveness is a beautiful thought, but one that's very hard to achieve.
|
|
|
|
Post by JB on Oct 10, 2008 16:10:59 GMT -6
Steck Dad, I'll simply say that of course a pastor can draw upon whatever experiences he/she deems relevant, but it just seems to me that this particular experience is one that is best LEFT ALONE. The District needs time to heal, and scratching fresh wounds does nothing to accomplish that. While the core of the message was good, it seems as if the pastor could have reached the same point in a way that didn't drag this up all over again. I did find interesting the note from Metzger today making a plea for volunteers. It's nice in a way that he's trying to reach out to our district parents again..that he remembers that some of us do exist.....but it's also hard to forget being told to sit down and shut up. The Christian value of forgiveness is a beautiful thought, but one that's very hard to achieve. Didn't see the e-mail - what was it for? ...and if a sterotype is "so exaggerated" does that make it OK? I'm always amazed it's OK to poke fun at some people, and positively verboten to even think about making fun of others. |
|
|
|
Post by steckdad on Oct 10, 2008 19:05:53 GMT -6
Steck Dad, I'll simply say that of course a pastor can draw upon whatever experiences he/she deems relevant, but it just seems to me that this particular experience is one that is best LEFT ALONE. The District needs time to heal, and scratching fresh wounds does nothing to accomplish that. While the core of the message was good, it seems as if the pastor could have reached the same point in a way that didn't drag this up all over again. I did find interesting the note from Metzger today making a plea for volunteers. It's nice in a way that he's trying to reach out to our district parents again..that he remembers that some of us do exist.....but it's also hard to forget being told to sit down and shut up. The Christian value of forgiveness is a beautiful thought, but one that's very hard to achieve. lemme just say this J....we drag up the past pretty much everyday here.....I think it is cleansing.... |
|
all kidding aside, we just look at it differently. hopefully not everyone that attends the church is always on the defense or looking to be offended and can look at themselves and say "I would never act like that" or maybe they saw a little(or a lot) of the skit in themselves and react accordingly....