James Loney uninvited to conference ... for being gay?
Thu, 2007-10-25 14:35
#1
N.Beltov
James Loney uninvited to conference ... for being gay?
Thu, 2007-10-25 14:35
#2
N.Beltov
I cannot find any links, yet, to this breaking story. James Loney, peace activist, was uninvited to a Winnipeg conference where he was scheduled to speak on peace activism in the church. He claims that the reason he was uninvited is that he is in a relationship with another man. The Catholic Archbishop here in Winnipeg has not yet replied to questions directed to him by the CBC about this story.
Does anyone NOT know who James Loney is?
Thu, 2007-10-25 14:38
#3
[ 27 October 2007: Message edited by: RosaL ]
Thu, 2007-10-25 14:51
#4
N.Beltov
The Catholic Church looks to be a sponsor or [b]the[/b] sponsor of the conference. I'm just checking. What's also interesting is that [b]Minister[/b] Bill Blakie, Member of Parliament, was ALSO uninvited for similar reasons as Loney was uninvited. Something about guilt by association with the NDP, which has a policy of supporting access to abortion and other medical services.
Gah. Looks like ugly bigotry to me.
Thu, 2007-10-25 14:52
#5
N.Beltov
It looks like the anti-abortionists and "LifeSite" activists knew about the invite to James Loney and decided to campaign against him:
[url=http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/oct/07101609.html]"Anti-Catholic" Gay Activist James Loney to Speak at Winnipeg Catholic Social Justice Conference [/url]
Loney is described as an "unrepentant" homosexual. However, according to the CBC report, he was scheduled to speak about peace and not about sexual orientation or justice issues associated with sexual orientation.
quote:
Most Rev. Gerard Bergie, auxiliary bishop of the Hamilton diocese said, “We have a general policy that we don’t sponsor events where a person has publicly disagreed with key teachings of our Catholic faith”.
Wait! There's more from these freedom loving misanthropes.
quote:
Local Catholics have complained about the choice of speakers to the Winnipeg archdiocese and to Sr. Johanna Jonker, the event’s organiser. Copies of the letters have also been sent to Archbishop Luigi Ventura, the Pope’s representative in Canada.Maria Slykerman, the head of Campaign Life Coalition in Manitoba has told LifeSiteNews.com that if no answer is forthcoming from the diocese, the event will be picketed.
OK. So it is a Catholic conference. But why uninvite a Minister from another church (Bill Blakie)?
Thu, 2007-10-25 14:59
#6
[ 27 October 2007: Message edited by: RosaL ]
Thu, 2007-10-25 15:18
#7
N.Beltov
The Archdiocese of Winnipeg website on the Conference is "not found". Hmm. I wonder if some things are being hurriedly changed? Ah, this just gets juicier by the minute. That will make things rather difficult for [i]conference participants[/i], eh, seeing how [b]the conference is tomorrow and Saturday?[/b]
[url=http://www.archwinnipeg.ca/social_justice/index.php]Archdiocese of Winnipeg Social Justice is nowhere to be found ...[/url]
[ 25 October 2007: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]
Thu, 2007-10-25 15:29
#8
N.Beltov
You know, seeing how the "pro-lifers" were ready to picket the conference if James Loney was allowed to speak about peace activism, then maybe it would be appropriate to organize a picket if he [b]isn't[/b] allowed to speak at the conference?
Now I begin to understand why the conference details are missing from the Archdiocese website ...
There is this, however, on the LIfeSite website ...
quote:
To express concerns to the Archbishop of Winnipeg, Most Rev. V. James Weisgerber
Email - archbishop AT archwinnipeg DOT caCatholic Centre
1495 Pembina Highway
Winnipeg, Manitoba
R3T 2C6
Phone: 204-452-2227
Chancery Fax: 204-475-4409
Pastoral Centre Fax: 204-453-8236
[ 25 October 2007: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]
Thu, 2007-10-25 15:36
#9
Did some poking around their website and found the program for the conference here:
[url=http://www.archwinnipeg.ca/social_justice_conference_2007.php]http://www...
It is shocking that they would disinvite James Loney. They should have ingored the Lifesiters and let them picket - all 5 of them would have had zero impact that way.
Bill Blaikie is listed as the keynote speaker, so I'm surpised that they would disinvite him, although these people don't have much sense so I wouldn't put it past them. It's more likely that Bill has told them he's not coming to a conference that won't let James Loney speak.
Thu, 2007-10-25 15:47
#10
N.Beltov
Maybe I should be more sympathetic to the Conference organizers. They seem to have shot themselves in the foot ... more than once!
No James Loney! Blam! No Bill Blakie! Blam! There's not going to be much social justice left to talk about once the conference begins. Sheesh!
Thu, 2007-10-25 15:53
#11
I think you're quite right - the organizers must be fuming, they'd probably join your protest!
Organizing a protest is a great idea, even if only a few people show up, let the media know and they're sure to cover it.
Thu, 2007-10-25 16:14
#12
N.Beltov
I've really got to rush off. But, perhaps if iI raise it with all the people who are at the anti-war rally on Saturday here in Winnipeg ... [img]biggrin.gif" border="0[/img]
Thu, 2007-10-25 19:27
#13
RevolutionPlease
Thanks for bringing this to light N. Beltov. If this was in the GTA, I'd protest.
But to the point brought up about the media, doubt they'd cover it here. Maybe the small community ones show up but unlikely to get print.
Fri, 2007-10-26 03:13
#14
I'm certain the CBC would cover it. They would probably consider international news given James Loney's profile.
Fri, 2007-10-26 04:16
#15
I have great difficulty getting upset or surprised by this incident. The Catholic Church doesn't like gay people much; it doesn't like non-Catholics much; the Pope spends his time denying politicians the rights of communion when they advocate the right to abortion; and I've never heard him consign Bush or Blair or Harper to hell for their crimes.
So why should they invite genuine peace activists to their phoney conferences - or better put, why would any genuine activist give them any credibility by showing up?
Regardless of that, like any other religious cult, they have the right to practise their activities without interfering with the rest of society. Same with political organizations. If they want to discredit themselves by letting their ugly prejudices trump their purported commitment to peace and social justice, why wouldn't we just hold up such actions in order to ridicule and expose them? "Protesting" that some religious types don't want someone of an opposing opinion or sexual orientation at their conference seems a bit of a wrong approach to me.
[ 26 October 2007: Message edited by: unionist ]
Fri, 2007-10-26 05:02
#16
N.Beltov
quote:
unionist: If they want to discredit themselves by letting their ugly prejudices trump their purported commitment to peace and social justice, why wouldn't we just hold up such actions in order to ridicule and expose them? "Protesting" that some religious types don't want someone of an opposing opinion or sexual orientation at their conference seems a bit of a wrong approach to me.
Well, OK. But James Loney was [i]invited[/i] and then [i]uninvited[/i] to the conference. Ditto for MP and United Church Minister Bill Blakie, near as I can tell. That should be exposed to the light of day. It's of public interest that a campaign was organized to silence Mr. Loney and those in the Catholic Church who invited Mr. Loney and MP Blakie.
There's more, I think. The Catholic Church isn't just some other harmless religious cult. It's such a huge organization that it plays a substantial role in civil society and influences public opinion and policy. There's no sense in adopting a turtle-like approach to that church and its internal machinations. There are parts of the world where that church [b]is[/b] the civil society.
CBC has just quoted the Archbishop. "He's ... being excluded because he takes public opposition to a policy of the church," said the Archbishop who finally decided to reply to media requests for an interview. So the church is backing away from the stated reason why Loney was uninvited.
For those who are interested, the CBC in Winnipeg will be broadcasting part of an interview with the Archbishop for his spin. That interview can be heard on the internet through cbc DOT ca [b]in the next hour or so.[/b]
[ 26 October 2007: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]
Fri, 2007-10-26 05:44
#17
N.Beltov
from the CBC interview just now ...
Archbishop Weisgerber has taken responsibility for the decision. His claim regarding the decision to uninvite Loney to the "Social Justice" Conference is quite different from Loney's remarks on the same topic. It's not unreasonable to assume that some hurried consultation took place after which it was decided to back away from identifying Loney's relationship as the "reason" for the [b]un[/b]invitation.
The Archbishop was at pains to claim that gay people are not "excluded" from the Catholic Church. Or, at least their money isn't excluded. I don't know about their souls as I am not an expert on Catholic theological doctrine. He noted that, in contrast to official Catholic doctrine which treats sex outside of marriage as "immoral", Loney has publicly expressed support of sex outside of marriage as not immoral. This is the reason, the Archbishop claimed, Loney was uninvited.
Weisgerber claimed that opposition to [i]any[/i] important "teaching" of the church would merit univiting Loney to the conference.
SO: If you want to speak at a Catholic conference, then you better not disagree publicly with any important policy of that church. It doesn't matter if you are speaking about peace and you do not disagree with the church's approach to that issue. You have to agree with [b]all[/b] important issues in order to speak on [b]any[/b] issue. That is the gist of what the Archbishop said.
The Catholic Church has a monopoly on what social justice is. Who knew?
[ 26 October 2007: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]
Fri, 2007-10-26 06:00
#18
What I don't get is why anyone's shocked by this. The Catholic Church is regressive on this issue and they show no signs of letting up.
Why support a conference sponsored by the Catholic Church (or try to speak at it) if you're a gay man living with another man? I don't get it. You know they hate gays - why go?
Although, any activism from within to change such attitudes is worth it.
Fri, 2007-10-26 06:22
#19
quote:
You know they hate gays - why go?
James Loney is Catholic - that's why they invited him, that's why he wanted to go. There are lots of Catholics like him, including the organizers of this conference, who are doing as you say, activism from within. And I am in awe of their courage and perseverance, I know I would have given up a long time ago. Progressive Catholics have always been marginalized within their church, but mainly in indirect ways (eg "sure have your little conference, but we won't promote it, we won't fund it"). Even when similar things have happened in the past (such as in this story [url=http://www.citynews.ca/news/news_1356.aspx]Ex-Hostage Jim Loney Claims Catholic Camp Shut Down After His Gay Revelations[/url]), the Catholic leadership has not admitted that James Loney's presence caused them to change their plans.
So colour me naive if you wish, but I am truly shocked that they have gone to the next level and now admit that they can't even bear to hear him speak amongst them. This will not endear the Archishop of Winnipeg to any Catholics save for the few lifesite harliners.
I wonder what the reaction will from other practicing progressive Catholics such as MPs Charlie Angus and Tony Martin and New Bruswick NDP leader, Roger Duguay.
[ 26 October 2007: Message edited by: Sara Mayo ]
[ 26 October 2007: Message edited by: Sara Mayo ]
Fri, 2007-10-26 08:44
#20
When was his invitation made? I thought that it's been public knowledge that he was gay and in a relationship ever since he got back from Iraq. How could they have issued an invitation in the first place without knowing?
Fri, 2007-10-26 08:48
#21
[ 27 October 2007: Message edited by: RosaL ]
Fri, 2007-10-26 08:54
#22
quote:
Originally posted by N.Beltov:
[b]
There's more, I think. The Catholic Church isn't just some other harmless religious cult. It's such a huge organization that it plays a substantial role in civil society and influences public opinion and policy. There's no sense in adopting a turtle-like approach to that church and its internal machinations. There are parts of the world where that church [b]is[/b] the civil society. [/b]
Yeah, well I agree fully with that. That's why the Pope and the Church should be roundly condemned by progressive people all the time whenever they take anti-human stands.
What we should [i]not[/i] do, in my submission, is give them credibility as a force for peace and social justice, by demanding that they invite dissidents or gays to their conferences.
That's what I meant by questioning the approach.
If there were a legitimate coalition of peace organizations which somehow retracted an invitation to someone like James Loney, that would be the appropriate and necessary context in which to condemn [i]that particular action[/i] and demand that he be re-invited.
Fri, 2007-10-26 09:05
#23
N.Beltov
If you bother to denounce that institution then it makes sense to give credit where credit is due.
Thing is, unionist, the Catholic Church has changed and does change. It's like any other institution in that regard. I realize that, using the apology over the treatment of Galileo for example, the change could be seen as [b]glacial[/b] in its slowness. But there is change. And that means outsiders should be interested. Maybe not [i]demanding[/i] this or that but encouraging positive change in this institution that resembles a wall of ice a mile thick.
Fri, 2007-10-26 09:12
#24
[ 27 October 2007: Message edited by: RosaL ]
Fri, 2007-10-26 09:17
#25
N.Beltov
Before I forget I should remind Winnipegers that James Loney will be at Augustine United Church on Sunday to talk about his activities as a Christian Brother in Iraq. Should be interesting.
Fri, 2007-10-26 09:28
#26
N.Beltov
My (small) church isn't like that, unionist. (Unitarian Universalists) And I doubt it's the only one like that.
Just some friendly advice that you can ignore: I think you need a more precise weapon than the sledgehammer you're using. Use the right tool for the job.
Fri, 2007-10-26 09:39
#27
[ 27 October 2007: Message edited by: RosaL ]
Fri, 2007-10-26 09:57
#28
N.Beltov
Thanks for sharing, Rosa. I hope we're not piling on unionist here but I feel somewhat like a Daniel Dennett to unionist's Richard Dawkins approach.
In any case, whatever Catholic theology asserts, including doctrines of infallibility and so on, I would make a distinction between perfect doctrine and perfect people. The latter are impossible and do not exist. Furthermore, the best "doctrine" I've come up against is one, like science, that tries to have coherent mechanisms for the inevitable change that must come with any theory. That's actually what attracted me to Marxism as an ideology so long ago now; there seemed to be an acknowledgement of the universality and permanence of change even with respect to the revolutionary doctrine and society itself.
I would not hope for the pure organization if I were you. There's no such thing. That shouldn't discourage you, however. What exists has room for improvement and that's probably a good thing. We've all got room for improvement, eh? And that's a good thing too.
Fri, 2007-10-26 13:12
#29
quote:
Originally posted by N.Beltov:
[b]My (small) church isn't like that, unionist. (Unitarian Universalists) And I doubt it's the only one like that.[/b]
I have Unitarian friends in Montrйal. They are humanists and (in my humble opinion) atheists, though they might not call themselves that. They actually run some wonderful and progressive activities out of the Unitarian church on de Maisonneuve. I don't consider it a religion. See how I define my way out of extreme positions? [img]smile.gif" border="0[/img]
quote:
[b]Just some friendly advice that you can ignore: I think you need a more precise weapon than the sledgehammer you're using. Use the right tool for the job.[/b]
What's the right tool for the Catholic Church? Name it and I'll try it out.
Fri, 2007-10-26 13:24
#30
quote:
Originally posted by RosaL:
[b]My church is in many ways flawed.[/b]
I'm sorry to hear that. I'm talking about the Catholic Church, because that's what the thread is about, and I don't know if that's your church or not.
I frankly don't give a damn if a person or party or church is "flawed". What I would like to understand is how a Church, professing to moral leadership, can be generations behind the rest of society in recognizing the equality of women, the right to divorce, the right to abortion, the right to birth control, the right to marry people of other religions or (horrors) of no religion at all, the rights and equality of LGBT people, the equality of all people (irrespective of faiths).
You call the above "flaws"? "Imperfections"? "Impurities"?
Explain to me why moral leaders are trying to hold society back.
Fri, 2007-10-26 13:32
#31
[ 27 October 2007: Message edited by: RosaL ]
Fri, 2007-10-26 13:41
#32
RosaL, I'll be very honest with you because you appear to take progressive stands on a host of issues. When you say:
quote:
The whole question of same sex relationships is (relatively) new.
and when you said this:
quote:
It seems to me that you and the Catholic church (or elements of it) agree on one thing: it all hinges on homosexuality!
it gave me pause. It also made me wonder what you see as the "message of Jesus".
Fri, 2007-10-26 13:46
#33
quote:
RosaL, I'll be very honest with you because you appear to take progressive stands on a host of issues. When you say:quote:
The whole question of same sex relationships is (relatively) new.
and when you said this:quote:
It seems to me that you and the Catholic church (or elements of it) agree on one thing: it all hinges on homosexuality!
it gave me pause. It also made me wonder what you see as the "message of Jesus".
Well, I won't attempt to answer that in this little box [img]smile.gif" border="0[/img] But maybe this will be a sufficient answer: I see nothing wrong with homosexuality. I'm in favour of same sex marriage. I have said that openly in my church. But if that's not what you were getting at, let me know, and I'll try to do better!
[ 26 October 2007: Message edited by: RosaL ]
Fri, 2007-10-26 13:49
#34
Ok, thanks for that reply. Just one more question. What did this mean:
quote:
I'm not a liberal so I don't see all these things in the same way you do.
Fri, 2007-10-26 13:55
#35
[ 27 October 2007: Message edited by: RosaL ]
Fri, 2007-10-26 19:17
#36
[url=http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/story/4065732p-4668289c.ht... organizer pulls out and condemns Archbishop's action[/url]
quote:
Barring peace activist and former Iraq hostage James Loney from speaking at a Roman Catholic social justice conference in Winnipeg this weekend has hurt and outraged some Catholics, who say they expected better from their Archbishop, James Weisgerber."I thought, 'how can I speak at a conference on social justice when it is committing such an unjust action?' -- and it is unjust to me," said Nerina Robson. She and her husband John Robson -- one of the organizers of the two-day event that starts Saturday morning -- have dropped out of the conference.
[url=http://www.cbc.ca/canada/manitoba/story/2007/10/26/loney-winnipeg.html]And from CBC.ca[/url]
quote:
One of the organizers of a Catholic-sponsored social justice conference in Winnipeg has quit in disgust over the Archdiocese's withdrawal of a speaking invitation to James Loney, a gay peace activist who was held hostage by militants in Iraq."We were facilitating a session where we were asking Catholics to talk about their vision of a church that was on fire with social-justice activity," John Robson, who initially extended the invitation to Loney, told CBC News Friday afternoon.
"You can't do that at the same time as you're representing an institutional church that is practising such an unjust, such an exclusionary practice."
Fri, 2007-10-26 19:45
#37
[ 27 October 2007: Message edited by: RosaL ]
Fri, 2007-10-26 19:51
#38
I have respected Bill Blaikie on a personal and political level for many years.
I intend to contact him and propose that he publicly request an apology to Jim Loney from the archdiocese, otherwise he will not participate in the conference.
I suggest that others may wish to do likewise.
Bill's email address is [email protected].
Sat, 2007-10-27 08:37
#39
The Church keeps finding [url=http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=c58f0330-5edf-431a... reasons[/url] to shit on James Loney - [i]after[/i] having banned him from their "social justice" [sic] conference:
quote:
James Buchok, a spokesman for the Archdiocese, said Mr. Loney wrote an article two years ago, which just recently came to light, in which he criticized several Catholic practices."He criticizes a number of fundamental practices and fundamental beliefs of the Catholic Church such as Mass, prayer and fasting. He does not believe in those things and does not see the worth of those things.
"Mr. Loney has been telling the people it's about his sexuality. It's because these other things were brought to light [that the invitation was withdrawn]."
Mr. Buchok may be in trouble, though, because his commander-in-chief, the Archbishop himself, said it was because of Loney's views on sexuality:
quote:
However, a press release issued by Winnipeg Archbishop James Weisgerber said Mr. Loney was asked not to attend the conference because of his views on sex."Since the invitation to speak was issued, the Archdiocese has become aware of Mr. Loney's public opposition to the Church's teaching on sexual morality," the release said. "Once the Archdiocese became aware of the public dissent, the Archbishop had no choice but to ask him not to speak at the conference..."
Like all hypocrites, these homophobes are running scared - because the majority of Canadian society has left such anti-human prejudices behind. They should be scorned and ridiculed any time they show their faces in public.
ETA: To N.Beltov: Am I being too harsh here? Perhaps I should be like James Loney, who is quoted as saying the Catholic Church is a "metaphor for the reality that we are somehow profoundly connected" ([url=http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/story/4066134p-4668699c.html]sour...) and who has already "forgiven" the Archbishop? I'm not in Loney's saintly class, however. I'll consider forgiving the Archbishop while he is burning in eternal hellfire for his sins.
[ 27 October 2007: Message edited by: unionist ]
Sat, 2007-10-27 08:49
#40
[ 27 October 2007: Message edited by: RosaL ]
Sat, 2007-10-27 09:10
#41
quote:
Originally posted by RosaL:
[b]This is how dialogue and debate and change happens ...[/b]
Yeah, in 1950 maybe. Or 1970. Not in 2007.
The law of Canada, and of every province, provides severe penalties for discriminating against LGBT people in employment, or in any public service, or in accommodation, or in commercial transactions...
The Churches (along with some purely private clubs) are the last legal refuge for open homophobes in this country.
We need "dialogue" to convince these "moral leaders" to cease and desist from practices which are [b][i]unlawful[/i][/b] in virtually every other sphere of human activity in Canada??
How about some "dialogue" to convince people that Jews and Blacks and Women aren't inferior beings?
Not in my humble opinion, not in 2007. Condemnation and ridicule are in order.
ETA: As for the Mennonite Church, they are light years ahead of the Catholic Church on this issue and have been for some time. [url=http://www.mennonitechurch.ca/news/statements/ssm/SSM_Letter%20_Prime_Mi... before[/url] the legislation passed on equal marriage, they wrote to the Prime Minister, saying in part:
quote:
We understand that the societal and legal definition is changing, and that there may come to be distinctions between our religiously-based definition and the civil definition of this institution. It is our intention to retain the practice of blessing and sanctifying marriages according to our convictions.
They understand the necessity of separating church and state and of practising their own private beliefs without infringing on the dignity of others. Try to imagine Pope Benedict or the Archbishop of Winnipeg following that example...
[ 27 October 2007: Message edited by: unionist ]
Sat, 2007-10-27 09:46
#42
N.Beltov
quote:
unionist: ETA: To N.Beltov: Am I being too harsh here?
Let me get back to you. I've got an anti-war rally to attend. First things first. [ETA: And if I forget to get back to you on this, then a reminder would be appreciated.] But I will add, parenthetically, that the Catholic authorities seem to have really bungled things here in Winnipeg. I find it very instructive to follow all the up and downs, ins and outs, to understand the theology or whatever it was that was going on in their heads ... even if I ultimately reject every bit of it. Maybe that's the microscopic difference between us. I need to look deeper.
By the way, the conference ends today I think. So I doubt you will have any influence over MP Bill Blakie as he may get your e mail [i]after[/i] the conference is over. (FYI)
[ 27 October 2007: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]
Sat, 2007-10-27 10:33
#43
[ 27 October 2007: Message edited by: RosaL ]
Sat, 2007-10-27 10:43
#44
quote:
Originally posted by N.Beltov:
[b]By the way, the conference ends today I think. So I doubt you will have any influence over MP Bill Blakie as he may get your e mail [i]after[/i] the conference is over. (FYI)[/b]
Well the banning of Loney was last-minute. Still, Bill will have to respond to the emails later and explain his views. He's experienced and principled enough to have taken a good stand without needing to be prodded. I hope that if he did speak at the conference, he had something to say on this issue.
Sat, 2007-10-27 13:35
#45
N.Beltov
We had a treat at today's anti-war rally in Winnipeg. James Loney was the special guest speaker.
Yes, boys and girls, it's good to go to peace rallies. You never know who will be there. [img]biggrin.gif" border="0[/img]
Sat, 2007-10-27 13:45
#46
What did he say?
How was the rally?
Sat, 2007-10-27 13:54
#47
N.Beltov
Loney spoke about his experience in Iraq. He made the interesting observation that one of his captors pointed to his Canadian markings (a maple leaf, something like that) and spoke positively about Canada because he (the captor) knew that Canada had NOT participated in the bombing, invasion and occupation of Iraq. Loney pointed out that people often see each other through the activities of their respective governments. This particular insurgent/captor had a different, more positive, attitude towards Canada than towards the U.S.. Who knows? It may have saved Loney's life.
In any case, the insurgent said something like, "Martin good", or something like that, indicating that he knew who the P.M. of Canada was and what the role of Canada was in regard to Iraq. That was a most interesting observation in light of the astounding ignorance of the Canadian role in Afghanistan as exposed by the Environics "survey" in Afghanistan.
Loney made the usual points and was solid in all regards. I must say that I am looking forward to hearing him in more detail tomorrow. Eat your heart out, babblers. [img]biggrin.gif" border="0[/img]
Edited to add: the turnout was modest at around 70 people (CBC on Sunday). The Raging Grannies sang, the speakers spoke, and a good time was had by all. Most Winnipegers, I expect, were glued to their TVs hoping for a Blue Bomber victory in Toronto. It looks like they will not get their wish as the clock is running out and the Argos are leading.
[ 28 October 2007: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]
Sat, 2007-10-27 14:01
#48
quote:
Originally posted by N.Beltov:
[b] I must say that I am looking forward to hearing him in more detail tomorrow. Eat your heart out, babblers. [img]biggrin.gif" border="0[/img] [/b]
You are so selfish. [img]frown.gif" border="0[/img]
Bring a camcorder, or a cellphone with video capability, or a friend who understands such things, and post it to YouTube.
What is it about [i]sharing[/i] that you don't understand? [img]smile.gif" border="0[/img]
Sat, 2007-10-27 14:02
#49
N.Beltov
How difficult would that be? The event is in a church. What about lighting? I don't know shit about such things.
Sat, 2007-10-27 14:19
#50
N.Beltov
Wait a minute. You were pulling my leg, weren't you?
Sat, 2007-10-27 15:59
#51
![http://www.simplefitnesssolutions.com/images/products/abductors-a.jpg[/img]](http://www.simplefitnesssolutions.com/images/products/abductors-a.jpg[/img]){kind=link}