4588686 Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 His article wasn't that long. Technology really has destroyed our ability to focus on one thing for more than five seconds, I'm afraid. It was a very good article, and I feel the length was necessary to give all of the very important points he made. Good on Matt. No. I'm reading a 200 page book right now. This book it not to long. His article, while much shorter, was far too long. The article was not too long in an absolute sense it was too long relative to the substantive content that it actually had to present. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4588686 Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 He probably could have made the same generic and oft-repeated point without droning on and on in such an incredibly self-important way and without making sweeping judgements about the marriage of two people he's never met before. Actually, given that Nicholas Sparks is also simultaneously generic and self-important this was kid of a good match. Maybe Matt and Nick should get hitched. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhuturePriest Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 He probably could have made the same generic and oft-repeated point without droning on and on in such an incredibly self-important way and without making sweeping judgements about the marriage of two people he's never met before. Actually, given that Nicholas Sparks is also simultaneously generic and self-important this was kid of a good match. Maybe Matt and Nick should get hitched. I want it known that I was not the one who peed in your Lucky Charms this morning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4588686 Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 I want it known that I was not the one who peed in your Lucky Charms this morning. Matt Walsh did. And he had that smug, self-satisfied look on his face the whole time as he did it. He never broke eye contact with me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 Matt Walsh did. And he had that smug, self-satisfied look on his face the whole time as he did it. He never broke eye contact with me. Clearly establishing dominance. Hasan confirmed beta-male. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4588686 Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 Clearly establishing dominance. Hasan confirmed beta-male. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Not A Real Name Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 http://youtu.be/Qn977W9HjWM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basilisa Marie Posted January 14, 2015 Author Share Posted January 14, 2015 Yes - I kept hoping he would start making a new point or exploring his main point in a new way, but that didn't happen, so I ended up skimming until near the end when he did his conclusion. And while I'm not opposed to the idea that there may be some level of divine providence at work when two people get married, that idea's been thoroughly used and abused to the point where even bringing it up sparks a chain of connotations in peoples' minds that does more harm than good. I'd rather teach teens and young people that marriage (and all Vocation, really) is about making a choice. Sure, some options might be fundamentally easier for you than others, but it's ultimately about us making a commitment to live our lives following God in a particular way. Anywho. I thought that since most of the time I absolutely despise Matt Walsh's opinions and the way he presents them, it was only fair that I point out when I thought he did something right. :) Maybe if his posts like these get enough traffic, he'll quit being such a jerk. Well, I can dream, I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhuturePriest Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Yes - I kept hoping he would start making a new point or exploring his main point in a new way, but that didn't happen, so I ended up skimming until near the end when he did his conclusion. And while I'm not opposed to the idea that there may be some level of divine providence at work when two people get married, that idea's been thoroughly used and abused to the point where even bringing it up sparks a chain of connotations in peoples' minds that does more harm than good. I'd rather teach teens and young people that marriage (and all Vocation, really) is about making a choice. Sure, some options might be fundamentally easier for you than others, but it's ultimately about us making a commitment to live our lives following God in a particular way. Anywho. I thought that since most of the time I absolutely despise Matt Walsh's opinions and the way he presents them, it was only fair that I point out when I thought he did something right. :) Maybe if his posts like these get enough traffic, he'll quit being such a jerk. Well, I can dream, I guess. I must ask: Who in your eyes is closer to Satan: Matt Walsh, or Michael Voris? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 I must ask: Who in your eyes is closer to Satan: Matt Walsh, or Michael Voris? List of Burn Centers in the United States Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 We are now accepting applications for FP's hype man. A shortlist of the ten most promising candidates will be permitted to audition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
veritasluxmea Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 I must ask: Who in your eyes is closer to Satan: Matt Walsh, or Michael Voris? Michael Voris. His handling of the March for Life was a terrible embarrassment. (http://theleadingedgeblog.com/michael-voris-tries-to-create-divisons-at-the-march-for-life/ for anyone who missed that drama.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhuturePriest Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Michael Voris. His handling of the March for Life was a terrible embarrassment. (http://theleadingedgeblog.com/michael-voris-tries-to-create-divisons-at-the-march-for-life/ for anyone who missed that drama.) I see nothing wrong with pointing out that supposedly "pro-life" people are in favor of stopping life from happening. I don't see the need for the outrage. And I would very much like to remind you that we are to speak charitably of others, and saying Michael Voris is close to Satan because he exposed how anti-life many pro-lifers are is anything but charitable. Dare I say even a sin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Veritas can audition as FP's hype man if she dresses up as bro-Elsa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhuturePriest Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Veritas can audition as FP's hype man if she dresses up as bro-Elsa. My hype man has to like Voris. It's my only standard, and I'm not willing to lower it. (And yes, I am aware that greatly shortens the list of candidates Phatmass has to offer.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts