Attire for Papal Audience
Aug 14th 2005, 7:21 pm
#91
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Attire for Papal Audience
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 23:30:24 GMT, "No Spam" <[email protected]> wrote:
>"Mxsmanic" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected].. .
>> Timothy Kroesen writes:
>>> Recognizing Jesus as an important figure in their own religion (let
>>> alone the same underlying Godhead) and recognizing their own demand for
>>> respect in their own religious choices and practices, they show
>>> respect???
>> Their religion requires that men wear a hat at all times. Catholics
>> require that men remove their hats in a church. So what do they do?
>Compromise: hiking boots!
Remove one and wear one? :-)
--
Martin
>"Mxsmanic" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected].. .
>> Timothy Kroesen writes:
>>> Recognizing Jesus as an important figure in their own religion (let
>>> alone the same underlying Godhead) and recognizing their own demand for
>>> respect in their own religious choices and practices, they show
>>> respect???
>> Their religion requires that men wear a hat at all times. Catholics
>> require that men remove their hats in a church. So what do they do?
>Compromise: hiking boots!
Remove one and wear one? :-)
--
Martin
Aug 14th 2005, 9:55 pm
#92
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Attire for Papal Audience
Luca Logi writes:
> Saudi Arabia is excessively religious, but they are filthy rich...
Only the royal family is rich.
--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.
> Saudi Arabia is excessively religious, but they are filthy rich...
Only the royal family is rich.
--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.
Aug 14th 2005, 9:58 pm
#93
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Attire for Papal Audience
[email protected] writes:
> This hypothetical situation goes back, I think, to the point I made a few
> posts back about consideration. It is not the hat (or the shorts or
> whatever other item of clothing one cares to propose) that is the issue -
> the issue is showing respect for the religious users of the building.
That doesn't answer the question. Does the Jewish man obey God, or
the people running the church?
> I greatly doubt any RC church with a "no hats" rule would exclude a Jewish
> person wearing a hat as part of their own religious observance (which as
> at least one other poster has indicated is pretty obvious in its nature) ...
Then why exclude anyone else wearing a hat? If it's okay for a Jewish
man, why isn't it okay for everyone else?
> ... or indeed exclude someone wearing shorts if they explained they had a
> medical condition which made the wearing of long trousers painful.
If it's acceptable when they have a medical condition, why isn't it
acceptable in every other case?
Medical condition or not, bare legs are bare legs, and if they are an
offense to God, they must be covered no matter what. Otherwise the
whole policy is badly hypocritical and grossly unfair.
--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.
> This hypothetical situation goes back, I think, to the point I made a few
> posts back about consideration. It is not the hat (or the shorts or
> whatever other item of clothing one cares to propose) that is the issue -
> the issue is showing respect for the religious users of the building.
That doesn't answer the question. Does the Jewish man obey God, or
the people running the church?
> I greatly doubt any RC church with a "no hats" rule would exclude a Jewish
> person wearing a hat as part of their own religious observance (which as
> at least one other poster has indicated is pretty obvious in its nature) ...
Then why exclude anyone else wearing a hat? If it's okay for a Jewish
man, why isn't it okay for everyone else?
> ... or indeed exclude someone wearing shorts if they explained they had a
> medical condition which made the wearing of long trousers painful.
If it's acceptable when they have a medical condition, why isn't it
acceptable in every other case?
Medical condition or not, bare legs are bare legs, and if they are an
offense to God, they must be covered no matter what. Otherwise the
whole policy is badly hypocritical and grossly unfair.
--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.
Aug 14th 2005, 10:01 pm
#94
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Attire for Papal Audience
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 11:55:40 +0200, Mxsmanic <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Luca Logi writes:
>> Saudi Arabia is excessively religious, but they are filthy rich...
>Only the royal family is rich.
Are the rest just filthy?
--
Martin
wrote:
>Luca Logi writes:
>> Saudi Arabia is excessively religious, but they are filthy rich...
>Only the royal family is rich.
Are the rest just filthy?
--
Martin
Aug 14th 2005, 10:01 pm
#95
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Attire for Papal Audience
Karen Selwyn writes:
> Please, let's not go down that path again.
Please, just answer the question. Does he obey God, or whoever is
running the Catholic church that he is visiting.
> Only one branch of the religion requires that a man's head
> be covered at all times.
And if the man is a member of that branch, what then? Answer the
original question.
> Furthermore, if you have ever observed the Orthodox, you would have
> noticed that the head covering falls into one of three types: the ritual
> skullcap (the kippah), a fedora-style hat, or a very exotic and
> distinctive broad brimmed hat from the 1500s. A basball cap or other
> casual style fails to qualify for the very reason that its casualness
> fails to comvey the proper sense of respect.
If there are certain hats that are okay for Jews, then can anyone else
also wear them into the church? And if so, why are certain hats okay,
and others not?
And for whom is one conveying respect? A head covering shows one's
humility before God himself. Isn't that sufficient? Or is showing
respect for the Catholic church or its management even more important
than respect for God?
> The typical hats are so distinctive -- especially when coupled with some
> of the other features of Orthodox clothing -- that the wearers'
> religious affiliation is immediately obvious.
So? If the rules say no hats, why would someone in Orthodox clothing
be exempt? If the clothing by its very nature is disrepectful--which
it must be if the clothing is itself the only criterion of its
acceptability--then it remains so no matter who is wearing it.
> Based on my own observations of such visitors in churches, they
> have never be asked to remove their hats.
So anyone else should be able to wear a hat also, right?
--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.
> Please, let's not go down that path again.
Please, just answer the question. Does he obey God, or whoever is
running the Catholic church that he is visiting.
> Only one branch of the religion requires that a man's head
> be covered at all times.
And if the man is a member of that branch, what then? Answer the
original question.
> Furthermore, if you have ever observed the Orthodox, you would have
> noticed that the head covering falls into one of three types: the ritual
> skullcap (the kippah), a fedora-style hat, or a very exotic and
> distinctive broad brimmed hat from the 1500s. A basball cap or other
> casual style fails to qualify for the very reason that its casualness
> fails to comvey the proper sense of respect.
If there are certain hats that are okay for Jews, then can anyone else
also wear them into the church? And if so, why are certain hats okay,
and others not?
And for whom is one conveying respect? A head covering shows one's
humility before God himself. Isn't that sufficient? Or is showing
respect for the Catholic church or its management even more important
than respect for God?
> The typical hats are so distinctive -- especially when coupled with some
> of the other features of Orthodox clothing -- that the wearers'
> religious affiliation is immediately obvious.
So? If the rules say no hats, why would someone in Orthodox clothing
be exempt? If the clothing by its very nature is disrepectful--which
it must be if the clothing is itself the only criterion of its
acceptability--then it remains so no matter who is wearing it.
> Based on my own observations of such visitors in churches, they
> have never be asked to remove their hats.
So anyone else should be able to wear a hat also, right?
--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.
Aug 14th 2005, 10:02 pm
#96
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Attire for Papal Audience
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 11:58:02 +0200, Mxsmanic <[email protected]>
wrote:
>[email protected] writes:
>> This hypothetical situation goes back, I think, to the point I made a few
>> posts back about consideration. It is not the hat (or the shorts or
>> whatever other item of clothing one cares to propose) that is the issue -
>> the issue is showing respect for the religious users of the building.
>That doesn't answer the question. Does the Jewish man obey God, or
>the people running the church?
>> I greatly doubt any RC church with a "no hats" rule would exclude a Jewish
>> person wearing a hat as part of their own religious observance (which as
>> at least one other poster has indicated is pretty obvious in its nature) ...
>Then why exclude anyone else wearing a hat? If it's okay for a Jewish
>man, why isn't it okay for everyone else?
>> ... or indeed exclude someone wearing shorts if they explained they had a
>> medical condition which made the wearing of long trousers painful.
>If it's acceptable when they have a medical condition, why isn't it
>acceptable in every other case?
>Medical condition or not, bare legs are bare legs, and if they are an
>offense to God, they must be covered no matter what. Otherwise the
>whole policy is badly hypocritical and grossly unfair.
Take your burka off and say that. :-)
--
Martin
wrote:
>[email protected] writes:
>> This hypothetical situation goes back, I think, to the point I made a few
>> posts back about consideration. It is not the hat (or the shorts or
>> whatever other item of clothing one cares to propose) that is the issue -
>> the issue is showing respect for the religious users of the building.
>That doesn't answer the question. Does the Jewish man obey God, or
>the people running the church?
>> I greatly doubt any RC church with a "no hats" rule would exclude a Jewish
>> person wearing a hat as part of their own religious observance (which as
>> at least one other poster has indicated is pretty obvious in its nature) ...
>Then why exclude anyone else wearing a hat? If it's okay for a Jewish
>man, why isn't it okay for everyone else?
>> ... or indeed exclude someone wearing shorts if they explained they had a
>> medical condition which made the wearing of long trousers painful.
>If it's acceptable when they have a medical condition, why isn't it
>acceptable in every other case?
>Medical condition or not, bare legs are bare legs, and if they are an
>offense to God, they must be covered no matter what. Otherwise the
>whole policy is badly hypocritical and grossly unfair.
Take your burka off and say that. :-)
--
Martin
Aug 14th 2005, 10:16 pm
#97
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Attire for Papal Audience
Martin writes:
> Are the rest just filthy?
No, but almost all the wealth is concentrated among the royals.
--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.
> Are the rest just filthy?
No, but almost all the wealth is concentrated among the royals.
--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.
Aug 14th 2005, 10:35 pm
#98
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Attire for Papal Audience
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 12:16:02 +0200, Mxsmanic <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Martin writes:
>> Are the rest just filthy?
>No, but almost all the wealth is concentrated among the royals.
but the royals have hundreds if not thousands of relatives.
--
Martin
wrote:
>Martin writes:
>> Are the rest just filthy?
>No, but almost all the wealth is concentrated among the royals.
but the royals have hundreds if not thousands of relatives.
--
Martin
Aug 14th 2005, 11:27 pm
#99
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Attire for Papal Audience
Martin wrote:
> Mxsmanic wrote:
>>Icono Clast writes:
>>>I think you'll find that the coasts of the USA are far less religious
>>>than inland.
>>True. The east and west coasts of the country are better educated,
>>more liberal, more worldly, less religious, and more wealthy than much
>>of the population in the center and south of the country. They also
>>voted mostly for Kerry in the last election, whereas the center and
>>south voted more for Bush, if I remember correctly.
>
> Are there no nutty religious old fishing communities like there are in
> Europe?
I know there's one near Long Beach in Oregon or Washington. I don't
doubt there are many others.
__________________________________________________ _________________
A San Franciscan who's visited 49 of 50 US states.
< http://geocities.com/dancefest/ >-< http://geocities.com/iconoc/ >
ICQ: < http://wwp.mirabilis.com/19098103 > ---> IClast at SFbay Net
> Mxsmanic wrote:
>>Icono Clast writes:
>>>I think you'll find that the coasts of the USA are far less religious
>>>than inland.
>>True. The east and west coasts of the country are better educated,
>>more liberal, more worldly, less religious, and more wealthy than much
>>of the population in the center and south of the country. They also
>>voted mostly for Kerry in the last election, whereas the center and
>>south voted more for Bush, if I remember correctly.
>
> Are there no nutty religious old fishing communities like there are in
> Europe?
I know there's one near Long Beach in Oregon or Washington. I don't
doubt there are many others.
__________________________________________________ _________________
A San Franciscan who's visited 49 of 50 US states.
< http://geocities.com/dancefest/ >-< http://geocities.com/iconoc/ >
ICQ: < http://wwp.mirabilis.com/19098103 > ---> IClast at SFbay Net
Aug 14th 2005, 11:33 pm
#100
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Attire for Papal Audience
chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn and prestwich tesco 24h
offy wrote:
> Well, I'm not religious, so I find the dress codes outmoded, but
> them are the rules! Also, even if a service isn't taking place,
> there are still people who go to the church to pray etc., and
> while I may not understand the necessity for them to take offense
> at my tank top, I think it's fair enough to require me to take it
> into account as a 'guest' of the building.
I don't know exactly what a "tank top" is but if it's what I think it
is it's underwear unsuitable for outerwear outside one's home except
at a beach.
Mxsmanic wrote:
> [email protected] writes:
>> Nevertheless [Notre Dame] is a church used for Roman Catholic
>> worship.
>
> If the Catholics don't own it, they have no right to dictate how
> people should dress inside. Not on my dime.
If they control access, they can do as they wish just as bars,
restaurants, and the First Class sections of airplanes do.
Mxsmanic wrote:
> Timothy Kroesen writes:
>> Whoever 'owns the structure is not material; the rules of entry
>> are clearly and publicly posted then went largely ignored by the
>> 'masses'...
>
> What happens if the person entering is Jewish?
When entering the temple of another, their superstitions and
practices are entitled to the same respect as your superstitions and
practices when they enter yours. That's a difficult concept for you?
chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn and prestwich tesco 24h
offy wrote:
> we were turned away from an establishment due to dress on a recent
> trip!
I have never in my life been turned away from anywhere because of how
I was dressed. My guess is that most San Franciscans could say the same.
__________________________________________________ _________________
A San Franciscan whose reverence for each god is equal.
< http://geocities.com/dancefest/ >-< http://geocities.com/iconoc/ >
ICQ: < http://wwp.mirabilis.com/19098103 > ---> IClast at SFbay Net
offy wrote:
> Well, I'm not religious, so I find the dress codes outmoded, but
> them are the rules! Also, even if a service isn't taking place,
> there are still people who go to the church to pray etc., and
> while I may not understand the necessity for them to take offense
> at my tank top, I think it's fair enough to require me to take it
> into account as a 'guest' of the building.
I don't know exactly what a "tank top" is but if it's what I think it
is it's underwear unsuitable for outerwear outside one's home except
at a beach.
Mxsmanic wrote:
> [email protected] writes:
>> Nevertheless [Notre Dame] is a church used for Roman Catholic
>> worship.
>
> If the Catholics don't own it, they have no right to dictate how
> people should dress inside. Not on my dime.
If they control access, they can do as they wish just as bars,
restaurants, and the First Class sections of airplanes do.
Mxsmanic wrote:
> Timothy Kroesen writes:
>> Whoever 'owns the structure is not material; the rules of entry
>> are clearly and publicly posted then went largely ignored by the
>> 'masses'...
>
> What happens if the person entering is Jewish?
When entering the temple of another, their superstitions and
practices are entitled to the same respect as your superstitions and
practices when they enter yours. That's a difficult concept for you?
chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn and prestwich tesco 24h
offy wrote:
> we were turned away from an establishment due to dress on a recent
> trip!
I have never in my life been turned away from anywhere because of how
I was dressed. My guess is that most San Franciscans could say the same.
__________________________________________________ _________________
A San Franciscan whose reverence for each god is equal.
< http://geocities.com/dancefest/ >-< http://geocities.com/iconoc/ >
ICQ: < http://wwp.mirabilis.com/19098103 > ---> IClast at SFbay Net
Aug 14th 2005, 11:34 pm
#101
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Attire for Papal Audience
Mxsmanic wrote:
>
> Please, just answer the question. Does he obey God, or whoever is
> running the Catholic church that he is visiting.
I did. In my earlier post, I wrote that I have observed Jews wearing
their hats in Roman Catholic churches. Why are you having so much
trouble recognizing that it answered/s your question?
Since I've already said that Orthodox Jews are permitted into RC church
with their hats on, clearly there is another principle operating:
reciprocal respect for other religions.
(Does someone want to weigh in with any sightings of Sikhs or others in
RC churches who wear head covering as part of their religious observance?)
> If there are certain hats that are okay for Jews, then can anyone else
> also wear them into the church? And if so, why are certain hats okay,
> and others not?
If someone is intent on entering a RC church wearing a hat, I suppose if
they dress in a manner identical to an Orthodox Jew, they won't be
challenged to remove their hats either.
I'll leave it to you to research the many details of dress that
communicate Orthodox religious observance. Then, you'll be free to make
a trip to the RC church of your choice and wear a hat.
> And for whom is one conveying respect? A head covering shows one's
> humility before God himself. Isn't that sufficient? Or is showing
> respect for the Catholic church or its management even more important
> than respect for God?
Since I answered you in yesterday's post, why are you still carrying on
about having to choose to show respect for one's God or the Catholic
church? Real-world examples prove Jews choose to show respect for God as
their religion defines respect, and the Catholic gatekeeper shows his
respect for the faith of visitors by allowing them to keep their hats on.
> So? If the rules say no hats, why would someone in Orthodox clothing
> be exempt? If the clothing by its very nature is disrepectful--which
> it must be if the clothing is itself the only criterion of its
> acceptability--then it remains so no matter who is wearing it.
Someone else has already done an excellent job of pointing out that it
is not the clothing by itself that is disrespectful. The RC church has
made certain rules that it defines as showing respect/disrespect.
Wearing hats is one of those rules. No one is asking you to approve or
understand those rules. However, with limited exceptions, the RC church
is asking visitors to abide by those rules as the price of admission.
>>Based on my own observations of such visitors in churches, they
>>have never be asked to remove their hats.
>
> So anyone else should be able to wear a hat also, right?
"Everyone" is an absolute statement. Nothing I wrote suggests I think
everyone should wear a hat. Only you are suggesting that uniform
application of a rule is more important than showing respect in a house
of faith and being sensitive to the beliefs of others when expressions
of respect are in conflict.
Karen Selwyn
>
> Please, just answer the question. Does he obey God, or whoever is
> running the Catholic church that he is visiting.
I did. In my earlier post, I wrote that I have observed Jews wearing
their hats in Roman Catholic churches. Why are you having so much
trouble recognizing that it answered/s your question?
Since I've already said that Orthodox Jews are permitted into RC church
with their hats on, clearly there is another principle operating:
reciprocal respect for other religions.
(Does someone want to weigh in with any sightings of Sikhs or others in
RC churches who wear head covering as part of their religious observance?)
> If there are certain hats that are okay for Jews, then can anyone else
> also wear them into the church? And if so, why are certain hats okay,
> and others not?
If someone is intent on entering a RC church wearing a hat, I suppose if
they dress in a manner identical to an Orthodox Jew, they won't be
challenged to remove their hats either.
I'll leave it to you to research the many details of dress that
communicate Orthodox religious observance. Then, you'll be free to make
a trip to the RC church of your choice and wear a hat.
> And for whom is one conveying respect? A head covering shows one's
> humility before God himself. Isn't that sufficient? Or is showing
> respect for the Catholic church or its management even more important
> than respect for God?
Since I answered you in yesterday's post, why are you still carrying on
about having to choose to show respect for one's God or the Catholic
church? Real-world examples prove Jews choose to show respect for God as
their religion defines respect, and the Catholic gatekeeper shows his
respect for the faith of visitors by allowing them to keep their hats on.
> So? If the rules say no hats, why would someone in Orthodox clothing
> be exempt? If the clothing by its very nature is disrepectful--which
> it must be if the clothing is itself the only criterion of its
> acceptability--then it remains so no matter who is wearing it.
Someone else has already done an excellent job of pointing out that it
is not the clothing by itself that is disrespectful. The RC church has
made certain rules that it defines as showing respect/disrespect.
Wearing hats is one of those rules. No one is asking you to approve or
understand those rules. However, with limited exceptions, the RC church
is asking visitors to abide by those rules as the price of admission.
>>Based on my own observations of such visitors in churches, they
>>have never be asked to remove their hats.
>
> So anyone else should be able to wear a hat also, right?
"Everyone" is an absolute statement. Nothing I wrote suggests I think
everyone should wear a hat. Only you are suggesting that uniform
application of a rule is more important than showing respect in a house
of faith and being sensitive to the beliefs of others when expressions
of respect are in conflict.
Karen Selwyn
Aug 14th 2005, 11:50 pm
#102
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Attire for Papal Audience
Icono Clast <[email protected]> wrote:
> chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn and prestwich tesco 24h
> offy wrote:
> > Well, I'm not religious, so I find the dress codes outmoded, but
> > them are the rules! Also, even if a service isn't taking place,
> > there are still people who go to the church to pray etc., and
> > while I may not understand the necessity for them to take offense
> > at my tank top, I think it's fair enough to require me to take it
> > into account as a 'guest' of the building.
>
> I don't know exactly what a "tank top" is but if it's what I think it
> is it's underwear unsuitable for outerwear outside one's home except
> at a beach.
I think you might be thinking of the white ones which often _are_ worn
as underwear, but so are white t-shirts. In fact, tank tops can be quite
fashionable and popular during warm weather, and certainly not just at
the beach.
[]
> > we were turned away from an establishment due to dress on a recent
> > trip!
>
> I have never in my life been turned away from anywhere because of how
> I was dressed. My guess is that most San Franciscans could say the same.
So?
--
David Horne- http://www.davidhorne.net
usenet (at) davidhorne (dot) co (dot) uk
pictures at http://homepage.mac.com/davidhornecomposer
> chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn and prestwich tesco 24h
> offy wrote:
> > Well, I'm not religious, so I find the dress codes outmoded, but
> > them are the rules! Also, even if a service isn't taking place,
> > there are still people who go to the church to pray etc., and
> > while I may not understand the necessity for them to take offense
> > at my tank top, I think it's fair enough to require me to take it
> > into account as a 'guest' of the building.
>
> I don't know exactly what a "tank top" is but if it's what I think it
> is it's underwear unsuitable for outerwear outside one's home except
> at a beach.
I think you might be thinking of the white ones which often _are_ worn
as underwear, but so are white t-shirts. In fact, tank tops can be quite
fashionable and popular during warm weather, and certainly not just at
the beach.
[]
> > we were turned away from an establishment due to dress on a recent
> > trip!
>
> I have never in my life been turned away from anywhere because of how
> I was dressed. My guess is that most San Franciscans could say the same.
So?
--
David Horne- http://www.davidhorne.net
usenet (at) davidhorne (dot) co (dot) uk
pictures at http://homepage.mac.com/davidhornecomposer
Aug 15th 2005, 12:19 am
#103
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Attire for Papal Audience
"Mxsmanic" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> [email protected] writes:
>> This hypothetical situation goes back, I think, to the point I made a few
>> posts back about consideration. It is not the hat (or the shorts or
>> whatever other item of clothing one cares to propose) that is the issue -
>> the issue is showing respect for the religious users of the building.
> That doesn't answer the question. Does the Jewish man obey God, or
> the people running the church.
The Jew is not wearing the hat in order to "obey God."
Your premise is faulty. Once again, you are holding
forth on a subject you know nothing about. You're an
idiot.
news:[email protected]...
> [email protected] writes:
>> This hypothetical situation goes back, I think, to the point I made a few
>> posts back about consideration. It is not the hat (or the shorts or
>> whatever other item of clothing one cares to propose) that is the issue -
>> the issue is showing respect for the religious users of the building.
> That doesn't answer the question. Does the Jewish man obey God, or
> the people running the church.
The Jew is not wearing the hat in order to "obey God."
Your premise is faulty. Once again, you are holding
forth on a subject you know nothing about. You're an
idiot.
Aug 15th 2005, 12:19 am
#104
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Attire for Papal Audience
"Mxsmanic" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Karen Selwyn writes:
>> Please, let's not go down that path again.
> Please, just answer the question. Does he obey God, or whoever is
> running the Catholic church that he is visiting.
>> Only one branch of the religion requires that a man's head
>> be covered at all times.
> And if the man is a member of that branch, what then? Answer the
> original question.
Who died and made you the Jello Sherrif of the newsgroup.
Your "original" question is full of shit, it does not
warrant a direct answer, and you don't make the rules
in the newsgroup. Besides, you're a ****ing arsehole and
a moron.
news:[email protected]...
> Karen Selwyn writes:
>> Please, let's not go down that path again.
> Please, just answer the question. Does he obey God, or whoever is
> running the Catholic church that he is visiting.
>> Only one branch of the religion requires that a man's head
>> be covered at all times.
> And if the man is a member of that branch, what then? Answer the
> original question.
Who died and made you the Jello Sherrif of the newsgroup.
Your "original" question is full of shit, it does not
warrant a direct answer, and you don't make the rules
in the newsgroup. Besides, you're a ****ing arsehole and
a moron.
Aug 15th 2005, 12:51 am
#105
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Attire for Papal Audience
"Mxsmanic" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Catholics require that men remove their hats in a church.
You got a cite for that? Like much of what you write, it is nonsense.
JohnT
news:[email protected]...
> Catholics require that men remove their hats in a church.
You got a cite for that? Like much of what you write, it is nonsense.
JohnT
