Re: Michael Jackson bust

On 26 Nov 2003 04:41:07 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob
Crowley) wrote:

>The difference between Michael Jackson and any other alleged
>paedophile, or a past American President and any other alleged
>adulterer, or a former (now deceased) cricketer and any other gambling
>"fixer", or a movie star with weight problems and any other overweight
>person, is that they are public figures.  For every public figure
>arrested or criticised on such counts, there are probably hundreds of
>private individuals who are not publicly berated.
Nevertheless, since they are public figures they have to bear the
responsibility of their actions. They want to be in the spot lights,
and have all the benefits? Then they pay the price. 

>It is a moot point whether the public figure should be so treated,
>although I suppose if they gain the benefit of sympathetic media and
>marketing in more favourable times, then they are at the risk of the
>opposite happening in due course.

>IN the case of the church, I believe God (I'm a Christian obviously)
>wants His church back in one piece.
Pretty weak god you worship. They (obviously you forgot to mention you
worship at least 3 deities) created the universe, didn't they? A minor
miracle would suffice...

>Between the thousands of
>differing Protestant sects who cannot agree despite having the same
>Bible by the same Holy Spirit, poltical chicanery by the Orthodox
>churches in Russia and the Balkans, the alleged infallibility of the
>Magisterium, the banning of the pill by the Catholic Church (I believe
>in fact it was God's gift), and now the coverups of paedophilia by
>Catholic church officials, there is not much hope.
There is, but very little. That one day people will merely laught at
all these shamans. 

>No wonder He is allowing the Moslems to challenge the West.  I think
>He's had enough and is going to jettison the current status quo and
Aids is a divine curse, right?