Richard suggested that I tone down my criticism of Robert's religion and to, effectively, "Be nice".
Richard is like this. He's a caring brother to both his older and younger brothers, their families and to extended families and friends. It was Richard who defended sister-in-law Sue (older brother's wife) who was being bullied at university by storming into the Hunter Building law library and calling out the chief bully, a guy with the ludicrous name Sandy King. It was Richard who organised parties and family events for his elderly aunt. It was Richard who stood under the school steps and looked up the ..... oops, that's another story.
I agreed with Richard and complied, toning down my criticism of Robert's religion and endeavouring to not get 'het up' about the ridiculous things that his Filipino priest says in the sermons and which Robert takes as 'gospel' and repeats in his posts.
The problem with this is that it isn't me and isn't in keeping with the posts I've written and the comments I've made on the blogs for more than a decade.
Robert has said in his posts (all
In Robert's second to latest post (I would put a link in but no doubt he will have deleted all the posts and maybe the entire blog again by the time you get to it) I made a few observations which I think pertinent but that might be construed as irreligious, blasphemous or downright offensive. Sorry about that 😈.
Anyway - all the best to you Sue.
5 comments:
Robert's posts have disappeared. Maybe that's an admittion that we non believers are correst?
Correct
Well, not your spelling of admission.
Oops! Well then, maybe Robert is right?
Right wing anyway.
Post a Comment