This is totally off topic, but would somebody please let Paul Manata know I've built on his arguments against Scripturalism?http://theoparadox.blogspot.com/2010/06/theological-paradox-debating-rules-for.htmlSatire is too much fun!
I appreciate seeing one who is labeled "a devout Catholic" being given a video presence here. The video is not about religion, but about being pro-life - a subject most (sadly not all) Christians agree upon. AMDG,Scott<<<CathApol Blog
Hi Derek,I've emailed Paul. Thanks!patrick-Hi Scott,Not sure if you're trying to imply something here, but, just to be clear, I've never labeled Bocelli as being "a devout Catholic" or said the video is about religion.patrick
SCOTT WINDSOR SAID:"I appreciate seeing one who is labeled "a devout Catholic" being given a video presence here."As appreciate Scott's candid admission of what it means to be "a devout Catholic." As one news outlet explains:"Andrea Bocelli... lives with his girlfriend, Veronica Berti, and has two children, Amos, 12, and Matteo, 10, from his estranged wife, Enrica."http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/the_way_we_live/article3040086.ece
Steve,We don't know the relationship he has with Veronica, nor what the estrangement is all about between he and Enrica. I will agree that "living with her" is scandalous, but if they are living as brother and sister until Enrica passes, then there is no sin. If you have proof to the contrary, I would look at it, but all else would be gossip - and sinful. Patrick,I wasn't implying anything, I was pleased to see the video here, that is all. I was not looking for something sinister, as it appears Steve is. Back to Steve, I cannot judge Mr. Bocelli for I do not know the circumstances mentioned previously. In JMJ,Scott<<<
SCOTT WINDSOR SAID:"I will agree that 'living with her' is scandalous, but if they are living as brother and sister until Enrica passes, then there is no sin."If you want to pretend that when a man has a live-in girlfriend, that's a platonic relationship, then it's hardly surprising that you're Roman Catholic. Your childish credulity is a hallmark of Catholic believers.And it's no more gossipy than his reputation as "a devout Catholic."
http://operachic.typepad.com/opera_chic/andrea_bocelli/http://www.rickross.com/reference/scientology/celebrities/celebrities154.htmlhttp://www.imnotobsessed.com/2007/01/12/andrea-bocelli-skipped-the-cruise-ceremonyhttp://stmichaelsociety.com/2010/06/04/andrea-bocelli-almost-aborted-devout-catholic/There's many, many more - many in his own words. It's not gossip to repeat his own words. Now, unless you've been in his bedroom and/or unless his "girlfriend" becomes pregnant with his child, or HE comes right out and says he's having a marital relationship with her - then YOU are participating in gossip. If you want to keep looking bad, keep continuing this discussion!
I find it ironic that I compliment the forum and this is turned into an attack.
You're welcome to make yourself look ever more foolish by denying the significance of a live-in girlfriend. By all means, keep it up.
I guess they're just hanging out innocently here. A man in his undies outside a room, a woman running her fingers through his hair. (Source.)
Scott Windsor said:I find it ironic that I compliment the forum and this is turned into an attack.Well, Mr. Windsor, on the one hand, you say: "The video is not about religion, but about being pro-life." Fine.On the other hand, you say: "I appreciate seeing one who is labeled 'a devout Catholic' being given a video presence here," even though I never labeled him "a devout Catholic." And even though you yourself admit it has nothing to do with religion. Also, you sign off with a link to your "CathApol Blog" at the end of your "compliment."So if this is your idea of a compliment, it's a bit more like a self-compliment, dontcha think?
>> sw: I find it ironic that I >> compliment the forum and this >> is turned into an attack.>> PC: Well, Mr. Windsor, on the > one hand, you say: "The video is > not about religion, but about > being pro-life." Fine.>> On the other hand, you say: "I> appreciate seeing one who is > labeled 'a devout Catholic' > being given a video presence > here," even though I never > labeled him "a devout Catholic." sw: I did not say YOU said he was a devout Roman Catholic, I said he is labeled so - and I have provided several links to non-Catholic sources making the statement.> PC: And even though you yourself > admit it has nothing to do with > religion. sw: This forum is religious, and Bocelli has a religious side to him as well. IF his life is as sinful as others testify, then it seems ironic that you would want to post the video of such a scandalous person. I would venture to guess a couple things here:1) You didn't realize he was labeled by many in the media as a "devout Catholic."2) You too were not aware of him having a live-in girlfriend. sw: THE POINT was and remains that opposing abortion is something we AGREE upon. I was happy to see the video here, so I said so. With all the ill-will being thrown my way, well, I'm sorry I drew that out of you and your compadres.> PC: Also, you sign off with a > link to your "CathApol Blog" at > the end of your "compliment."> So if this is your idea of a > compliment, it's a bit more like > a self-compliment, dontcha think? sw: I think what comes AFTER the signature is like a "tagline" and is not necessarily related to the post at hand at all. The CathApol Blog is just a blog site where I share with others and defend the Catholic Faith. I often use in as a "tagline" to my signature - there was nothing special about using it in that posting or any others. In JMJ,Scott<<<CathApol Blog
Further responses here.