![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Jun. 25th, 2006
snark in the face of tactlessness
Jun. 25th, 2006 03:10 pmdear law review editors,
it was ever-so-kind of you to send a big rejection letter out to the entire class, whether or not they tried to write on, whether or not they were accepted.
just know that i rejected you first by not even purchasing the write-on packet, much less deigning to try.
love,
me
p.s.: best wishes for the coming year.
it was ever-so-kind of you to send a big rejection letter out to the entire class, whether or not they tried to write on, whether or not they were accepted.
just know that i rejected you first by not even purchasing the write-on packet, much less deigning to try.
love,
me
p.s.: best wishes for the coming year.
(no subject)
Jun. 25th, 2006 03:57 pmThe cynical side of me is less than surprised that some team, somewhere, decided to do this, although it doesn't stop the fact that, now that it's reality, it makes me even more cynical and frustrated. Apparently, for the Colorado Rockies to want you to play baseball for them, you have to be a christian.
is it employment discrimination? i would think so...whether you're making five fifteen an hour or millions upon millions a season, to be ineligible because of your faith for a job that you could otherwise do is discriminatory. is it counterproductive? i think so...it would be like tom monaghan deciding that only christians could deliver pizza for domino's, shutting out otherwise qualified people who would be willing to do the job, because of a fundamentally private issue.
i didn't really have an opinion on the rockies before...they were that baseball team in colorado. now, though, i don't like them. i'm annoyed with them. there's no place for religious tests on the job, unless the job is some sort of religious staff in a specific faith's house of worship, for obvious reasons. to whom the players pray on their own time, or if they pray at all, is no one's issue but the players themselves. the job of a baseball owner is to run a baseball team, not a church.
and, on a lighter note...their proclamations of "hallelujah! we're .500!" do ring a little hollow.
is it employment discrimination? i would think so...whether you're making five fifteen an hour or millions upon millions a season, to be ineligible because of your faith for a job that you could otherwise do is discriminatory. is it counterproductive? i think so...it would be like tom monaghan deciding that only christians could deliver pizza for domino's, shutting out otherwise qualified people who would be willing to do the job, because of a fundamentally private issue.
i didn't really have an opinion on the rockies before...they were that baseball team in colorado. now, though, i don't like them. i'm annoyed with them. there's no place for religious tests on the job, unless the job is some sort of religious staff in a specific faith's house of worship, for obvious reasons. to whom the players pray on their own time, or if they pray at all, is no one's issue but the players themselves. the job of a baseball owner is to run a baseball team, not a church.
and, on a lighter note...their proclamations of "hallelujah! we're .500!" do ring a little hollow.
bulls bull
Jun. 25th, 2006 04:34 pmcraziest argument for creation ever, courtesy of Fundies Say The Darndest Things:
Did you know that all bulls are males? How can these bulls mate to have more bulls?
Did you know that all bulls are males? How can these bulls mate to have more bulls?
