Sunday, August 30, 2009

We're Sorry, This Blog Is Currently Under is its Destiny

Over the past week, two different people have confronted me about the contents of my blog. They've said that certain things were juvenile and adolescent.

Now I will be honest with you, my first instinct was to tell both of them 'You know what, I'm 26, I hang out with kids all day long and I laugh when people burp, so the immaturity of this blog probably reflects that of its author!'

But the more I thought about it, the more I realized that I am a Christian...and as a Christian I should be held accountable. So thank you Rosie and thank you Rex. You were both spot on. I was going after cheap, inappropriate laughs which were juvenile and furthermore insensitive.

This blog is irreverent (hat-tip to Jeff), and I doubt I will stop using the word 'd-bag' or drawing devil horns on people, but at the same time if any of you feel that I am really crossing a line then please do let me know. I'd appreciate it.

{Clarification: I'm not saying I will change every little thing that ticks someone off. Heck, I may even start doubling the amount of slanderous things I say. :) What I'm saying is, if I post something outright unacceptable, bring it to my attention. I can admit when I am wrong, and I will change it if there's validity to your argument. That being said, I am RARELY wrong...that's why I handle it so well when I am. Lightening just happened to strike twice this week.}


  1. You know what, Destiny, if anyone finds what you say offensive, they don't have to keep reading your blog. No one is holding their hand on the mouse to click it to go to your blog.

    I personally thought your horns were appropriate in this case. You did not write the original article that prompted you to think of the horns. It was just plain funny.

    As far as irreverant on the D---bag? It was not. Maybe a little off color, but not irreverant. There again, you had to fill in the blanks, so any one who was offended had to fill in the letters for themselves and make it say whatever they came up with.

    This is what blogging is all about. Letting your thoughts ramble? Am I right?

  2. I find your blog fascinating and entertaining. I check several times a day.
    "Don't go changin'"

  3. I think it depends on what you want and where you want to go with what you with “your” blog. That is the important thing. Public figures are fair game for commentary. They wanted the attention and positions. So when they earn it, they have it coming. Being hateful is where the line gets crossed. Are you trying to make us “hate” people, or just poking some fun at some of the public figures at their own expense?

    If the DMN wrote and published some of the stuff you wrote and published (and dream up), it would be inappropriate. You, however, are not the DMN and do not have to act as they do. And believe me, it is a good thing!

    You are wonderfully creative with your site. You have taken on rumors and squashed them like a bug (really wish more people would do that). Your take on things is sometimes far different than mine, but it is very interesting, entertaining and thought provoking. To substantially change the content matter on “your” blog site would be a true loss. The stings of anonymous comments aren’t fun, but it is a part of opening up and exposing your ideas and thoughts. The personality you inject into “your” site is what separates it from the kind of site most people, me included, could build. It is on a completely different level.

    Several “old” people, (like me) with whom I have had conversations, say they wished they had your common sense, sense of humor and good judgment and the ability to express it in a fashion such as you do, at 26 or even their present age.

    There are many types of blogs out there. I like C&P for the irreverence, humor, decent content and how twisted (in a good way of course) you can get. If a person does not like your blog, there are lots of other blogs they can go visit. If, on the other hand, what they really want is a propaganda site, I know exactly where they can go! Not to H..L, but the RC spinsters “business as usual”, DD&B site (now how is that for insensitivity?)

    Just another of my 2 cents worth

  4. Destiny, honey, don't you change a thing! You approach things straight up, and aren't afraid to tackle the tough issues. Taking on the Richardson Coaltion can be scary because they're desparate people! My hat goes off to you!

    If we want to read jaded propaganda, then we can always go visit The Richardson Echo or Richardson Coalition websites. The "editors" of these website are very biased in their writing - all centered around maintaining Gary Slagel as mayor, and keeping his puppets (Murphy, Townsend, Solomon, Omar, and Macy) in office. I know that this is shocking, but these websites even link to one another. And, word has it that the editor of the Echo considers himself the son that Gary Slagel never had. Now that's a doosy!

    Chuck Eisemann and his Richardson Coalition fear the truth and choose to ignore all of the unethical business deals/actions that Gary Slagel has concocted during his tenure as mayor. Could it be that they are perhaps involved in it? We can only hope that one day - probably with the FBI's help - we'll have the answers.

  5. No offense, but I refuse to subscribe to the whole 'if you don't like what I'm doing, don't read it' mentality.

    Partly because, I'm so use to being on the other side of that argument. 'If you don't like abortion, don't have one,' 'if you don't like women being exploited, don't look,' 'if you don't like the government, butt out!'

    I made a legitimately offensive joke the other day about mental retardation. It was just flat out unacceptable. And seeing as how I have counseled women in the past who were facing crisis pregnancies under similar circumstances, I knew better. Rosie stood up for what was right, and I commend that. She did it in a respectful, and sincere way and I am blessed to have readers like her.

    My very favorite quote of all time from Ben Shapiro: "The "live and let live" societal model is a recipe for societal disaster. The myopic question posed by advocates of the new, "Tolerant," morality is : "How does my immoral behavior hurt you?" But the overwhelming truth is that these are not individual acts, but inherently social acts with social consequences. And when society sanctions and encourages your immoral behavior, that does have an impact-it doesn't just hurt me, but it hurts my future children as well."

  6. Ok, after reading your last post, let me just refer back to the 4th paragraph in my last post. :)

  7. I read C&P because:

    * Destiny pays closer attention to the City than I do, and then writes about it.

    * the writing is personal and irreverent.

    I do not think that irreverance or an eye for absurdity is imcompatible with a moral core. "Credo quia absurdum" and all that.

    Humor also serves as a backstop of sorts, keeping gentle words like those of Mr. Shapiro from being misused by power-seeking thugs to support things like Taliban-style enforced morality. In that scenario "If I don't like it, then no one will be allowed to read it."

    There was an article a few years back (In D magazine?) about "South Park Republicans". It referred to conservative young folks who also think South Park is funny. I do not imply that D thinks SP is funny, but rather that conservatism comes in many styles and not all of them wear dark blue bankers' suits or stand outside and yell "You kids get off my lawn!" Some of them have nose rings and write interesting blogs.