Lilith,

You may be onto something here. We both agree that we can disagree. One issue where we might disagree is if disagreement need be a terminus. I do feel that point need not end a conversation, but can be the starting point from which we can learn from the other. Mind you, there is no requirement that we do so, only that we can if both contribute.

:(







:mad: Now look what you did! :mad:

The Pilgrim Baptist Church...



Is that over by the O'Leary place? :confused:

not anymore :o















:D * hands WI the paddle and bends over :D

WildIrish,

WAS over by the O'Leary place. It was pretty much totaled…

Fire Destroys Landmark Chicago Church
By KAREN HAWKINS, Associated Press Writer
Sat Jan 7, 2:39 PM ET


CHICAGO - The architecture was majestic, the gospel choir was inspiring and services at the Pilgrim Baptist Church were so popular that worshippers in the 1930s and '40s had to show up an hour early to find a seat.

On Friday, the 115-year-old church, an integral part of the development of gospel music, was destroyed by a fire so intense that its flames and smoke could be seen from miles away. The fire gutted the church and collapsed its roof and steeple. The cause wasn't known.

"It was a landmark church. God, it was just so beautiful," said Lena McLin, who was baptized at Pilgrim as a 12-year-old in the early 1940s. "It was very spiritual — you felt you were meeting the Lord there."

McLin's uncle was Thomas A. Dorsey — considered the father of gospel music — and Pilgrim was where he perfected his cross of the raw soulfulness of the blues with the sacred music of his youth. His all-time greatest hit, "Take My Hand, Precious Lord," was popularized by Mahalia Jackson and became a favorite of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.

He was Pilgrim's music director from 1932 until the late 1970s. The church was designated a Chicago landmark in 1981.

Over the decades, the gospel stars who performed at Pilgrim included Jackson, Sallie Martin, James Cleveland and the Edwin Hawkins Singers. The funeral service for early 20th century boxing champion Jack Johnson was held at the church.

The congregation recently numbered about 300, but in its heyday in the 1940s it had about 10,000 members, said the Rev. Hycel B. Taylor, the church's former pastor.

It had been "the quintessential black megachurch," he said.

The church was a place where the famous architects Louis Sullivan and Dankmar Adler experimented with the features that made them famous — such as vaulted ceilings, amazing acoustics and ornamental designs, such as the terra cotta panels with intricate foliage designs, said Ned Cramer, curator of the Chicago Architecture Foundation.

It was built as a synagogue between 1890 and 1891, but it has housed the Pilgrim congregation since 1922. The surrounding Bronzeville neighborhood was a vibrant hub for blacks during the first half of the 20th century.

"It's like hearing a close relative has died or a good friend. It's heartbreaking," said Cramer.

Though no one was injured in the blaze, it is feared the church's archives — including old photographs and Dorsey's original sheet music — were destroyed.

McLin said she's hopeful that Dorsey's wife might have sent some of those mementoes to Fisk University, where the family choose to deposit some of Dorsey's belongings. But she is sure a huge painting of her uncle — whom she lived with as a child — was destroyed.

Still, she said, she'll never forget the feeling of being in that church, surrounded by thousands of worshippers packed on the floor and the balcony, listening to gospel music.

"The spirit was just all over the place," she said.

Associated Press Writer Anna Johnson contributed to this report

This article: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060107...ark_church_fire

bummer the church burnt...may it rest in peace....





last one to post in this thread is the debate "LOSER"

I will happily take that crown...... mbuh bye buh bye now........

/me whispers "it was a joke"

See, it's rumored that Mrs. O'Leary's cow knocked over a lantern and started the "Great Chicago Fire of 1871", (The Chicago Fire ) and since the Pilgrim Baptist Church was also in Chicago, I thought I'd make a little joke by connecting the two.

lizzardbits

Ah, it seems you’ll have to work for it. :)

Interesting that – about the “debate”. I looked back at the very beginning of the thread, and I noticed who challenged who, and then advocated an alternative. It gives some indication just where the “debate” started.

this thread, in an odd way, takes me down memory lane to when I took an educational tour of DC and NYC. I distinctly recall visiting two different churches during that week - and both had the claim to fame that they were THE church that George Washington attended/was a member of.

Alas, carry on, that's all I wanted to say.

got my crown again

Trying to make the last post on this thread is like taking tweezers to a shit shoveling contest. :rolleyes:

LMAO^^^ But it's the new "who's the winner game" totally pointless

Now gimme back my loser crown old man!

I'll take the loser crown!
Stimulating conversation...here.I lefta Cnet forum because it was all PC and politics all the time.I come here for fun and I get this crap.
BTW.......






















WHO WANTS TO FUCK?!!

i love fucking

i love being the looser!

again i'll have my crown back

Honey I'm sure you're not loose.
And,I'm sure you're not the loser....I am.

ahhh, but you see, sexy, you are wrong on that point.

i insist that i remain the loser! this loser crown is rather pretty....

And the rest of this thread wasn't? :rolleyes:





rofl :D

that was precisely what i was implying!

notice that my loser crown has no points on it--it fits the thread and my head

good gawd! i am not only the loser, i am getting dumber by the moment. My I.Q. has now gone down
down
down
down
d
o
w
n

Did you say that you're going down? Mmmmmm, now there's a thought! :D

PantyFanatic,

That is true for those who do not learn from it.

mmmmmm Yes! i'll go down, just as long as you don't knock my loser crown off my head!

Yes we all get the point Jseal unless you have a dozen links to post (even if they are pointless and do anything to prove your point) don't post anything that disagrees with Jseal's point. Unless you want a pointless argument with self apointed Mr. Right.

Links i can do links :D

The Origins of Gospel

Booger,

Thank you for you patience. The emotions seemed to be running rather high on Thursday night/Friday morning, so rather than increasing the likelihood of a post that shouldn’t be, I thought I’d let the passions die down somewhat.

Am I Mr. Right? No sir, I’ve been wrong often enough in the past to know that I can be wrong at any time. That is why, as I have said before, I try to base my opinions on evidence.

You’ll note that my eight references all include Thomas A. Dorsey, with descriptions such as “seminal influence”, the "Father of Gospel Music", “the first who composed such new songs”, “the Father of Contemporary Gospel”, etc. This is why I consider them coherent, as they have him as the coordinating theme. As Mr. Dorsey was PBC’s music director starting in 1932, it seems to me to be reasonable to conclude that Gospel Music originated where he practiced it, at that church in Chicago.

I am aware that by responding to your post, I am exposing myself to criticisms, such as gratuitously extending the life of this thread, being verbose, etc. etc. While your posts seemed to me to be somewhat harsh, I thought they warranted a reasonable response. I also hope that the fact that I took the time to respond to your posts will not anger you.

Ahahahahaha, so you're not acknowledging what Boog said about you posting link after link after link to prove a case. Nope, you're now going to spell it out.

Seriously.

Why are you here, jseal? Are there not debate forums you'd find more enjoyable?

It's a sex site & I'm getting the sense you're getting your jollies by being holier than thou.

Seriously!

In a sick way, I think you enjoy that. That's sad.

[QUOTE= Click here, QUOTE]

Your argument is very thin at best. Yes your eight references all include Thomas A. Dorsey but if you also look at the first link you referenced you'll note the first paragraph says

The word Gospel is an elision of 'God' and 'spel' (The old English for story). The genre is distinguished primarily by spontaneity and informality, qualities which, while sometimes arousing suspicion or unease, have been present since the very beginnings of the Christian faith. By a further arbitrary use of the term, however, Gospel music is considered to have begun in the United States, sometimes in the 19th century, first appearing in print in 1874 with the publication of Gospel Songs by Philip Bliss


so I guess my question is did how did godspel get published 25 years before Thomas A. Dorsey was born? Did Thomas A. Dorsey also invent the time machine and go back in time or did it fall threw a rift in time to be published.

P.S. nope emotions weren't running high wednessday night/thursday morning at all. Just observations that I have made from this thread and watching you in the past on this site.

Steph,

When I presented my evidence in the form of unexpanded links, Booger referred to them as pointless. When I presented the same evidence, but limited to the particulars that were (and remain) the crux of the examples from the original references, his response was different. While it is clear that he remains unpersuaded by what the authors have to say, he did take the time to respond in kind. Changing how I presented what I had to say changed how he responded.

It is impossible to satisfy criticism both when I use links for my references and also when I do not.

It is true that Pixies Place still has many sexually oriented pictures, and I am only one of many who browse the erotic stories. That being said, in the Advice forum you may be surprised to find:

Lilith, in the Pixies Power thread is exploring “support in our efforts to change our lifestyle meaning things like habits (such as smoking or even financial spending), dietary changes, or exercise.” She also started the General Well Being thread, the focus of which is being healthier.

Lion started a thread concerning replacing the timing belt on his car. It is in a post to that thread that Booger expressed his opinion that if you look at the site as a whole that sex is only a small part of it.

wanderingsoul’s Those damn 'describe yourself' questions! is a thread where people posted suggestions on how to improve his profile on some personal sites - including web design.

LixyChick’s Softer Hands...Stronger Nails??? is about manicure.

Two recent threads focused on travel plan suggestions, several on particular physical ailments. I also think that is more appropriate to view some of the threads as relating to romance, rather than sex.

In the General Chat forum the ratio of sexual to non-sexual threads is even more heavily weighted towards the non-sexual. I’d go so far as to suggest that most of the threads there have a non-sexual focus. That could be interesting to determine, although it might be difficult to decide what exactly is a “sex thread”.

Most of the threads in the Games forum are not sexually oriented, although we often take advantage of the opportunities that become available.

Given what I’ve listed above, as to Pixies being a sex site; I’m sure you don’t mean to suggest that that limits the extent of our community, do you? I’m minded of something GingerV once wrote as part of a post “… That Pixies is a wonderful open sexual playground is great, but if it was nothing but naked folks I'd have moved on a long time since …”. I tend to agree with that position. I think that many other long term members do also.

You and I march to the beat of rather different drummers. While I find the personal posts you and PantyFanatic make about me a bit of a bother, there’s little I can do about them, and so I carry on as best I can. I do suspect that those posts are among the reasons that others here often fear having their personal ideas challenged and so don't speak up. All I can suggest is that you try to not let my different point of view upset you so much. In the same vein as BIBI’s response to someone’s complaint about finding a timing belt thread at Pixies, ”LMAO...why let it get your knickers in a knot?”.

Here ^^^ is where jseal and I both agree, "pompous" or not. :D

I support our rights to have different perspectives, ideas, and experiences...and I think it's one of the things that made Pixies Place a great place to be...back in the day. But recently I've felt my honest ideas and opinions are a lot less welcome...and I may not be the only one.

<sigh>

Osuche, you have expressed that several times in the past year and I'd like to point out that we all have that happen at times. I believe I posted my honest idea/opinion in this thread.

I know...I get frustrated, go away...and then come back a few weeks later because (in general) I LIKE this place, and many of the people in it. I just find that people tend to only like *me* when I try to fit in, not when I express my true feelings.

But then again, such is life.

I've stayed out of this thread because I know NOTHING about gospel music. Nothing. But it makes me sad to see a mass feeding frenzy on one member...especially when it gets so personal. Life's too short to spend much time being mean to others...I think there is good in everyone, and a viewpoint that can be appreciated.

I agree and as I stated my issue comes when someone constantly feels the need to challenge everyone else's viewpoint and I am tired of seeing good topics go bad because of the same situation over and over. People should be welcome to express/discuss their views with out being forced to defend them constantly.

OK..What's all this talk about making Puerto Rico a steak?

Well let me say you try be an Aussie and try to fit in *LOL*

Noone gets my humour nor my slang

Have you tried subtitles? :D rofl





(inside joke ;) )

*pokes tongue out at PF*


LMAO

It's too funny. I was at a party tonight & there was a pompous know-it-all dude (Yes, I know jseal & PalaceGuard don't like dude but I'll have to deal with that somehow) there & he didn't even know he was pompous.

Agree or not . . . pompousity is something that has to be looked at . . . spade a spade, etc.

Humor, slang, holidays....or the fact that you drive on the wrong side of the road. :D But it's the differences that make this place fun!

I do know it must be hard...especially since we're all on a WAY different time zone than you. (((((Alasse))))

Steph,

Your post above emphasizes my concern about how few registered users here post. Please take a moment to review this thread. Think of how it may appear to a registered user who has not yet mustered up the courage to start a thread. After removing the personalities, this is what she or he can look forward to:

1. The very first response is one challenging a base assumption of the thread.

2. After our thread starter defends the assumption, the next post advocates an alternative definition, which if accepted, denies the validity of the thread.

3. She accepts the debate, and challenges her challenger, but the response she gets takes the form that the advocated alternative is an opinion formed beforehand and which does not need back up.

4. Now Challenger #2 posts, also without substantiation, that “it's so obviously the case.”

5. The thread starter replies to this new post that there are an awful lot of opinions that were once obvious but are no longer, and identifies a few.

6. The first challenger mistakes this response and irately begins a reply with “WTF”, the common acronym for “What The Fuck”.

7. So now our thread starter replies that her reply to challenger #2 had to do with challenger #1, and opines that there seems to be different ideas about conversation afoot here.

8. Challenger #1, who initiated the debate, then criticizes the thread starter for engaging in a debate.

9. Now another – new poster to the thread, mind you – after the obfuscation is removed, advises the thread starter to eat shit.

… and it goes on and on and on with other personal attacks and insults towards the thread starter.


I think that an environment like this is very uninviting to anyone thinking about starting a thread for the first time.

I will say what I believe to be true. You are either part of the solution or part of the problem. Jseal you repeatedly in this forum refuse to see your responsibility as part of the problem and therefore the situation has little chance of being remedied.

Consistently the same few personalities clash. I think if it's a problem a wise solution would be to just not post or respond to people or threads begun by those who you know will invariably turn things ugly. It is what I intend to do.

Jsael you seemed to miss two steps


2.5. A 3rd party enters into the argument (this being an open forum I assume this is excepted). The third party using part of the first parties argument points out a big hole in the first party arugmaent. But is ignored becuase if the first party excepted this he would be wrong.

10. Once again the trird party state his case to be ignored beccause the first party find it easier to respond to the party who told him to eat shit