Rudy Kelly and the Pope

Old thread alert, yes I know this. But it seems as though Rudy Kelly has really pissed alot of people off (including myself) with his latest write up regarding the Pope. I really don’t understand why The Northwest Weekly would publish such work.
Who the heck is he to pick on an elderly fellow like the Pope? It is one thing to pick apart people’s beliefs, but another thing to bash the person for who he is and what he believes.

Before Mr Kelly puts other people down for what they believe in, he should take a real hard look at himself and his roots. Actually that is probably the root of his whole problem, his past.
But to make a career out of putting other people down (including his own people of aboriginal ancestry) in a local newspaper, is obsurd and uncalled for.

Mr. Kelly, you are not funny.

Ah… there’s the problem. You’re not actually supposed to read the Northwest Weekly, you know. The “articles” are just filler for when they don’t have enough advertising.

Next you’ll complain about a Bat-boy story in the Weekly World News…


Ah… there’s the problem. You’re not actually supposed to read the Northwest Weekly, you know. The “articles” are just filler for when they don’t have enough advertising.

Next you’ll complain about a Bat-boy story in the Weekly World News…[/quote]

They have articles? I thought they just forgot to delete the “Lorum Ipsum Dolor Sit Amet…” stuff that the program puts in there.

But seriously, Tootz (you know I wasn’t serious, right?), I didn’t read the article, and I suspect that 95% of the “readers” of the paper won’t read the article.

Rudy’s a bit smarter that we give him credit for… I’ll bet any controversy he can stir up will only increase the number of people who read his column. Any attention, even negative attention, is better than no attention.

So if you really don’t like his stuff, you probably shouldn’t be drawing people’s attention to it. Most of us would have just ignored him …

So where do you guys get your news ?

Anywhere but there :wink: TV, radio, even the other newspaper. But by the time it gets in the NWW it isn’t exactly “news” anymore, is it?

Isn’t that a running joke or something? “Look for the news article on today’s local event in tomorrow’s Daily News, or in next week’s Northwest Weekly.”

Honestly, I’m just hitting a really easy target here. The NWW is actually improving, from what I can see. I’ve even started to flip through it now and then … after somebody pointed out that they had a new editor and stuff that really cared about the content.

But for those of us who used the latest issue to wrap fish, what did Rudy’s article actually say, Tootz?

Terrace Standard

I dont want to have to type the speel out… but if you want to waste your time, try

I understand why you brought the article up. That was a complete waste of time reading it. It’s almost offensive.

The only time I’ve ever read his column is when someone else told me he mentioned HTMF.

Heh, it’s a big image file!

I wonder why Rainbow Chrysler would advertise their website when it doesn’t work?

Works for me.

Their webmaster just needs to put another entry in for and redirect it to

Sorta like htmf in reverse.

Type in )

and it will redirect.

“www” in front of domain names is so 1995.

Oh, and I’ll bet that this thread will drive more people to the Rainbow Chrysler website than the NWW ad.

I forgot to do that for! Also found an alternate name pointing to the webmail server instead of the web server.
thx MiG !

I find it annoying when people go to the effort of buying a domain and setting up a website, but keep using their @citytel email address. I’m pretty sure that Citytel will quite happily forward your email to what ever address you want. I know that when I was at Creative, we did it for free.

As far as the effectiveness of NWW, I was working on a project with Creative to setup a Web store and we put in a big ad. We didn’t get one hit on the website for a week after the paper was distributed.

I mostly agree with what Rudy wrote in his article. I have taken the time to read what he has written a number of times, usually I disagree, but with this one I don’t. It is one thing to disagree with same sex marriage, but it is another to call it a new ideology of evil. With this one statement the Pope condemning some 600 000 000 people for being born gay. What are gays and lesbians supposed to do, deny who they are and live a life of isolation and shame?

Then there is the woman’s right to choose; I have a hard time with the idea of abortion, but I am not going to deny women the right to make the choice for themselves.

The manner in which Rudy states his arguements does piss people off, but as MiG says that is one of the reasons he does it; to piss people off and get them thinking.

The Pope is not comdemning those people!

Marriage is the remenats of the church. If Christianity never evolved, I highly doubt the term marriage would mean the same thing as it does today.
So I am with the Pope 100% when it comes to the issue of same sex marriage. Yes we all have rights as humans, but why confuse our children?? Marriage is a sacred union between a woman and man. If two men want to have some sort of ceremony to unite them, then call it something else.

Oh and I never would have imagined anyone putting down the Pope. Especially when he is basically on his last legs.

Even non- Christian people have lots of respect for the big guy.

If the figurehead of an organization as large as the Catholic Church called me a subscriber to a new ideology of evil, I’d feel pretty condemned. I’d be waiting for some meathead with a bat to come knocking at the door.

Why shouldn’t the Pope be criticized? When somebody influential makes a statement, especially calling a group of people evil, they’re bound to piss a few people off. For starters, the group they called evil and second people who STRONGLY disagree. Just out of curiosity, I would like to know where in the bible (or whatever) it’s says that homosexuality is evil. Please refer to passages, as I have no desire to read the whole thing.

I have a really simple answer to the same-sex marriage issue. Liberals say it’s a human rights issue and it should be allowed. Conservatives say that the sanctity of marriage should be maintained by the traditional definition, but “civil unionsâ€