As many of you know, for a time I enjoyed moonlighting over at this catholic's blog. She's a pretty good writer, and most of the time, I just like to read it. However, when the Da Vinci Fiasco got rolling, I started behaving, well, like me. I picked a fight because I like to argue.
After the tomfoolery died down, I went back to behaving. Until I tried being funny. Those of you who know me understand when I try to be funny with strangers, it usually has a tragic ending.
So I guess the Catholic host was asked repeatedly at a conference if she was a nun. She went on a rant about what nuns should or actually look like, and posted her picture to demonstrate what they *do not* look like. You can see it on her blog, which I linked above. Having been to Catholic school, I am somewhat of an expert on "nunning it up."
Being funny, I threw this comment out there:
I dunno...I think it's the glasses. They look like glasses a nun would wear. Not that all nuns wear glasses, but those who do generally own a pair that look like those. Welcome back, by the way. Your writing has been missed.
Aaron Traas, apparently, is still a little bitter about discussions involving the Da Vinci Code. He replied:
No offense, but are you really that dumb, or just pretending?
Aaron, Aaron, Aaron...Didn't you're mother ever teach you to *NEVER POKE THE BEAR?*
The author seemed to get my jest, why didn't he? There can only be two possible conclusions. I highlighted them in the following response:
I think it's safe to say you absolutely meant that to be offensive. I mean, when you see a retarded kid do something retarded, you don't walk up to him and say, 'hey, are you retarded or something?' No. You don't. Why? Because you know it's offensive.
So Aaron, my question for you is, are you really so stupid that you had to ask that question, or do you just not have any sense of humor whatsoever?
Hint: It has to be one or the other. Take your pick.
53 minutes ago