🚀 go-pugleaf

One of the interesting things is the assumption here by some parties 
that whatever the problem was, it wasn't the fault of Bill McCartney
and the Promise Keepers staff, and that if anyone says it is or blames
them it must be anti-Christian bias.

What's ironic is that the reason PK has been able to get away with what
it has gotten away with, I think, is that the University is afraid of
just that charge.

Consider, the University, which forbids large concerts because of
Neighborhood concerns, has allowed PK back after PK failed to live up
to promises it made to the neighborhood about traffic management (this
came up last year, in the discussions just after the incidents, unfortunately
I seem to have nuked the saved articles). The University has allowed
PK to return to the Boulder Campus even after illegally produced shirts
were marketed at a PK Function (they used the CU trademark without
permission).

Would they have done this for any other group?

The problem isn't just that Promise Keepers dropped the ball rather badly
as regards the conduct of attendees and their responsibilities to the
neighboring communities, it's that there seem to be a group of people
who are unwilling to concede that PK should be blamed for its own mistakes.

It's ironic that a group which is organized to foster morality, promise
keeping, honesty, and so on, has trouble keeping its own promises, and
some of the supporters at least seem to think that if you invite 50,000
people over, you don't have any obligation towards the neighborhood
you invited them into.

Compare this to World Youth Day, which had many more people, and didn't seem
to have the problems with the neighborhoods that PK had (the people staying
across the street from me were perfectly polite, and very well mannered). (*)

--Dave

(*) Interestingly, I did see some responses after WYD which claimed that
    anyone blaming WYD for the fact that WYD did not listen to emergency
    medical personnl who wanted more porta-lets and wanted them closer so
    that people wouldn't stop drinking to stop having to hike to and wait
    in line for the toilets, were also exhibiting anti-Christian bias.

    If critizing someone for bad planning and bad behavior is anti-Christian
    bias (since no one would criticize a Christian for any other reason?),
    I think we may finally have seen a clearcut case of right-wing
    "political correctness".
-- 
Dave Weinstein                             olorin@netcom.com
"We'll serve anyone, meaning anyone, and to anyone, at all!" 
               N. Lovett, S. Todd