NBC's "Today Show" Coming to Scranton (East Stroudsburg, Stroudsburg: how much, houses)

[SteelCityRising]

It looks as if the Electric City will be getting even more positive press from the national media in the upcoming weeks as Al Roker will be broadcasting live from the University of Scranton for the "Today Show" on Friday, October 26, 2007 in order to help herald in "The Office" Convention, which is expected to draw hundreds of tourists to our city from across the country. I'm happily-awaiting this convention, and I hope we all do our best to help make Scranton shine brilliantly as a Rust Belt Rebounder!

[Mr Yuk]

That's good. But I wonder why they chose the U of S? Why not downtown? (Courthouse square would have been perfect if the commissioners didn't have it torn up).

[casper]

Originally Posted by go phillies

That's good. But I wonder why they chose the U of S? Why not downtown? (Courthouse square would have been perfect if the commissioners didn't have it torn up).

University of scranton..mayor connections.....Catching on??

This whole office thing is a complete ****ing joke. I'd rather sit back and watch alf episodes. **** the mayor!

[weluvpa]

They can control the situation better at the U. The U buildings look better then the mall and they certainly are in better shape then anything in the downtown. Its a control issue and the city is able to control its image by not having this anywhere near the actual city. Wait and see they will broadcasting from "The University of SCranton" not the "downtown". Its a plug for the U and they get the glory. I am not sure if there will hundreds from all over the country coming, but I'll bet it will full of HS and college kids, that have no money and will spend next to nothing. I personally hate the show and find nothing about it that funny and certainly if I did have a favorite show I doubt I would drive across the country to go to a half ass convention in Scranton.

[Mr Yuk]

The U turns my stomach. I'm really not a fan of the Jesuits and feel that they should be booted out of the Catholic Church. I think they would feel more at home with the Episcopals or Methodists (or with Enron with their shady business practices).

[NYRangers 2008]

Don't really care about this one. The U buys up all this property that could be used for houses on the tax rolls and the city gets nothing because they're a non-profit. The new buildings do look nice, but how much more land are they going to gobble up with even less taxes going to the city.

[cjseliga]

Originally Posted by go phillies

The U turns my stomach. I'm really not a fan of the Jesuits and feel that they should be booted out of the Catholic Church. I think they would feel more at home with the Episcopals or Methodists (or with Enron with their shady business practices).

Most of the Jesuit Priests agree with the church on matters of abortion, priestly celibacy, and homosexuality. Not all of them are overly liberal when it comes to these matters, the way you generalize them. In my 4 years at the U of S, I never had a Jesuit Priest as a teacher mention that they were pro-abortion, in favor of priests getting married and having sex and in favor of homosexuality (I probably had 12 to 15 different priests as teachers during my 4 years). When I took Theology I and II (which everyone has to take), my professor wasn't a Jesuit priest, he wasn't even Catholic, he was Methodist, but he got his Doctorate in Theology from Notre Dame. I wouldn't generalize the Jesuits the way you do.

[Mr Yuk]

Originally Posted by cjseliga

Most of the Jesuit Priests agree with the church on matters of abortion, priestly celibacy, and homosexuality. Not all of them are overly liberal when it comes to these matters, the way you generalize them. In my 4 years at the U of S, I never had a Jesuit Priest as a teacher mention that they were pro-abortion, in favor of priests getting married and having sex and in favor of homosexuality (I probably had 12 to 15 different priests as teachers during my 4 years). When I took Theology I and II (which everyone has to take), my professor wasn't a Jesuit priest, he wasn't even Catholic, he was Methodist, but he got his Doctorate in Theology from Notre Dame. I wouldn't generalize the Jesuits the way you do.

Here's a little tidbit I found from the student newspaper at Georgetown, another liberal Jesuit school, where "Father" Pilarz from the U came from. Its an editorial from a Georgetown alum who claims to be Catholic yet is a pro-abortion liberal. He praises Jesuit priest and Georgetown professor Robert Drinan, who was also a pro-abortion liberal congressman who supported federal funding of the slaughter of unborn babies (all the while claiming that he was "personally" against abortion, the same old double-speak heard from other pro-abortion politicians who claim to be Catholic yet support abortion, a la John Kerry). You also prove my point about Jesuit institutions, in that a Methodist is teaching theology at a Catholic university. If I was running a CATHOLIC university, I would want someone teaching CATHOLIC theology that believed in what he was teaching. It would be different if it was Penn State or East Stroudsburg, but it is *supposedly* a Catholic institution.

The Georgetown Voice | Our father, who art in Congress - February 1, 2007

[cjseliga]

Originally Posted by go phillies

You also prove my point about Jesuit institutions, in that a Methodist is teaching theology at a Catholic university. If I was running a CATHOLIC university, I would want someone teaching CATHOLIC theology that believed in what he was teaching. It would be different if it was Penn State or East Stroudsburg, but it is *supposedly* a Catholic institution.[/url]

My theology professor was actually very conservative and anti-abortion, in favor of priests being celibate and against homosexuality. He taught catholic theology very well. You also proved my point that you generalize way too much, you pick out one Jesuit priest and all of a sudden all 20,000 Jesuits are like that. Like I said there are some Jesuits that are liberal, that doesn't make all of them liberal. That's like me watching the scranton city council meetings and thinking that all of scranton's citizens are a bunch of mentally challenged degenerates. When I know they're not, because I don't generalize like you do.

[SteelCityRising]

I happen to be an anti-abortion Christian myself, but I don't agree with the church's stance on same-sex marriage. While an abortion is the intentional MURDER of an unborn child in which the fetus most certainly endures pain, I see no harm arising from same-sex relationships. If Christians by and large feel as if homosexuals are destined to hell, then what difference does it make if they make the "sinful mistake" of having a civil union while they're alive as well? President Bush, Conservatives, and Republicans need to stop legislating from the Bible. Bush has inarguably run our nation into the ground with his mistaken entry into a nation that had no credible ties to 9/11 due to "faulty intelligence," yet the right-wing nut jobs are willing to completely overlook that in favor of trying to stop the "Adam and Steves" of the world from joining.

I'm currently enrolled in a philosophy class in school, and we've been discussing the topic of "What is a right?" now for several days. From the parameters we've covered, our professors made the claim that we all have the "right" to gamble, and that people have the "right" to protest people's "rights" to gamble as long as they don't physically prevent people from entering a casino by, per se, forming a human chain or something. Similarly, homosexuals should have the "right" to engage in a legal civil union, and Republican Conservatives should have the "right" to protest this. However, these right-wingers should NOT have the "right" to physically stop my partner and I from engaging in our "right" to be joined in a civil union.

I find that most who are vehemently opposed to same-sex civil unions are also those who are poorly-educated, so I take most of their comments with a grain of salt since I know there is no credible intellect behind them. I'll trust my professors at school much more than I'd trust some loud-mouthed Marlboro man from the South on issues like these.