Street food played out like gastronomy. Maybe u should open a bahn-mi place....
Cool - another place to get small quantities of cheap ingredients for a very high markup!
Yey! I am so happy about this!!! The Johns Island "30-something" has beeb praying for a cool bar on the Island. And the Moose..what?! Live music, too..yes!!
Wow, Mexican wrestling masks...doesn't Cha-Cha's already have that theme covered?
Proper Fish & Chips, yes please! And maybe a fried Mars bar too!
I don't know about you, but my "big night out of drinking" usually doesn't end at 8 PM.
Not a job for everybody, but these people bring great relief to the people they help.
Love it. thanks for sharing.
How about the city use some common sense instead of creating new problems? Here are my ideas:
Hopefully the state legislators who wish to deprive state-supported colleges and universities of funds if they associate any activity with LGBTTQIA people will not discover that Greene's site is hosted on and part of the College of Charleston's website. Y'all hide it now, 'cause the rest of the state, especially elected officials aren't so tolerant.
I was on the board during the time of Charleston Pride moving downtown and I will say with a loud voice that the decision was only made after a survey went out to hundreds of pride participants. The board was met with overwhelmingly amounts of people wanting pride to at least attempt to hold the parade downtown! We went into the City of Charleston office and were granted a permit to hold the event downtown Charleston. I know we were all shocked especially since most people thought it would never happen! To look at this as a bad thing is just awful! Charleston Pride could easily change venues and I think mixing it up is a great thing. Instead of complaining why don't you join the pride board and make a push to alternate between downtown and North Charleston! I for one am 100% for that!!!!
Not hiding behind a vague screen name!
You would think if they didn't want it stolen, they shouldn't have wheels on the thing!
Where do I sign up??
Well said, Ben. That aligns with what older family members have told me as well.
However, the impression that Charleston specifically / SC in general was some sort of big KKK rally until just before whichever transplant arrived is indeed common. "When I moved here in 1998 from New Hampshire, gay men were just starting to live without the fear of instant public execution in Marion Square."
No, Gay people are not demanding entry into your Church and to be married at your altars. They are simply asking for their equal rights as written in the constitution. Last time I looked there were not any EXCEPT for gay people clauses in the constitution. Nor were there any ONLY good Christians allowed clauses. The constitution spells out clearly that everyone is equal and can pursue happiness. There are NO exceptions to the American Constitution. Government cannot exclude any group of citizens from the civil benefits or the expressive dignities of marriage. No religion runs the American Government. Same sex marriage is best viewed as a true realization of the promise contained in our constitutional guarantees.
I was in the business for over 30 years, managing and owning restaurants. I can not figure out how this family keeps the place packed! Service is rough, food is mediocre in regards to the prices charged.
So what do the various interpretations and evolutions of the institution of marriage in the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament) or the Christian Bible have to do with the legal institution of American marriage, which is prevented by the Constitution to establish religious preference?
Again, freefirezone, are we allowed to use any ancient definitions of things similar to marriage or can we only use ancient Middle-Eastern perspectives? I mean, to avoid "re-defining" it from whatever it is you think was carved in stone...
For the record, the legal definition of American marriage was gender neutral for like 200 years until YOUR side changed it, between DOMA (1990s) or all the unconstitutional state amendments (past like 10 years). Not exactly a historical precedent for your particular favored definition of marriage.
BUT EVEN STILL, if it makes you feel any better, this is not a "re-definition" of marriage, as your religious definition is staying exactly the same. Nothing has been redefined for you. The fight you are losing is the fight to make the legal definition of marriage a relatively modern one specific to a particular religion. Which flies blatantly in the face of the U.S. Constitution, making your definition anti-American.
Even that losing battle is entirely irrelevant to your own personal situation, as I imagine that if you ever convince someone of the opposite sex that you're a decent person I assume you'd get married in whatever snake-handling church you belong to that I am sure has long since scared away the gay. So please tell me why it's such a big deal to you, a person who will never, ever, ever, ever have to be personally affected in any significant way by two other people (that you likely will already go out of your way to avoid) who love each other?
Back in the early seventies when I had a catering company called "The Movable Feast," we did quite a lot of adult men gay receptions held at private homes in what is now called "The French Quarter," and around Ansonboro. All the events were black tie and other than the fact that they were all men, with several older committed couples, the events were just like any other downtown reception. Most of them came from prominent families and I recognized them at other receptions all over town. They appeared to be unconditionally well received. I think, contrary to the perceptions stemming from popular urban legends of Charleston's social insularity, that Charlestonians then were far less brittle and more forbearing than commonly depicted.
My comment is actually about the current mascots. How come they aren't named Ashley and Cooper instead of Charlie and Chelsey ?
What do you think Genesis 2:24 is a reference to?
Do you suppose that passage is frequently cited by the clergy administering wedding vows because it's a reference to two pals entering into a property contract?
Why would Christ cite that passage in one of his most noteworthy discourses on marriage? To show what marriage is not?
Thanks for the morning chuckle, Brewengineer. I'll be sure to refer to you anyone needing illumination of scripture.
Powered by Foundation
© Copyright 2014,
Charleston City Paper