10/15 11:19pm   DV: First of all, in response to your post of 10/11 @ 4:54pm, let me say that I'm sorry if you feel I've pricked your thin skin. My question to you was plain, simple, and sincere; I asked you to clarify the definition of the "very Jewish town" to which you referred. In your reply, you immediately "corrected yourself" (your earlier remark) by stating that you and/or your kids had (somehow) determined that you had counted more Jewish kids than Catholic in your particular neighborhood. Perhaps that can explain why your children's best friends are Jewish, only. Your rephrasing your statement could have resolved the question and ended our conversation, but then you added, "If you want to make my post into something it was not, go right ahead". That remark redirected my attention and stirred my curiosity, as I wondered, "What thoughts are lurking in the back of her mind that make her believe that someone could think that her post had a hidden agenda? ...My conclusion: Only you have the true answer to that question, DV. While the following is not intended to apply to you personally, you've now prompted me to generally ponder why any person bothers to identify themselves as being Catholic while pointing out that her kids' best friends are all Jewish. Does this labeling process also extend to the point of her inventorying the national origins, eye color, hair color or skin color of her children's friends as well? Of course, another developing question briefly races through my mind of if she also pigeonholes her own friends the same way. In response to your subsequent post of 10/11 @ 7:26 PM, my answer to your question is that you haven't offended me at all; you posted your initial remarks on a forum, which encourages all types of discussion; your statements simply opened the door for verbal intercourse, that's all. In addition several posts, from others--as well as yours--addressed "religious differences" in such an elementary--almost careless--manner that they were misleading and/or potentially harmful. Now, onto my last point, I've always found it remarkable that there is a peculiar mindset that, when questioned, immediately counters (I suspect probably in defense) with accusations that any question, requiring further explanation, is rude. This goes right along with the same--somewhat popular--inclination, expressed, by some, on Norfolknet, that if someone provides information contrary to that of the seemingly prevailing flow, then they're the ones "guilty" of negativism. This attitude appears to be a ramification of the old cliche that "the best defense is a strong offense". To me, it seems like a pretty ineffective approach, and is probably self-defeating, at best. I hope that this satisfies your questions. - MT Norfolknet.com your community, on-line