By the way, I should have given a credit here to alvin rhodes. He did a piece using the same OS that I really just expanded on in a different direction. While it's an entirely different piece i would not have had this idea with having seen it. I was putting this in while at work and neglected to make that mention up top. It didn't dawn on me till I was in my car driving home.

reverent and appropriate for today..nice job

I don't get you at all, man. You write a parody about the crucifixion, but then use "p****d off." Combining the two is wholly unacceptable. This site is for funny stuff, get it?

Thanks, alvin! Johnathan S. - I think you miss the point here. This is a REVERENT piece I wrote for Easter. It's not really a "funny" parody, and though most folks think "funny" when they here the word "parody" I believe that they can also be serious, reverent, angry, emotional...you name...the range of human thought...I know I enjoy thoughtful pieces as much and sometimes more than those that are strictly funny. I think that there's room for both types of pieces (and more) here. I think quite a few reader's might agree. As to my language, I write what I choose...I occasionally get limited by the site editor(s), and I have to live with that...that's their call. I don't think "pissed off" is obscene, nor do I think it inappropriate to a piece about Christ's crucifixion. Are you trying to tell me he DIDN'T "piss" some people off? If so, how did he end up on a cross with nails driven through his wrists & ankles? But anyway, even though I am not religious I do respect Jesus Christ as a righteous person and this piece is to honor his sacrifice and ask people today if perhaps they should try to conduct themselves that Jesus would recognize and commend. Thanks for stopping by.

Fine Easter Penning

AFW - Thanks!

Paul, just what I was going to say to Johnathan S....you miss the point entirely. The whole parody...a very reverent one, Paul...is to love each other as Jesus did us. This is also refreshing as it was not an actual hymn made into a parody (can't stand them), but an OS made into a hymn. Thank you for writing it.

Very moving and well done. 555

Pat - Thanks! That was the intent and I have to say I was more than a little peeved at this JS fellow nit-picking it. I was going to get a bit edgier with him, but then I remembered who I was writing about...which was the whole point, wasn't it, and decided to just try and clarify some things. However, this minor secular epiphany also made me reflect on the tone JS took in his criticism...uh, I'm looking at his words and they strike me as less than Christian-like, which puts me in a bit of a dilemma...I wouldst not judge, lest I be judged myself, yet it strikes me that perhaps a mild rejoinder might profit this young fellow. Or as Jesus might say, "Nit-pick not, lest ye be nit-picked yourself".

Well, where the H*ll are my manners? LOL....YOIDY - I was so busy trying to put a minor bite on my erstwhile critic that I forgot to say "Thank you" for your comment ~ ~ ~

"perhaps a mild rejoinder might profit this young fellow." Perhaps J.S. needs a loving reproof? : )

A thoughtful and well done tribute.

That's probably a better choice of words, Pat...I was looking for just the right tone, I think your suggestion is a better fit. PMS - Thank you!

Okay, dang. Sorry. The bigger issue of the two was that you could just have said "ticked" or "peeved," instead of mixing the Easter story with un-christian profanity.

JS, your complaint is duly noted, but I disagree with your perception that the term was an "un-christian profanity". Reading the language within the context it seems rather clear to me what the line means to say, and let me add that I used that word after considering what word I thought worked best for that line. "pissed" was EXACTLY how I wanted to say it...and it also flows better when the parody is sung to the original music...which is a major consideration to me when I write my pieces. I sing and record all of them as overlays to the original song, both to have fun and also to check my pacing and word flow. I often make changes after doing so to improve those areas and then I post from my final revision. Regardless, I consider my piece...EVERY WORD in it...to be in utter and absolute respect to Jesus Christ and I kind of resent any implication that it wasn't. Jesus, after all, is said to have consorted with "common" people, and I would bet they used some language that would singe one's ears...I think he would been more likely to be concerned about their actions instead. But I'm not a "christian", so what do I know? Anyway, thanks for stopping by to clarify your objection...you're not obligated to 'like" or "agree" with anything I write, but don't even think for a moment that I just toss words up there without giving some thought to what they mean or the image they might project.

Perfectly appropriate topic for Easter, PR.

PR: You just don't get it, do you? Well, it can't be helped. I am SO outta here!

Perception has nothing to do with it--swearing is swearing! J.S. WAS/and IS correct in stating that your cuss word was "un christian". If you EVER took the time (a little research) to read in the Bible, you would see the verse that says (basically),'let the words of my mouth and the meditations of my heart be acceptable to You(God)'. YES, Jesus DID "hang out" with "common'" people...but he did so while teaching them to change their behavior-"Go and sin no more."! (He did NOT condone bad language.) You commented that Jesus was probably more interested in their actions-WELL...speaking & writing ARE actions! I disagree with your stating that it flowed better when sung to the music--as if it were the ONLY word that would fit. You can't honestly be that "limited". Other words DO fit just as well.(Maybe you used your "reason" just as an excuse for using profanity. tsk tsk) You are wrong when you say your song- every word to be in utter & absolute respect to Jesus. There is NO respect in combining a swear word with the sanctity of Christ's crucifiction/sacrifice. You don't have to be a christian to NOT put the name of Jesus and a swear word in the same song! If you're going to insis on being controversial(disrespectful), you're going to have to expect to be commented to about your misguided thinking. Your "angry" comment to J.S.("don't even think for a moment that I just toss words up there without giving some thought to what they mean or the image they might project") Obviously your use of the word "some" means "VERY LITTLE" NOT "A LOT"!!!!You definitely did not put long thought into what you "image" you were projecting. Yours is the only song on the website of this type(wrongful mix), maybe there's a reason....hmmmmm?

JS - I was going to post a long and detailed explanation, but I think I will just say, "Bye-Bye". You left the room the moment you read that "awful" word and nothing I could say or do would change that, except maybe saying I was sorry and promising never to use anything that could remotely construed as a "swear" word, even by the narrowest of minds. That's not going to happen, so...

JD - Thank you! I'm glad to have a little support here. I'm absolutely flabbergasted at the narrow-mindedness, but I really shouldn't be. Mom Police, I'll get back to you in a moment.

From Isaiah 29:20-21: "all that watch for iniquity are cut off: that make a man an offender for a word...and turn aside the just for a thing of nought." Howdy, Paul. Biblical evidence puts God on your side in this little pissing match, so don't let the bastards get you down. I once wrote a "Jesus" parody of "Venus," a verse of which went like this: He fraternized with freaks and whores And pissed off the establish-ment Good Friday to Easter he was Gone where no one else went If today's Christians were a bit more like those of Jesus's time, they'd be much better people. Cheers, bro. Spaff

The original meaning of the term was restricted to blasphemy, sacrilege or saying the Lord's name in vain. Somewhere along the way it has been changed to mean anything derogatory in any fashion at all. This is how the 'N' word got added into the whole thing.

Spaff - WHY??!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?! I wouldn't have thought a talented parodist like you would get suckered this guy's trash!!!

ChuckyG or some editor...please give me a list of those "banned words" because I just went out of my way to make a lengthy reply here and I'm running into some asinine "form error" message. You're wasting my time with that stuff...I copied it before removing it and I reference the term "having a bug up their *ss" once...and that's an expression that's been around a long, long time and I've NEVER heard of anyone getting bent out of shape about it. I did use the term "bull-p*cky"...that's a euphemism that I believe is more or less accepted as a replacement for sterner stuff...other than that I used a lot of "quotation marks"...asking for clarification of some comments. If you completely wussify this site you will find certain folks avoiding it for the most part...I tend to speak freely when I'm having a discussion...When someone wants to tell me that a piece like this is somehow "blasphemous" I really must take issue challenge them...I'm not inclined to let those remarks stand without comment...it might give the impression that there could be a scintilla of merit in them...which there is absolutely not. You know, the folks criticizing this piece act like the own Jesus, but they don't...last time I checked he tried to light the lamp for everyone. Yes, I'm blunt and not always that gentle, but I'm just trying to make myself clear. Thank you.

I normally don't read the latest comments page, so I might have missed this comment. If you have a copy of what you tried to post originally it would help if you send it to me in email so I can see what's wrong. The new filters are totally different than the old ones, so I have no idea if they are working right yet or not. No one's complained to me yet, so I assumed they were ok

"Shocked Spaff Fan": Oh, you poor dear. If you, an apparent Jesus fan, can read a song sincerely praising Jesus and dismiss the whole work as "trash" simply because it includes the phrase "He pissed off some folks" (which he most certainly did), then you can expect a life filled with disappointment and outrage.

Anyone else notice that while JS was berating Paul for using "He pissed off some folks" in his parody that he uttered "Dang"? Dang and damn mean the same thing; "dang" is just more cutesy. If Paul had used "peeved (off)" as you suggested, it would not mean anything different than what he typed: it's just more cutesy. By the way, your rolodex of pseudonyms here doesn't fool anyone but yourself. Paul - I DKTOS, and the topic, while well-written, isn't one I really want to give any kind of in-depth review on open boards.

RD: I did not send in the "Mom Police" statement, if that's what you're thinking.

ChuckyG - Thanks! I will e-mail you a copy in a little bit. Spaff - Looks like a lost you a fan..sorry-bout-that...but thanks again for spooning out just the proper dosage of corrective medicine in a palliative manner. Red Ant, Im glad you pointed that out, this JS fellow seems to think that there are things you shouldnt say unless you say what you think in a cutesy, watered -down way, and that somehow it will still communicate what you want it to. I think that pretty much demonstrates he has a very weak conceptual grasp of how to communicate clearly. So in that vein I would slightly quibble with your peeved off analogy, if only at the nuance level. I really appreciate it, though. My feeling about using watered-down words is that its like mixing water with the milk you normally put on your morning cereal...it just doesnt transmit the flavor you were looking for. Its the type of substitution that would only have a place when the idea you are trying to communicater really doesnt matter much anyway. Do I ever have lines like that? Sure, sometimes...and believe me, I know which lines I want to communicate strongly and which ones lines that are just being used to fill the pace/rhyme scheme and then bridge the story to the next section. It would not peeve me to change lines like those...but it would piss me off to have to change the lines where I am trying to match my lines to a certain level or image. Red, no problem with not reviewing or commenting directly. I said what I wanted to say in the piece and it was more for people to mull over and chew on. I should point out that this piece, like many of my pieces, is written from a certain Point-of-View that does not necessarily match up exactly with my own personal views or beliefs in every way, but Im not going to say in which ways it diverges from them. Thanks! PS - ChuckyG - it looks like using apostrophes and quotation marks causes some problems. I had some in this an got an error message, so I just took them out and will now try and resubmit. Thanks. I may still send you the comment that got bumped, but right now I had better get back to work. Thanks

Sorry to have to disagree with your comment,"I think tha pretty much demonstrates he has a very weak conceptual grasp of how to communicate clearly." Not using swearing in a song about Jesus is NOT "watered down" or "cutesy". Using swear words is NOT the only way to speak "Macho-ly". There are plenty of words in a Thesaurus, and plenty of instruction in college speech classes. You could even look in a Bible Dictionary or Concordance. Not being able to put a sentence together without swearing just shows a persons verbal inadequacy. There are plenty of non-swearwords out there that "get the point across strongly". I know, I used some of them when I had my ex-husband on the witness stand in court. It's a shame that this has come down to "Your way or no way". You & the other commenters do not want to allow J.S. freedom of speech.(to post his opinion)AFTER ALL....you DID mark the bottom of the parody submission page,"The author of the parody has authorized comments , and wants YOUR feedback." If you did not want anyone to disagree with you you should not have "ok'd" people to send in comments. *** P.S. to Spaff-consider yourself "mom-smacked in the back of the head" for your nasty tirade. SHAME ON YOU! You should promptly go to the bathroom & wash your mouth out with soap.

Not trying to chime in here much, but why all this over the word pissed? Pissed isn't even a cuss word anyway. . .it's not a word that is beeped on TV and if we start making every somewhat objectionable word a curse word eventually we will need an actual book on what is and what is not a curse word. This is just my personal opinion. . .and I don't believe in curse words anyway, but Pissed isn't one of the ones my mother or teachers disciplined me for.

Mom Police - there are plenty of words and I know quite a few of them...then I choose from what I know in the places where I think they work. After all, I'M writing the piece...not you or JS or anybody else. If you want "clean as the driven snow" pieces, fine, you write 'em. As far as my work is concerned, yes, I mark the box for "allowing comments" and it is also true that you are free to say whatever you wish within the site rules. However, I have no obligation to agree with your criticisms and when I think they are absurd (as I do in this case), or evidence of a small, narrow mind (as I do in this case), or if I just wish to defend my work (as I chose to do in this case), well, I am also free to do so. I don't see anywhere where I interferred with J.S. and his freedom to state his opinion...HE was the one that bowed out - I didn't make him...I figured he was just fresh out of arguments. Actually, I just looked back to see and I found 3 J.S. comments, none of them longer than 2 sentences. The first was about how he thought my piece was unacceptable due to the presence of the word 'pissed', a point with which I basically brushed aside since it appeared to be nit-picking. The second he suggested that I should have used a "more acceptable term", such as peeved or ticked...a suggestion I found both lame and laughable, and the third to tell me that "you just don't get it" and tell me he was outta here. My internal response? "Bud, what took you so long" - because the dude really had nothing to say. So I'm not the bully here...I never was and I'm still not. He left on his own, probably because he recognized he could not hold his own. I don't foreclose on anyone's freedom of speech...YOU'RE the one that wants to do that, remember? Feel free to disagree...but don't expect me or anyone else to fall in line behind your extremely pinch-faced Moral Code. By the way, since this piece generated such unexpected(at least by me) criticism with regard to my description and presentation I have asked several people who are rather religious if they had any problem with my piece. Not a one had any quibbles with language or my presentation and perception of the events. To sum it all up, lady, I think you should "chill".

B.A. Dave - Thanks for injecting a small but much-needed dose of sanity into the thread.

Yeah, but you just said, "rather religious." Did you actually ask any CHRISTIANS, or just some people who CONSIDER themselves "religious," which is not the same as being a Christian?

Jon S - I've been away on vacation and have purposely avoided the InterNet during that period. Ah, more nit-picking...I'm thrilled. Again, I respect Christ and his teachings. I am not in any way required to conform to yours or anyone else's interpretation of them. I wrote this piece to emphasize his sacrifice and amount of love for humanity he must have had to be willing to suffer in this way for mankind. I asked some people that I know to believe in Christ because I was truly curious if I somehow stepped in serious goo and was assured that what I wrote was respectful and positive. In fact, to a person they liked it and several wanted to hear my voice overlay version, which I sent them. I wrote the piece in respect and I still carry that respect, although I'm mystified at the micro-carping from people who supposedly believe - focusing on one word at the expense of possibly enjoying what I thought might be a positive and uplifting reminder. But it's your (or their) loss, not mine and not those who DID see the point and DID enjoy or get a positive re-inforcement of their beliefs. At this I'm at full peace with my piece is every and all aspects, including my responses to all the above comments. I guess that pretty much sums up where I'm at here. Good day.

You might want to consider counselling-for your "verbal anger management".(You should not be at peace with ALL of your 'comments'.) You and mr. spaff went on an ATTACK of the person(not their comment), those that did not comment positively on your song that is. You definitely have issues. I feel sorry for you. But do feel comforted as there are several of us "out here" praying for you.