Bill Maher, true to form on his "Real Time" program on HBO on Friday, went on a tirade against Pope Benedict XVI and the Catholic Church, only days before the Pope’s visit to the U.S.. He stated that the Pope "used to be a Nazi" and compared him to a cult leader. He then went on to call the Church a "child-abusing religious cult" and "the Bear Stearns of organized pedophilia." "And that’s the Church’s attitude: 'We’re here, we’re queer, get used to it,' which is fine, far be it from me to criticize religion."
Following a profanity-tinged one-liner concerning the raid on the Texas compound of Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, Maher quipped, "In fact, whenever a cult leader sets himself up as God’s infallible wingman here on Earth, lock away the kids. Which is why I’d like to tip off law enforcement to an even larger child-abusing religious cult. Its leader also has a compound, and this guy not only operates outside the bounds of the law, but he used to be a Nazi and he wears funny hats. That’s right, the Pope is coming to America this week and ladies, he’s single!" At the "funny hat" line, Maher displayed a picture of Pope Benedict wearing a wide-brimmed hat called a saturno
Maher’s smear to the contrary, Pope Benedict didn’t "used to be a Nazi." In fact, as the New York Times itself reported after the Pope’s election in 2005, Pope Benedict’s father was anti-Nazi, and "Joseph Ratzinger [the Pope’s birth name] huddled with his father and older brother around a radio and listened to Allied radio broadcasts," an act that if they were caught doing, they would have been sent to a concentration camp.
Maher then devoted the rest of his anti-Catholic rant to the clergy sex abuse scandal angle. [Audio of the highlights from this rant are available here.]
MAHER: Now I know what you’re thinking: "Bill, you shouldn’t be saying that the Catholic Church is no better than this creepy Texas cult." For one thing, altar boys can’t even get pregnant. But really, what tripped up the little cult on the prairie was that they only abused hundreds of kids, not thousands, all over the world. Cults get raided, religions get parades. How does the Catholic Church get away with all of their buggery? Volume, volume, volume!
If you have a few hundred followers, and you let some of them molest children, they call you a cult leader. If have a billion, they call you 'Pope.' It’s like, if you can’t pay your mortgage, you’re a deadbeat. But if you can’t pay a million mortgages, you’re BearStearns and we bail you out. And that is who the Catholic Church is: the BearStearns of organized pedophilia -- too big, too fat. When the current pope was in his previous Vatican job as John Paul’s Dick Cheney, he wrote a letter instructing every Catholic bishop to keep the sex abuse of minors secret until the Statute of Limitations ran out. And that’s the Church’s attitude: 'We’re here, we’re queer, get used to it,' which is fine, far be it from me to criticize religion. But just remember one thing: if the Pope was -- instead of a religious figure -- merely the CEO of a nationwide chain of day care centers, where thousands of employees had been caught molesting kids and then covering it up, he'd be arrested faster than you can say 'who wants to touch Mr. Wiggle?'
Maher grossly misrepresented the contents of the 2001 letter then-Cardinal Ratzinger wrote to the bishops. He did not tell them to "keep the sex abuse of minors of State of Limitations ran out." The letter clarified that the Catholic Church’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith had jurisdiction according to the Church’s law (canon law) to try clerics concerning abuses of the sacraments, and also, as the letter put it, a "delict against morals, namely: the delict committed by a cleric against the Sixth Commandment of the Decalogue [thou shall not commit adultery] with a minor below the age of 18 years."
Maher has a long record of mocking religion in general and the Catholic Church in particular. A few months earlier in January 2008, Maher mocked Catholics’ belief concerning the Eucharist and called Jesus a "2,000 year-old space god." In May 2007, he compared the sacrament to gay oral sex. And in April 2007, he joked about President Bush attending the National Catholic Prayer Breakfast and how "you could tell this was a Catholic prayer breakfast because [Maher laughs] it was in the morning and he said 'I'm dying for a little joe' and they brought him an altar boy."
—Matthew Balan is a news analyst at the Media Research Center.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Bill Maher is a hateful
April 14, 2008 - 12:35 ET by motherbeltfar be it from me to criticize religion. ????? (but here I go....)
Bill Maher is a hateful little man.
The operative word being "little."
A hateful little man with
April 14, 2008 - 13:22 ET by mattmA hateful little man with an inordinate fear of religion. (Except Islam, of course)
he just wants attention -
April 14, 2008 - 13:50 ET by TruthMongerhe just wants attention - like a toddler
I was just reminded of
April 14, 2008 - 17:48 ET by motherbeltI was just reminded of Maher's previous forays into Catholic-bashing. I amend my opinion. He is a disgusting, hateful, little man.
Maybe I should take a cue from him:
He's a disgusting, hateful, little man. That's a fact.
No fear of Islam? Hardly.
April 14, 2008 - 17:59 ET by CortillaenNo fear of Islam? Hardly. He fears them the most, which is why he doesn't talk about them. He knows random Catholics aren't going to chop off his head or suicide bomb him for his anti-Catholic statements, which is why he continues to make them. I'd say he doesn't fear Christianity as much as he resents it. He knows that their are many Christians who are at peace with the world and able to live their dreams because of it, and he hates that. The Catholic Church, being an old, powerful, and rich organization, is simply one of the easiest targets for him to find a vent for his personal frustrations.
www.rhjunior.com Great comics with a hefty dose of Christian and anti-nutjob goodness.
"With your mind as high as Mt. Fuji you can see all things clearly. And you can see all the forces that shape events; not just the things near to you." -Miyamoto Musashi
Bill Maher?
April 14, 2008 - 12:38 ET by ThalpyBill Maher? I thought he had died. Oh, well.
→ Bill Maher
April 14, 2008 - 12:41 ET by Cool ArrowThe RCC is not a cult of pedophiles, but a society of pedophiles was protected within it.
I disagree with Maher's analysis.
♣ a seal
rog the bigot says all peds
April 14, 2008 - 13:52 ET by TruthMongerrog the bigot says all peds are catholic
and all muslims are terrorists
→ Truthie
April 14, 2008 - 13:58 ET by Cool ArrowWhy are you calling rog a bigot?
What did he say?
♣ a seal
he rips on Muslims the
April 14, 2008 - 14:39 ET by TruthMongerhe rips on Muslims
the way Maher rips on Catholics
Waaaaaah!!!!!
April 14, 2008 - 15:20 ET by jpatchUm...
We don't try and silence Maher's words; we try and show them to the world as being ignorant, innaccurate, and lame. However, people are free to watch his show and agree/disagree with his views.
But are you saying here that "Muslims" are being "ripped on" unjustly? Is there no evidence in the real world that some Muslims have brought criticism on themselves? Or are you just trying to being contrary and "insightful"?
Bill Maher's show on HBO=roger the shrubber's comments on NewsBusters...you're onto something there!! ROG is EXACTLY like a conservative Bill Maher!! You've got it, TruthMonger!!
We'll stick to "ripping on" the certain homicidal, cowardice, pathetic, insane Muslims that are giving Islam THE WORST name, and you can stick to defending those that "rip on" Christianity. Let's see who's the last one standing...
truth hurts I know:) you
April 14, 2008 - 16:09 ET by TruthMongertruth hurts I know:)
you shouldn't lump all Catholics togther as peds
or all Muslims as terrorists:)
in other words don't be an ass like Bill
TM, I'll lump all Catholics
April 14, 2008 - 18:24 ET by CortillaenTM, I'll lump all Catholics together as supporters of pedophilia and all Muslims as supporters of terrorism until they speak out against it. To rephrase, the burden is on other members of the religions to distance themselves from and condemn the despicable acts of some. I personally know several Catholics who were so distraught over issues in the Church that they left, and I'd daresay they were not alone, even without considering those who lodged complaints that such things had been allowed to happen because of the bureaucracy dominating the Church.
I've not seen so much as a peep of condemnation from Muslims of even more despicable acts committed by other Muslims. Instead, they rant and rage at anyone who dares to clearly expose those acts to the world. Perhaps if a letter were leaked from someone high in the Muslim order declaring that terrorists would be tried for their crimes by the religion, as the letter noted by Maher really says, I'd have somewhat more faith in the overall humanity of Islam. Sadly, I don't see that happening any more than I see masses of Muslims complaining about perverters of the faith or leaving it. Of course, the latter is probably due to apostasy carrying a death penalty in Islam.
Can you imagine the uproar we'd have if even one local priest in a tiny parish were to claim he believed in executing anyone who renounced Catholicism? We'd never hear the end of it. More than a few Muslim clerics have said the same without getting so much as the bat of an eye from the MSM. It's simply a game of fear. People know Catholics aren't going to suicide bomb them for slandering the faith, its leader, or Christ, no matter how vile the words used. It's another matter entirely with Islam, as has been shown over and over ad nauseum with the cartoons, Fitna, etc. Don't try to draw a parallel between these two utterly different entities.
www.rhjunior.com Great comics with a hefty dose of Christian and anti-nutjob goodness.
"With your mind as high as Mt. Fuji you can see all things clearly. And you can see all the forces that shape events; not just the things near to you." -Miyamoto Musashi
FS is on a break, so I'm filling in. . .
April 14, 2008 - 22:28 ET by tracheostomyCortillaen - 1
TM - 0
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
you guys won't be seeing
April 15, 2008 - 11:46 ET by TruthMongeryou guys won't be seeing any peeps until you open your eyes:)
Muslims can't open them for you - seek and ye shall find - google makes it so easy even a bigot can do it - if you have a few months to read, here's a start...
How the Quran Looks at War
Insights from Imam Tamman Adi of the Islamic Cultural Center of Eugene, Oregon
Al-Azhar condemns suicide attacks
Grand Sheikh Mohammed Sayed Tantawi of the Al-Azhar mosque of Cairo - which is seen as the highest authority in Sunni Islam - said groups which carried out suicide bombings were the enemies of Islam. Speaking at the conference in the Malaysian capital, Kuala Lumpur, Sheikh Tantawi said extremist Islamic groups had appropriated Islam and its notion of jihad, or holy struggle, for their own ends.
BBC News, 11 July, 2003
Memo to Osama bin Laden:
"I would rather live in America under Ashcroft and Bush at their worst, than in any “Islamic state” established by ignorant, intolerant and murderous punks like you and Mullah Omar at their best."
A thought-provoking, controversial, pre-war article by Muqtedar Khan, Ph.D., February 12, 2003
Qaradawi Rejects Al-Qaeda’s Killing of Innocents
Prominent Muslim scholar Dr. Youssef Al-Qaradawi has condemned Al-Qaeda for their fuel tanker suicide bombing of a centuries-old Jewish synagogue on the Tunisian island of Djerba in April 2002.
etc, etc, etc...
TM: game set and match
The game's not over just yet...
April 15, 2008 - 18:37 ET by CortillaenBefore you go feeling all smug about your four little examples of so-called moderates, allow me to take them apart and point out the truth. You seem to be having trouble with that.
How the Quran Looks at War
A brief read shows this to be a single American Muslim offering his interpretation of several passages, interpretations that sometimes seem misleading. "Second, after praising Abel for not fighting back when Cain murdered him, and decreeing that killing one soul is like killing all humanity, God condemns mass murder by gangs, calling it a war against law and order. The only exceptions are killing in self defense and court ordered execution of a murderer when the victim's family does not forgive. 5:27" Examining a translation of the section in question suggests that Tamman Adi is doing a fair bit of expansion on the actual text. There is no mention of gangs or court orders that I can see. It's also interesting to note that the Koran has Abel hoping for Cain to burn in hell for murder. Right forgiving, that. "Third, we learn that people in certain groups will keep trying to kindle a fire of war, and God promises to put it out. 5:64" This one is very interesting to me, mostly because of what it carefully avoids. The verse does not describe "certain groups" starting wars. It explicitly states that to be the work of the Jews, and even says, "and (as for) most of them, evil is that which they do". Reading the next seven verses makes me wonder how anyone can claim the Koran protects Jews and Christians: Starting from the "Jews are warmongers and do evil" bit, it goes on to say that they "follow no good till [they] keep up the Taurat and the Injeel" (those being Islamic ordinances, I would guess), the Jews kill Muslim apostles, and the Christians who believe in the Trinity are unbelievers and hell-bound. Another note of interest, since Christians and Jews who refuse to convert are defined as unbelievers here, an earlier verse instructs, "grieve not therefore for the unbelieving people". At times, it seems almost schizophrenic how the Koran bounces back and forth between "we should protect the People of the Book" and "they're evil, murderous warmongers, and hell-bound, and we shouldn't worry about them". Here's the kicker: He's a liar. A quick search of an online version of the Koran reveals the concept of war invoked no less than 18 times. Oops. Either he's ignorant of his own religion or trying to hide something. Take your pick. Based on the carefully omitted bits, I know which one I'd pick.
Al-Azhar condemns suicide attacks
Ah, nice try, but that was a temporary position that has been refuted by him more than once. As detailed here, he has wholeheartedly endorsed suicide bombings against the US and in any other situation where jihad has been declared. Oh, and yes, he has endorsed and even declared jihad against the US in Iraq. I wonder if his change in stance was due to internal pressure... I suspect it was, and that would indicate an overall support for such actions within the Sunni organization, at least. So, those who try to be moderates, even from positions of considerable power (or is being the supreme Sunni authority not powerful?) get shouted down by the masses, it would seem.
Memo to Osama bin Laden:
Again, at a glance, this would seem to be a rare moderate. Unfortunately, closer examination suggests that Khan's just playing both sides. I'd take a guess that he is more interested in prestige and power than anything else. Oh, you wanted proof of my charge of falseness? Sure thing. Among other tidbits, he had "Bush's Hall of Shame" on his blog, featuring "The Bigot: Gen. William Boykin", "The Taliban: Attorney General Ashcroft", and "The Tyrant: Donald Rumsfeld". A quick look at his blog also reveals that he spends a considerable amount of time lambasting the US's actions, but next to none on our enemies. As ABC even recorded, he seeks to equivocate terrorists, not condemn them: "The deaths of their own families, the destruction of their homes -- all these are leading to frustration and anger and hopelessness, and they want the enemy to feel the same frustration and hopelessness, so they are resorting to this violence." In another example of the same, he was brought in to speak at a Wahabist conference in Saudi Arabia, the purpose of which included "... conveying to the entire world the true vision about Islam and to show to them that the real terrorism is that committed by the enemies of Islam. In fact the enemies of Islam are committing mass killings against Muslims." Just another apologist without the guts to condemn the atrocities themselves. Regarding the conflict between Israel and Palestinians, Khan still would not condemn suicide attacks or even any attacks on Israelis at all. Instead, he expounded on how attacking civilians did little to benefit the Palestinians: "Notice Israeli response to the killing of a dozen soldiers is more brutal and more comprehensive than any of its responses to suicide attacks on civilians. Suicide attacks on civilians help Israel. Attacks on soldiers hurt Israel. Hence the all out assault." Why, that almost sounds like he's giving advice on how to make terrorist attacks more effective, doesn't it? Oh, and don't forget his blog article "Hamas Victory: Positive for All". "What can be a more spectacular advertisement for the idea that democracy makes politicians out of terrorists than the electoral victory of Hamas in the recent Palestinian elections?" How about the majority condemning the terrorists instead of electing them? That sounds better to me. Apparently Mr. Khan begs to differ. Oh, wait, that would imply both his and the majority of Palestinians' support for Hamas's tactics, huh? Neato.
Last, but not least, Mr.
Don't-Kill-Innocents-(but-there's-no-such-thing-as-innocent-Jews-or-US-soldiers). I'm
just going to let wikipedia shoot him down (quotes sourced here):
"Defending terrorist bombing against off duty soldiers Qaradawi told BBC Newsnight that:
* "An Israeli woman is not like women in our societies, because she is a soldier."
* "I consider this type of martyrdom operation as an evidence of God's justice."
* "Allah Almighty is just; through his infinite wisdom he has given the weak a weapon the strong do not have and that is their ability to turn their bodies into bombs as Palestinians do"."
'Nuf said on him.
Unlike your presumptuous declaration of winning the game with unsounded examples, I'll give you the benefit of overtime. I will lay claim to the lead, though. Next time you try to refute my point, research your examples a bit. These guys were all on my side of the argument. They may pose as moderates at times, but they really aren't. Much as I'd love to see myself disproven, I won't be. I'm sure you can find a few good examples somewhere, maybe even a few hundred, but you won't find enough to even remotely suggest that the majority of the world's Muslim population (1.5+ billion, isn't it?) condemn terrorism. Hm, I guess I am claiming to be taking the game, huh... Oops. Well, I don't mind extending the overtime for you to try again, so go ahead.
www.rhjunior.com Great comics with a hefty dose of Christian and anti-nutjob goodness.
"With your mind as high as Mt. Fuji you can see all things clearly. And you can see all the forces that shape events; not just the things near to you." -Miyamoto Musashi
Game over.
April 29, 2008 - 13:10 ET by CortillaenSince TM seems to have fled this discussion and disregarded two reminders, I suppose I get to claim victory. I wonder, when the opponent in a debate forfeits rather than admit they don't have a leg to stand on, does that constitute normal victory? Oh well...
www.rhjunior.com Great comics with a hefty dose of Christian and anti-nutjob goodness.
"With your mind as high as Mt. Fuji you can see all things clearly. And you can see all the forces that shape events; not just the things near to you." -Miyamoto Musashi
Kindly show me where I said
April 14, 2008 - 19:26 ET by Roger the ShrubberKindly show me where I said all peds are Catholics, Douchie.
You can't find it. Thought so.
And kindly tell me where I said all Muslims are terrorists.
You can't find it. Thought so.
Kindly prove that I am a bigot for pointing out the facts.
You can't. Never could, even when given ample opportunity.
0-for-3, dumbass.
Take your meds, Islamic Douche Boy.
hello rogread your own
April 15, 2008 - 11:50 ET by TruthMongerhello rog
bigots love to point out their "facts"
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bigot
read your own posts:)
i see you are learning, btw
bigot "douchie" boy:)
Hate Speech! Where is the
April 14, 2008 - 12:41 ET by dscottHate Speech! Where is the FCC?
Lord Sidious / Darth Vader 2008 Long Live the Empire! Come to the Dark Side, it is your Destiny.
where's Don Imus? Where's
April 14, 2008 - 13:53 ET by TruthMongerwhere's Don Imus? Where's Rush on the NFL?!!!
What did the FCC
April 14, 2008 - 14:02 ET by sarcasmoEver do to either of them that remotely-compares to what they did (to the delicious tune of a hypocrite-FCC's busted double standards) to a certain other broadcaster?
JMR
The tax & spend drug war looks racist in the real world.
No jurisdiction
April 14, 2008 - 14:06 ET by nkviking75I don't believe the FCC has jurisdiction over cable.
When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.
Bill Maher is a disgrace.
April 14, 2008 - 12:42 ET by Missouri ConservativeAn absolute disgrace. A hateful little lemming.
"women and minorities hardest hit"
A hateful little lemming.
April 14, 2008 - 12:57 ET by motherbeltA hateful little lemming. MC
Wow, that's WAY harsh, MC!!
At least "I" called him a hateful little "man." LOL
Even rudimentary civilized
April 14, 2008 - 12:43 ET by HelenSEven rudimentary civilized behavior includes being respectful to other people and their beliefs.
Which leaves me with the inevitable deduction that even rudimentary civilized behavior is beyond the abilities of this little twit.
"Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war" - Shakespeare
→ Helen
April 14, 2008 - 12:47 ET by Cool ArrowEven Radical Islam? It is a religion you know?
♣ a seal
They may well be a religion
April 14, 2008 - 13:03 ET by HelenSThey may well be a religion but I'm not so sure they're civilized.
"Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war" - Shakespeare
kareem abdul jabbar was
April 14, 2008 - 13:59 ET by TruthMongerkareem abdul jabbar was very un-civilized, yes...
→ Hey, HalfTruthie
April 14, 2008 - 14:05 ET by Cool ArrowDid I say "Islam", or "Radical Islam"?
But since they're both the same to you now that you're so far into your cursade, I guess the confusion on your part is understandable.
I can't believe now you're defending Radical Islam.
Have you bought your six-year old wife yet?
♣ a seal
oops, i did miss the
April 14, 2008 - 16:24 ET by TruthMongeroops, i did miss the "radical" in your post, very sorry oh perfect one:)...kareem was not a radical of course...
but it's true that I defend alot of religious radicals against bigotry - FLDS, the Amish, Hasidic Jews...
Respecting other religions doesn't mean I share their religious beliefs - but I know many people like yourself have trouble grasping the concept of respect:)...
not exactly a new human problem
Because Kareem was a raised Muslim in Iran...
April 14, 2008 - 15:25 ET by jpatchRight?
Kareem was a devout Muslim from birth, just like "Muhammed" Ali was!! Might as well throw Cat Stevens in there as well!!
What in the hell are you talking about?
Have you even taken a math or logic class before? I'll give you a free lesson...
"All squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares."
Get back to me once you've figure that out.
dude, you might wanna try a
April 14, 2008 - 16:16 ET by TruthMongerdude, you might wanna try a valium once in a while - or lighten up on the full throttle a bit...
It's very simple.
April 14, 2008 - 16:55 ET by jpatchSomeone accurately points out that WE discern between RADICAL MUSLIMS and those that aren't jihadists (you know, the mainstream Muslims that are all over the airwaves, denouncing the tactics of jihadists, condemning the inflammatory words of Islamic zealots that are hell-bent on the destruction of western civilization in the name of Muhammed, Islam and Allah...)
You then use Kareem Abdul Jabbar as your "proof" that Islam is peaceful and civilized. It's very simple: not all that practice Islam are evil, we know this. We're talking about RADICALS. You're presentation of a converted American Muslim as an example of the "civilized" nature of Islam is a joke.
Understand now? Or are you just going to revert back to making one or two snide sentences that prove nothing...except your ineptitude to grasp complex topics? And by the way...
You might wanna try not making negative blanket statements about people you don't know. Saying that people on here have a hard time understanding what "respect is" just goes to show that you are completely offbase. Perhaps it is you that doesn't understand how RESPECT works. RESPECT needs to be EARNED. It is not something that is just GIVEN, no questions asked. It is the reason why people can lose and gain respect from others. It is the reason why many around the world have LOST RESPECT FOR ISLAM. Is that our fault?
It is the burden of the Muslim community as a whole to distance themselves from these jihadists...and yet they don't.
Go take a valium yourself, it will help you remember that these "evil" people we talk about all of the time are just figments of our own racist, bigoted, and disrespectful minds.
respect is not earnedyou
April 15, 2008 - 11:54 ET by TruthMongerrespect is not earned
you did not earn the respect of Jesus
it is given, despite what you've earned...
return the favor, stop acting like a radical so-called "Muslim" or die by the sword you live by...
it's pretty simple:)
http://www.dougbrittonbooks.com/onlinebiblestudies-irritationandangermanagement/loveyourenemy-lovingallyourenemies.asp
Helen---"Twit" is a good
April 14, 2008 - 18:09 ET by the strugglerHelen---"Twit" is a good word for him.Right on.
I don't know
April 14, 2008 - 13:01 ET by rimskyI don't know whose worse.. Bill Maher, or the idiots that laugh and applaud anything he says.
Amateur Psychology
April 14, 2008 - 13:02 ET by CaringwhiteguyFor all you amateur psychologists out there, Bill Maher's father was Catholic and his mother was Jewish. Go to it friends!
I Wonder...
April 14, 2008 - 13:11 ET by geoff.galeIf, in Bill Maher's mind (what a pitifully painful place that must be) all those in any group are to be smeared by what the weakest in that group have done, then shouldn't he be tarred by the same scandals that have clung to the entertainment industry like fetid barnacles on the hull of a rotting ship?
Bill, it's known as the Golden Rule - treat others as you would like to be treated.
"All that is necessary for the trimuph of evil is that good men do nothing."
- Edmund Burke (1729 - 1797)
www.conservativeboot...
Ah hem...Baraka Hussein Obama, Jr.
April 14, 2008 - 13:54 ET by jpatchgeoff gale...
Excellent point: we need to look no further than Baraka Hussein Obama, Jr.'s words and analysis of issues using this same technique.
We're still 7.5 months away from the GE, and his campaign has already given us:
"Typical White Person"..."that clings to guns, religion, anti-immigration sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations [from being jobless for the past 25 years]..."..."that's afraid of black men as they walk down the street"...
"God Damn America!!!"
"The United States of KKK!!"
"America's chickens are coming home to roost!!" (applause, from the "typical black people")
And here's one more thing that I found that was interesting...
“for the first time in my adult lifetime I am really proud of my country. And not just because Barack has done well, but because I think people are hungry for change.”
"for the first time in my adult life, I am really proud of my country, because it feels like hope is making a comeback… not just because Barack has done well, but because I think people are hungry for change."
The top quote is from ABC and Fox news. The bottom quote is from CNN. Anyone see the difference?
"
I don't see what's so
April 14, 2008 - 13:27 ET by LeonI don't see what's so outrageous about his comments.
The Catholic Church has actively protected pedophiles.
They deserve much more than a verbal tongue lashing.
The pedophilia problem is rampant and little has been done to rectify the situation.
Nice work Bill Maher in keeping this scandal in the open.
That really dosn't suprise
April 14, 2008 - 13:31 ET by bassndudeThat really dosn't suprise anyone here, Leon. We would be suprised if you did see it.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
There's the opening line
April 14, 2008 - 13:41 ET by Chris NormanThere's the opening line in his attempt to change yet another thread into The It's All About Leon Show starring Leon.
Bass, So you think the RCC
April 14, 2008 - 14:31 ET by LeonBass,
So you think the RCC has handled the pedophile crisis within its walls in an honest and just fashion?
peds are a human
April 14, 2008 - 16:21 ET by TruthMongerpeds are a human phenomenon, not a Catholic phenomenon...
the Church handled it badly in many instances...
but they handled as well as any human organization could...
news flash: everyone on earth is imperfect
unless you have some scientific research that proves Catholics are less perfect than the rest of us...?
or is your extensive expertise on peds and the RCC based on Comedy Central...
Sorry...the elephant in the
April 14, 2008 - 17:04 ET by motherbeltSorry...the elephant in the room is the fact that it was not a "pedophile" problem; it was a "homosexual" problem.
Exactly how many priests molested girls?
I don't think it was
April 14, 2008 - 17:11 ET by JerI don't think it was "either/or" but "both".
Jer
Nah Jer, Homosexuality
April 14, 2008 - 17:16 ET by LeonNah Jer,
Homosexuality has nothing to do with pedophilia.
You're either a pedophile or you're not. One's sexual orientation is irrelevant in predicting deviant/illegal behavior.
Leon...
April 14, 2008 - 17:50 ET by JerHomosexuality has nothing to do with pedophilia.
I'm not saying that it does. But there are homosexual pedophiles as well as heterosexual pedophiles. With regard to the specific problem of sexual abuse of young boys by Catholic priests, I think it's self-evident the former are the issue.
If I'm off base here, please explain.
Jer
Jer, Perhaps, but there
April 15, 2008 - 09:58 ET by LeonJer,
Perhaps, but there are two things to consider:
1) Were the priests homosexual by nature or did they simply have more access to boys?
2) Does the illness of pedophilia supercede sexual orientation? So straight or gay is irrelevant when children are your interest.
mb, If it was a
April 14, 2008 - 17:13 ET by Leonmb,
If it was a homosexual problem, how do you explain all of the young girls that have also been abused?
Nice try though.
How about some numbers
April 14, 2008 - 17:31 ET by motherbeltHow about some numbers Leon, instead of your usual B as in B, S as in S?
Nice try though.
So MB, Are you claiming
April 15, 2008 - 09:55 ET by LeonSo MB,
Are you claiming that Catholic priests haven't molested any girls?
The point is, even a handful of girls being abused makes your claim worthless.
Unfortunately, it's much more than a handful. While boys are more often the targets of creepy Catholics, a sizable number of young girls have also been targeted.
Here's a great article out of Dallas documenting the protection of priests by the Catholic church.
In the beginning of the article they state:
Most protected priests were accused of sexually abusing minors - primarily adolescent boys, but also younger ones, and a sizable number of girls of various ages
LINK
Girls have indeed suffered at the hands of these monsters.
What does that mean with regard to your silly comment?
It's not a homosexual issue, it's a ped issue.
From what I can find about 1 out of every 5 victims is a female.
20% is a major proportion.
Leon,1) Stop typing your
April 15, 2008 - 12:05 ET by futbolisgreat1Leon,
1) Stop typing your posts as if this was a rampant problem within the Roman Catholic Church, it is not. If you bothered to look up statistics, you will find that it is less than 2% of priests. However, Yes, 2% too many.
2) The secular world has a much, much, much, much, much, much bigger problem with pedophiles than any number you can find in the Roman Catholic Church. Just look up your local city, State, etc sex offender database (which includes convicted pedophiles), it outnumbers GREATLY any number you can find in the Roman Catholic Church....yes percentage wise too.
3) Do you call the ACLU, NAMBLA monsters? If not, why not? They have BOTH been involved in pedophile and ownership of child ponography? why the hypocrisy?
4) Not excusing the monstrocity committed by a FEW priests within the Church, just showing you your incredible hypocrisy and selective outrage. according to statistics, a child is safer with a priest than their own parents when it comes to pedophile, than their own teacher, local policemen, etc, etc, etc.
4) I hate to agree with you at any point, but you are somewhat correct. Pedophile, for whatever reason is a much bigger problem with married men than it is with single men. Proves also that the numbers of priests committing thiss horrific act are much smaller than you, the MSM make them out to be. Also proves that it has nothing to do with homosexuality.....However!
5) 99.9% of the priests convicted of pedophile have turned out to be homosexuals. go figure.
6) As for you citing some news story as your prove, please. The media hates the Church with a passion, they hated it before the priesthood scandal and they will hate it long afterwards.
Why do you get so easily influenced by the MSM? why?
I already knew the
April 15, 2008 - 12:13 ET by motherbeltSo MB,
Are you claiming that Catholic priests haven't molested any girls?
That's not what I said, and you know it. Don't extrapolate. I said the same thing to Balboa yesterday.
I already knew the numbers, Leon, I was checking to see if you did.
And how does "How about some numbers?" (which I asked you) translate into "Catholic priests haven't molested any girls" Which you are asking me if I am saying?
Throwing out baseless accusations disguised as innocent questions is a thoroughly disingenuous and sneaky way of discussing a topic.
Leon, Furthermore, how
April 15, 2008 - 12:14 ET by futbolisgreat1Leon,
Furthermore, how about Bernie Ward....where is the left wing outrage by individuals like you who love attacking the Church?
You do know who Bernie Ward is, right?
Well, I am guessing that since the MSM hasn't told you, you probably do not know.
Bernie Ward was a very popular Liberal radio host in California that enjoyed an immense Liberal audience in the West Coast.
Yes, this example of Liberal values man has been arrested and charged with owning, watching, and being involved in pedophilia.
Where is the Liberal outraged? Where is the MSM outcry? where? did you even know this had happened?
I am sick and tired of those that attack the Church on this subject who are such great hypocrites.
They run and defend the ACLU, don't have a clue about Bernie Wards and then they show selective outrage against the Church.
Bernie Ward is a hero to West Coast Liberals, even after his arrest, he has been defended by countless Liberals including Libereal politicians...
where is YOUR outrage, the MSM outrage, hypocrite?
So that means the problem
April 14, 2008 - 17:14 ET by balboaSo that means the problem wasn't that they were fondling underage boys, it's that they weren't fondling underage girls?
That doesn't make sense.
Yeah, It's a discrimination
April 14, 2008 - 17:43 ET by motherbeltYeah, It's a discrimination problem that they molested boys, not girls.
<sarc off>
That's not what I said, and you know it. Don't twist my words.
To quote Leon, "Nice try though."
Well you seemed to take the
April 14, 2008 - 17:44 ET by balboaWell you seemed to take the pedophile part of it out of the equation, meaning that it was the homosexuality was the problem.
It was mainly a homosexual
April 14, 2008 - 17:52 ET by motherbeltDon't be cute. You knew what you were doing.
It was mainly a homosexual molestation problem. The number of boys far exceeded the number of girls...something like 80/20.
Yes, but the problem isn't
April 14, 2008 - 17:54 ET by balboaYes, but the problem isn't that they're homosexual.
The problem was that they
April 14, 2008 - 18:09 ET by motherbeltThe problem was that they were both....homosexuals with a penchant for young boys. The numbers indicate that far more of the molestations were homosexual in nature. Which indicates that homosexuality was a significant factor, more than simply pedophilia. And it wasn't even pedophilia, technically, since most were post-pubescent. However, I would definitely call it sexual abuse of a minor.
→ Motherbelt
April 14, 2008 - 18:27 ET by Cool ArrowThere is a term for homosexuals who molest young boys . . . pedophile.
♣ a seal
mb, It's an access
April 15, 2008 - 10:02 ET by Leonmb,
It's an access issue.
The fact that these priests have limited access to girls and still managed to molest enough girls to forma a significant proportion of the victims points to this fact.
A ped is a ped. Sexual orientation is irrelevant when your mind is that disturbed.
"I don't see..."
April 14, 2008 - 14:17 ET by jpatch"I don't see...I don't see...I don't see...I don't see...I don't see..."
OPEN YOUR EYES!!!
jpatch...
April 14, 2008 - 14:26 ET by Syriusjpatch,
You're defending the RCC against Maher? What color hats do you wear with your clown costume while at kid shows?
Syrius
"...the dire consequences to society when people begin to believe that by
renaming someone to erase their humanity opens the door to the
devaluation of everyone's life..."-dscott
Falling for the media perspective
April 15, 2008 - 00:53 ET by KC MulvilleMethinks we spot a little rhetoric here. Hear me out. It turns out that a statistically unusual number of pedophile priests joined in the years just before Vatican II. The cases of abuse come from priests all within the same age group. And yes, the abuse cases are overwhelmingly homosexual. Surprisingly few abuses against girls, and way below the statistical norm. In fact, except for this "crop" of priests, the statistics for other priests are way below the statistical average.
A lot of people who study this issue feel that it was an unfortunate conjunction of problems. There was a (pardon the pun) spike of homosexual entrants for those years, and the church was unprepared for the psychological differences. Priestly celibacy is a complex and powerful issue (I speak from hereosexual experience on that), and I can only imagine what homosexuals faced. Further, the people who really fumbled the issue were the bishops. I place a lot of respect on the bishops - all the more infuriating when they screw up. Reality is that when all these cases started cropping up, the bishops should have responded quickly and pastorally. But instead, they followed their lawyers' advice, and tried to buy silence from victims. (Of all people, you'd think priests would know better than to follow lawyers' advice!) That didn't work well.
As for your other points, Leon, let's get real. The church drew up new rules of engagement. We've also paid out three billion dollars, and have funded as many counseling centers and programs as possible. The church has done what it demands everyone do when confronting our own sins. We've made sincere apologies, worked hard for restitution, and made as many amends as are possible. You have a right to be disgusted at the sin, but disgust at the sin doesn't give you the right to ignore the repentance.
Leon, I'm surprised at you. You have swallowed the media's perspective ... hook, line, and sinker. You claim that the problem is still rampant? And that little has been done to rectify the situation? That's a media myth.
And you know what I've discovered? Everyone loves the media ... when they're distorting in your side's favor.
Exactly KC.... ....and
April 15, 2008 - 01:00 ET by bigtimerExactly KC....
....and this constant Catholic bashing with the msm is getting way past irritatingly old...unless of course it is a political figure on the leftist side..then they embrace or spin the Catholic Church for a moment when reporting on said political figure as long as it is a leftist...
Oh I could go on and on with their agenda driven hypocrisy.
Really beyond sad in my opinion.
"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Churchill
→ Thank you KC
April 15, 2008 - 01:06 ET by Cool ArrowYour take on this issue is not too much unlike mine.
I saw it this way:
♣ a seal
My experience
April 15, 2008 - 09:49 ET by KC MulvilleI can only speak of my experience. When I entered the Jesuits in the early 1980s, maybe a quarter or a third of the entrants were gay (that I knew of). The gays didn’t bother me, and it really wasn't a gay culture. (On the other hand, the yuppie, passive-aggressive, extremely political culture bothered me a lot.) Some of my gay friends admitted that they went into religious life, thinking that once they had taken a vow of celibacy, their sexuality didn’t matter. If you weren’t going to have sex anyway, it no longer mattered if you wanted to have sex with other men. They all eventually admitted that their sexuality wasn’t something they could ignore. They had to address it. Now, not to brag about my former order, but the Jesuits had plenty of resources available to help guys deal with their sexuality. The Jesuits are filled with psychologists, and since Jesuits give retreats all the time, they have to be trained in spiritual counseling.
That wasn’t true for most of the regular parish priests, in my time. The ordinary diocesan priests were given comparatively little training, and some of the young guys were simply pushed out of the seminary and had to make it on their own. That’s how it was for many years. In some ways, it's no wonder why some of the regular parish priests turned out to be so "damaged."
The abuse scandal has changed some of it. Regular priests are being given more attention. Now, how much, and how effective it is … I don’t know. Time will tell.
KC!!!
April 15, 2008 - 01:19 ET by tracheostomyNow here is a valid argument! Nice.
It's more original than what I've been hearing.
It's reasonably delivered too. Love the rhetoric jab.
All I'm missing are names and numbers for this demographic. Maybe an outside article that sets up all the individuals accused and connects the dots.
I don't care if it's from a "Pro-Catholic" or "Anti-Catholic" site either, as long as the verifiable info is there.
And even if you can't find it right off the bat, I'll keep it in mind and keep an eye out for something fitting this theory in the future.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Thanks, trach
April 15, 2008 - 10:18 ET by KC MulvilleFor the hard statistics of the point about the pre-Vatican II priests, I’ll cite the report commissioned by the U.S. Catholic Bishops Conference, done by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice. (I'm not a statistician myself, and don't claim to be. But this is what someone sent me.)
One thing to note – according to this study, the incidents rose to a frightening peak between the years 1970 and 1980. Then it drops off dramatically. Anyway, say a priest takes about eight years to go through the seminary and find himself out in the world. Give another five to ten years before a predator priest feels ‘safe” enough to begin abusing kids. That means that the abusers were likely accepted into the seminary about 15-20 years before the abuse cases start happening. Given that the incidents reached a peak in the late 1970s, that suggests that the abusing priests were all accepted in the late 1950s or early 1960s.
What’s interesting to me is that the cases start declining dramatically for priests accepted right after Vatican II. During Vatican II, the church adopted a much more modern attitude toward sexuality, in a variety of ways. (No one said it was a more promiscuous approach, just modern.) I’m thinking that maybe the more adult attitude toward human sexuality helped stop the dark side, almost as a side effect.
Guess who was one of the driving forces at Vatican II, and who championed the shift in church attitudes? John Paul II!
Great read. Glad I
April 15, 2008 - 16:53 ET by tracheostomyGreat read. Glad I checked back on this. Thanks KC!
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Question here
April 14, 2008 - 13:31 ET by kdizzydazeWhat are Maher's ratings? I know of no one that watches his show. Or is this something along the lines of Sirius where ratings don't matter - only subscribers.
And speaking of subscribers - is HBO losing theirs?
Just wondering.
Bringin' me in...
April 14, 2008 - 14:12 ET by SyriusDizzy,
If his ratings were through the roof and one of your leaders told you to watch him- You'd be the first to grab the popcorn...Oh, wait a minute...they let you watch the YouTube video without paying HBO for it. Great Comedy! Sheer Irony! Your masters just told you, "Don't look at Bill Maher, don't you dare watch him! Ok, go ahead watch him and then comment!"
Just like watching "girls gone wild" tidbits and videos on FoxNewsChannel- NBers favorite "go to" show for the latest on dirty, naughty skanks. Who needs HBO's Cathouse 2 or RealSex? Anyone ready to go see the "Puppetry of the Penis"! Here's the link...
http://en.wikipedia....
Anyone have a "wristwatch"? Probably not on this site!
Syrius
Ummm...
April 14, 2008 - 14:36 ET by jpatchThe thing is, I force myself to watch Bill Maher for the sole purpose of staying informed. If that means that I have to be informed of Bill Maher's complete lack of intellectual or political *acumen* (shout out!!), then so be it. At least I'm hip to the current wave of insults being vomitted by Maher and his followers. And sometimes the show could border on being funny...if the topics weren't always the Catholic Church, George Bush, and the military. Gosh if I were to be so astute as to make an Obama-like observation...but Bill Maher and Keith Olberman use the same routine, no? What are they going to do when President Bush is out of office? Is the WHOLE show gonna be about the plague that is Christianity?
So, of course, you come here with no commentary on the content of his show. Must we endlessly board this carousel of ignorance? Bill Maher, like someone has brilliantly pointed out already, is a "professional" mocker. He stands for nothing. He defends nothing. He believes in nothing...except himself and his day to day quest for hedonistic satisfaction. Does he mock Islam on his show? No, he's afraid. Does he mock Imams on his show? No, he's afraid. His whole show is just a sad metaphor for the cancer that his ideology spreads.
"Professional" mocker?
April 14, 2008 - 14:46 ET by Syriusjpatch,
"What are they going to do when President Bush is out of office?"
REJOICE!!!
"Is the
WHOLE show gonna be about the plague that is Christianity?" ...Maybe, you do know...
"Making fun of born-again Christians is like hunting dairy cows with a high powered rifle and scope."-P.J. O'Rourke
He's a comedian. Waaaa, waaaa, waaaah!
Syrius
"...the dire consequences to society when people begin to believe that by
renaming someone to erase their humanity opens the door to the
devaluation of everyone's life..."-dscott
You seem to have taken an
April 14, 2008 - 15:04 ET by Roger the ShrubberYou seem to have taken an extra dose of douche pills today.
Have a rough weekend?
Daddy, when I grow up, can I be a mocker?
April 14, 2008 - 13:46 ET by KC MulvilleMockery. That’s what Maher does for a living. He mocks people. He mocks politicians who disagree with him. He mocks religion, for any number of reasons. (It’s revealing, though, that the moment he starts on religion, it’s always about sex. What does that tell you?) He doesn’t offer reasons. He simply smirks, and tosses off a handy slogan. He runs from debate. Oh, he invites an occasional conservative on his show, but when he’s actually in front of a conservative, he’s completely intimidated. Not only that, whenever the conservative makes a point, Maher throws out a slogan to the crowd (which is packed, naturally, with people who think that hooting and hollering counts as political discourse).
Ask yourself. When you were a kid, did you want to grow up to be a mocker? Other kids wanted to be firefighters, or soldiers, or doctors … but did you know anyone who wanted to mock people for a living? Sure you did. He was the kid who wanted to be popular by putting others down.
We had a name for those kids. Punks. (Ok, we had several other names for them also …)
KC, What amazes me is that
April 14, 2008 - 14:13 ET by Chris NormanKC,
What amazes me is that Maher can look at himself in the mirror, knowing that he's based his career on being hateful and mean-spirited.
You forgot...
April 14, 2008 - 14:19 ET by SyriusKC,
...They grow up to be conservatives and join this site to- generate goodwill?
Love your comment- "He was the kid who wanted to be popular by putting others down."
Like most of the NBers who comment on anyone opposing their viewpoint, they like to pile on with the rest of the herd. Mooo, mooo, moooooooo!
It's so much fun, isn't it?
Mock away...
Syrius
"...the dire consequences to society when people begin to believe that by
renaming someone to erase their humanity opens the door to the
devaluation of everyone's life..."-dscott
Damn. I thought we were
April 14, 2008 - 14:24 ET by Roger the ShrubberDamn. I thought we were sheep.
It's amazing.
April 14, 2008 - 14:32 ET by SyriusRog,
You've come so far in your self-awareness classes. I commend you for acknowledging you're a ewe. Your shepherd is calling. He's feeling a little frisky! He's wearing a hat, too!
Syrius
"...the dire consequences to society when people begin to believe that by
renaming someone to erase their humanity opens the door to the
devaluation of everyone's life..."-dscott
Who said I'm a ewe?
April 14, 2008 - 14:42 ET by Roger the ShrubberAre you projecting your preference to everybody? A little wishful thinking going on?
I'm not into sheep...
April 14, 2008 - 15:34 ET by SyriusRog,
I'm laughing so hard right now!!!
I do need some shrubbery for the knights who say "Ni!', though!
Syrius
It's the hypocrisy stupid.
April 14, 2008 - 16:05 ET by Jonah JohansenIt's the hypocrisy stupid.
I think most of us on the right could live with the principle that groups of people should not be mocked, demeaned or insulted publically by employees of companies that in one way or other are trying to sell us something or are sponsered by companies wanting to sell us something.
On the other hand if the left demands the right to publicaly mock, demean and insult those people and groups who they do not approve of; then grant us the right to do the same, by not going into some form of mock outrage and threats of boycotts, whenever one of us is critical of one of your sacred cows.
It is simple don't demand Don Imus' head and defend Bill Mahr and Rosy O'Donell.
When our local universty (Unversity of Colorado) intitially defended Ward Churchill's freedom of speech; I actually saw it as a possible positive because that meant they wouldn't be able to enforce their campus speech code. Unfortunately, it didn't matter they went ahead not renewing instructors contracts or disciplining students who expressed some skepticism about the gay rights agenda or used an unflattering term for a Hispanics. They saw no contradiction between enforcing a campus speech code and at the same time supporting the "free speech" of Ward Churchill.
0-2
April 14, 2008 - 14:43 ET by jpatchSyrius...
Get over yourself.
No one cares about you at all, because you bring nothing to the table. At least challenge us with some kind of cogent thought. No one here is interested in silencing opposing views, like you claim. We only insult people that are trying to disrupt the threads, or that post insults themselves under the guise of innuendo, ignorance, or just plain nonsense...like you constantly do.
Stop pretending like you are important here...you're not. I'm bothered in the extreme that I have to waste my time writing this out, but it's obvious that you have created a fantasy land for yourself.
Go ahead...pull the covers up tight over your eyes, and sleep tight. Just try not to think about the monster under your bed...
No one here is interested in silencing opposing views?
April 14, 2008 - 15:01 ET by Syriusjp,
We only insult people that are trying to disrupt the threads, or that
post insults themselves under the guise of innuendo, ignorance, or just
plain nonsense...like you constantly do.
I have no problem disrupting a right wing authoritarian thread. Do you really believe you have a monopoly on morality? Conservative "family" values? Watching FNC with the kids? Pointing out hypocrisy in your comments is a wonderful thing!
Examining both sides of the debate raises your own awareness- look at Rog, he didn't know he was a ewe in the eyes of his shepherd! Raising awareness, that's what I do!
Syrius
"...the dire consequences to society when people begin to believe that by
renaming someone to erase their humanity opens the door to the
devaluation of everyone's life..."-dscott
Well there Syrius, it's
April 14, 2008 - 15:07 ET by dscottWell there Syrius, it's hard not to have a monopoly on values when the left is so devoid of it.
I couldn't resist, you left yourself open to that one. <sarcasm> LOL
Lord Sidious / Darth Vader 2008 Long Live the Empire! Come to the Dark Side, it is your Destiny.
Just like the Dems...
April 14, 2008 - 15:21 ET by Syriusdscott,
...in the upcoming general election- devoid of any actual Republicans, they should win by a landslide. Now, that's what I'll call a monopoly!
Syrius
"...the dire consequences to society when people begin to believe that by
renaming someone to erase their humanity opens the door to the
devaluation of everyone's life..."-dscott
devoid of any actual
April 14, 2008 - 15:50 ET by dscottdevoid of any actual Republicans
Now you're being mean. Nice quip.
However, unless Obama wins the Dem nomination, there will be no landslide in the general election for McCain that is. LOL If Clinton wins the Dem nomination, it will be close and extremely dirty. Both Obama and Clinton are damaged goods, they did it to each other. I don't see McCain losing against either Dem nominee, he is too liberal of center siphoning off the Independents, Clinton and Obama supporters and will push the national security angle. The libs are in a win/win/win situation, they got the candidate that was acceptable to them.
Lord Sidious / Darth Vader 2008 Long Live the Empire! Come to the Dark Side, it is your Destiny.
Do you really believe you
April 14, 2008 - 15:18 ET by Dan The Man 2Do you really believe you have a monopoly on morality? Conservative "family" values. YES
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.
Oh, Really...?
April 14, 2008 - 15:30 ET by SyriusDan,
Show me the list!
Shall I start with the Senate, The Church, The Christian Right, etc.?
How about that little Mormon temple in Texas that just got raided?
Good "family" values on the ranch!
Since it would be wrong of me to broad brush all of you...
Dan, where do you fit in when it comes to conservative "family" values...Evangelical? God-fearing? Go ahead describe your definition of conservative "family" values? Don't worry most of the NBers will stand behind your views...
Syrius
"...the dire consequences to society when people begin to believe that by
renaming someone to erase their humanity opens the door to the
devaluation of everyone's life..."-dscott
What you asked was broad
April 14, 2008 - 16:05 ET by Dan The Man 2What you asked was broad and we do have a monopoly in broad terms. Then you come back with abberations and ones taht dont match. I am saying I have the monopoly on Morality, its called the Bible.
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.
Which one?
April 14, 2008 - 16:11 ET by SyriusDan,
King James?
Syrius
"...the dire consequences to society when people begin to believe that by
renaming someone to erase their humanity opens the door to the
devaluation of everyone's life..."-dscott
When you get some real
April 14, 2008 - 16:54 ET by Dan The Man 2When you get some real knowlege about such matters then ask.
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.
Syrius
April 15, 2008 - 00:55 ET by KC MulvilleIf you disrespect the people on this site so much that you throw us all into insulting and broad generalizations, why bother conversing with us? You haven't offered reason, certainly not in the above post, and you haven't built a case to prove any point. You just ... well, let's face it ... mocked someone (in this case, me) who disagreed with you.
After Maher mocked my religion, I mentioned the obvious fact that he makes his living mocking people. His humor isn't political humor. It's just smugly mocking his political opponents. And although it's a free country, that doesn't mean that insults come free.
Mahrer is a mohron
April 14, 2008 - 13:56 ET by greenfairieIf you want to see a cult full of pedophiles, look no further than your local public school system. A year doesn't go by in any large city or town where at least one teacher or school employee isn't caught doing something with a student.
But public schools don't get in the way of Bill Mahrer's Playboy lifestyle, so it's all good for him. He probably wishes he had Debra LaFayve for one of his teachers.
Perhaps Green Faire, The
April 14, 2008 - 14:27 ET by LeonPerhaps Green Faire,
The only difference, however, is that when you get caught in the public school system, you get fired and prosecuted...not quietly moved to another school.
The Catholic Church has actively protected pedophiles. Maher's mocking criticism is well-deserved.
Ok...
April 14, 2008 - 15:07 ET by jpatch"The Catholic Church has actively protected pedophiles."
That statement has some truth to it. How many "pedophiles" that have been "actively protected" by the "Catholic Church" is not known to me; nor do I know just who specifically is responsible for doing this "protecting".
But, I'll accept your premise that Maher's "mocking criticism is well-deserved." However, doesn't it get old, stale, and boring to keep mocking the Pope and Christianity with every breath? And along the same token...aren't there any other religions, religious figures, politicians, statesmen, etc. from here and from around the world that would merit as much, if not more, attention than what Maher is giving to Catholic Church?
It's obvious: Maher will never go after Islam, and it has nothing to do with there being any lack of "well-deserved mocking criticism" to be thrown at radical Muslims, Muhammed, Imams, mosques, etc. It has everything to do with Maher being a little p*ssy who is too afraid to turn his mocking exploitations onto anything that could, would, or should mock him back (or worse...).
You can myopically focus on something that may be "true", but if you're lense is so narrow that you're missing the big picture...is your view really a "truthful" one? Doesn't the rest of the picture need to be filled in before you can see the whole landscape? My point being: Bill Maher is OBVIOUSLY FOCUSING ON ONE SIDE, and OBVIOUSLY IGNORING equally inflammatory behavior by many, many, many others. When you're unable to be even slightly objective, you lose all credibility. (at least to people who THINK.)
It's like when people try to defend Rolling Stone's 100% ANTI-REPUBLICAN REPORTING RECORD..."it's no big deal, it's just a magazine that's really all about music and stuff..." If you're about music and entertainment, STICK TO MUSIC AND ENTERTAINMENT!! DON'T GET INTO POLITICS WHEN YOU DON'T KNOW SH*T!!!!
jpatch, 1) Protecting
April 14, 2008 - 17:24 ET by Leonjpatch,
1) Protecting even one pedophile is a greivous crime.
2) Perhaps it's stale territory and it has been covered frequently, but what have they really done about it? It's still a major problem that the RCC desperately tries to ignore. Until they deal with it in a full on fashion, they will continue to get mocked by the likes of people like Bill Maher. As they should.
3) I've heard Bill Maher attack Islam on more than one occassion. In fact, if I remember correctly he dedicated an entire segment to discussing the premise that Islam is NOT a religion of peace. So you're attacks about Maher and Islam are completely misguided. He routinely attacks all religions for their inconsistencies, hypocrisies, or outright insanities.
4) Bill Maher is not a musician and he's no longer really a comedian. He's a full time host of a political show. Thus, he's going to express political opinions. that's what he's paid to do. So your final call for musicians and entertainers to be quiet is irrelevant.
"Perhaps it's stale
April 15, 2008 - 00:01 ET by KC Mulville"Perhaps it's stale territory and it has been covered frequently, but what have they really done about it? It's still a major problem that the RCC desperately tries to ignore." Where did you get the idea that the church is trying to "ignore it?" I know where you got it. From the media. That's what they want you to think.
"Until they deal with it in a full on fashion, they will continue to get mocked by the likes of people like Bill Maher." I have several questions here.
Leon, Leon....and all those
April 14, 2008 - 15:53 ET by futbolisgreat1Leon, Leon....and all those that attack the Church because of priests that committed pedophile.
1) Every single priest that has done this, may God have mercy on his soul. The great damage that the Church has suffered do to a few twisted men, is horrific!!! And the horrific suffering that children were put through....terrible, terrible!!!! May God consoul, and aid those that have been harmed by the FEW twisted priests.
2) I find it amusing that Leon, Cool Arrow, etc would attack the Church because of supposed rampant pedophile (studies have been done that show that less than 2% of priest have done this...yes 2% too many), yet complete and utter silence when this happens int he secular world.
Leon claims that in our public school system when pedophiles are caught they are prosecuted...LIE! some have, but many haven't. In fact, many excuse pedophile, especially when it is an adult woman teacher against a teenage boy, saying that....isn't that every teenage boys dream! The media in Chicago has defended more than one woman teacher pedophile this way. Where was the outrage?!
Furthermore, here in Chicago, they had to put passwords in all the police department computers because EVERY single police district child ponography was found in 99% of police computers.
Where is your outrage? Oh, how can you be outraged, the media didn't report this! And we know how Cool Arrow, Leon, etc work. They only opine on that which the media reports.
3) There are more athiest and secular pedophiles than priest pedophiles, where is your outrage? Right before 9/11 there was a huge national raid of pedophiles and owners of child ponographers. The FBI nabbed over 10,000 individuals, judges, policemen, teachers, lawyers, engineers, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc.....where was the media outrage? Where was the outrage of those that are "outraged" by the horrific thing that a few priests have done?
4) Quite a few of the pedophile cases have been thrown out because they were found to be slander are lies against priests.
5) Sometimes the Church is too big for its own good. The Pope didn't know the pedophiles that had entered the priesthood. I can assure you that the Pope doesn't go down the list of countless individuals who believe that their vocation is the priesthood and look at their files. He wouldn't do anything else.
6) Is it terrible, hell YES!!! and these men should be punished big time! Is it the Churches fault? of course not! That is like blaiming the City of Chicago for all the child ponography sites stored in police department computers.
7) those that claim that more should be done than scolding the Pope, I hope you are also calling for court houses, cities, governorns, mayors, CEOs, chiefs of police to not only be scolded, but be held accountable for the actions of the people they employee. How ridiculous, right?
8) Lastly, and this is where the greatest hypocrisy lies with individuals like Leon, Syrius, Maher, and any other Liberal that attacks the Church for the few pedophile priests and at the same time embraces the ACLU. Where is the outrage from the left, from Liberals who attack the Church for the few priests who are pedophiles, against the ACLU for defending NAMBLA?!!!! Where Leon?!!! Where Leon?!! Your hypocrisy and that of Maher would be laughable if it was NOT so pathetic! This proves that Liberals like you and Maher don't attack the Church because of the few pedophile priests, but rather for pure and uncontrolable, irrational hate. If it were true that you cared about the children, you and every single Liberal would be condemning the ACLU for helping NAMBLA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Will you and Maher condemn the ACLU for protecting NAMBLA, for defending it? will you?
I have run into way too many Liberals who are proud card carrying members of the ACLU, yet they attack the Church for the pedophile priests. What a bunch of pathetic hypocrites!!!!!!
HYPOCRITES!
Fut, right on & how about the Commander BJ Clinton
April 14, 2008 - 16:03 ET by PawpawNYou are so right on. And how about the Commander in Chief Bill (BJ) Clinton and his disgrace of the sanctity of the office of the PRESIDENT of the United States. Nothing has defiled our reputation more in the world!
PawPawn, Furthermore, the
April 14, 2008 - 16:36 ET by futbolisgreat1PawPawn,
Furthermore, the ACLU hasn't only defended NAMBLA, a few of its directors and regional director lawyers have been found to have engaged in pedophile or own child ponography!!
If we use Bill Maher's standards and that of Leon's, the ACLU is an incredible evil organization, right?
and where is the demand from Leon, Bill Maher, etc to have the ACLU shut down? uninvited to places? etc, etc, etc.
This has nothing to do with individuals that attack the Church because of the few pedophile priests, it has more to do with the FACT that there are quite a few people that hate the Church with an incredible passion and they will grab unto any reason to hate it.
As Hitchcock would say...
April 14, 2008 - 16:06 ET by SyriusFut,
...whenever he saw a priest with his hand on a young boy's shoulder, "Run for your life, little boy, run for your life!".
Fut, you're correct the Church has gotten a bad rap over the years and has been through the ringer. It has done some very good things and some very bad things. Time will heal the wounds. It is up to the Church to make amends and not try to label itself as a victim of its own failings by a select few. Time will tell. The Church will be around longer than any of us. It has gone through darker times...
Syrius
"...the dire consequences to society when people begin to believe that by
renaming someone to erase their humanity opens the door to the
devaluation of everyone's life..."-dscott
Syrius, 1) Well, when
April 14, 2008 - 16:32 ET by futbolisgreat1Syrius,
1) Well, when you have the media day in and day out attacking the Church...what do you expect? They attack the Church, but then they stay silent about NAMBLA and the ACLU. If not, they even defend it. Or like they do constantly here in Chicago, the media defends teacher pedophiles who are women. Groups like Naral, NOW, etc do the same thing. Sad, sad. However, you don't hear the outrage by the same individuals that attack the Church.
2) Thank you for the well mannered response.
3) As I said, and I believe NB brought up this point about Bush, or I read it somewhere else, but it goes well with the Church. The media in the USA act like a marketing campaign. I mean, day in and day out all they do is talk about the few priests that have committed this horrible act, but they don't tell anyone the great things the Church has done. I hate to say this, but WAY too many people much rather have the media "inform" them than to get off their seats and do research.
I have ran into quite a few Liberals in Chicago who had this blind hate for the Church due to these few priests, but when I pointed out the facts and the many other things the Church has done very well which are things for good, they were awe struck and they admitted that they didn't know. They admitted that all they hear all the long, whether at work, school, watching television, etc is bad things about the Church.
the RCC is no worse than
April 14, 2008 - 16:40 ET by TruthMongerthe RCC is no worse than the rest of humanity, but better than most of it...
as we speak several million great things have been done by the RCC today - for orphans, the sick, the poor, the hungry - libs like Maher haven't done as much for someone else in his entire lifetime that the typical priest has done for someone this week...
what has Maher ever done for others?
I know he's big on comic relief (no surpise there helping his own industry), and he's big on helping dogs...?
I'll take the ped priest anyday instead, Bill - and be alot better off by leaps and bounds:)
You almost had me
April 14, 2008 - 18:30 ET by JerI was with you until that closing comment, TM.
Jer
→ Jer
April 14, 2008 - 22:35 ET by Cool ArrowI don't understand Truthie's comment either.
BJ Clinton did his deeds with adults and Truthie thinks pedophiles are morally superior to Clinton.
Could have something to do with Truthie's condoning the child brides of Islam.
♣ a seal
Cool Arrow, BJ Clinton
April 14, 2008 - 22:55 ET by futbolisgreat1Cool Arrow,
BJ Clinton actually is alleged to have raped a woman. In my book that is as bad as pedophile!!! I don't know about yours Cool Arrow.
As for your attack on all Muslims. Ignorant Cool ARrow, quite ignorant. You like trach are zealots, and you guys do an immense harm to the Conservative movement and Christianity.
Not all Muslims are evil doers like Hamas, Hezzbolah, Al Qaeda, etc.
In fact, I venture to say that most Muslims are incredibly ignorant.
If we go with your logic, should all Christians be judged by the extreme Christian Mormons who marry off their 12, 13, 24, etc teenage girls to 50 year old farts?
I do believe and know that Islam has it big problems, but to stereotype all Muslims to equal Al Qaeda, Hamas, etc, is stupid and uneducated. Just like it is stupid and uneducated to equate all Christians with the extreme Mormons or the crazy Christian group that goes around disturbing the funeral of men and women who died in Iraq and they hold signs up saying that these soldiers deserved to die because of homosexuality in the USA.
think before you type. You only make a fool out of yourself.
Cool...I think the "Bill"
April 14, 2008 - 22:59 ET by JerCool...I think the "Bill" he is referring to is Maher and not Clinton, but that's hardly relevant. The mere suggestion of accepting or tolerating pedophile priests is incomprehensible.
Jer
→ You're right Jer
April 14, 2008 - 23:05 ET by Cool ArrowI got the "Bills" mixed up.
But the preference Truthie stated is disgusting.
Guess he forgot about the "Better a millstone be hung around their neck and they be cast into the sea" (or words to that effect)
♣ a seal
I'll take a ped priest over
April 15, 2008 - 12:20 ET by TruthMongerI'll take a ped priest over a liberal agnostic like Maher any day...
and so will St. Peter at the gates of heaven...
it's not my rule, it's the Gospel
if you're disgusted with it take it up with the big guy:)
That's Just Gross
April 15, 2008 - 12:26 ET by Free StinkerI'll take neither.
TM has lost it... I
April 15, 2008 - 12:30 ET by Clear thinkerTM has lost it...
I cannot believe what I just read. Unless.... TM is trying to get attention again.
"Abstain from McCain"
The sad thing is, he used to
April 15, 2008 - 12:31 ET by Free StinkerThe sad thing is, he used to come across as normal. I'm not sure what happened to him.
He's been spending too much
April 15, 2008 - 12:33 ET by Clear thinkerHe's been spending too much time with radical Muslims would be my guess.
"Abstain from McCain"
Maybe one of them has him
April 15, 2008 - 12:37 ET by Free StinkerMaybe one of them has him hostage, and only lets him blog under duress?
please with the circle
April 15, 2008 - 14:40 ET by TruthMongerplease with the circle jerks people - this is a family site:)
John 3:16 Many people
April 15, 2008 - 14:43 ET by TruthMongerJohn 3:16
Many people have trouble believing it...
your wish is granted have
April 15, 2008 - 13:53 ET by TruthMongeryour wish is granted
have a nice day:)
→ fut
April 14, 2008 - 18:44 ET by Cool ArrowHaggerd And Swaggert were both left to defend themselves against their failings.
Their respective churches made no attempt to shuffle them off to another unsuspecting congregation
Sadly, the Catholic Church allowed a systemic shell game to continue within its clergy.
Not only those priests who engaged in this heinous activity deserve condemnation, but also every clergyman who helped conceal the scandal known to them outside Confession.
This is not an attack against the RCC, but rather an indictment against the pernicious infection that existed within it.
If you are saying this is an attack on the Church, you must necessarily contend that the conspiracy involved complicity at the highest level.
You never know when you're giving your high and mighty attitude to the wrong person, fut. Perhaps I have very good reason to believe you are an apologist S*B.
I will not elaborate further.
♣ a seal
Cool Arrow... OH
April 14, 2008 - 22:47 ET by futbolisgreat1Cool Arrow...
OH PLEASE!!!
you are the typical anti-Roman Catholic who doesn't have a clue about the Church.
"The Catholic Church allowed a systematic shell game"? This statement of YOURS implies that there was a conspiracy at the highest levels! There wasn't Cool Arrow, there wasn't. Stop repeating like a parrot what the media has brainwashed you to believe. Next thing you will do is what Leon did last week. Link me to Boston.com, The Guardian, etc and tell me that it comes directly from the Vatican.
If you understood how the Vatican rules all the dioceses around the world, you would understand that in ALL cases it was that particular dioceses which screwed up, NOT the WHOLE Roman Catholic Church. Dioceses enjoy a GREAT deal of autonomy. If they don’t report to the Vatican the short comings of a priest, Bishop, etc, 99.9% of the time, the Vatican will never find out.
Just like I urged you on Friday to stop spewing half-truths about Roman Catholic history and teachings, I urge you to silence yourself now before you once again slander the Church. You do enough damage with your ignorance about the Church as it is, don’t make it any worst.
And of course you won’t elaborate any further, it is easier to attack and run than to stand your ground.
→ fut
April 14, 2008 - 23:01 ET by Cool ArrowYou are so apologetic you won't even concede there was a shell game?
Obviously you didn't have a close friend or family member molested by one of those priests.
Good for you fut. Deny Dioceses moved pedophiles from one Parish to the next to avoid litigation. You're much too invested to believe any of it happened anyway.
My quarrel, as I stated before, is with everyone who committed these acts or gave the practice a nod and a wink.
We know they exist.
♣ a seal
CA: You are so apologetic
April 14, 2008 - 23:16 ET by tracheostomyCA: You are so apologetic you won't even concede there was a shell game?
I'll even stick up for the RCC on this one. I believe it wasn't an intentional cover-up, but according to their own theology, they couldn't do anything about it. Their hands were tied because they didn't have anyone to give them a systematic alternative.
Yeah, I'd love to elaborate on this one. If you're guessing it has anything to do with the "marriage" issue, you're half right. The other is all about confession.
http://www.biblebb.com/files/MAC/catholicscandal.htm
Note to Futbol: Don't read this. You'll assume he's automatically lying because he's a protestant, and you can't prove anything otherwise anyway, so don't bother. You'll just get upset.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Cool Arrow, Gave the
April 14, 2008 - 23:17 ET by futbolisgreat1Cool Arrow,
Gave the practice a nod and wink?! Another pathetic statement by you. If it fits into your anti-Catholic world to call me an apologetic, by all means feel free to do so. I would hate to destroy your made believe world created by the USA MSM!
Besides what the media reported, can you please give me the name of the dioceses that did this? Not the slander spewed out by the media, but YOUR own researched facts. Can you do this, or are you the typical lazy American that loves to seat on his couch and let the media turn your brain into jello?!
Because you believe I don't have anyone close to me that this happened to, I defend the Church so hard? Please, what an obtuse logic you have.
You claimed that this problem is a systematic problem in the Church, PROVE IT beyond what the enemies of the Church claim.
Furthermore, to claim that it is a systematic problem is to claim that it is a wide spread problem, this is the biggest lie that individuals like you have swallowed from the MSM constant attack on the Church.
Do some research, have a mind of your own, and stop spewing anti-Catholic propaganda.
At no point have I denied that this abuses happened. They did, horrific, horrific. I pray every night for the children that were abused by this terrible, sinful priests. But the problem is no where near being as wide spread as you, the MSM, etc make it out to be.
I will tell you where the problem IS widespread and much bigger than an individual like you is willing to believe or care to research, in the secular world.
No please, learn some self-control, learn to do research BEYOND what the media tells you on the 30 minutes nightly news. You do such great harm with your ignorance and hate of the Roman Catholic Church. You truly do.
→ fut in mouth as always
April 14, 2008 - 23:26 ET by Cool ArrowCardinal Law - Boston Diocese.
Shell game is documented
Father Cos, Dallas. Almost sent the Diocese into bankruptcy. Also was moved out of Diocese to avoid litigation.
♣ a seal
CA,
April 14, 2008 - 23:33 ET by tracheostomyI'm going to have to require more than that. Like some links to actual letters or quotes with sources attached. I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt here. I still maintain the primary motive is the theology behind manditory asceticism in general, and not avoiding legal action.
And I really hope I'm not wrong about this.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
→ Trake
April 14, 2008 - 23:46 ET by Cool ArrowI began early in this thread by excluding the confessional.
And don't expect me to do a Poptech flood. I pulled up two off the top of my head without googling anything.
We are both aware the overwhelming majority of these cases were settled out of court with secrecy agreements demanded.
Only in a few cases, like Dallas, LA, and Boston, I think, were all documents subpoenaed and dissected.
But the results were staggering.
♣ a seal
Cool Arrow, "We are both
April 15, 2008 - 00:14 ET by futbolisgreat1Cool Arrow,
"We are both aware the overwhelming majority of these cases were settled out of court with secrecy agreements demanded." by Cool Arrow
Wait, if the majority of the cases were settled out of court with secrecy agreements demanded, how do you know they happened?
If you know, someone violated this secrecy, right?!
c'mon Cool Arrow, I took you to be incredibly more logical than your above statement!
You are assuming, you are conjecturing based on what a few anti-Catholic commentators have said and on your own hate for the Church.
If you know this fact of yours, then the it WASN'T secret, correct?!
then you would have countless names of priests, Bishops and dioceses who covered up for the few pedophiles, correct?
You are lying, you are completly lying! and now you are making things up to back up your earlier, equally baseless statement and attacks against the Church.
PLEASE!
One thing that all anti-Catholics have in common, they are liars and they love their lies.
→ And you, fut
April 15, 2008 - 00:19 ET by Cool ArrowAnd you, fut, are pathetically inept at hiding disbelief in what you're saying.
Lame argument. Same as the one presented when Michael Jackson paid that kid's family $25 million to stop "lying" (nudge nudge wink wink) about him.
♣ a seal
Cool Arrow, Oh, what's
April 15, 2008 - 00:29 ET by futbolisgreat1Cool Arrow,
Oh, what's the matter. Caught you lying through your illogical statement?! don't be so sad. :(
You lied my friend.
There is NO way your statement is true without you being able to either disclose the fact that someone told you these secret plea deals existed or that you participated in one. Which if you know this, you could go to jail, together with the individual (s) that divulge this information to you. And if no one divulged this information, but you participated in one, you are breaking the plea deal agreement. Right?
Either way......
Your statement is pure and utter conjecture, speculation, made up, lying, talking out of your behind, blowing some smoke in my direction...be a man and admit that this is what YOU believe, NOT the facts.
If it is true what you are saying, you should have a long list of names and priests and dioceses that participated in this so very secretive plea deals, right?
dude, take your tin foil hat off. Your hate for the Church is getting laughable. Sorry for ever taking you seriously. You are a conspiracy nut job.
Careful next time you walk by or drive by a Roman Catholic Church, it will GRAB you and it won't let you go. BOO!!!
wow! such great nut jobs in this world.
Fut: One thing that all
April 15, 2008 - 00:23 ET by tracheostomyFut: One thing that all anti-Catholics have in common, they are liars and they love their lies.
o_O < !!!
Wow.
Just. . .wow.
You know, instead of screaming rhetoric and calling "liar-liar," you could actually beat CA to the punch if you ran down the case documents that he cited and provided proof to the contrary.
Thus "proving" CA a liar and convincing your audience.
Rather than embellishing your bluff.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Trach, Oh please...oh
April 15, 2008 - 00:34 ET by futbolisgreat1Trach,
Oh please...oh please, oh please.
Cool Arrow claimed to be able to name countless dioceses that participated in the shell game.
He named two, two out of how many in the world!
If the problem was systematic as he claimed, he would have been able to name dozens, if not scores right off the top of his head.
The guy is a liar, a conspiracy theory nut against the Church.
To think that I respected him once.
Cool Arrow hates the Roman Catholic Church, he does, plain and simple. He will do anything to discredit it. Lying is an old game played against the Church.
So be it, the Church has with stood the false accusations of much smatter and wiser men than Cool Arrow. Let him spew his lies. I think it is theraputic for him.
→ Trake
April 15, 2008 - 00:35 ET by Cool ArrowI don't see the purpose of debate as being a need to prove another person a liar.
♣ a seal
That's reasonable, but. . .
April 15, 2008 - 00:49 ET by tracheostomyCA: I don't see the purpose of debate as being a need to prove another person a liar.
What about those who are honestly on the fence here?
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
-->
April 15, 2008 - 00:38 ET by tracheostomyCA: And don't expect me to do a Poptech flood. I pulled up two off the top of my head without googling anything.
That would be impressive though, wouldn't it?
CA: We are both aware the overwhelming majority of these cases were settled out of court with secrecy agreements demanded.
I'm telling the truth when I state that even though I am aware, yes, of the cases being settled out of court. . .I don't remember anything about any "secrecy agreements."
Would I like to believe you? No, not really. Because I'm really not as "anti-Catholic" as Fut would like to believe. I still honestly believe the RCC is an honest and well-meaning organization, and any proof of this would absolutely shatter my trust in the well-meaning nature of the members of the clergy.
Do I disagree with their systematic soteriology?
Yes, absolutely.
Do I have any ground in accusing them of intentionally aiding and abetting criminal behavior on the level of ". . .causing any of these little ones to stumble. (???)"
Whew. Can't take that last step there man.
The thought sickens me. This would reduce the RCC to total complicit apostasy from the Christian faith. It has major faults, but I don't want to deal with the implication of this. Not without a smoking gun.
Please.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
→ Understood Trake
April 15, 2008 - 00:53 ET by Cool ArrowI was aware of two "situations" within my church 40 years ago (aside from two heterosexual consenting affairs by priests) but left 10 years later for other unrelated reasons.
I always felt celibacy was a gross invitation to disaster, and I think it contributed to the ped problem. Not much chance of Mrs. Priest being unaware of dalliances. (just my opinion)
♣ a seal
You can name two dioceses
April 14, 2008 - 23:37 ET by futbolisgreat1You can name two dioceses out of how many in the United States?
I thought this was a systematic problem within the Catholic Church?!
what happened, two out of how many in the world?
Oh my slow friend, try harder. The funny thing is that these are the two that were in the news!
BWAHAHA!! thanks for proving my point Cool Arrow, you only repeat like a parrot what the media orders you to repeat.
clueless my anti-Catholic friend, you are completly clueless.
Thanks for playing and thanks for proving my point.
futbol
April 14, 2008 - 23:04 ET by shawn228Cool Arrow, I admit is not the most polite poster on this board, but if there is anyone attacking and spewing insults, it seems to be you fut.
→ Shawn
April 14, 2008 - 23:09 ET by Cool ArrowWell, I have gotten somewhat politer haven't I?
I just won't sit by while people get into "deny mode" and act like all this whole scandal is nothing more than a smear campaign.
It happened and fut is still trying to make a molehill out of it after billions have been paid out.
♣ a seal
You have CA
April 14, 2008 - 23:27 ET by shawn228Towards me anyway :-) I have not had much interaction with futbal, except he gave me a tongue lashing once because I said our military is strained. I believe even the Pentagon admitted this, but lets not move off topic.
According to the Futbal, when it comes to the church, it is see no evil, hear no evil. Your right even though billions have been paid out, he believes it was only a few isolated incidents.
→ Shawn
April 14, 2008 - 23:32 ET by Cool ArrowAnd I have seen, firsthand, the results. The drastically changed personality. Only the most blind, or most insidious person would try to turn the tables on the facts here and make it into some kind of political attack on the Church.
♣ a seal
How dare you accuse the
April 14, 2008 - 23:39 ET by balboaHow dare you accuse the church of... doing... something... they've... already done?
Please
April 14, 2008 - 23:45 ET by BlondeTell me...who you are to demand anything? You've never taken a "real" stance on this topic.
Furthermore.....
About any topic?
You are a liberal...all you do is make snarky comments about everything and anything here.
So, please, bal.....justify your most inane comments.
If you can.
Just so you know, I don't usually find your comments offensive.
But when you veer off into this topic...it's offensive. Since we all know you have no religious feelings...but you just feel free to snark along.
Gross, bal. Totally gross.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
You don't know what you're
April 14, 2008 - 23:52 ET by balboaYou don't know what you're talking about.
You know nothing about my posts. Or about me.
You just repeat your favorite lines, over and over again.
I have no need to justify anything to you, of all people.
Begone.
Balboa, Oh my goodness.
April 15, 2008 - 00:01 ET by futbolisgreat1Balboa,
Oh my goodness. Please, you are THE apologists for the MSM. Amazing how quick you are to defend the MSM, but how quick you are to condemn the Roman Catholic Church.
You are as ignorant, as lazy and as pathetic as they come.
Next thing you will do is justify the Ancient Roman Empires persecution of the early Christians, make fun of them for dying as martyrs and then act like a 2 year old innocent baby that ment no harm by your mocking of martyrs. Just like you mocked the millions of Jews that died under Nazi Germany.
Sorry to take so long to
April 15, 2008 - 10:50 ET by balboaSorry to take so long to reply...i just finished laughing.
Bal, That is the best
April 15, 2008 - 14:01 ET by LeonBal,
That is the best Blonde impression (and analysis) I've ever seen.
You wonder how it could possibly be fun to participate on this blog with a repetitive MO like that.
If I had a nickel for everytime she said 'better class of troll', I'd be a rich man.
LOL! No-no Bal, these are
April 14, 2008 - 23:50 ET by tracheostomyLOL! No-no Bal, these are all just a smattering handful of numerically vague and very isolated incidents. >;)
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Shawn228, Oh, how you,
April 14, 2008 - 23:53 ET by futbolisgreat1Shawn228,
Oh, how you, Cool ARrow, Balboa below, etc, are so incredibly ignorant!!!
Did it ever occur to you that the Church has paid out money in the billions, not to silence anyone, not to repay the sins of a few priests, but rather to stop the media circus clown? Did it?!
The Church rather go bankrupt than have the media, Cool ARrow, idiots like Balboa, keep on slander it.
Some believe by making pay outs, the media circuse clow would end.
Obviously, people that judge according to what they would do, have taken it as admittence of guilt.
How little most of you know abou the Roman Catholic Church.
Tell me, if your family is being attacked publicly and the only way you believe to silence the media is to make the problem go away by paying a few billion dollars, wouldn't you do it?
I certainly would.
As for your attack that the troops are stretched! Oh please, we have 3 million active and reserved forces. how many are in the battle fields of Iraq and Afghanistan? Less than 5% of these forces. If you call this over stretched, no wonder you believe that the Church claimed guilt by making pay outs. pathetic!
futbol
April 15, 2008 - 00:13 ET by shawn228I want to stay on topic and I don't want to really go into the stretched thin part, we can talk about it a different time if you like.
One thing though, I enjoy watching futbol as well. It is good to have a good offense, when you send all your strikers in, but when you also send your midfielders and pour on the offense you are leaving your defensemen and goalie very vulnerable.
That being said, if someone was attacking my family publicly because one of my family members was a ped. I would quickly denounce that family member and apologize and acknowledge what that family member did. I would pay compensation because It is the right thing to do, not because I want to silence someone.
Also, I do not see how denouncing some dispicable acts makes me a Catholic hater.
Shawn228, Well, then so
April 15, 2008 - 00:21 ET by futbolisgreat1Shawn228,
Well, then so be it. I would never denounce any of my two brothers, or any of my four sisters, any of my nieces and nephews, any of my children, nor my wife, nor my parents. I would not.
I would defend their honor with my life!
This type of stuff stays within the family.
i truly believe the Church did the right thing.
What I do find interesting, that it hasn't crossed the mind of anyone of your that quite a few of these attacks were slanders and proven in court!!!!
why didn't the media report on this? Why don't you guys talk about this?
I mean, to use Cool Arrows logic, I believe even yours, should we claim that all those that accused priests of pedophile be considered liars because there were those that did lie about it? think about it.
Who are you? who is the USA, who is Cool Arrow, who am I for the Church to have to admit to anyone of us that there were sick people, in every sense of the word, within their ranks?
Honestly, once again, if we go with your logic and the those that are attacking the Church. Who is teh USA MSM to report on this, while they have reporters, producers, etc, etc involved in pedophile and child ponography!
Who are the policeman of Boston, Chicago, etc, etc to arrest these priests, when their own police stations were caught with child ponography?!
Should the Chief of police of these cities come out and admit that they had sick policemen being hypocrites? if you demand this from the Church, were is the loud outcry against the secular world? secular corporations, against police stations, law firms, etc, etc?
that is actually kind of sad futbol
April 15, 2008 - 00:35 ET by shawn228So if you found out one of your brothers was obsessed with teenage boys hershey highways and decided to take him to the back room againt his will forcably remove his trousers and and perform sodomy, you would defend him with your life? Very interesting.
What would it take for you to turn against a family member. Pediaphelia obviously won't do it. Mass Murder perhaps?
It is also law enforcments job to arrest people for wrong doing.
Shawn228, Kind of sad to
April 15, 2008 - 00:47 ET by futbolisgreat1Shawn228,
Kind of sad to have a sense of family and honor? Only you.
YOu don't know what I would do to him, punishment stays within the family. So don't assume. I think the punishment would start by me finding out he/she is a pedophile.
If the police caught him/her, I would do everything legally and morally within my power to help them and defend them. Does it mean that I believe he/her did right, that I agree with the horrific action, of course not.
but it is NOT my place to denounce publicly (key word there, publicly) any family member of mine.
I would never turn a family member into the police or admit pubicly any of the sins of a family member.
I think the sad one is you. That you fail to understand this, speaks tons of who you are.
You are truly nuts futbol
April 15, 2008 - 01:10 ET by shawn228"I would never turn a family member into the police or admit pubicly any of the sins of a family member.
I think the sad one is you. That you fail to understand this, speaks tons of who you are."
Your right futbol, it does. It means I will do the right thing no matter if I am related to the culprit or not.
If someone from your family decides to be a Muslim extremist and decides to take out a building and a few thousand American lives with him, you would not turn that person in? If that is the case, you are as bad as the culprit.
Shawn228, I completly
April 15, 2008 - 01:21 ET by futbolisgreat1Shawn228,
I completly disagree. I do not believe that the good of the many, out weight the good of the one, or the few.
I would never turn a family member in, sorry. I just wouldn't. I would probably take the law into my own hands before I would allow the State to do it.
Now, if it was you, Cool Arrow, Trach...oh believe me, I personally will fly you to Guantanamo Bay and ask permission to personally torture you. HAHAHA!!!! :)
You must have ONE lousy family to not understand that blood comes before anything and anyone, except God.
→ As I said, fut
April 15, 2008 - 01:25 ET by Cool ArrowThe depth of your depravity has now been plumbed.
♣ a seal
"I would NEVER turn any one
April 15, 2008 - 01:32 ET by shawn228"I would NEVER turn any one member of my family into the police, into
the authorities. If they are caught, so be it, but I would not turn
them in. NOT my place. You can bet I would tell them what they have
done is wrong and depending on what they did, i would NEVER speak to
them again. But I would NEVER turn anyone of my family to the
authorities"
Good thing I had a chance to copy some of your comments before you had a chance to edit them.
I guess if Mohammed Atta was in your Church, it would not have mattered if you knew he was going to crash his building into the world trade center huh? It is not your place. Well when he is up there with his virgins, he must be very upset because sniff futbul not would not talk to him again.
"You must have ONE lousy family to not understand that blood comes before anything and anyone, except God. "
I love my family with all my heart futbal. How dare you imply otherwise. I just did not think you would excuse mass murder. Had enough of you for one night. Good night all.
→ Shawn
April 15, 2008 - 01:35 ET by Cool ArrowYou forgot to tell him to take his blood pressure medicine.
♣ a seal
Fut: I completly
April 15, 2008 - 01:50 ET by tracheostomyFut: I completly disagree. I do not believe that the good of the many, out weight the good of the one, or the few.
*facepalm*
I hope you didn't hear that one in church, because that's from "Star Trek" and well. . .it only makes for good theology if you're wearing brand new black & white Nikes, and waiting for Hale-Bopp to fly by.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
trach
April 15, 2008 - 01:53 ET by shawn228He does sound like a Klingon
→ No Shawn
April 15, 2008 - 01:58 ET by Cool ArrowIt's more like
NANU NANU
♣ a seal
→ Say what? fut?
April 15, 2008 - 00:33 ET by Cool ArrowCertainly the Catholic Church has no more responsibility to be honest than a corporation or a police force.
The second to last vestige of a loser is the rationalization "well, they did it too"
Go ahead, count it as equal the actions of a secular world versus your church. I guess the latest "tradition" is to be "of the world".
Truly pathetic.
♣ a seal
Cool Arrow... Eh?! are
April 15, 2008 - 00:43 ET by futbolisgreat1Cool Arrow...
Eh?! are you kidding me, are you truly kidding me?
Sorry my conspiracy theorist fool. No one has claimed, at least not I, that since the secular world does it, the Church is justified.
What you failed to understand, my tin hat wearing friend, is that while you are so incredibly busy attacking the Church for the mere less than 2% of priests that committed this horrible act, the secular world is on a daily basis carrying out such horrific acts.
Yet individuals like you are more worried about spitting on the Church than on the secular world.
get it my slow friend.
why do losers always want to twist the words of others to mean what they feel comfortable with.
sad cool arrow, you are a sad individual.
You claim that the Church, or as you say, dioceses (even though you only produce the name of two dioceses) are systematically working on cover ups. Yet, you haven't not ONCE attack the judges, policemen, lawyers, teachers, coaches, parents, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc..members of the secular world who in much greater numbers are molesting children.
And in fact, I am equating priests to anyone else in our community which has great positive or negative influence in our children.
You are worried about sending your children to Sunday School at a Catholic Church, yet your teenage boy was probably already abused by his female teacher and his coach, and the policemen that make sure that they get home safe. get the point fool?!
Statistically, your child is safer with a priest, then with anyone from the secular world, including YOU! his parent. get the point my slow friend! idiot. honestly.
get a clue. wow! your hate blinds you, your hate of the Church is your weakness.
Try to be a little bit more honest and stop putting words into the mouth of those you disagree with.
→ Hey fut
April 15, 2008 - 00:56 ET by Cool ArrowYou're typing so fast you don't realize what you're posting.
Who are the policeman of Boston, Chicago, etc, etc to arrest these priests, when their own police stations were caught with child ponography?! - futbolisgreat.
Your contradictions are also pathetic.
♣ a seal
Cool
April 15, 2008 - 01:05 ET by futbolisgreat1Cool Arrow,
Contradictions? Eh?! you are so desperate to prove your hate for the Church is justified that you will do and say anything. How much did the Devil give you to sell your soul to him?
My point stands. If there is a contradiction, is my English being my second language, my young fool.
but my point stands. Policemen arrested priests involved in pedophile, then we find out that these police stations, involved in the arrests of these sick priests, had child ponography stored in the hardrive of the computers that only the policemen have access to.
what is so contradictory of this statement? are you so blind to the obvious hypocrisy of the secular world? to YOUR hypocrisy? to your selective outrage? of course.
take off the tin foil hat, I can assure you, you will start making sense again.
→ Hey fut
April 15, 2008 - 02:27 ET by Cool ArrowThere you go again.
You rationalize pedophilia in the priesthood with claims of policemen with kiddie porn.
"Looky there what those cops did" is not an excuse.
But maybe it's a new "tradition" developed since I left.
♣ a seal
Cool Arrow, EH?!! you
April 15, 2008 - 02:33 ET by futbolisgreat1Cool Arrow,
EH?!!
you do read into the posts what you want to read...
Stooge, Curly, I never justified or rationalized the horrific acts of a FEW sick priests.....I was just pointing out to YOUR obvious hypocrisy as well as that of the secular world....
DUH!!!
don't be so slow Curly.....
ahi, ahi, ahi Caramba!! con estos idiotas!!
Cool Arrow
April 15, 2008 - 01:05 ET by shawn228"Try to be a little bit more honest and stop putting words into the mouth of those you disagree with"
This coming from a person that says anybody that denounces some acts is a Catholic hater.
I wonder if he will answer my question on what it would take to turn in a member of his church family.
looks like he answered cool
April 15, 2008 - 01:12 ET by shawn228He will not turn in a member of his church for any reason. Sounds kinda wacky to me.
→ Not surprising Shawn
April 15, 2008 - 01:17 ET by Cool ArrowBut really sad
♣ a seal
Cool Arrow, I don't know,
April 15, 2008 - 01:36 ET by futbolisgreat1Cool Arrow,
I don't know, but your statement doesn't have the stinging power that it did once....what happened?
Oh yeah, I discovered...oh wait, wait....you revelead to the world that you are a tin foil hat wearing conspiracy nut.
You have always been, always were, are and always will be a tin foil hat wearing conspiracy nut.... but only revealed it today.
You three stooges are fun to play with. Thanks for making my night so incredibly enjoyable.
Maybe fut
April 15, 2008 - 01:44 ET by Cool ArrowOh gosh, please don't call me a "tin foil hat wearing conspiracy nut".
Now you've got me all chagrined. Please no guffaws. I can't take it.
ROFLMAO
♣ a seal
Shawn228, Trying to talk
April 15, 2008 - 01:16 ET by futbolisgreat1Shawn228,
Trying to talk to you about honor in the family is pointless.
Let me just put it this way, and you can conclude what ever pleases you, what ever allows you to sleep better at night about this statement of mine....
I would NEVER turn any one member of my family into the police, into the authorities. If they are caught, so be it, but I would not turn them in. NOT my place. You can bet I would tell them what they have done is wrong and depending on what they did, i would NEVER speak to them again. But I would NEVER turn anyone of my family to the authorities.
The problem that you have is that you are claiming and so is Cool Arrow, etc, that the secular world is better than the Catholic Church. WRONG! WRONG! try again.
As someone said in an ealier post, if the Church is bad, the secular world is worst, infinitely worst! why would I turn anyone into this mess of corruption.
I HAVE first hand experience dealing with the courts, lawyers, police, etc, etc....these people, most of them will, how do they put it, "testelie..." in order to get false convictions. I respected the police world once, I truly did, until I got deep, deep into this dark, dark, dark, very dark world. They are NO different than street gangs. And neither are State attorney's office. Sorry to burst your bubble. And I don't have first hand experience as a criminal.
That you DO NOT understand this means that you have a lousy family.
I am glad that I am not a member of your family, and I pity your family, I truly do. I hope they never go over the speed limit, you will be dialing 911.
→ fut
April 15, 2008 - 01:19 ET by Cool ArrowIf your wife killed your child or grandkid and buried it in the back yard you wouldn't turn her in?
I get it. The depth of your depravity has now been plumbed.
♣ a seal
Seconded, CA. . .
April 15, 2008 - 01:26 ET by tracheostomyFut: I would NEVER turn any one member of my family into the police, into the authorities. If they are caught, so be it, but I would not turn them in. NOT my place. You can bet I would tell them what they have done is wrong and depending on what they did, i would NEVER speak to them again. But I would NEVER turn anyone of my family to the authorities.
This is patently unjust and amoral. It is harboring a criminal.
Someone asked this hypothetically to my wife and I at a party once, and we looked totally insane when we both nodded "yes," in fact we would turn the other in to the police in a heartbeat.
Heck, my own father-in-law wouldn't (and hasn't) bailed any of his sons out of jail for even the slightest infraction.
You just implicated yourself cold there, Fut.
Sad.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Trach, NO, the sad ones
April 15, 2008 - 01:32 ET by futbolisgreat1Trach,
NO, the sad ones are you and your wife.
But I am glad that you two are married.
EH?!
Fut: You must have ONE
April 15, 2008 - 01:45 ET by tracheostomyFut: You must have ONE lousy family to not understand that blood comes before anything and anyone, except God.
Fut: NO, the sad ones are you and your wife.
I am simply staring utterly slack-jawed at this incredible out-of-control flaming free-fall.
Your statement would of course, include obeying Christ and his apostles, wouldn't it?
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
→ Trake
April 15, 2008 - 01:54 ET by Cool ArrowHe's well beyond obeying Christ by this point.
♣ a seal
CA,
April 15, 2008 - 17:07 ET by tracheostomyMy point exactly.
That's why it's so sad.
This was more for the record.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Cool Arrow, If you want
April 15, 2008 - 01:27 ET by futbolisgreat1Cool Arrow,
If you want to call it depravity....You and Shawn know that you are taking this to extremes to try to make me look like a fool, right?
Not working guy, not working....
besides, in the heat and passion of the moment, i would put a bullet in the brain of my wife! realizing what I did, I would turn myself in. Or maybe, because I wouldn't denounce my wife, I would tell the neighbor so they would call the police for me. HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
so, nope, got it wrong, nice try though my tin foil hat wearing buddy.
I mean, if we take your "logic" and that of Shawns to the end, you fools should be reporting anyone and everyone on NB that posts during their work hour, right? you should also be calling the police every single time that you run into a person that is speeding, right?
I mean, geez, if not, you are two depraved fools that hide behind...."that law is not so bad to break..."
honestly, I hate to be members of your families....how many times have you guys called the police on your family for walking on the law of a neighbor? scaaaarrrrrryyyyy!!!
give me a break, how stupid can you two tin hat wearing twins be?
→ So fut
April 15, 2008 - 01:32 ET by Cool ArrowWhat you're saying is that we cannot take you at your word? How then can we expect to get honest debate from you. And how does this reflect on the faith you claim guides you?
I would NEVER turn any one member of my family into the police, into the authorities. - futbolisgreat.
Very pathetic, fut.
♣ a seal
Cool Arrow, what? How
April 15, 2008 - 01:48 ET by futbolisgreat1Cool Arrow,
what? How the hell not turning in a family member ties into that you believe you can't take me at my word?
I could give a sh...t if you can't take me at my word. All I know is that my family can take me at my word.
And how does this reflect on the Faith that guides me? what does this have to do with the Roman Catholic Church whether I turn my family in or not...
You people make connections that do not exist anywhere.
As I said, I am just glad that I am not a member of your families. I can see it already, when your kids gets a DUI...leave him in jail until he/she rots.
While I would leave my child in jail for a night or two so they learn a lesson, i would get them out and I would DEMAND that my son/daughter doesn't admit ONE thing to the authorities.
You Christians zealots are quite the weird ones. I know, I know, you'll answer..."And we are proud of it..." that's the scary part.
→ fut in mouth
April 15, 2008 - 01:56 ET by Cool Arrowmore contradiction.
Truly pathetic.
♣ a seal
Cool Arrow, Don't you
April 15, 2008 - 02:01 ET by futbolisgreat1Cool Arrow,
Don't you love it boy....when you believe that what I type contradicts me...
Oh my tin foil hat wearing friend.
Do tell, where do your conspiracies end?
Pathetic, me? I think you looked in the mirror when you typed, "Truly pathetic." I am sorry you think so poorly of yourself.
Maybe our young "Christian" zealot can help you out by quoting the Bible and some feel good Chapter and verses...wha' ya' think my young padwan?
→ OK, fut
April 15, 2008 - 02:10 ET by Cool ArrowI'll bite. What the heck is a padwan?
♣ a seal
Edit: Narrowed me out +
April 15, 2008 - 17:09 ET by tracheostomyEdit: Narrowed me out + too much info.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Fut: besides, in the heat
April 15, 2008 - 01:36 ET by tracheostomyFut: besides, in the heat and passion of the moment, i would put a bullet in the brain of my wife!
You mean murder. . .right?
I really think you should shut down that computer and walk this one off for a bit.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Trach, No, it would
April 15, 2008 - 01:43 ET by futbolisgreat1Trach,
No, it would probably be considered involuntary manslaughter, since it was not premeditated and it would be considered a crime of passion.
And even then....the prosecutor would get a Grand Jury to push this to trial, but a 12 member jury, would never convict me...given the circumstances and the example given by Cool Arrow.
If you are going to try to mock me, at least do it right.
You don't only spew Bible verses without knowing what you are saying....now your playing at lawyer....sad, sad.
Trach....get close, closer...I have a secret to tell you....LAW AND ORDER IS NOT REAL!!! hahahaha!!!! by the way, neither is your McDonald's Menu religion.
Your honor, I request a recess. . .
April 15, 2008 - 01:58 ET by tracheostomyFut: No, it would probably be considered involuntary manslaughter, since it was not premeditated and it would be considered a crime of passion.
Pot. . .
Fut: And even then....the prosecutor would get a Grand Jury to push this to trial, but a 12 member jury, would never convict me...given the circumstances and the example given by Cool Arrow.
. . .meet. . .
You don't only spew Bible verses without knowing what you are saying....now your playing at lawyer....sad, sad.
. . .kettle.
Fut: If you are going to try to mock me, at least do it right.
"Try"??? I swear I'm not even putting forth the least bit of effort here. I'm TRYING to get you some shred of dignity back here, man!
You're scaring me Fut, and in the bad way. Seriously.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Trach, Hmmm...what's your
April 15, 2008 - 02:12 ET by futbolisgreat1Trach,
Hmmm...what's your best trach?
The garbage and hate that you spewed at me in the private messages? is that your best? how truly sad since with one Bible quote I silenced you and you gave up.
don't you get it Trach....I am mocking you because...I DO NOT RESPECT YOU!
I am mocking you...so people take you for what you are...a clown. a zealot, that does know well how to spew Bible Chapters and Verses, but doesn't know how to live the Bible.
Give you an example...you quote for me the part in the Bible that talks about Rebuking someone is not only right, but also love....yet you didn't bother to quote from the Bible that talks about treating your bretheren with love. You talk about ST. Peter and ST. Paul rebuking each other, but you missed the WHOLE part in which they did it with love, care and in complete and utter pursuit of the truth.
You rebuke people with hate, you rebuke people not in search of the truth, but desperatly trying to prove that you are right and eveyrone else is wrong about their religion.
I have been rebuked many times in my life by individuals that love me, and geniuenly care for me...from my wife, to my priest, to my brothers, sisters, mother, father, best friends....
let me tell you something, I think WE all know the difference between a caring and compassionate rebuke ment to do well and an evil, hateful rebuke ment to do harm. You fall in the latter...
Tell me Trach, how many people on NB have you been able to turn to yoru McDonald's Menu religion? shouldn't this tell you how wrong you are? probably not, somehow you will say something about the gate to Hell is wide and the gates of Heaven narrow or some other Bible verse that you feel will justify your fake religion.
AHH!! my bad...I did promise no more Pearls to the Swine, didn't I.
familiy secrets
April 15, 2008 - 01:59 ET by shawn228If it is shoplifting, drugs and DUI, of course I would not turn them in. If it was a murder by self defense, I would ponder not saying anything at all.
If it is a deliberate malicious act, of course I would turn them in. Your just a raving lunatic. Yes I said I was going to bed, but I had to check my email and saw you posted more of your nonsense.
Fut, maybe you should move to the Vatican or something. . .
April 15, 2008 - 01:33 ET by tracheostomyFor rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. For he is God’s minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil. Therefore you must be subject, not only because of wrath but also for conscience’ sake.
- Romans 13:3-5
This was written back when rulers were a bit more corrupt, as well as insane from gradual lead poisoning.
But you knew that.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Trach, Trach: "Look at
April 15, 2008 - 01:38 ET by futbolisgreat1Trach,
Trach: "Look at me, look at me...I can quote the Bible with my eyes closed."
Futbol: "Get a clue. No more Pearls to the Swine".
→ Hey fut
April 15, 2008 - 01:52 ET by Cool ArrowWhat was it that Jesus said? Something like " I come to bring a sword between" ?
I honestly can't remember, but since you can quote the bible with your eyes closed . . .
♣ a seal
Cool Arrow, Eh?! Care
April 15, 2008 - 01:56 ET by futbolisgreat1Cool Arrow,
Eh?! Care to point out where I have claimed that I can quote the Bible with my eyes closed?
liar, liar pants on fire...
Talk to Trach...the man can quote the Bible not only with his eyes closed, but also while riding a bike, driving, standing on his head, painting his face like that of a clown....oh yeah....talk to him. The guy is a whole circus act.
Fut
April 15, 2008 - 02:05 ET by Cool ArrowYou've been saying that all night.
Are you saying it is a quote from Trake?
♣ a seal
Allow me to translate CA,
April 15, 2008 - 02:14 ET by tracheostomyFutbol is both sensitive and resentful because he cannot place his theses upon a sound, consistent, or reliable footing such as say, the Bible.
And as such, he still has faith in the unsupported belief that his Nanny Church still interprets it for him in the correct manner.
So therefore, any verse I quote is "just wrong" because the RCC told him, and it's "just so."
Heck, I could sit here right now and quote two completely off-topic verses in a totally contradictory manner, and he'd still hide his eyes and scream.
Heck, I was one verse off earlier in this thread, and he spooked so easily he even failed to exploit my obvious goof.
So, pretty much ever since he called me the devil,* I reminded him that Jesus quoted scripture to get rid of him.
Hence, the play you see before you now. He's capitalizing on "pearls before swine" as a catch-all bat to swing. . .assuming the labeling is spot-on.
Assuming, that is. . .
At least he's reading the Bible a little now.
-PJ
*Totally lost count of the number of times I've heard THAT since I started here. If I'm the master of lies and deceit, I'm doing an amateur job of it.
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
→ Thanks Trake
April 15, 2008 - 02:20 ET by Cool ArrowI knew he had to be told how to believe.
He obviously has no freedom to hold Scripture higher than tradition.
I remember those days.
♣ a seal
Cool Arrow, Look at your
April 15, 2008 - 02:30 ET by futbolisgreat1Cool Arrow,
Look at your hypocrisy...and you are so ignorant, so arrogant, so full of yourself that you don't even realize it...
Look how you embrace and agree with someone that equates himself to Jesus Christ.
How truly sad...
I see like always, you do NOT understand the Church...
so be it...I much rather be what you believe I am...a person that holds tradition above scripture (not that this the case), than be part of your fake or trach's fake, McDonald's Menu, hateful, arrogant, lack of compassion, lack of anything true religion.
So ahead, spew your Bible chapters and verses, you two stooges aren't the first ones or the last ones to be able to use Bible Chapters and Verses to justify your evil ways. The Nazis, the KKK know how to carry out your clownish events. Using your logic and that of Trach, these two must be right, since they know the Bible inside out and they don't hold tradition over scripture.
You fools that don't know how to think.
I enjoy watching you two stoogest fall all over yourselves and make a mockery out of your "knowledge" of scripture.
→ Laughable fut
April 15, 2008 - 02:35 ET by Cool ArrowYou don't really work at a University, do you?
Come on, fut. Everybody embellishes a little.
♣ a seal
Hey come on Cool, I for
April 15, 2008 - 02:44 ET by bigtimerHey come on Cool,
I for one am glad he works at one of the University's...we need more of him at them, he has been here before you Riled One and trach too if memory serves me, what reason would you not want him to be employed by a University compared to the leftists that out-number a good man like him?
Btw..you can look at the number of weeks he has been here compared to the two of you but I know when they changed the system here a lot of changes have happened with that, I know how long futbol has been here, just wanted to put that in before one of you brought that up.
Not trying to fight with you all, but the way you treat him is disgraceful IMHO.
"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Churchill
Bigtimer, Thanks for
April 15, 2008 - 03:08 ET by futbolisgreat1Bigtimer,
Thanks for coming to my defense.
I use to respect Cool Arrow, until I ran into his deep, deep, deep, I mean deep seeded anti-Catholic hate, pure and utter hate. I never understood how a self-described Christian can hate as much as Cool Arrow and trach...
I do believe however that he was going after my spelling and grammar, i might be wrong....
but Cool Arrow does make an miserable attempt at belittling me for my Roman Catholic believes....the guys got all riled up since Friday of last week because I slapped him with REAL Church history and teachings and he couldn't refute them.
These two guys are true "Christian" zealots. They do so much harm to real Christians and real Christianity. Their logic and arguments when it comes to this topic, is no different than the FEEL good logic of Liberals
But yeah, I have been here a long time, days after Newsbusters open this site....my first login was lost.
I remember the days of Hater who tried so many times to come back with different names, or he would post to himself and pretend it was to other people talking.....quite a while. Those day were fun, calling Hater on his games. It was truly funny.
I don't post as much as I use to back in those days because my job at a university here in Chicago, keeps me incredibly busy.
The sad part is, that I fight Liberals with the FEEL good logic of Cool Arrow and Trach, all day long.
fut... I know how long
April 15, 2008 - 03:20 ET by bigtimerfut...
I know how long you've been here, I also remember everything back when it was the real wild wild west here...including yeller' dawg, hater/leon, little jimmy, the night they burned old dixie down, JC ect ect...
I have read you views on religion and have learned a lot, along with tons of other people who have come and gone...I usually do not ever get into this, I know what is going on...
I just found it sad when another conservative poster says to another about the job at the University...we all should hope for more conservatives to be in those institutions....I for one am glad you are.
...anyway, later old friend.
"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Churchill
Cool Arrow... Oh,
April 15, 2008 - 02:47 ET by futbolisgreat1Cool Arrow...
Oh, oh...could it be, could it be??? the final attack direct it towards me when you know you have failed in your debate....
c'mon, do it, c'mon...don't back off now.....I know what you are going to attack...it never fails....so be predictable and do it...
AND Do you think I care if you believe it or not that I work at a university...oh geez, another fool with delusions of grandeur....
but do it Cool Arrow, make the final attack that every dumb loser uses after they know their face has been dragged through the mud and they don't have anything else left to say.....
we both know where you are going with your question....so just get it over with....
Um. . .no.
April 15, 2008 - 03:08 ET by tracheostomyI have no idea.
Where exactly is CA going with his question?
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Trach, How the fall of
April 15, 2008 - 02:25 ET by futbolisgreat1Trach,
How the fall of men and Lucifer has always been pride.
Trach, you are so f.....king full of yourself. As i said, you know how to quote the Bible well, but you don't have a clue how to live it.
I see that you like to turn things around. Don't forget that it was YOU the one that said...."Fine, I will no longer open up your PMs".
coward, liar....
I have said this two you a million times, the Nazis also knew how to quote the Bible to justify their murdering ways, so could and can the KKK, does it mean that they are right?
Does it mean that they fall into what Jesus did, quoting scriptures to prove ditractors wrong? OF COURSE NOT!
THINK A LITTLE, WHICH YOU CAN'T DO before you speak words that prove you are so obviously fool or yourself.
Don't you get it Trach, don't you get it PJ, you don't come accross as someone that knows the Bible well....you come accross as an arrogant little sh...t. Don't you get it?
Aren't you clued in yet that atheist, Jews, Catholics, even Protestans alike find you arrogant, demeaning, prideful (in the BAD sense of the word). They find your "debating" skills lacking and meaningless....don't you get it?
are you saying that everyone, EVERYONE is wrong, but you? WOW!
The sad part about your Jesus comment is that you put yourself at the same level as Jesus Christ.....how dare you, you false prophet, how dare you equate yourself with Jesus Christ?
I am honestly, honestly shaking my head as I type this to you because I know you are too slow, to arrogant, too haughty, to egotistical, too concieted, to see how wrong, how incredible wrong you are.
and look at Cool Arrow, he who claims the Church is wrong for comparing the Pope to Jesus Christ embraces and imbecil like you who equates himself ot Jesus Christ.
do you two stoogest, clowns not see your obvious sad, pathetic, ANd malicious hypocrisy?
you two do such great harm to Christianity. You are both enemies of Christianity. Wolves in sheeps clothing.
fut... You're beating
April 15, 2008 - 02:31 ET by bigtimerfut...
You're beating your head against the wall here...
Know what I mean?
Good to see you here as always...good luck...you aren't ever gonna' win with trach, he parses and knows everything.
Later...
"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Churchill
BT,
April 15, 2008 - 02:54 ET by tracheostomyNot everything.
As a matter of fact, I wrote up a (not completely) comprehensive list of the things I still don't know.
Remember?
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Wow, fut
April 15, 2008 - 02:31 ET by Cool ArrowWere those Nazis quoting Scripture to Eugenio Pacelli?
Sure worked on him.
♣ a seal
Cool Arrow, Why don't you
April 15, 2008 - 02:42 ET by futbolisgreat1Cool Arrow,
Why don't you read some Nazi history my stooge, eh Curly?
Why don't you find out how the Nazis quoted the Bible to justify the Arian race to be the best and brightest? obviously combined with Darwinism.....
Many are those that can spew Bible Chapter and Verses....not all can LIVE by the words they can so eloquently spew out.
That Trach learned the Bible inside out and knows how to quote Bible verses right and left, doesn't mean a thing...since like the Nazis, he doesn't know how to live it!
Like the Nazis, Trach uses the the Bible to justify his pride, arrogance, sense of superiority, he uses the Bible to equate himself to Jesus Christ. He uses the Bible to spew hate.
Much like today, the Nazis using scripture to justify their murdering ways did great harm to Christianity, Trach's quoting of the Bible does EXACTLY the same thing.
Trach is NOTHING else than a false prophet.
As I said, and he is too much of a coward to admit it....with ONE Chapter and ONE verse from the Bible I silenced him.
Now, like you, he wants to revise history.
So be it...I have wasted enough time on you two stoogets, Moe and Curly...
No more Pearls to the Swine....No more Pearls to the Swine.
I kid you not, I predict that he will respond quoting a bunch of Bible verses and then like you, he will claim he can think on his own.
Ahhhh, the hypocrisy of you two.
Although, thank you for playing, it was fun tonight.
I do enjoy playing with the weak minds of fools like you twoo stooges.
Please, bring me a challenge tomorrow, or next time I am on, ok? Please....
it gets slow and boring with you stooges....
S: Also, I do not see how
April 15, 2008 - 00:46 ET by tracheostomyS: Also, I do not see how denouncing some dispicable acts makes me a Catholic hater.
Good point. Very sound advice using the family example there as well.
Too bad Fut here is in too much of a foaming lather to actually give it any real consideration though.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Oh man, quit while you're ahead. . .
April 15, 2008 - 00:57 ET by tracheostomyFut: Did it ever occur to you that the Church has paid out money in the billions, not to silence anyone, not to repay the sins of a few priests, but rather to stop the media circus clown? Did it?!
1st - Circular argument. Stopping the media = silencing someone. Therefore, it really is to "silence anyone" as you are desperately trying to deny.
2nd - I don't believe that would be a valid motive for a Christian, because it totally abandons faith in Matt 5:11.
To a real Christian, silencing the MSM slander really shouldn't be all that high of a priority.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Trach, Trach: "Look at
April 15, 2008 - 01:09 ET by futbolisgreat1Trach,
Trach: "Look at me, look at me, I can quote the Bible to justify my pathetic life. Look, look...I SAID LOOK!!! GOSH DARN IT!!." So says Trach with the Evil voice of the evil character of Ghostbusters II!!
Futbol: "No more Pearls to the Swine".
LOL! Actually Fut. .
April 15, 2008 - 01:15 ET by tracheostomyLOL! Actually Fut. . .
Fut: Trach: "Look at me, look at me, I can quote the Bible to justify my pathetic life. Look, look...I SAID LOOK!!! GOSH DARN IT!!." So says Trach with the Evil voice of the evil character of Ghostbusters II!!
. . .I was one verse off! LOL! I messed up and I'm not perfect.
*sarc on*
Thanks for clicking though.
*sarc off*
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Cool Arrow, and this is
April 14, 2008 - 23:30 ET by futbolisgreat1Cool Arrow,
and this is what the enemies of the Church have to grab unto?
Where have I denied that this horrible priests molested children and committed pedophilia....care to point?!
you are so incredibly dishonest, typical of the enemies of the Church.
Be a man and stop putting words into my mouth.
I will not stand here and allow anti-Catholic hate mongers like you slander my beloved Church, my Faith.
You are incapable of doing your own research, everything you have spewed out here has come from what the American MSM has said, NOTHING NEW.
Am I insulting you? it is not insults when you speak the truth about someone. I am only judging you by your own words and actions on Newsbusters.org. If you are someone different than this, you have yet to show it.
You are lazy, you are anti-Catholic, you hate the Church much like the other clownish Christian zealot Trach, who is trying to bait me into another one of his meaningless debates.
My point is that you, just like the MSM did, are blowing this out of proportion and REFUSE to put it in perspective as compared to the rest of the world, secular and religious! why don't you try doing that and then come back and tell me that it is systematic and that the Church is covering up by moving priests around.
Like I said, since the media didn't report on the over 10,000 secular men and women that were caught in pedophile rings and owning child ponography, you don't have a clue this happened!
Because you don't know that the ACLU lawyers, directors, etc have been caught with child ponography and committed pedophile, you don't have a clue it happened.
Like the typical lazy American, who all his does is seat infront of a televison all day long and allows the media to turn his brain into jello, you are repeating like a parrot what they "informed" you about.
Cool Arrow, admitted, you don't have a clue. You just hate the Church and you want to discredited any way you can. Be enough to at least admit this, people will take you a bit more seriously.
→ fut
April 14, 2008 - 23:37 ET by Cool ArrowI don't need to see the Church discredited any more. It is already paying a high price in lost attendance and tithe.
My original post way at the top of this thread stated my indictment only against those priests who engaged in the action and those clergy who knew of it outside the Confessional.
If you are defending these, your conscience is seared by tradition.
♣ a seal
Cool Arrow, If this was
April 14, 2008 - 23:44 ET by futbolisgreat1Cool Arrow,
If this was your original thought, then state it better next time.
At no point have I defended ANY priest who committed pedophile, or who was involved in any type of cover up outside ot the confessional.
However, you did claim that this is a systematic problem within the Church and the the Church played a shell game. This is a complete lie.
that a dioceses here or there did this and played a shell game, doesn't equate to the whole Church, but a few priests. Furthermore, in many cases the allegations stayed allegations for many years and nothing could be proven. Youc an't defrock a priest without hardcore evidence. YOU should know this.
Furthermore, as for your claim that this has caused the decline of attendance of masses, is also a lie. For years before the MSM reporterd on the FEW priests that committed such a horrible act, attendance at masses has decreased dramatically.
In Europe where no such scandals have broken out like in the USA, attendance at masses is pratically null, especially by the 35 and under. This has been the case for years before any scandal broke in the USA.
Funny thing is, that in Third World nations, where the scandal received as much play as in 1st and 2nd world nations, attendance is up.
Nothing to do with the priesthood, so called scandal.
If you are talking about a few priests and a few others that didn't know how to handle the problem, I agree with you. If you are claiming the whole Church was invovled with this, and that the problem went all the way to the Pope, then you have a fight in your hands.
However, I will also say, that I do find it interesting that the MSM went crazy over this, but they didn't ove the ACLU, NAMBLA, and others int he secular world enganged in such behavior. And the numbers dwarf any number of priests that did this. Care to comment on this FACT? or too inconvinient for you attack on the Church?
Fut: You are lazy, you
April 14, 2008 - 23:41 ET by tracheostomyFut: You are lazy, you are anti-Catholic, you hate the Church much like the other clownish Christian zealot Trach, who is trying to bait me into another one of his meaningless debates.
No, not really. I'm actually acting as an advocate in your favor. Mine really is the appeal to a lesser charge, unless you want to choose CA's take on it.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Trach, My little swine,
April 14, 2008 - 23:46 ET by futbolisgreat1Trach,
My little swine, you and your author of the speech that you linked me to, do not have a clue about the Roman Catholic Church.
Let's just live it at that.
No more Pearls to the Swine.
Hi fut,
April 14, 2008 - 23:49 ET by BlondeI've not seen you in eons...then I see you engaged with the trollboy?
It's all good.
Glad to see you back. Carry on.
P.S. (do you hear me clapping?)
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Could you come down from the skybox please?
April 14, 2008 - 23:54 ET by tracheostomyB: P.S. (do you hear me clapping?)
And get in the game? He could really use some help here.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Hi Blonde, yes, i have
April 14, 2008 - 23:55 ET by futbolisgreat1Hi Blonde,
yes, i have been here and there at NB. I am very busy with my job these days, so hard to get on.
but thanks for the claps. I am taking four to five anti-Catholics at the same time. it is way too easy, since all they do is repeat centuries old, recycled attacks. Nothing new, nothing original.
Fut: Nothing new, nothing
April 15, 2008 - 00:03 ET by tracheostomyFut: Nothing new, nothing original.
Nothing proven either.
Just saying so doesn't magically make it so.
Maybe you should call for a relief pitcher. Maybe someone who can cite actual sources, names, and quotes. . .I dunno.
Someone who's on your side maybe?
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Trach, Trach:
April 15, 2008 - 00:07 ET by futbolisgreat1Trach,
Trach: "Look at me, Look at me. I can quote the Bible. I can do it upside down, with a hat on my head. Riding my bike with training wheels. I can do it even while I run. My religion is better than yours! Nah, nah, nah boo-boo. Prove me wrong! I dare you, you scum of the Earth!!!"
Futbol: "No more Pearls to the Swine."
Hey now. . .
April 15, 2008 - 00:18 ET by tracheostomyThat was a pretty entertaining impression of me (awfully flattering too). . .
Fut: "I dare you, you scum of the Earth!!!"
. . .but you'll have to cite the exact link where I ever directly called you a name.
And if I did, I sincerely apologize in advance.
Proof is still required though. This actually might be easier in fact than proving your theology. But then arguments to the person always are.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Trach, Trach: "No one
April 15, 2008 - 01:00 ET by futbolisgreat1Trach,
Trach: "No one can argue as well as I can. No one can quote the Bible as good as I can...well except the Nazis that used it to justify their murdering ways. But still, my religion is better than yours! you FALSE PROPHET! The power of my personal god compels me to prove you are a false prophet! the power of my god compels me, compels me, compels me!!!!! AHHHH!! you evil doers! My religion is better than yours...Nah, nah, nah boo-boo!!!"
Futbol: "No more Pearls to the Swine".
→ Wow fut
April 15, 2008 - 01:09 ET by Cool ArrowJust Wow!
Cool
April 15, 2008 - 01:53 ET by futbolisgreat1Cool Arrow,
Eh?!
Thanks I guess for being awe struck by my excellent parody of our young "Christian" zealot.....
Eh?!
Blonde: ...then I see you
April 15, 2008 - 00:08 ET by tracheostomyBlonde: ...then I see you engaged with the trollboy?
Hey, I resemble that remark! You said you'd respect me in the morning!
=)
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Fut: No more Pearls to
April 15, 2008 - 00:01 ET by tracheostomyFut: No more Pearls to the Swine.
I remember now! Thanks for the reminder.
Is this your convenient escape hatch for avoiding my questions?
Because it's a pretty awesome catch-all excuse for ignoring all the scriptures I shared with you about sound rebuke, doctrinal correction, Acts 17:2, 17:17, 1 Peter 3:15, etc, etc.
But I digress. . .I guess.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Trach, Trach: "My
April 15, 2008 - 00:04 ET by futbolisgreat1Trach,
Trach: "My Christianity is better than yours. Because I can quote the Bible as I damn please. Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah... I am invincible!. Nah, nah, nah boo-boo".
Futbol: "No more Pearls to the Swine".
Trach: "My Christianity
April 15, 2008 - 00:12 ET by tracheostomyTrach: "My Christianity is better than yours. Because I can quote the Bible as I damn please. Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah... I am invincible!. Nah, nah, nah boo-boo".
LOL! Love it!
Still waiting on that proof of your particular divine revelation. Sorry, but I have my orders.
Nothing personal. Really.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Trach, Trach: "Still
April 15, 2008 - 00:53 ET by futbolisgreat1Trach,
Trach: "Still waiting on that proof of your particular divine revelation. Sorry, but I have my orders. You know I love twisting the Bible to fit into my McDonald's Menu religion."
Futbol: "No more Pearls to the Swine."
Trach: "But the Emperor commands it. YOU do not yet know the power of the Dark Side. I MUST fulfill my destinity. The Force is strong with you, but only if you knew how to use it for the Dark Side of the Force."
Futbol: "No more Pearls to the Swine".
Trach, Trach: "...many
April 15, 2008 - 00:55 ET by futbolisgreat1Trach,
Trach: "...many false prophets."
Futbol: "Look in the mirror lately my young padwan?"
"Wisdom is justified by
April 15, 2008 - 01:09 ET by tracheostomy"Wisdom is justified by her children."
"You will know them by their fruits."
I seem to remember once being openly praised for our mutual regard for one another. As stated before, I used to trust you and was at one time convinced that you were a supporter of honest debate and fair play.
This relationship only went sour when you continued to support a Michael Moore-type redactor to a cherry-picked and textually altered Augustinian quote.
I therefore admonish you in the name and love of Christ to repent of your first lie, and concede that you supported a decietful apologist.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Let's see what's on the back label of this dog food. . .
April 14, 2008 - 23:05 ET by tracheostomyINGREDIENTS:
Fut: OH PLEASE!!!
"Exclamatory glutamate", . . .filler.
Fut: you are the typical anti-Roman Catholic who doesn't have a clue about the Church.
"Cliched ANTI-monomate" . . .more filler.
Fut: This statement of YOURS implies that there was a conspiracy at the highest levels!
"Obvious supplement A." . . .more filler.
Fut: There wasn't Cool Arrow, there wasn't.
"Just-so-dium phosphate" . . .*sigh* more filler.
Fut: Stop repeating like a parrot what the media has brainwashed you to believe.
"Direct quotes rendered inert from processing."
Fut: Next thing you will do is what Leon did last week. Link me to Boston.com, The Guardian, etc and tell me that it comes directly from the Vatican.
"Second-guessing mononitrate."
Fut: If you understood how the Vatican rules all the dioceses around the world, you would understand that in ALL cases it was that particular dioceses which screwed up, NOT the WHOLE Roman Catholic Church.
"Direct evidence rendered inert from processing."
Fut: Dioceses enjoy a GREAT deal of autonomy.
"Bone meal"
Fut: If they don’t report to the Vatican the short comings of a priest, Bishop, etc, 99.9% of the time, the Vatican will never find out.
"Obvious supplement B." . . .even more filler.
Fut: Just like I urged you on Friday to stop spewing half-truths about Roman Catholic history and teachings, I urge you to silence yourself now before you once again slander the Church.
"Empty-threat-by-products" . . .bleah!
Fut: You do enough damage with your ignorance about the Church as it is, don’t make it any worst.
"Crude fat (min) 20%"
Fut: And of course you won’t elaborate any further, it is easier to attack and run than to stand your ground.
"Contains less than 5% real courage."
Ehh, I think I'll pass. It's the cheapest on the shelf, but I don't wanna give my pet the runs.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Oh Trach, What's the
April 14, 2008 - 23:33 ET by futbolisgreat1Oh Trach,
What's the matter little one. I silenced you by quoting the Bible and now all you have left is to play a silly game.
No more Pearls to the Swine my little pig. Now run along.
I am sure that some weak minded fool like Cool Arrow, is waiting for you to preach your McDonald's Menu religion.
Shocking!!!!
April 14, 2008 - 23:51 ET by tracheostomyFut: I silenced you by quoting the Bible and now all you have left is to play a silly game.
"GASP!" You quoted the Bible?!?? When? I don't remember.
No, it's not a silly game. The empty rhetoric is just that. Empty.
I don't know if you're old enough to remember. . .but Lorne Greene used to sell dog food, and he'd back it with more than his celebrity status or delivery.
He'd claim that what he was selling the consumer was "real meat." He'd open the can and SHOW IT TO THE VIEWER.
Then you could go to the grocery store and SEE FOR YOURSELF!!!
Or to sum up: You really suck at this. But not as bad as Tumbler.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Trach, Trach: "Blah,
April 14, 2008 - 23:57 ET by futbolisgreat1Trach,
Trach: "Blah, blah, blah, blah...blah, blah, blah. I am better than you. My religion is better than yours. Nah, Nah, nah boo-boo."
Futbol: "No more Pearls to the Swine".
He's so brave.
April 14, 2008 - 14:12 ET by FlashmanI"m assuming next week he'll be going after Islam.
Yes! Have some. BM is
April 14, 2008 - 14:17 ET by rightsideYes! Have some.
BM is an angry, bitter man, and will meet his demise in a horrible, horrrible fashion.
Bill Maher is the one in a
April 14, 2008 - 15:22 ET by zfBill Maher is the one in a cult. The rigid selfish liberal cult that spews hatred to anyone no matter how decent if they disagree with them. Once he gets rid of his rigid idealogy, that he can pontificate (no pun intended) about cults.
Of course Maher doesn't believe in anything like religion, that way he can do whatever feeds his gut without any thought of its greater harm. Maher's secularism is a crutch that helps him avoid making sacrifices or believing in something greater than himself. Lazy, selfish, shallow and bigoted to the core.
does anyone know---
April 14, 2008 - 15:55 ET by misterbilldoes anyone know---if Bill Maher was the victim of a pedophile priest when he was younger. Over a year ago, I posted that his hatred of all things Catholic bordered on the obsessive.
PS Since the Catholic church's interference in USA immigration policy, I am no fan either. But--Maher is in a constant hate rage!!!
Bill Maher is a lonely,
April 14, 2008 - 15:54 ET by sam.i.ambitter man already. I have pity for what kind of burnt-out, dessicated husk he will become later in life. He is truly a sad human being who will likely die alone, or surrounded by Playboy bunnies like his idol Hef. For his sake, I hope that he will have a deathbed conversion to Christianity, give and seek forgiveness, and meet his maker prepared.
Maher, like many comedians (George Carlin comes to mind) become so embittered, cynical, and political that they cease to be funny.
Well I think Bill Maher is
April 14, 2008 - 16:06 ET by radiofitz34Well I think Bill Maher is free to say anything he wants. One thing for sure, he's got the worse case of verbal diarrea I've ever seen.
it's so easy to attack Christians
April 14, 2008 - 16:58 ET by szampit's so easy to attack Christians. There will be no riots, demands for apologies, terrorist acts as consequences of his remarks. I wonder if he is brave enough to make similar remarks about an important Islamic figure.
Anyone calling Catholic priest pedophiles should look at the teacher union. Which one has more cases of child abuse? Is the teacher union going to apologize or pay reparations to anyone? Probably not.
Battling a cold here, but
April 14, 2008 - 17:37 ET by BobAnthonyI have a cold, but I am still able to get here on the web enough to ask the never-was Maher a big question...
How would you feel if a Catholic or Christian came up to you on the street in the same gear as the homicide bombers and that person shouted,
"IN THE NAME OF JESUS I BLOW MYSELF UP FOR YOUR SINS, AMEN!"
Sort of akin to the Islamofascist's Allah Akbar. How would Maher and all the other leftist America hating fools like that, eh?
Bill Maher is a typical
April 14, 2008 - 17:59 ET by johnbarryBill Maher is a typical liberal- a scribbler who resorts to bullyboy tactics and invective. Is not abortion child abuse? Liberals such as Maher support abortion. The Catholic Church and many Evangelicals and Episcopalians strongly oppose it.
Maher is in all probability an insecure individual. Liberalism is built on foundations of sand.
Once again, I am reminded why I cancelled HBO.
April 14, 2008 - 21:12 ET by Free StinkerOnce again, I am reminded why I cancelled HBO.
No way I want to be paying Maher's salary.
Pledge to not support RINOs ever again!
I cancelled HBO long ago
April 14, 2008 - 22:46 ET by jefflebowskiI used to subscribe to HBO. I liked some of their series. But as soon as the Sopranos ended, I cancelled my subscription because of the liberal trash that they scheduled. Haven't missed it one little bit.
Bill Maher is a hateful
April 14, 2008 - 23:02 ET by futbolisgreat1Bill Maher is a hateful ignorant fool. I notice that the anti-Church zealots didn't even make a comment on the hateful words of Bill Maher claiming that the Pope was a Nazi.
The Pope wasn't a Nazi. At 14 he was recruited, conscripted, into the NAZI, at the same age, he went AWOL, if he would have been caught by the Nazis, he would have been murdered in the spot.
The Pope is so wise, that at 14 he was willing to risk his life NOT to support the evil ideology of the Nazis. How many of us would have done the same thing at 14?
I had a co-worker make this idiotic comment, I put her in her place with the FACTS!!!!
Leon, Cool Arrow, do you defend this comment from Bill Maher too?
Oh wait, Cool Arrow, will wiggle out of it by saying, "Well, it wasn't all the Church, but blah, blah, blah, blah, blah..." pathetic, I am embarrassed for you guys, truly, I am.
I prefer
April 14, 2008 - 23:05 ET by BritcomBill Mahr is a hateful prig.
---
Communist vs. Statist '08
Q. Is Panamanian born John McCain a "Natural Born Citizen"
→ fut
April 14, 2008 - 23:20 ET by Cool ArrowI am aware the pope was brought into Nazi Youth (or something like it) at an early age. Why would I hold that against him when he was so young.
There was a wave of youth involvement sweeping Germany. It wasn't his fault.
And I won't even bring up the guy who sold all these Catholic youth into Nazi slavery, being that Germany was 53% Catholic at the rise of the Reich.
♣ a seal
Bill Maher...a
April 15, 2008 - 00:28 ET by bigtimerBill Maher...a pathetic little man with a pathetic little mind.
Some things never change.
"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Churchill
Fut: The garbage and hate
April 15, 2008 - 02:50 ET by tracheostomyFut: The garbage and hate that you spewed at me in the private messages? is that your best?
Nope, I'm laying off.
Fut: how truly sad since with one Bible quote I silenced you and you gave up.
If you disregard the other half-dozen or so I lobbed in return, then yeah I guess.
Fut: don't you get it Trach....I am mocking you because...I DO NOT RESPECT YOU!
*thinking*
Okay. Does this make me like, your enemy then?
Fut: I am mocking you...so people take you for what you are...a clown. a zealot, that does know well how to spew Bible Chapters and Verses, but doesn't know how to live the Bible.
Still waiting for that link where I ever called you a name.
Fut: Give you an example...you quote for me the part in the Bible that talks about Rebuking someone is not only right, but also love....yet you didn't bother to quote from the Bible that talks about treating your bretheren with love.
You looped your logic there.
PJ treats brethren/enemies --> with tough love* and warning rebukes from scripture.
Therefore, all of the scriptures urging PJ to treat brethren --> with love are not in violation either.
Just because you feel a stinging sensation on your ass doesn't mean you're not loved. Your mother would tell you that, or at least mine did anyway. . .
Secondly, I see no fruit on your tree. I was initially fooled by your seeming kindness and graciousness during our first debate.
I myself might feel regret for my delivery and the lack of care I may have taken in how it would be reacted to (if you could only tell me where and what it was I said), but never the actual content.
Fut: You talk about ST. Peter and ST. Paul rebuking each other, but you missed the WHOLE part in which they did it with love, care and in complete and utter pursuit of the truth.
Which you have yet to define on both counts. Your standard of truth is continually fluctuating. Your standard of love and care is wholly subjective. You are behaving as if you were some kind of a walking-talking exposed nerve, and you're steadily unforgiving. All I did to set you off was accuse you of cheating. You never apologized for that.
Fut: You rebuke people with hate, you rebuke people not in search of the truth, but desperatly trying to prove that you are right and eveyrone else is wrong about their religion.
Then ST. Paul was a hater too.
Fut: I have been rebuked many times in my life by individuals that love me, and geniuenly care for me...from my wife, to my priest, to my brothers, sisters, mother, father, best friends....
And if it were in written form, how would it have sounded to you? How do you want to be addressed when being corrected online when you are in error? I'm more than willing to accomodate you on this.
Fut: let me tell you something, I think WE all know the difference between a caring and compassionate rebuke ment to do well and an evil, hateful rebuke ment to do harm. You fall in the latter...
What harm? Either it's true or it isn't.
Fut: Tell me Trach, how many people on NB have you been able to turn to yoru McDonald's Menu religion? shouldn't this tell you how wrong you are? probably not, somehow you will say something about the gate to Hell is wide and the gates of Heaven narrow or some other Bible verse that you feel will justify your fake religion.
LOL. You mean like this one? So, no. Instant professions of faith are no real indicator of success for me. I'm convinced of it. I don't count the soldiers in my army and I don't log Sunday attendance records.
Fut: AHH!! my bad...I did promise no more Pearls to the Swine, didn't I.
What pearls where??? Where is all this jewelry you're throwing at me?
-PJ
*Binxly both observed and phrased it rather accurately during the Woodshed debate.
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Trach, why do I bother
April 15, 2008 - 02:59 ET by futbolisgreat1Trach,
why do I bother with you...it's like talking to a pre-recorded tape.
Man you are a fool! and in an earlier post you equated yourself with Jesus Christ....in this one, you equate yourself to St. Paul....
arrogant, haughty, conceided, prideful (in its bad conotation).....excellent words to describe who you are.
What a great idiot you are. What a great fool you are for being blind to this fact.
I defeated your fake religion with ONE Bible Chapter and Verse....so much good it does you to be able to spew out the Bible with your eyes closed.
but I know you, you can't stand it that someone else believes that they defeated you. You MUST make sure to come back quoting the Bible, cutting and pasting their post or some other ridiculous thing that you do to make yourself feel, yes FEEL that no, you were not defeated, it is just that the other person is not as smart, knowledgeable as you are, right my Swine?
The problem is that when you do this, you don't come out winning, you come accross as what you are, a spoil brat, an arrogant, haughty, superiority complex, pimpled face little sh...t head.
Anyways....No more Pearls to the Swine, my young pig.
If you respond to my posts, you know how I will respond to you....
Futbol: No more Pearls to the Swine.
Fut: why do I bother with
April 15, 2008 - 03:24 ET by tracheostomyFut: why do I bother with you...it's like talking to a pre-recorded tape.
I dunno why you bother with me.
Fut: Man you are a fool!
Raca?
Fut: . . .and in an earlier post you equated yourself with Jesus Christ....in this one, you equate yourself to St. Paul....
Quotes plz.
Emulation does not equal self-elevation.
As you have recently advised me on, as a matter-of-fact.
Fut: arrogant, haughty, conceided, prideful (in its bad conotation).....excellent words to describe who you are.
You done with that cheek? Here, have the other. . .
Fut: What a great idiot you are.
RACA you say?
Fut: What a great fool you are for being blind to this fact.
What fact?
Fut: I defeated your fake religion with ONE Bible Chapter and Verse....so much good it does you to be able to spew out the Bible with your eyes closed.
Truly withholding pearls to swine would include walking away and actually not throwing anymore. So if your words and your position is holy, then do it, don't just sit there talking about it.
Fut: but I know you, you can't stand it that someone else believes that they defeated you. You MUST make sure to come back quoting the Bible, cutting and pasting their post or some other ridiculous thing that you do to make yourself feel, yes FEEL that no, you were not defeated, it is just that the other person is not as smart, knowledgeable as you are, right my Swine?
Man, you really hate the Bible, don't you? You don't even bother to correct my perceived misquoting of it. If I'm doing it wrong, I'm sure to screw up sooner or later. . .but then I quote so much.
???
Fut: The problem is that when you do this, you don't come out winning, you come accross as what you are, a spoil brat, an arrogant, haughty, superiority complex, pimpled face little sh...t head.
I have congenital ichthyosis vulgaris actually. Never had a pimple in my life.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Okay BT, help me out here. . .
April 15, 2008 - 03:06 ET by tracheostomyBT: I for one am glad he works at one of the University's...we need more of him at them, he has been here before you Riled One and trach too if memory serves me, what reason would you not want him to be employed by a University compared to the leftists that out-number a good man like him?
Well, for one thing, he supports TM's Nazi/Christian arguments quite well. For another he seems to think the Bible was a translation of a translation of a translation, and the whole of the gospels were originally written in Aramaic. He also doesn't believe Jerome made any translational errors in the Latin Vulgate, despite the fact that I will freely own up to any that have been made in my English translations, from the KJV to the NIV. <-- If they were ever brought up, that is.
BT: Not trying to fight with you all, but the way you treat him is disgraceful IMHO.
No offense taken at all.
Okay, let's take your word for it. What am I doing here that is so egregiously offensive in comparison to Fut's posts? Is this because I'm debating another conservative?
What? I'm honestly asking here.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Trach, How dishonest of
April 15, 2008 - 03:19 ET by futbolisgreat1Trach,
How dishonest of you, how truly dishonest of you....
Where do I buy well into TMs whole Christianity/Nazi argument quite well.
i am just proving to you, how some Nazis use the Bible to justify their evil ways, you use the Bible to justify yours.
this is a fact, they twisted, and twisted, and twisted, and twisted Bible Chapters and Verses, like you do, to justify their evil ways.
The KKK today, as you yourself admitted to allegedly have debated KKK members that do this, twist and twist and twist and twist the Bible to justify their racist ways, right?
I am not buying into anything, just stating facts. I have debated many a Liberal when they attack Christianity for the Nazis using part of it to justify their evil ways and told them that if they attack Christianity for this, they need to attack science too, especially evolution, since the Nazis also use evolution to justify their racism and murdering ways. Doesn't make evolution right or wrong that the Nazis use it, it just proves, that like YOU, the Nazis were willing to use anything, religion, science, geography, etc, etc to justify their evil ways. Get it?
as for your claim that I said that the Bible was written in Aramaic, lie.
What I said, and I corrected you once already, is that the word of Jesus, the ORIGINAL word of Jesus, was spoken in what language? ARAMAIC!!! so, when it was translated into Ancient Greek and written, some words didn't match exactly, neatly with each other....that has led to much of today's confusion.
I speak two languges, I can understand well how confusion can be made if the RIGHT words are not use and in many cases, there is NOTHING, no word, phrase or saying that matches what you say in the other language. get it?
Do you speak and right fluently two or more languages? If you don't, you don't have a clue to what you are talking about. If you do, then you are being dishonest.
As for me debating a conservative....I am sorry Trach...you are NOT a Conservative, you are a Zealot. Two, very, very, very, very, very, very, very different things.
If you are going to speak about me with others, please make sure to at least be honest.
Ok, enough, time for bed, I am terribly tired.
Have fun Trach and remember...
Futbol: No more Pearls to the Swine.
and I could careless if you get offended or not.
by the way....fraternal correction doesn't fall you, Trach. Get off your high and arrogant horse!
Fut: How dishonest of
April 15, 2008 - 03:54 ET by tracheostomyFut: How dishonest of you, how truly dishonest of you....
Only dishonest if. . .
Fut: Where do I buy well into TMs whole Christianity/Nazi argument quite well.
. . .the reasoning and logic are dissimilar. Maybe you should go back and read the thread in question.
Fut: i am just proving to you, how some Nazis use the Bible to justify their evil ways, you use the Bible to justify yours.
Yet in order for Nazis to do this, they must use it partially. Therefore, the rest of the Bible is capable of being used to reveal both their sins and mine.
Do this, and you will WIN on both counts.
Don't forget that Bonhoeffer is also among the martyrs, and his blood cries out far louder than your Roman Curia.
Fut: this is a fact, they twisted, and twisted, and twisted, and twisted Bible Chapters and Verses, like you do, to justify their evil ways.
Then if true, you should be far more equipped to truly un-twist and correct my errors.
Fut: The KKK today, as you yourself admitted to allegedly have debated KKK members that do this, twist and twist and twist and twist the Bible to justify their racist ways, right?
That individual was also not allowed to hold a ministry position in my former church, despite the fact that he was a retired pastor.
He also refused to listen to the vast passages that explicitly corrected him (such as "neither Jew nor Greek" and how the gospel is given "to the Jew first.")
Fut: I am not buying into anything, just stating facts.
What facts?
Fut: as for your claim that I said that the Bible was written in Aramaic, lie.
What I said, and I corrected you once already, is that the word of Jesus, the ORIGINAL word of Jesus, was spoken in what language? ARAMAIC!!! so, when it was translated into Ancient Greek and written, some words didn't match exactly, neatly with each other....that has led to much of today's confusion.
I stand corrected then. No lie, but an honest mistake on my part, because you're still in error despite the details. You are accusing Jesus' own amanuenses, such as St. Mark, to be in error. Nor do you have any of the manuscripts that would prove Jesus only and always taught in Aramaic. Regardless, this does nothing to justify the gag you have over Mary.
As a matter of fact, how could Jesus have taught His audience always and all in Aramaic and at the same time quoted the Septuagent? Was the Old Testament of Jesus' day ever translated into Aramaic?
Fut: Do you speak and right fluently two or more languages? If you don't, you don't have a clue to what you are talking about. If you do, then you are being dishonest.
No, I don't "speak and right fluently two or more languages." But then your blanket accusations would go further than just myself alone (see above).
Fut: As for me debating a conservative....I am sorry Trach...you are NOT a Conservative, you are a Zealot. Two, very, very, very, very, very, very, very different things.
I hear that a lot and I still have no idea what anyone means by that. Is this some sort of sin that I am unaware of?
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Here trach parse this.
April 15, 2008 - 03:56 ET by bigtimerHere
trach
parse
this.....
good
night
"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Churchill
You kept me up waiting for this? Thanks for nothing.
April 15, 2008 - 04:04 ET by tracheostomyBT: Here
trach
parse
this.....
good
night
May I remind you, that if I parse you incorrectly or in a truly dishonest manner, you're always welcome to correct. . .since we all leave paper trails.
I take full responsibility for what you find merely annoying. For me it's both a science and my job.
The general thought you want to deliver to others is made of parts that are carefully considered, and then reconsidered as part of the whole.
I take every word you write very seriously. I listen to you as close as I possibly can. Yet all I get is evasive treatment.
I asked you an honest question BT. I'm not playing silly games.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
trach...and I asked you for
April 15, 2008 - 04:15 ET by bigtimertrach...and I asked you for an apology long ago.
Me thinks that steak dinner is off.
"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Churchill
Okay, I'm busted I guess.
April 15, 2008 - 04:20 ET by tracheostomyBT: trach...and I asked you for an apology long ago.
For what? Bring it back and the apology is yours. I totally don't remember whatever grudge you're holding over me. What'd I do to anger you?
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
I have never ever asked
April 15, 2008 - 04:27 ET by bigtimerI have never ever asked anybody to apologize to me here trach, you inferred I was lying awhile back about never hearing of the George character...regarding the Rush show...
What offends me more than anything is you decide to parse every word I say...you never used to do that, it is aggravating to say the least, you act as if it is the smartest way to communicate all the time.
You have changed IMHO.
"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Churchill
BT: I have never ever
April 15, 2008 - 04:39 ET by tracheostomyBT: I have never ever asked anybody to apologize to me here trach, you inferred I was lying awhile back about never hearing of the George character...regarding the Rush show...
Okay, I vaguely remember that. Let me look it over. BRB.
BT: What offends me more than anything is you decide to parse every word I say...you never used to do that, it is aggravating to say the least, you act as if it is the smartest way to communicate all the time.
It is. It really keeps your thoughts together, avoids skimming/overlooking errors when doing a reply, and it helps focus on the statements that make the overall opinion. It also provides a backlog so I can avoid revisionist errors when members like Syrius walks into an old thread and plants his flag on it.
BT: You have changed IMHO.
Nope. I swear I do this with everyone. If you think this is a conservative/liberal thing, it's not. I've been parsing "conservative" members here on NB since I arrived. I even do it with members I highly regard.
If it's about some members' opinions that the NB comments section is some kind of conservative social club, well then you got me. I'm here for one reason, and that's to bang ideas together and learn from others (<-- Threads I ask questions on, or fail to comment on altogether). My take on the comments section is like the School of Athens or the Areopagus. I know not all share that POV.
But anyway, BRB on that Curious George thing.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
I may of not made one thing
April 15, 2008 - 04:47 ET by bigtimerI may of not made one thing clear trach, I said you owed me an apology back then, you kept it up inferring I was lying about never hearing of that George character....it went on and on with your parsing too..just like yesterday on the Leno thread..man, give it a break....I know you do that with all anymore, and you will continue to do so, but if you think everyone here reads all of that parsing BS you are dreamin'....
I have to get out of here pretty quick, I know full well you know well what I am talking about.
"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Churchill
BT: . . .but if you think
April 15, 2008 - 05:14 ET by tracheostomyBT: . . .but if you think everyone here reads all of that parsing BS you are dreamin'....
I don't expect anyone to really.
But then that's where my opponents continually mess up.
Talk is cheap? Not on my watch it ain't.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Tale of the tape. . .
April 15, 2008 - 05:11 ET by tracheostomyBT: I have never ever asked anybody to apologize to me here trach, you inferred I was lying awhile back about never hearing of the George character...regarding the Rush show...
>_< - Oootch! Hate to open up old wounds here, but. . .
1. As a matter of fact, you didn't "ask" me for an apology, no. The apology was in fact out and out required, and in a public setting I would even go so far as to state that it was even demanded. <-- But I won't.
2. Candance understood completely and opened me up wide on the issue. Please note that she is one of my favorite members here and I parsed her as well. I also openly stated my own limitations, which I hold every member here to equally (take CA for example, and I admire his debate skills deeply).
3. I made an across the board cut on that issue. Even candance didn't like it. It's harsh, but it's fair. I simply don't recognize seniority or rep here. All that matters is your capacity for reason and fair debate. I absolutely hate forums that encourage behavior that favors mere seniority.
4. In this very same thread I got into a somewhat tense argument/discussion with Cool Arrow, but we made up in the end. However, to this day BT, you still hold your ground on whatever insult you still wish to harbor for the sake of bitterness between one member and another.
Okay. . .fine.
I apologize for offending you Bigtimer. I apologize for every single time you wanted it and I had failed to deliver.
I deeply and sincerely did not wish to offend you when I made it a habit of disregarding real life experience and personal stories as valid supportive evidence.
I will however, endeavor to continue this habit. If in the future you should "feel" offended in any way, then none is truly ever meant. I expect everyone to treat me 100% the exact same way if I assert something here tomorrow or 5 years from now. Period. My rep here means nothing to me and I expect to be treated like a rank N00B every day when it comes to proven facts. I will strive to do the same with others, regardless of how favorably I might feel towards them.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
ADDENDUM: 1. I'm
April 15, 2008 - 05:47 ET by tracheostomyADDENDUM:
1. Just as I did before, I'm going to forget this incident between BT and myself ever happened. I got bigger fish to fry.
2. Ben totally sees right through me. I think everyone that thinks I'm infallible should take a tip from him. He had my own limitations pegged way back in March. He's one sharp cat.
Too bad others here aren't as perceptive. <-- And for the hyper-sensitive among us, I'm not necessarily implying anyone in particular either.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
Bill Mahr
April 15, 2008 - 14:25 ET by nandrelliI see there are about a gazillion comments on this, but I might just as well post mine.
Bill Mahr is an idiot.
I came to this conclusion many years ago.
He has no talent.
He has poor material.
He has no personality.
He bases his entire career on hating Bush, or hating religion, or hating anything middle America cares for.
God only knows how Mahr actually got picked up by HBO in the first place (I guess he has more pictures than any of us realize).
What I would like to see is how he gets treated by the MSM if a Democrat gets elected, and he continues with his schtick (but, with a little luck, that won't happen this year). Chances are, he'll end up out on the street, just like Randi Rhodes, whose comments against Hillary were much more mild than what she has said against Bush for the last 7 years (if I remember right, she was appealing for Bush's assassination at one time), and all of a sudden she is not "acceptable" anymore.
In Germany, they came first for the Communists...
April 16, 2008 - 02:01 ET by LiveFreeOrDie1776My email to HBO/Time Warner/FCC/Demonic Sponsors:
It goes for all of Bill’s useful idiots and fellow travelers as well.
Dear Purveyor of anti-Christian bigotry.
Bill Maher the self loathing, “atheist Jew” (OxyMORON) is a discriminatory bigot who will cost HBO/TimeWarner dearly.
I am joining my church and community and non-believers of conscience in a BOYCOTT of hate preaching Time Warner & HBO for their legacy of tolerance of anti-Christian bigotry.
We have the power and you need our money. You will lose big. [u]Bill goes or we go.
I am pretty confident that my OUTRAGE will fall on feckless deaf ears and bulging blind eyes.
I will personally work tirelessly using all of my financial and legal resources and community activists to petition the FCC, and your sponsors to enforce a zero tolerance policy against anti-Christian bigotry which is already established in THE LAW.
How dare that wobbling boob Maher blame HIS HOLINESS THE POPE for a tragedy which is clearly a PREDATORY HOMOSEXUAL CRISIS created by the "liberalising" of the church and mentally-ill “gay priests” who VIOLATED THEIR SOLEMN VOWS AND BROKE THE LAW.
THE 96% OF NUNS AND PRIESTS WHO HONORED AND STILL HONOR THEIR SACRED VOWS HAVE PAID DEARLY IN DISHONOR, SHAME, RIDICULE AND UNPRECEDENTED MONETARY PENALTIES, FOR THE SINS OF THE DEVIANT GAY 4% of the priesthood who should never have been ordained and WHO COMMITTED UNSPEAKABLE CRIMES.
It is no surprise that HBO/TIME WARNER & BILL MAHER side with the “Violet Mafia”.
Your decisions are being closely watched.
You have already disgraced your "brand" by airing the hater Maher, you have one opportunity to make it right.
MAHER MUST GO.
There’s a line in the sand, which side are you on?
"In Germany, they came first for the Communists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist;
And then they came for the trade unionists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist;And then they came for the Jews, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew;And then . . . they came for me . . . And by that time there was no one left to speak up." Martin Neimoller Survivor of Nazi Concentration Camp. "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Att: Edmund Burke HAVE YOU REGISTERED YOUR OUTRAGE TO TIME/WARNER/HBO/SPONSORS OR ARE YOU TOO NUMB AND BUSY WITH IMPORTANT THINGS LIKE "AMERICAN IDOL" WAKE THE FOOK UP!
Isn't it FUNNY
April 16, 2008 - 09:28 ET by chiefpaynehow Maher can say this about the Catholic church yet the VERY people HE supports approves of this and OTHER disgusting behavior.
Seems to me if he wants to prevent this, he needs to look to the liberals factions (of which HE is a PART) and make his comments there. At least the people in the Catholic church condemn these people...can Maher say the same about the people HE associates with?
As for his comments about the Pope, I believe fools generally are ignored as a majority of people know he is borderline insane in the first place.
?????????
April 16, 2008 - 09:51 ET by shawn228I realize you are not a big fan of liberals, but last I checked no liberal politician supported polygamy or pedophilia.
I wish it were funny
April 28, 2008 - 23:14 ET by LiveFreeOrDie1776Good point. The church will emerge from their scandal stronger than ever. Where there is no struggle there is no progress. The good news is that the church has been purged of the homosexual predators. Bill Maher will realize he is in hell when he finds himself surrounded by the unrepentant perverts of the narcissistic cult of conspicuous sexuality for all eternity.
But It's Techinically True...
April 17, 2008 - 01:34 ET by The7SticksI hate to break it to you, but the Catholic Church did aid Hitler in hunting down and murder us Jews. I don't specifically know what kind of circustances the current pope was under at that time, but it is an undisputed fact that the pope of that era, Pope Pious the XII, aided Hitler in murdering the Jews. The Church deserves to be ridiculed for the heinous attrocites it has inflicted upon us over the centuries.
And one more thing: God Bless You, Bill Maher, and may God have mercy on the souls of all you pathetic losers who have been blinded by these Catholic cartels who want to take over our country.
7Sticks...
April 17, 2008 - 02:26 ET by mastersofdeceitI hate to break it to you