Calling nominal and liberal Catholics

Page 3 of 3 [ 44 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3

Previous topic | Next topic

abacacus
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Apr 2007
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,380

11 Mar 2012, 6:16 pm

Love that picture.

The sooner we erase religion, the better. It has no place in any sane society.

_________________
A shot gun blast into the face of deceit
You'll gain your just reward.
We'll not rest until the purge is complete
You will reap what you've sown.

CoMF
Deinonychus

Joined: 7 Feb 2012
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 328

11 Mar 2012, 7:32 pm

HerrGrimm wrote:

It is quite obvious CoMF only knows that the child rape happened and nothing else. The fact he responded to me without looking at my entire post is ridiculous, and it is even more ridiculous that he passed over CrazyCatLord's post that had a quote from it and just kept going ignorantly with a weak argument.

What are you talking about? I never addressed you at all, until now.

ETA: Correction. Looking back, I did give you one response that merely corrected your assumption that I expected sweeping changes to happen overnight.

Also, I completely missed you trying to point me to the videos because I was too focused on responding to CatLord. Frankly, I don't feel like watching them.

HerrGrimm
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Mar 2011
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 987
Location: United States

12 Mar 2012, 5:42 pm

CoMF wrote:

HerrGrimm wrote:

You addressed me on the last page...is it that hard to keep track?

I show proof using videos, and people tell you there is some evidence there, but you choose not to watch them? Not only that, but you tell people they need to show proof despite it being in the media I gave. This is the most ignorant argument I have seen this month on PPR.

Your position is completely based on wishful thinking and not a single bit of knowledge of anything beyond the fact the rapes happened. Your position that something should stay standing and the way it is because people are attached to it deserves ridicule and mockery. Not a single thing deserves that defense. Would you extend this to Hezbollah for their work in their community?

And it is dishonest to try to gain more credibility by saying you're not Catholic concerning this position.

CoMF
Deinonychus

Joined: 7 Feb 2012
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 328

12 Mar 2012, 6:50 pm

HerrGrimm wrote:

You addressed me on the last page...is it that hard to keep track?

Non issue. I already admitted my mistake and corrected myself.

HerrGrimm wrote:

I show proof using videos, and people tell you there is some evidence there, but you choose not to watch them? Not only that, but you tell people they need to show proof despite it being in the media I gave. This is the most ignorant argument I have seen this month on PPR.

You mean those videos of the delightful Stephen Fry making apologists for the RCC have to defend its entire sordid history going back all the way to St. Paul in the course of 20 minutes, and then said apologists proceeding to stumble their way through it in a manner so laughably incompetent that you wonder if both sides were ever fairly matched to begin with? They "prove" about as much as a Hannity and Colmes "debate," and appeared to be just as dissatisfying to watch. Don't get me wrong. I like Stephen Fry and imagine his points were perfectly valid, but when I can discern the content of those videos simply from reading the YouTube comments, there's no point in watching them since outcome is essentially a foregone conclusion.

HerrGrimm wrote:

Your position is completely based on wishful thinking and not a single bit of knowledge of anything beyond the fact the rapes happened. Your position that something should stay standing and the way it is because people are attached to it deserves ridicule and mockery. Not a single thing deserves that defense. Would you extend this to Hezbollah for their work in their community?

And it is dishonest to try to gain more credibility by saying you're not Catholic concerning this position.

I'm sure you feel that way. Thanks for sharing your opinion.

HerrGrimm
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Mar 2011
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 987
Location: United States

12 Mar 2012, 6:59 pm

CoMF wrote:

HerrGrimm wrote:

I'm sure you feel that way. Thanks for sharing your opinion.

I do feel that way. Because it is true. You're quite welcome.

You've dodged a lot of relevant parts of my posts, by the way. You're quoting things you don't answer.

CoMF wrote:

One piece of evidence about Ratzinger writing a letter. Your previous answer was weak since you did not know the relationship between Ratzinger and John Paul II. That's a surprise

CoMF
Deinonychus

Joined: 7 Feb 2012
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 328

12 Mar 2012, 7:37 pm

HerrGrimm wrote:

I do feel that way. Because it is true. You're quite welcome.

How quaint, becuase I hear similar arguments used to "prove" that the Bible is the "word of God." :wink:

HerrGrimm wrote:

You've dodged a lot of relevant parts of my posts, by the way. You're quoting things you don't answer.

Sorry, I forgot that we aspies aren't good at perceiving subtlety, so I'll state it plainly:

I have absolutely no intentions of engaging you in a debate. Interpret that however you will, but my personal reasons are that I'm really not interested and I don't believe that any good will come of it.

HerrGrimm wrote:

One piece of evidence about Ratzinger writing a letter. Your previous answer was weak since you did not know the relationship between Ratzinger and John Paul II. That's a surprise

Your "evidence" is a Stephen Fry quote, not an actual letter. Niether you nor CatLord provided us with a link to the text of said letter in its entirety.

HerrGrimm
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Mar 2011
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 987
Location: United States

16 Mar 2012, 8:22 pm

CoMF wrote:

I have absolutely no intentions of engaging you in a debate. Interpret that however you will, but my personal reasons are that I'm really not interested and I don't believe that any good will come of it.

I appreciate that because you were honest about it. If only the rest of WP could admit that.

Anyone else want to join? You think i could take some criticism after being called a Stormfront member, a xenophobe, a Fascist, a Nazi apologist, a Communist apologist, a troll, a muppet, and having 'cyclopean' free speech views (whatever that is).

I'm not going anywhere. It's too much of an investment, and I want to shove it to all the people who tried to ban me.

puddingmouse
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Apr 2010
Age: 38
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,777
Location: Cottonopolis

16 Mar 2012, 10:32 pm

Here's the 2001 letter to sent by Ratzinger to all bishops concerning sexual abuse: http://www.bishop-accountability.org/re ... nglish.htm

'Cases of this kind are subject to the pontifical secret.'

_________________
Zombies, zombies will tear us apart...again.

CoMF
Deinonychus

Joined: 7 Feb 2012
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 328

17 Mar 2012, 2:07 am

puddingmouse wrote:

Thank you! Sure enough, sexual predation of minors was specifically mentioned in the letter, and then Cardinal Ratzinger stated clearly that those among other things were subject to pontifical secret. Then again, if you ask the Catholics, only the internal procedures of the church in connection with the punishment of such offenses are covered under the pontifical secret.

Incidentally, in June of 2002, the Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People (Link) was approved by the Vatican. It states in Article 4:

Quote:

Dioceses/eparchies are to report an allegation of sexual abuse of a person who is a minor to the public authorities. Dioceses/eparchies are to comply with all applicable civil laws with respect to the reporting of allegations of sexual abuse of minors to civil authorities and cooperate in their investigation in accord with the law of the jurisdiction in question.
Dioceses/eparchies are to cooperate with public authorities about reporting cases even when the person is no longer a minor.
In every instance, dioceses/eparchies are to advise victims of their right to make a report to public authorities and support this right.

If Ratzinger was indeed attempting to protect the guilty from secular justice, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops foiled that conspiracy a little over a year later.

munch15a
Snowy Owl

Joined: 16 Nov 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 153

17 Mar 2012, 2:11 am

I am a catholic and consider myself to be pretty hard-line that said I have never heard a reasoned augment against contraception

but the morning after pill is just form of early abortion and can not ever help someone else have one because in my estimation I would then be an accessory to a murder not legally but theologically

CoMF
Deinonychus

Joined: 7 Feb 2012
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 328

17 Mar 2012, 2:22 am

HerrGrimm wrote:

I appreciate that because you were honest about it. If only the rest of WP could admit that.

No worries, and it's nothing personal.

webcam
Velociraptor

Joined: 8 Feb 2012
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 427

12 Apr 2012, 4:20 pm

See... my problem as a nominal catholic (you're born into it, they won't let you escape being termed 'catholic' apparently) is that I'm 100% pro-life, 100% anti-religion, and 100% for personal choices that mean you can kill another person... So where do I fit into this argument?

Page 3 of 3 [ 44 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3

Jump to:

Calling nominal and liberal Catholics Post Reply New Topic

Calling nominal and liberal Catholics