Thanks for the memories, but it's time for Christians to unite not fight

self | 3/2/2015 | two134711

[daniel1212]

You are one of the ones who uses probably the MOST bandwidth EVERY single day to post your pro-Catholic threads on the Religion Forum and you have the nerve to try and blackmail Free Republic for allowing the free expression of religion??? Give me a break!

Ouch!

[redleghunter]

Ironic isn’t it.

[boatbums]

Could we then ban the trolls who can’t behave in the general Religion forum?

Who gets to decide who is a "troll"? Catholics???

[boatbums]

MamaB doesn’t make “ugly” remarks about other people’s religion. You are the one being the bully here.

[redleghunter]

However you specifically called out screen names in your original post.

Both are also pinged. I hope you have a reason why both of them reached your wall of fame while many others did not.

[Salvation]

You are the one being the bully here

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-backroom/3263766/posts?page=264#264

Perspnal attack Remove?

[RedHeeler]

Silly inanity is a personal journey. Jesus held no such value

[redleghunter]

How are you doing narses? How did your local walk for Life group do this year?

[redleghunter]

You do realize you are making the point of the original poster?

[redleghunter]

Please don’t use a curse word in the same sentence our Lord’s Name is used.

Thanks.

[Resettozero]

BTW, that poster’s vile post will live in infamy.

It was the poster's opinion. And it isn't the vilest ever posted on FR. You jumped into a RF thread in the past without having read the context of the entire thread and how it progressed. I was there and witnessed your outburst. So did Jim at a later time.

I thought the latest FReepathon was another success. How are Catholics threatening a ban on financial support hurting FR so far?

Onyx, you are advocating censorship of religious expression on Free Republic; don't you understand that? Don't you understand where that leads next?

[Religion Moderator]

This is in the Smoky Backroom.

[boatbums]

This is my concern as well. If you the reader are quick to profess your beliefs, does your posting life display them or deny them? Now, I do not agree with others who have posted that the Religion Forum should be closed or never should have started--but the forum is what we, as posters, make of it.

Thank you for stating that. It needs to be something we should all consider before we post anything on the RF. WE are what will make or break Free Republic and it is the best Conservative/Pro-Life/Pro-God/Pro-America site out there.

[Resettozero]

Always remember that their brand of Christianity always begins with the negative proposition of being against Christ's Church, rather than being for Christ.

That is not the truth and is devilish. And secondly, you identify yourselves ALWAYS first as Catholics, and not as members of "Christ's Church".

[redleghunter]

>>I do not think any one of my posts contains a single ad hominem attack, although I do defend the Faith. If so, it was an accident out of frustration. It is pointless here.<<

Maybe not ad hominem but you do take quotes out of context to advance your assertions.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3261525/posts?page=188#188

[Not gonna take it anymore]

Oh damn did that upset you? Too bad. I don’t care.

[redleghunter]

Actually Alinsky used the meme “if you repeat something enough people will believe it no matter the accuracy of the account.”

That DOES happen often in the RF. Multiple assertions stating something is so because they say it is so. That is not debating or arguing. It’s propaganda.

Then when one is challenged on an assertion a hailstorm of victimization ensues.

This thread is such an example. I would expect a thread such as this one sided victimization meme to be on DU and not the Conservative FR.

Liberals complain and commiserate…Conservatives drive on.

[boatbums]

There is a HUGE double standard going on here and I am, frankly, surprised to be reading it on this thread by some of the people whom I thought were very supportive of Free Republic. If defining "personal attacks" is changed to include a specific religion rather than what we ALL understand it to mean, then it would eliminate ANY disagreements with anyone about anything of a religious nature. You're talking censorship and that's NOT what Free Republic is about.

I think there are already plenty of protections and safeguards built in with the way JR runs things here and for those who simply cannot tolerate reading criticism of their religion, there already IS an escape - DON'T CLICK ON THEM. Nobody has a gun to their heads forcing them to read, is there? There is plenty of warning given for what one can expect from OPEN RF threads, so no one has any excuse for getting their feelings hurt.

Why is it that on this thread the ONLY ones who are screaming for banning dissent are the Catholics? Do non-Caths just have thicker hides because we are used to having our faith attacked? I try not to let anyone get under my skin though I can't say I bat 1000 WRT that. I have had my share of personal spit-wads tossed my way and what they prompt me to do is pray for them. Choosing to participate on threads that may be contentious is something we must decide for ourselves. Unlike some here, I have learned and benefited from much that gets posted - both OPs and comments - and I don't take contention personally. I don't know them and they don't know me. I already KNOW it isn't personal - I don't expect someone showing up at my door with a gun just because I debated them on FR.

Instead of censorship, why don't we try for more sensitivity? I can disagree with someone and not be disagreeable.

[redleghunter]

You sure did stand up for your church which I know values the Commandments of God.

Blasphemy is not condoned by your church, so why do it?

[redleghunter]

This thread is very revealing. It certainly convinces me why red states are red and blue states are blue.