[big'ol_freeper]

Seems like the best way to refute a Catholic is to invite another Catholic to the discussion.

Let me see. The article is about Martin Luther creating an environment that fostered Nazism and in some way the Catholics have something to refute...hmmm...how would that be possible without a straw man being set up to avoid refuting the author? Seems to me SOMEONE...ANYONE who disagrees with the author would want to do some refuting...but since I have only seen one or two posts attempting to do that and the rest making concerted efforts to create and prop up straw men to avoid discussing Martin Luther, I am guessing the authors position must be credible.

[big'ol_freeper]

Straw Man argument:


A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position. To "set up a straw man" or "set up a straw man argument" is to describe a position that superficially resembles an opponent's actual view but is easier to refute, then attribute that position to the opponent (for example, deliberately overstating the opponent's position). A straw man argument can be a successful rhetorical technique (that is, it may succeed in persuading people) but it carries little or no real evidential weight, because the opponent's actual argument has not been refuted.

Nobody seems to want to actually refute the article. We sure have some experts in this rhetorical technique on this thread.
 

[wmfights]

The article is about Martin Luther creating an environment that fostered Nazism and in some way the Catholics have something to refute...hmmm...

Wouldn't what's good for the goose be good for the gander apply?

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Most Protestants will agree that Luther carried a lot of baggage which was shackled to his back by his anti-semitic upbringing in the church of Rome.