Again, take it up with the RM, vlad. You’ve been deliberately pushing the boundaries of acceptable behavior on here, for a long time.
It’s become no longer possible to debate matters in a civil manner with you, with all your backhanded, third person slams, as far as I’m concerned.
You wrote:
“Again, take it up with the RM, vlad.”
No. I already said I would not.
“You’ve been deliberately pushing the boundaries of acceptable behavior on here, for a long time.”
I sometimes post as I see others post.
“It’s become no longer possible to debate matters in a civil manner with you, with all your backhanded, third person slams, as far as I’m concerned.”
I doubt that. The simple fact is that I have been right about the facts all along while you have not. When anti-Catholics are shown to be wrong on the facts (or asked questions they are apparently incapable of answering) they claim debate is impossible. In post 73 I asked, “What policy? Again, this abusive priest was put on trial. He was on tril while Ratzinger was working as a cardinal. So, how did he fail in his duty exactly? What policy did he not enforce? Seriously, can you answer ANY of those questions? Even one?”
And you never responded. I have no reason to believe you know any of the facts.