Posted on 03/26/2011 12:59:03 PM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg
Hotmail is generally for formatting, not grammatical errors. Can you point out any grammatical errors of mine, not that I doubt you at all. I'm not the most scrupulous about checking my tenses and subject verb agreement, but I don't see how html would help with any of that.
Most often we see the "consenting teenage boy defense" or the "gay priest defense*". It is good to see a Roman Catholic dust off another equally lame defense every once in a while.
lol. Any shot in the dark will do, just as long as it's fired away from Rome.
“Open Firefox, which has Google News set as my home page. 2 seconds.
Type the term “Catholic Priest” 2 seconds
Hit enter. 0.5 seconds.
Wait for results. 1-2 seconds.
Wow, that took all of 5.5-6.5 seconds!”
___________________________________________
lol. Approx. 6 seconds and hundreds if not thousands of results about the Roman Catholic pederast priest scandal.
CATHOLICS RAPING CHILDREN
than your own misconceptions in the Presbyterian Church
AMEN!
But where's the sport in that?
In a thread full of dumb Presbyterian statements, this is a standout dumb statement. How can you guarantee a vote in a secret ballot?
Only the really dumb ones. How can somebody 'guarantee' the secret vote of another? And what does that guarantee consist of? And what does that make somebody who praises said dumb statement?
May your envy lead you to desire the truth.
I should have been more specific and said punctuation errors which are a type of grammatical error, but are more exact as to the nature of your mistakes.
Read the article that begins this thread. That is what some people are trying to do on this thread.
Other people litter the thread with all sorts of nutty deflections and comical/bogus/vile tangents which do nothing to further the debate.
Which is exactly their intent.
Let's see. About.com. Why not link to Wiki? All right, let's see what this is all about.
About.com gives its source as http://www.religionfacts.com/religion_statistics/religion_statistics_by_country.htm. Religionfacts.com? They post a comparison by country. Where is their source?
The CIA Factbook (text only, no link). Where is the link? Where is the study and the methodology? What year was it published? No information. My good Doctor, you fail again. Let's push further into the molasses.
http://www.religionfacts.com/religion_statistics/american_religious_identification_survey.htm gives the top level stats of what they purport is a collection of three studies. What is the source? Again, text only: Source: The American Religious Identification Survey (ARIS) was conducted in 2008.
Interesting. ARIS was the source for the CUNY study. There is no methodology listed - these liberal sites that you Presbyterians like are either amateur or deliberately obfuscating. But let's see what the numbers shake out to be.
Since you've performed a grand mal seizure waving a victory hanky about in terms of how much more the Protestants (of whatever ilk) number versus the Catholics, let us see what that means in the studies.
In 1990, Protestants in the US outnumbered the Catholics by 2.3 to 1. In 2008, Protestants in the US outnumbered the Catholics by 2.0 to 1. So your claims based upon on your own selected study says that you are dead wrong. Catholics are increasing compared to Protestants. Nice fail.
Let us see how that applies to Presbyterians. In 1990, Catholics outnumbered the Presbyterians by 9.2 to 1. In 2008, Catholics outnumbered the Presbyterians by 12.1 to 1. More fantastic fail - Catholics increased 33% compared to Presbyterians.
My good Doctor, what exactly are you attempting to prove here? That even you cannot find sources to prove your claims? Actually you are proving our claims quite nicely. Thank you.
May the Presbyterian envy of the complete dictatorial control not lead them to liberal Democratic practices of being able to guarantee the outcomes of secret balloting which is a fundamental practice in the free United States of America. This is not the tyrannical command and control of Calvin pitted against the good burghers of Geneva.
Mark, while you may interpret Lumen Gentum as rejecting all outside Catholicism as Christians(?), to relegate data on Catholicism as being an unclean or contrived thing due to its negativity or lack of research on your account is unwarranted in this respect, if not uncommon. While stats can be misused, and a slight margin of error is assumed, the reality is that multitudes of comparative demographical studies (http://www.peacebyjesus.com/RC-Stats_vs._Evang.html), and every study i have ever seen, including Catholic sponsored ones, shows RCs to overall being more liberal in faith and morals than their evangelical counterparts. And which other data concurs with.
In addition, they also testify to spiritual declension among Protestants and evangelicals in general.
Rather than impugning the credibility of such reports, some conservative RCs as well as evangelicals invoke them in warning against spiritual declension, which is the more reasonable response.
As for the U.S. Religious Landscape Survey, info on that is easily obtained, and is done by the the "Pew Research Center, a nonpartisan "fact tank" that provides information on the issues, attitudes and trends shaping America and the world. The Pew Research Center does this by conducting public opinion polling and social science research; by analyzing news coverage; and by holding forums and briefings. It does not take positions on policy issues." http://pewforum.org/Pew-Forum/About-the-Pew-Forum.aspx The 143 page Landscape Survey (http://religions.pewforum.org/pdf/report-religious-landscape-study-full.pdf) is based on interviews with more than 35,000 Americans age 18 and older, a very large representational population sample as compared with other studies.
Can you point out to any specific mistakes, not that I am denying that there are any?
To get the ball rolling, I'll point out that you should have put a comma after the word "errors."
“In a thread full of dumb Presbyterian statements, this is a standout dumb statement. How can you guarantee a vote in a secret ballot? “
Your hostility is noted. Of course I can’t know for SURE. I just believe what people tell me.
Thanks for sharing that. I had never heard that before, and it's good to know.
The PCUSA is so wildly out of control with its liberalism that it's practically a branch of the democrat party, as is the UCC and other mainline denominations.
The OPC and the PCA are conservative. No abortion, gay marriage or gay pastors...
I am an engineer. I prefer data that is untainted by its gatherers. I detest experiments that are designed to point the outcome in one direction or another, or to come to a prearranged conclusion. Whatever my interpretation of Lumen Gentium, I will accept untainted data and unbiased analyses and will not accept either sloppy or deliberately misleading conclusions.
While stats can be misused, and a slight margin of error is assumed, the reality is that multitudes of comparative demographical studies (http://www.peacebyjesus.com/RC-Stats_vs._Evang.html), and every study i have ever seen, including Catholic sponsored ones, shows RCs to overall being more liberal in faith and morals than their evangelical counterparts. And which other data concurs with.
If you have a good scientifically designed and performed study, by all means, trot it out and let's have a look at it. I will repeat: I am no advocating the CUNY study, I merely prefer it or one managed in like manner because I will have confidence in its outcome.
Rather than impugning the credibility of such reports, some conservative RCs as well as evangelicals invoke them in warning against spiritual declension, which is the more reasonable response.
The reasonable response is to gather and use accurate data in order to arrive at a realistic world view and the truth. If Catholics are shrinking in the US for real, I will accept it. However, everything that has been trotted out by my opponents has been bereft of facts, methodology, and design to eliminate biased conclusions; an interesting side note is that even those waved about give different results than those waving them about are claiming.
As for the U.S. Religious Landscape Survey, info on that is easily obtained, and is done by the the "Pew Research Center, a nonpartisan "fact tank" that provides information on the issues, attitudes and trends shaping America and the world.
I see that you are shilling for Pew, now. Pew is non partisan in the same manner that Media Matters is non partisan, or The Huffington Post is non partisan. Or PBS, for that matter.
Find a good pollster with a good and open data set, methodology, and analysis and let's talk. That way we can discuss totals, percentages and trends. In an objective fashion.
Certainly, to a degree. However, there has been shrill objection to church rolls by the Presbyterians here, since they claim that the Catholic Church is padding the rolls.
The CUNY poll puts everything on the responses of the surveyees, and eliminates any influence of the church institutions and their current rolls.
Your hostility is noted. Of course I can’t know for SURE.
You made the statement that you guaranteed the outcome of a secret ballot in the federal election of the United States in 2008. The only people that I know that can guarantee the outcome of secret ballots are third world dictators and Chicago Democrats. Which group do you claim to belong to?
I just believe what people tell me.
Believe me when I tell you that conservative Presbyterian churches do not practice Christianity as defined by the Nicene Creed or by the Bible. Now what are you going to do?
“You made the statement that you guaranteed the outcome of a secret ballot in the federal election of the United States in 2008. “
Don’t be ridiculous. I told you that no one in my congregation voted for Obama. Unless they lied, they didn’t. You’re freaking out unnecessarily.
And no women pastors in the OPC and PCA.
Pray that the PCUSA presbyteries will vote down the General Assembly’s recommendation to admit practicing homosexuals into the ministry. They’ve voted it down every time it has come up, but homosexuals are relentless.
If the PCUSA okays this abomination, the PCA and OPC will reap the righteous rewards of what the PCUSA has sowed in shame.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.