In a movie theatre, I paid to watch the movie, not hear someone preach. This site is allegedly is about discussing conservative ideas, a good many of which are formed on faith. Without God, there can be no real conservatism. I firmly believe that. When the site decrees a rule that there shall be no “bashing” but can’t even express in third grade words what that means, I challenge the intellectual credentials of that site.
We can have a discussion of religion here without animosity but clearly, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism et all are at odds with each other. Note that I did not differentiate between Protestants, Catholics, Mormons et aux because I believe in principle we are brothers in arms with common cause against forces that would deny free will. Is that not the common ground given us by one God?
That being said however, A pope that pushes a statist agenda, socialism and authoritarian rule is no friend of any Christian. If Catholics cannot accept criticism of a pope, then perhaps it is they that need to find a place where critical thinking is far more restrained. If they want to defend papal infallibility as “God’s Word” and silence me for saying otherwise, then I will criticize them, “bashing” or not.
This site is private property and the OWNER just said knock off the catholic bashing and you want to argue with the property owner on what he allows on his property.
Not very wise.
The daily sport of posting Catholic bashing threads on FR stops today.
Actually, while my own knee-jerk reaction was "does this mean there can be no more articles refuting RC claims, the rule actually is "The daily sport of posting Catholic bashing threads on FR stops today."
And which bashing is defined as "Trashing religion" versus debate. And see response to my question as to whether this applies to Prot bashing as well
Rather than getting more technical and expanding the wise basic rules which RMs have overall judiciously enforced - the best in the business in my opinion (and despite some attempts to censor all opposition or debate), i think the owner is excluding the daily articles (that were in response to incessant RC ones) which are more proactive attacks rather than those which invite intelligent debate.
But given the elitist claims of RCs that inevitably are typically made rather than reasonable arguments, as well as certain Prot responses, then that is difficult.
That's cool. I'm Catholic and I'm unimpressed with this Pope too. There's a difference between thinking a particular Pope is a bozo, and attacking the concept of the Pope.