Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: DBeers
Whenever you're ready to explain why the author's work is just a whole lot of drivel, I'd be happy to hear it.

If, on the other hand, you never really had anything substantive to offer to begin with, then sure, perhaps measuring your words carefully really is the best course of action for you. That would be understandable.

338 posted on 12/14/2004 11:39:50 PM PST by pascendi (Quicumque vult salvus esse, ante omnia opus est, ut teneat catholicam fidem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 337 | View Replies ]


To: pascendi
I suggest you compare the following two statements and see where your dilemma may lie with both my statement and your inability to recognize the 'anti-American' tone of the article in question:

ME: "Yet more of John Rao's anti-American drivel..."

YOU: "Whenever you're ready to explain why the author's work is just a whole lot of drivel, I'd be happy to hear it.

In addition to not being pleased with the authors attempted disparaging of Cardinal Ratzinger. The premise of the article itself disparaging Cardinal Ratzinger in 'guilt by association' methodology self-evidently must be anti-American in presupposition.

My opinion is in the broad sense and not as you apparently believe an attempt to discount any specific and or obvious Truth interweaved with the opinion the article contains.

339 posted on 12/15/2004 3:45:51 AM PST by DBeers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 338 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson