Cah! Cah! Cah!
Posted on 02/22/2007 9:46:01 AM PST by Alex Murphy
Catholic ping!
The fringe groups are easy to dismiss, but the stereotypes about Catholicism are especially hard to take coming from people who should be smarter, like those working for presidential candidates.
This is where the author gets off the track a bit. Both the bloggers and the "Pope is the Antichrist" crows are both on the fringe.
Cah! Cah! Cah!
I wish they could be published, with blanks in the worst places, so that people could get an idea of just exactly how far outside decent public discourse these two women were.
Edward's not firing these characters speaks for him. He may call himself a Christian like Slick Willie does, but keeping these bashers on the payroll says otherwise, IMO.
I am also a practicing Catholic, which makes me a "Christofacist" in these atheists' eyes. So be it. Jerks are entitled to their opinions.
Still, if these comments had been made of any other religion, including Islam, or of blacks, they would have been fired.
Edwards knows what his base is, and its not the so-called Religious Right, despite what he may say.
I'm confused. Do the Protestant Catholic bashers agree with or condemn the leftist Catholic bashers? Because they generally say the same things.
Your standard, average, anti-Catholic bigot isn't nearly clever enough to be a crow.
I have no idea myself - when one shows up, remind me to ask them. Or maybe one of you can ping me, should either of you comes across one first!
How about a turkey? They routinely drown in rain storms from looking up and getting water in their nasal systems.
I forgot about the cleverness of crows. Maybe wagglebee is right about comparing them to turkeys. ;-)
Besides, even a turkey knows that he's a turkey, and recognises other turkeys when he sees 'em.
Have you got any suggestions? Perhaps earthworms?
4: Sloth, in so far as the bigot does not bother to learn the truth about the object of his bigotry. Rather, he is quick to believe lurid falsehoods.
5: Anger, in which the bigot lashes out unjustly at the perceived faults of the object of his bigotry, whilst ignoring his own faults.
6: Envy, in which the bigot is motivated by wishing he had some good which the object of his bigotry is perceived to have.
7: Pride, in which the bigot convinces himself that he is better than the object of his bigotry ... often to the point of partially or wholly denying the humanity of said object.
It is also a violation of the Eighth Commandment ... in that almost everything which the bigot says of the object of his bigotry is a half truth, a distortion of the truth, or an outright fabrication. It can lead to violations of the Fifthe Commandment, as well.
Just my opinion, but I think we've started waving the "Catholic-bashing" card way too often on FR. There are some who are legitmately, venemously opposed to the Catholic Church. Others just don't know or understand. I think we would be better off not over-using that phrase because, frankly, we're starting to sound like a bunch of hypersensitive pansies. As anyone who reads my posts knows, I'm committed to earnest debate and countering clearly false claims against our Church, but not everyone who disagrees with our faith is burning the pope in effigy in their backyard. It just seems as soon as someone makes any kind of negative comment, the "Catholic-bashing" responses come out. Sometimes people just don't know any better and it would be better for us to find out before dropping the "C-B" Bomb on them.
Once again, despite its (unmerited) conservative image, Catholics are a historically "oppressed minority" in the United States and will pull out the victim card as quickly as anyone (as the reference to "Know-Nothings" demonstrates).
The author dismisses the idea that Catholics are not considered "Bible-believing chr*stians," but it is a simple and undeniable fact that most Catholics (especially the theologians and clergy) subscribe to higher Biblical criticism and naturalistic theories about how the world works. It is simply ridiculous to deny this.
Also, Catholics and other non-missionary religions do indeed demean other (missionary) religions by attacking them for being missionary religions. Although I am a Noachide and accept the authority of the Jewish Sages, I am simply dumbfounded by the dogmatic anti-proselytization ideology that holds that "I'm right and you're wrong, but that's perfectly all right." This simply makes no sense! Is the non-proselytizer a snob of some kind who doesn't want the other person to be as correct as him?
It is absolutely astounding how many religions think the worst possible thing that can happen is to be handed a tract by a Protestant missionary. Of all the evils in the world, is there nothing else to fight against?
I foresee a time when sinister forces will attempt to create a syncretistic new age "religion" based on nothing but the condemnation of Protestant missionaries.
That is untrue. Fundamentalist anti-Catholics don't invoke mysogyny or mythology, and liberal anti-Catholics sure as blazes don't say that "Catholics are going to hell."
Once again a "good conservative" takes a dig at the allegedly inbred morons who didn't have the intellect or the ambition to be born as illiterate Mayan peasants or Haitian voodoo practitioners.
We know that all Catholics are geniuses.
When are Catholics going to apologize for making life unpleasant for Protestants in Mexico? Why is burning the Pope in effigy worse than actually stoning people???
Ya think?
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.