Bill Donohue: Over the line?

dotCommonweal ^ | David Gibson

[Dr. Eckleburg]

The problem is non-Catholic posters coming on RF threads with troll posts, repeating the same anti-Catholic diatribes on every Catholic thread.

I would be happy to ping you to some.

lol. "Non-catholic posters on RF threads!"

What nerve!!!

And here we have the very reason for the Reformation itself -- because Rome cannot be challenged, all disagreement must be obliterated., or at the very least dismissed as "diatribes" by "trolls."

There must be some Catholics out there who recognize how to debate issues without declaring the discussion null and void simply because it does not like the counter-argument.

Some of these suggestions being made by Catholics on this thread would be laughable if they weren't so sad, and would be tantamount to either closing the Religion Forum or putting up a sign, "NO PROTESTANTS ALLOWED."

And just once I would like to see a Catholic count up the number of Catholic threads and compare them to the number of Protestant threads on the RF. It is easily 10 to one.

It very often feels like some Catholic posters here will not be happy until that ratio is 10 to zero.

[Petronski]

"Non-catholic posters on RF threads!"

Here's another one of your famous truncated posts. You pulled those words out of their context.

Let's take a look at the actual protest:

...non-Catholic posters coming on RF threads with troll posts, repeating the same anti-Catholic diatribes on every Catholic thread.

The part in bold is what is cut off, and it is plain to see now why.

[Petronski]

And here we have the very reason for the Reformation itself -- because Rome cannot be challenged, all disagreement must be obliterated., or at the very least dismissed as "diatribes" by "trolls."

All that is required is an honest retelling of our faith...rather than the heaping strawman versions of our faith that you love to bat away.

[Judith Anne]

Selective quoting on your part.

The rest of the sentence:

The problem is non-Catholic posters coming on RF threads with troll posts, repeating the same anti-Catholic diatribes on every Catholic thread.

[Petronski]

Some of these suggestions being made by Catholics on this thread would be laughable if they weren't so sad, and would be tantamount to either closing the Religion Forum or putting up a sign, "NO PROTESTANTS ALLOWED."

More like "ALL RESPECTFUL HONEST PROTESTANTS OF GOOD WILL WELCOME!"

[1000 silverlings]

And the last defense, even though most of the Protestants have been posting for years, citing scripture, citing Catholic doctrine, is to label the opposition as “trolls”. Last time I saw it was on evolution creatinist threads where every Christian poster was automatically a troll.

[P-Marlowe]

And just once I would like to see a Catholic count up the number of Catholic threads and compare them to the number of Protestant threads on the RF. It is easily 10 to one.

Not to be crude, or anything but it seems to me that every time the Pope passes gas, someone posts a thread on it.

[Judith Anne]

And just once I would like to see a Catholic count up the number of Catholic threads and compare them to the number of Protestant threads on the RF. It is easily 10 to one.

So post more Protestant threads.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

You're bothered because Catholics get to post threads on FR, and you're bothered because you don't like the titles, and because we can post anytime we want?

Do you honestly not see that is what is being suggested here regarding Protestant posters by preventing them from posting threads and making comments according to their beliefs?

Just today I saw a Catholic poster say Protestants shouldn't be posting threads about Catholicism.

Is it now a "hate crime" to disagree with Rome?

For the record, Protestants are generally fine with Catholics posting whatever threads their heart desires, and making whatever comments they are compelled to make, as long as they abide by the FR rules of no personal attacks, racist comments or foul language.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

I posted the entire comment, Petronski. Something you neglected to do.

[Judith Anne]

So ignore them, right? No one obligates you to read a thread.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

All that is required is an honest retelling of our faith

BUT WE DISAGREE.

You present your side. We present ours.

It's called DEBATE!

[Judith Anne]

Quix can’t answer for himself?

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Nothing selective about it. I posted your entire comment.

[Petronski]

And you complained of a deceptively-truncated portion of the text, ripping her words from their context. Your post was deceptive.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Hey, thanks for the ping. I missed that terrific thread on the SCF.

Alex, you should ping more people to your great threads.

[Petronski]

You think you have your own side of what we believe?

OMG.

You are entitled to your opinions of what we believe, but you are not entitled to have “your own side” of what we believe.

Catholics define what Catholics believe. You’re not required to believe it or even like it, but if you redefine it, you are bearing false witness.