“Again, are you suggesting the solution is to ban certain posters because their style of debate is vulgar?”
First, let's not make this so directly personal. Should certain BEHAVIOR be banned? Certainly. Certain posters? I suppose if they find themselves completely unable to abide by the rules, that might have to be done. However, I'm pretty sure that pretty much every poster here is capable of better behavior (okay, there may be a poster or two who aren't capable - so yes, you'd have to ban them).
As to vulgarity - I don't think that's the word I'd use.
I'm not sure one word covers it.
Think about the word iconoclasm: “Tearing down the (sacred) icons.” Think about the history of iconoclasm, the smashing of the holy Christian icons by savage, barbarian Muslims who thought they were doing the will of God (I wish some of the iconoclasts here would have the self-awareness to realize how much they look like barbarian Muslim iconoclasts to many Catholics here.).
Anti-Catholic (and anti-Mormon, as well) iconoclasm happens around here on Free Republic verbally every day.
And the rules permit and encourage it.
It's verbal vandalism.
If someone directs their verbal vandalism at what another holds holy, or if someone regularly derisively mocks what another holds holy, using language devoid of any actual argument, yeah, if they insist on persisting, those folks should be permanently banned.
Why?
Because that's not how conservatives do things. That's how liberals do things, and this is a conservative website, or so I've been told.
Liberals argue by content-free insult, by belittling, by mocking. Remember we're just “bitter”? Remember that Republicans are all Nazis? Remember that Bush = Hitler?
That's how liberals do it - namecalling, the attempt to tear down and destroy without any effort to understand, to persuade, to engage, to reason with the other.
Yeah, I'd definitely permanently ban folks unwilling to change from that sort of "style" (if that's what you want to call it).
But I think you'd only have to ban a small number before folks would straighten up and fly right. I don't honestly think that there are any posters here (well, maybe one or two) who are incapable of withholding the vicious venom. I think they'd adjust.
Remember this:
The rules forbid personal attacks.
Yet, many (maybe most?) Catholic posters here would sooner be attacked personally by another poster than to see the Mother of God attacked, or Jesus in the Most Blessed Sacrament attacked.
In this way, the rules favor those who attack what we hold holy, and disfavor those of us who hold what is holy as more important than ourselves.
sitetest
In this way, the rules favor those who attack what we hold holy, and disfavor those of us who hold what is holy as more important than ourselves.
If the Protestant side can contend for its faith without using vulgar debate styles, would the Catholic side be able to respond without "taking it personally?"
Or is it an impossibility such that every thread should be a "closed" thread. Or ecumenicism only on "open" threads?