Welllllllllll! Harumph!
I think it’s extremely unreasonable for any Papist
to think that Prottys must be fluent
in the language of obfuscation, slippery diplo-theo-speak, rubbery daffynitions, boiled okratized rationalizations 12 layers thick, double-speak, double-standards out of both sides of the theological bureaucrats power mongering fingers and mouths, . . .
I mean . . . don’t Papists go to universities and tutleges for long years to learn how to split such hairs, mangle such meanings and generally trash straight-forward honest communication?
The term "Papist as defined by the American Heritage Dictionary is:
NOUN: Offensive Used as a disparaging term for a Roman Catholic"
I am objecting to the continued use and tolerance of this word and other offensive terms for Catholics such as "RC" on these Religion Forum threads particularly with the precedent of similar offensive descriptors of non-Catholics being removed along with the entire post containing them.
Shouldn't all participants have the same protections or the same thick skin?