Thank you for saying that. If I thought, even for a moment, that I had your respect, I would be forced to acknowledge that I had done something very wrong.
Your comment is exactly what liberals do -- trash not only the opposing idea, but the person holding that idea and then try to shout down that idea and prevent it from even being spoken.
On the contrary, I'd far rather let the bigots speak their minds (though it amuses me how they can only do so through the anonymity that the internet affords, I rather doubt that they would make similar statements to the Catholic friends, neighbors and relatives that they claim to have).
On the other hand, you have made at least one statement that certainly suggests support for suppressing Catholicism. It's right here:
Scotland’s downfall began when they let the papists back in.
There are hundreds on this forum and dozens on this thread who are anti-Mary as sinless co-redeemer, anti-transubstantiation, anti-"alter Christus," anti-papacy, anti-magisterium; anti-Apocrypha, anti-baptismal regeneration, anti-confessional booth, anti-indulgences, anti-purgatory, anti-limbo, etc., who are indeed, Christian.
I've never suggested otherwise. There are, however, some anti-Catholic bigots on this forum and thread who ARE NOT Christians.
I am clearly anti-papist. I would never say, however, that all anti-Protestants are bigots and are not Christian, which is exactly what you said about those who protest RCC superstitions.
WAGGLEEBEE: Being an anti-Catholic makes someone a bigot, not a Christian.
And that remains a pathetic, vile and really stupid remark.
. . .
. . . There are, however, some [Papist] bigots on this forum and thread who ARE [from all appearances] NOT Christians.