Selective reading of Christian faults is selective reading. I expect no better from a poster who did not know of the Regensburg address when she accused the Pope of saying nothing against Moslem atrocities...
How on earth would you interpret "selective?"
My very last post here quoted Ephesians 4:15 with a prayer that it reflect my attitude toward this. Is that your same disposition here?
So what are you saying, we should never point out sin, evil, wickedness, or corruption - because the affected party can simply say you are being "selective?" If your brother-in-law was an alcoholic who was beating your sister and abusing your niece - but he provided for them financially, was not unfaithful, and had once loaned you money, then by your twisted standard you could not speak about this great evil because it was "selective."
I expect no better from a poster who did not know of the Regensburg address when she accused the Pope of saying nothing against Moslem atrocities...
I have little doubt I have been critical of the Pope(s). I don't remember the thread you are speaking about. If Benedict XVI criticized Islam and highlighted persecution, then I applaud him. It is certainly a better foundation than what John Paul II did by kissing the Koran in public and in front of the international press. However, please post the thread and my specific post in question here. Then I can defend it, or say I was in error. In either case, I can fairly say I have made a lot of posts here on Free Republic over the last 14 years. Some I am more proud of than others, and I would say the same applies to you. But, since you want to bring it up, post the past thread in question, and my reply/replies you object to.
I do find it interesting, however, that you want to jump from the topic of homosexuality in denominations and among the priesthood ranks to the subject of Islam.