Here are some rules from my profile page, which you can access by clicking on my name at the bottom of this post:
Linking to Previous Posts on the Religion Forum:
The objective, on the Religion Forum, of not bringing forward disputes from prior threads is to discourage flame wars spreading, in particular the needling or badgering of other posters by bringing up their past remarks, again and again. However, if you were to say “I recall your saying something else on an earlier thread” and the poster challenged you “Oh yeah, where?” then you would be obligated to link to the previous thread and I would not pull it.
If you want to argue the previous claim, then go back to the earlier thread, ping all the interested parties and say something like “Here you say the sky is green. Why?” The respondent will be obligated then to explain the green comment in context with that particular thread and parties involved in it.
If however you are seeking to “impeach the witness” by showing he waffles back and forth THAT is “making it personal” and I will pull it to avoid a flame war.
And if you are trying to embarrass another Freeper by recalling his inconvenient comments from prior threads, THAT is also "making it personal" and I will pull it to avoid a flame war.
A poster may quote himself from a prior thread. And he may link to articles he has previously posted. That is not "making it personal" - he is merely reasserting his own views. He may link to articles posted by others or other posters' remarks which are not part of any dispute, e.g. "You hit the nail on the head when you said..."
If however he is linking to an article posted by someone else - and that article was a "caucus" of which he was not a member - then I might pull the post anyway if I think it would have the affect of defeating the caucus label. Besides, he can always quote the source article directly without seemingly trying to work around the caucus protection.
I cited Salvation's page because she has a ton of catholic links there from which I've done research. The only reason I pinged her is there is an understanding you are to ping someone when you mention their name.
There is no intent to embarrass her or anyone else. I'm merely citing catholic sources she has made available to refute a catholic position.
She said "I don't think you checked them all", so I posted the links to show she did have these and that I had checked them.
You have to follow the links as follows:
http://www.freerepublic.com/~salvation/
Under Mary, the Mother of Jesus: Saint
Catholic Biblical Apologetics: The Immaculate Conception of Mary
From there to below:
From your post #6 on 5/11/2010 at 12:57:20 am in a thread you started on 05/11/2010 at 12:50:06 titled Catholic Biblical Apologetics: The Immaculate Conception of Mary. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2510959/posts
You have a link to: The Catholic Encyclopdeia: Immaculate Conception (The Doctrine and Its Roots)
This is the url to the posting. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1297027/posts
I apologize for not being able to create the links. I'll have to play in the sandbox on that; but don't have the time right now.