Coulter's Anti-Catholic Slur

  • Thread starter Thread starter tclay
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
*Only a false religion needs hate mail, threats, courts of inquisition and Hollywood movies to sustain it. *

So, Coulter repeatly used papal indulgences as an analogy to her thoughts on global warming in a way that is quite offensive, and then she ends her piece with a statement that includes “courts of inquisition” and we are somehow supposed to say she is making a good argument?

No, she is perverting known Church history (indulgences and their abuse is not something that can be explained properly in a sound bite situation and I suspect she knows that), and coyly slamming the Catholic faith as being a false religion. Sure, Anne loves the Catholic faith.
 
marybee said:
Could it be that she actually became popular because of her intellect or for her ideas? She may have a style that you don’t like but you can’t say that she is popular because of her sense of humor. She obviously has some good ideas or the left would not hate her so much.
Click to expand...
I would hardly say that someone who has to use insults is intelligent.
 
Tom317 said:
I would hardly say that someone who has to use insults is intelligent.
Click to expand...
Tom, what was insulting about that? Adamantly Disagreeing with someone does not mean you are isulting them.

You don’t have to like her but you can’t say that she slams the faith by that comment. That is a stretch.
 
marybee said:
Tom, what was insulting about that? Adamantly Disagreeing with someone does not mean you are isulting them.

You don’t have to like her but you can’t say that she slams the faith by that comment. That is a stretch.
Click to expand...
She essentially called the Catholic faith a false relgion. That is a direct insult and it smacks of very low intelligence imo.

I used to like her, yet her constant use of insults and slams is something a child does, not grow people. Couple that with her ridiculous leather outfits that were used just to entice men, and I personally get a very poor picture of her as a person.
 
Tom317 said:
Only a false religion needs hate mail, threats, courts of inquisition and Hollywood movies to sustain it.

So, Coulter repeatly used papal indulgences as an analogy to her thoughts on global warming in a way that is quite offensive, and then she ends her piece with a statement that includes “courts of inquisition” and we are somehow supposed to say she is making a good argument?
Click to expand...
Her inquisition reference was aimed at the liberal courts who seek to destroy those that disagree with their false ideas. All anyone has to do is simply read her article and all these references will suddenlyl make sense. Taken out of context you could lead others to believe she is anti-Catholic when she is not.

Here is her example of liberal courts of inquisition:

*"Further proving that liberalism is a religion, its practitioners respond with the zeal of Torquemada to any dissent from the faith in global warming.

A few years ago, Danish statistician Bjorn Lomborg wrote a book titled “The Skeptical Environmentalist,” disputing the hysteria surrounding global warming and other environmentalist scares. Lomborg is a Greenpeace anti-war protester — or, as he is described on liberal Web sites, he is a “young, gay vegetarian Dane with tight T-shirts.” His book was cited favorably in The New York Times.

But for questioning the “science” behind global warming, Lomborg was brought up on charges of “scientific misconduct” by Denmark’s Inquisition Court, called the “Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation.” I take it Denmark’s Ministry of Truth was booked solid that day.

The moment anyone diverges from official church doctrine on global warming, he is threatened with destruction. Heretics would be burnt at the stake if liberals could figure out how to do it in a “carbon neutral” way."*

She is cleverly comparing this new false “religion” with God-based religions. In this scenario the religion of “Liberalism” is the false religion.
 
Tom317 said:
She essentially called the Catholic faith a false relgion. That is a direct insult and it smacks of very low intelligence imo.

I used to like her, yet her constant use of insults and slams is something a child does, not grow people. Couple that with her ridiculous leather outfits that were used just to entice men, and I personally get a very poor picture of her as a person.
Click to expand...
The outfits aside Tom, I did not find her comments remotely anticatholic. I did not see how you concluded she called it a false religion. Please explain.
 
martino said:
Her inquisition reference was aimed at the liberal courts who seek to destroy those that disagree with their false ideas. All anyone has to do is simply read her article and all these references will suddenlyl make sense. Taken out of context you could lead others to believe she is anti-Catholic when she is not.

Here is her example of liberal courts of inquisition:

*"Further proving that liberalism is a religion, its practitioners respond with the zeal of Torquemada to any dissent from the faith in global warming.

A few years ago, Danish statistician Bjorn Lomborg wrote a book titled “The Skeptical Environmentalist,” disputing the hysteria surrounding global warming and other environmentalist scares. Lomborg is a Greenpeace anti-war protester — or, as he is described on liberal Web sites, he is a “young, gay vegetarian Dane with tight T-shirts.” His book was cited favorably in The New York Times.

But for questioning the “science” behind global warming, Lomborg was brought up on charges of “scientific misconduct” by Denmark’s Inquisition Court, called the “Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation.” I take it Denmark’s Ministry of Truth was booked solid that day.

The moment anyone diverges from official church doctrine on global warming, he is threatened with destruction. Heretics would be burnt at the stake if liberals could figure out how to do it in a “carbon neutral” way."*

She is cleverly comparing this new false “religion” with God-based religions. In this scenario the religion of “Liberalism” is the false religion.
Click to expand...
I strongly disagree. I read the article twice with the hopes that it would shed a better light on Ann. Yet, it is a clear clam against the faith when she says only false religions use courts of inquistions. Sorry, you can love Ann all you want, but she definitely attacked the faith–TWICE.
 
marybee said:
The outfits aside Tom, I did not find her comments remotely anticatholic. I did not see how you concluded she called it a false religion. Please explain.
Click to expand...
Marybee…people are confusing her remarks because they didnt read the column.

The falso religion was “Liberalism”, which was the point of the entire column.

Im no genius trust me on that…it was not that difficult to follow!!!
 
marybee said:
The outfits aside Tom, I did not find her comments remotely anticatholic. I did not see how you concluded she called it a false religion. Please explain.
Click to expand...
She concludes her article with:

*Only a false religion needs hate mail, threats, **courts of inquisition **and Hollywood movies to sustain it. *

The Catholic Church is well known to have held courts of inquisition, along with having sold indulgences–it is no accident both of those “events” are found in her article. She knew exactly what she was writing and that statement basically says “any” religion that holds courts of inquisition are false religions. It is a coy, yet still quite obvious slam. It makes no difference if she was also trying to slam the liberals (which I have no doubt she was doing), she still slammed the Catholic faith and she did not care enough to change the words.

I feel it is a sign of a troubled person who has to constantly attacks others in order to keep their career moving forward.
 
martino said:
Marybee…people are confusing her remarks because they didnt read the column.

The falso religion was “Liberalism”, which was the point of the entire column.

Im no genius trust me on that…it was not that difficult to follow!!!
Click to expand...
I understand you martino, but what do you have to say about the leather outfits? Doesn’t that make her somewhat liberal? Isn’t immodesty always wrong in every case? Especially when you are in the public eye? Should someone publically chastize her?
 
martino said:
Marybee…people are confusing her remarks because they didnt read the column.

The falso religion was “Liberalism”, which was the point of the entire column.

Im no genius trust me on that…it was not that difficult to follow!!!
Click to expand...
Wrong! I read the article twice. Stop lying, it is not helping your case.
 
Tom317 said:
I strongly disagree. I read the article twice with the hopes that it would shed a better light on Ann. Yet, it is a clear clam against the faith when she says only false religions use courts of inquistions. Sorry, you can love Ann all you want, but she definitely attacked the faith–TWICE.
Click to expand...
So Tom, in your mind the article was about Catholicism, not liberalism?

Here is the last line in her column:

“Only a false religion needs hate mail, threats, courts of inquisition and Hollywood movies to sustain it.”

None of those things refer to the Catholic Church, she had just finsished giving multiple examples of these things taking place in the Liberal church. After given her liberal example of hate mail she even added "…one can’t imagine the pope writing a letter to Jerry Falwell saying, “If you continue to speak out, you won’t live to see further infallibility.”

You see, the Church is the example of true religion and liberism is the example of false religion. That is why when she talks about liberal hate mail she adds the the Pope would not behave that way.

Do you really believe that Ann Coulter thinks the Catholic church needs “Hollywood movies to sustain it” ?

Seriously…do you?
 
The thing about media figures like Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh and Al Franken is that they thrive on preaching to the faithful. Their arguments are never meant to convince the other side but rather to keep their side feeling good about their positions. Their attacks are taken as truth by their faithful and insults by the opposition, the whole while adding virtually nothing to the dialogue of ideas that should be going on in this country.

Frankly American Democracy would do alot better if the polemicists on both sides would just shut up. What we need is real critical thinking and real debate. We need people who are less interested in ideology and more interested in ideas. We need more pragmaticism and less ideology.

–
Bill
 
Tom317 said:
If that is true, then he needs to stop saying people have not read the article, that is just flat wrong.
Click to expand...
Ok im sorry, correction…some people have read it but were incapable of understanding it.

Tom, its funny we both used that last line to make our point. But you used it wrong…your not even paying attention to the entire sentence, much less the entire article.

Please respond to my earlier explanation of that last line.
 
martino said:
Ok im sorry, correction…some people have read it but were incapable of understanding it.

Tom, its funny we both used that last line to make our point. But you used it wrong…your not even paying attention to the entire sentence, much less the entire article.

Please respond to my earlier explanation of that last line.
Click to expand...
That makes the point that maybe while she is trying to have a conservative ideology she still reinforces the bad behavior that is antiCatholic by wearing such provocative outfits. So she preaches abstinance and then provokes the men to have lustfull thougts about her by showing cleavage and of course her long legs.
 
marybee said:
I understand you martino, but what do you have to say about the leather outfits? Doesn’t that make her somewhat liberal? Isn’t immodesty always wrong in every case? Especially when you are in the public eye? Should someone publically chastize her?
Click to expand...
oh you are funny aren’t you. let me see this outfit you guys keep talking about. how bad could it be?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top