Homosexuals immune to Mass. budget cuts

[v3orb]

The truth has no walls.

But the Church cannot interfere with secular government. It can only attempt to influence its members within government.

 

[buffalo]

But the Church cannot interfere with secular government. It can only attempt to influence its members within government.

The truth has to illuminate all institutions. The Church in this case is the messenger of truth.

Right, it sets forth truthful propositions that try to influence members of government.

Human beings must rise to a higher truth even if government does not.

 

[v3orb]

Government IS human beings.

 

[latinmasslover]

Right. The chaste homosexual, that person living as the Church teaches, should keep his or her mouth shut. He or she should step as far back in the closet as possible in an effort to make sure that nobody is able to see an example of Church teaching actually being lived. The chaste homosexual should not bring attention to himself (or, God forbid, attention to the young people dealing with homosexuality) because that would make many pious heterosexuals uncomfortable. And, as we all know, the children of those pious heterosexuals couldn’t possibly be homosexual and in need of a good example of the truth being lived.

Good thinking. Let’s don’t accept the fact that many people are struggling with homosexual tendencies. Let’s sit our kids down tonight and let them know that we will never accept that some people are dealing with homosexual tendencies. That way, if our kids do happen to be homosexual (oh, I know that’s not possible, but humor me for a minute), we’ll make sure they never come to us for help, support, and least of all: acceptance.

Wow. Quite simply, wow.

I’ll go ahead and take my chaste, homosexual self back into hiding. Oops, forgive me for declaring myself a chaste homosexual. I forgot that there could never be a point in doing that. I’ll just hide in the pews as usual. I was going to say, “forgive the sarcasm”, but I’ve decided not to.

Note to self: quit coming back to CAF. It’s not worth it.

:crying: :crying::crying: You poor, innocent thing. Your paranoid and defensive responses reveal a guilty conscience…grossly obvious.

But you’re right. You shouldn’t be on these forums, don’t you have bad desires to declare to the public?

 

[Kolbe300]

As a chaste homosexual do you push the gay lifestyle?

As another poster mentioned, that really depends on what you mean by “gay lifestyle”, buffalo. You’ve asked the quesiton before and I’ve addressed it. Yet, you continue to ask it. Do you push the heterosexual lifestyle? You know: love, marriage, fidelity, pornography, infidelity, lust, fornication? Can you see the problem here? Heterosexuals, just like homosexuals, live many different kinds of “lifestyles.” I push my lifestyle, as a chaste gay man: celibacy, obedience, and faith. That’s my “gay lifestyle” and that’s what I push. Contrary to popular (CAF) belief, being celibate doesn’t make a person’s sexuality disappear. My question to you is why should I, living as the Church teaches, NOT be honest about that? Why should I stay quiet? And why do you assume my honesty is pushing any lifestyle or “agenda” at all?

:crying: :crying::crying: You poor, innocent thing.

Need a kleenex for those tears? I am poor, but I’m not innocent. Are you?

Your paranoid and defensive responses reveal a guilty conscience…grossly obvious.

Be careful that you don’t take too much pride in that psychic ability you think you have. In all seriousness, what’s grossly obvious is that if the reasons why a chaste homosexual might want to be honest about their sexuality were stapled to some people’s forheads, they still wouldn’t see it.

And this is why:

But you’re right. You shouldn’t be on these forums, don’t you have bad desires to declare to the public?

Can you see it there? Why do you assume my guilt? Because I take offense to some things I see here? Is that why? Personally, I think a chaste homosexual nibbles away at what you believe, or should I say hope, homosexuality is. What if it isn’t just that parade you see on television? What if it’s sitting next to you at mass? What if it’s your child? Then what?

 

[latinmasslover]

I push my lifestyle, as a chaste gay man: celibacy, obedience, and faith. That’s my “gay lifestyle” and that’s what I push.

That’s the Christian lifestyle, not a “gay lifestyle.”

Contrary to popular (CAF) belief, being celibate doesn’t make a person’s sexuality disappear. My question to you is why should I, living as the Church teaches, NOT be honest about that? Why should I stay quiet? And why do you assume my honesty is pushing any lifestyle or “agenda” at all?

My question to you is why you would want to draw that attention to yourself? My dad had a close friend who is gay, and he’s been public about it, which hasn’t been the best for him. He’s a practicing Catholic now and lives chastely. He does not wear the fact that he’s a chaste homosexual as a badge of honor. I’d like to know which saint paraded their sinful inclinations, only to tell people “see, it can be overcome.” Christians are not to boast of their sinful desires simply because they fight them. There are times where bringing this up is appropriate, but for the most part it’s not.

Need a kleenex for those tears? I am poor, but I’m not innocent. Are you?

Less innocent than you can imagine.

Be careful that you don’t take too much pride in that psychic ability you think you have. In all seriousness, what’s grossly obvious is that if the reasons why a chaste homosexual might want to be honest about their sexuality were stapled to some people’s forheads, they still wouldn’t see it.

Please don’t take my words out of context to fit your agenda.

And this is why:

Can you see it there? Why do you assume my guilt? Because I take offense to some things I see here?

Because you take offense at people saying to keep your sinful tendencies to yourself, to not throw them out as something to be proud of. People who make this announcement generally do it while pushing for “gay rights.” Not all, but many.

Is that why? Personally, I think a chaste homosexual nibbles away at what you believe, or should I say hope, homosexuality is.

I know that’s what you would like to believe that I and others think.

n’t just that parade you see on television? What if it’s sitting next to you at mass? What if it’s your child? Then what?

Are you asking how I would react if my child told me he was gay, or if he told me he was gay and there was nothing wrong with having a gay relationship and that he intended to do it?

 

[Lujack]

My question to you is why you would want to draw that attention to yourself? My dad had a close friend who is gay, and he’s been public about it, which hasn’t been the best for him. He’s a practicing Catholic now and lives chastely. He does not wear the fact that he’s a chaste homosexual as a badge of honor. I’d like to know which saint paraded their sinful inclinations, only to tell people “see, it can be overcome.” Christians are not to boast of their sinful desires simply because they fight them. There are times where bringing this up is appropriate, but for the most part it’s not.

Why would a black man who has made it by rising up out of the ghetto go back to the ghetto? To set an example, that’s why.

Homosexual inclinations are not shameful. At the moment, those inclinations are an impediment to the priesthood, but so are severe allergies to wine, and those aren’t shameful. Homosexual acts are sinful, but a homosexual orientation, in and of itself, is not in any way sinful or shameful.

That’s just my two cents.

 

[latinmasslover]

Why would a black man who has made it by rising up out of the ghetto go back to the ghetto? To set an example, that’s why.

Homosexual inclinations are not shameful. At the moment, those inclinations are an impediment to the priesthood, but so are severe allergies to wine, and those aren’t shameful. Homosexual acts are sinful, but a homosexual orientation, in and of itself, is not in any way sinful or shameful.

That’s just my two cents.

Uh-huh. And I suppose that there’s nothing wrong with me desiring to kick a certain person so hard in the chin that all his teeth shatter, as long as I don’t act on it. Homosexual desires and being born black are two very different things; one can be changed, the other can’t.

Sinful desires are sinful desires. The Church does not teach that we just accept them; we should be ashamed of any that we have and again, what saint proclaims their specific sins. What saint approves of proclaiming their sin to the world in order to “set an example?”

 

[Calliso]

Bullying is an issue across the board and all forms of bullying should cease.

Kids should be careful enough not to act in a way that paints a bullseye on them.

And by the way - lot’s of boys state “I don’t like girls” at different ages.

This might work in some cases but not in all. People who bully can often find a reason to bully a person no matter how hard the person tries to act or look a certain way. IN my own experience the bullying was because of my physical appearance which unless they can cure the fact that my spine is now bent into a position that gives me a slightly hunched position is unchangable.

Course I am not really sure how much the schools can really do about it. It seems mine wasn;t willing to do much about it. And standing up can back fire big time if and when you get in trouble for standing up for yourself! Or just laugh at for attempting!

 

[Lujack]

Uh-huh. And I suppose that there’s nothing wrong with me desiring to kick a certain person so hard in the chin that all his teeth shatter, as long as I don’t act on it. Homosexual desires and being born black are two very different things; one can be changed, the other can’t.

You’re wrong about homosexual desires. Homosexual desires are are exactly the same as the sexual desires a heterosexual like myself feels for someone I know I have no intention of ever marrying; we are called to suppress them.

Even though, however,I have to suppress those desires for all but one individual, it is not sinful for me to admit that my sexual attractions are directed towards those of the opposite sex. The same is true for homosexual desires.

The difference is that homosexuals are called to repress those desires in all cases.

Sinful desires are sinful desires. The Church does not teach that we just accept them; we should be ashamed of any that we have and again, what saint proclaims their specific sins. What saint approves of proclaiming their sin to the world in order to “set an example?”

What saint proclaimed their sin to the world in order to set an example?

Hmm…let me think, I heard of one once, he’s highly respected…oh, that’s right-St. Augustine!

 

[Kolbe300]

That’s the Christian lifestyle, not a “gay lifestyle.”

Very true, which is why I put the term “gay lifestyle” in quotes, just like you did. It’s an unbelievably stupid term because there is no one “gay lifestyle”. That brush is way too broad.

My question to you is why you would want to draw that attention to yourself? My dad had a close friend who is gay, and he’s been public about it, which hasn’t been the best for him. He’s a practicing Catholic now and lives chastely. He does not wear the fact that he’s a chaste homosexual as a badge of honor.

Nor do I wear my sexuality as some “badge of honor”. I have been honest to those people in my life that deserve to know. Everyone else doesn’t have a clue and they don’t need to have a clue. Why would I want to “bring that attention to myself”? Because I was tired of lying to the people I loved for 28 years. I was tired of being set up by my friends and constantly being asked why I wasn’t dating or married yet. I was tired of hiding a part of me that I didn’t choose to have, just for the sake of others.

I’d like to know which saint paraded their sinful inclinations, only to tell people “see, it can be overcome.”

I have read a number of books on different saints. I can’t think of ONE that didn’t make their sinfulness well known through either what they wrote or said. St. Francis being a perfect example.

There are times where bringing this up is appropriate, but for the most part it’s not.

Exactly. There are times when it’s appropriate. Which leaves me wondering why the question of why a chaste homosexual would be honest was even asked.

Please don’t take my words out of context to fit your agenda.

My agenda? You said, “don’t you have bad desires to declare to the public?” Feel free to put that into context for me.

Because you take offense at people saying to keep your sinful tendencies to yourself, to not throw them out as something to be proud of.

No. Actually, I take offense at people assuming I’m full of a certain sinful tendency that I should be ashamed of. I’m offended by what is automatically assumed when someone says they have a homosexual orientation.

People who make this announcement generally do it while pushing for “gay rights.” Not all, but many.

Right, “not all”. Which is exactly why we shouldn’t make assumptions.

Are you asking how I would react if my child told me he was gay, or if he told me he was gay and there was nothing wrong with having a gay relationship and that he intended to do it?

It was more of a rhetorical question. The point simply being that it is so dangerous to paint something with such a broad brush. There is a great danger if we allow ourselves to only see and react to one aspect of a subject like this. We end up looking right over the heads of those that want help in order to focus on those that don’t.

 

[latinmasslover]

You’re wrong about homosexual desires. Homosexual desires are are exactly the same as the sexual desires a heterosexual like myself feels for someone I know I have no intention of ever marrying; we are called to suppress them.

Even though, however,I have to suppress those desires for all but one individual, it is not sinful for me to admit that my sexual attractions are directed towards those of the opposite sex. The same is true for homosexual desires.

A man and a woman having sex is sinful if it’s pre/extramarital. Women having sex with women, and men with men, is always a sin. Homosexual desire is not the same as heterosexual desire. Speaking of which, do you have a Church document or Saint that shares this particular view of yours.

The difference is that homosexuals are called to repress those desires in all cases.

Why, if they’re not different than a man’s feelings for a woman?

Hmm…let me think, I heard of one once, he’s highly respected…oh, that’s right-St. Augustine!

Yeah, nice try. I said proclaim [publicly] their specific sins, not journaling. All the saints did this, but I know of none that shouted from the rooftops, so to speak. Sins are something to be ashamed of, or maybe you don’t agree?

 

[JPUSC]

The Catechism defines lust as desire for sexual pleasure. It doesn’t differentiate by ‘sexual orientation’.

2351 Lust is disordered desire for or inordinate enjoyment of sexual pleasure. Sexual pleasure is morally disordered when sought for itself, isolated from its procreative and unitive purposes.

On homosexuality, the Catechism says this:

2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

It says their inclination is a trial; it doesn’t say it is evil. You can’t control your thoughts. You can’t punish someone for something they have no control over. Like all sin, it is a result of original sin.

If Kolbe300 is living a chaste life then there is no reason for you to attack him as he is fulfilling what the Church asks of those with such an inclination. He doesn’t need someone condemning him in a Catholic forum, of all places. I don’t think that’s what our Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI would do. Instead, he should receive our love and support as he has a greater cross to carry than the rest of us.

The Church condemns sins of sodomy because they are selfish acts that use other people for pleasure and close the possibility for life. Other acts in this category include viewing pornography, use of contraception, co-habitation, masturbation, etc.

1. How does unmarried cohabitation contribute to the rise of homosexuality?
   Unmarried cohabitation either excludes the possibility of children, or is a grave detriment to the welfare of the children who need the stability of a lifelong commitment of married love from their parents.

Homosexuality by its very nature, excludes the procreation of offspring. It is the selfish indulgence in sexual pleasure of two persons of the same gender whose claim of loving one another excludes the love of children who cannot be conceived or born (P8).

1. How does the Catholic Church distinguish homosexuality?
   The Church distinguishes between homosexuality as a tendency, as an attraction, and as an activity.

1. What is homosexual tendency?
   Homosexual tendency in any person is within the normal range of human nature. Our fallen condition includes every kind of impulse, whether morally good or morally bad. We may therefore have a sexual inclination towards persons of the same or opposite gender to our own. Our inclination towards persons of another gender is called heterosexual; our inclination towards persons of the same gender is called homosexual. With sincere efforts and divine grace the homosexual impulse can be controlled.

1. What is homosexual attraction?
   Homosexual attraction is for members of the same sex. This may be partly due to the peculiar make up of certain individuals. More often, however, it is the result of indiscretion or seduction and presents a greater problem. But, once again, this too is not by itself sinful. In fact, it may be an occasion for great supernatural merit. When the condition is pathological, it requires therapy, but always consistent with the basic principles of Christian morality.

1. What is homosexual activity?
   Homosexual activity is sexual relations between two or more persons of the same gender. It is the constant teaching of the Catholic Church, based on divine revelation and Christian tradition, that homosexual activity is morally indefensible. The reasons for this are founded on the revealed truth that sexual experience is divinely reserved to husband and wife in their marital relations. Moreover, as we shall see, homosexual activity is destructive of the very foundations of human society.

1. Why did the Holy See issue a special document on homosexuality?
   In 1986, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith published a document on “The Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons.” The reason was the widespread dissemination of ideas and assertions inconsistent with the teaching of the Catholic Church. Since then, these erroneous opinions have become more devastating than ever before in the history of Christianity (HP1).

therealpresence.org/archives/Chastity/Chastity_014.htm

 

[latinmasslover]

Interesting, so Christ was wrong when he said the that the thought, essentially, was as good as the act? If you hate you’re brother you’ve committed murder, if you look at a woman with lust you’ve committed adultery…why do His words not apply to homosexuals?

 

[JPUSC]

Interesting, so Christ was wrong when he said the that the thought, essentially, was as good as the act? If you hate you’re brother you’ve committed murder, if you look at a woman with lust you’ve committed adultery…why do His words not apply to homosexuals?

We look to the Magisterium for the proper interpretation of Scripture.

Here is what the Catechism says:

ARTICLE 9
THE NINTH COMMANDMENT

You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or his manservant, or his maidservant, or his ox, or his ***, or anything that is your neighbor’s.299

Every one who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.300

2514
St. John distinguishes three kinds of covetousness or concupiscence: lust of the flesh, lust of the eyes, and pride of life.301 In the Catholic catechetical tradition, the ninth commandment forbids carnal concupiscence; the tenth forbids coveting another’s goods.

2515
Etymologically, “concupiscence” can refer to any intense form of human desire. Christian theology has given it a particular meaning: the movement of the sensitive appetite contrary to the operation of the human reason. The apostle St. Paul identifies it with the rebellion of the “flesh” against the "spirit."302 Concupiscence stems from the disobedience of the first sin. It unsettles man’s moral faculties and, without being in itself an offense, inclines man to commit sins.303

2516
Because man is a composite being, spirit and body, there already exists a certain tension in him; a certain struggle of tendencies between “spirit” and “flesh” develops. But in fact this struggle belongs to the heritage of sin. It is a consequence of sin and at the same time a confirmation of it. It is part of the daily experience of the spiritual battle:

For the Apostle it is not a matter of despising and condemning the body which with the spiritual soul constitutes man’s nature and personal subjectivity. Rather, he is concerned with the morally good or bad works, or better, the permanent dispositions—virtues and vices—which are the fruit of submission (in the first case) or of resistance (in the second case) to the saving action of the Holy Spirit. For this reason the Apostle writes: "If we live by the Spirit, let us also walk by the Spirit."304

II. THE BATTLE FOR PURITY

2520 Baptism confers on its recipient the grace of purification from all sins. **But the baptized must continue to struggle against concupiscence of the flesh and disordered desires. With God’s grace he will prevail **

• by the virtue and gift of chastity, for chastity lets us love with upright and undivided heart;

• by purity of intention which consists in seeking the true end of man: with simplicity of vision, the baptized person seeks to find and to fulfill God’s will in everything;313

• by purity of vision, external and internal; by discipline of feelings and imagination; by refusing all complicity in impure thoughts that incline us to turn aside from the path of God’s commandments: “Appearance arouses yearning in fools”;314

• by prayer:

I thought that continence arose from one’s own powers, which I did not recognize in myself. I was foolish enough not to know . . . that no one can be continent unless you grant it. For you would surely have granted it if my inner groaning had reached your ears and I with firm faith had cast my cares on you.315

vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a9.htm

Sin is a part of the fallen nature of man. We are called to live holy lives, but no human is free from sin except Jesus and Mary. We have the sacraments to help us along the way.

They said to him, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the very act of committing adultery. Now in the law, Moses commanded us to stone such women. So what do you say?” They said this to test him, so that they could have some charge to bring against him. Jesus bent down and began to write on the ground with his finger. But when they continued asking him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let the one among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” Again he bent down and wrote on the ground. And in response, they went away one by one, beginning with the elders. So he was left alone with the woman before him. Then Jesus straightened up and said to her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?” She replied, “No one, sir.” Then Jesus said, “Neither do I condemn you. Go, (and) from now on do not sin any more.” Jesus spoke to them again, saying, “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will not walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.”
John 8: 4-12

 

[Lujack]

A man and a woman having sex is sinful if it’s pre/extramarital. Women having sex with women, and men with men, is always a sin. Homosexual desire is not the same as heterosexual desire. Speaking of which, do you have a Church document or Saint that shares this particular view of yours.

The Catechism calls a homosexual orientation a trial, not sinful. That’s my church document supporting that view.

Why, if they’re not different than a man’s feelings for a woman?

I didn’t say they aren’t different from a man’s feelings for a woman, I said they were no different from a man’s extramarital sexual desires for a woman.

Yeah, nice try. I said proclaim [publicly] their specific sins, not journaling. All the saints did this, but I know of none that shouted from the rooftops, so to speak. Sins are something to be ashamed of, or maybe you don’t agree?

And admitting oneself to be a chaste homosexual is shouting from the rooftops? Anyone who has ever read Augustine knows about his sinful life. A chaste homosexual would only raise that fact in an appropriate context, such as right here! Augustine willingly made his sinfullness more public than Kolbe300 has, and he does not deserve to be attacked for it in the way you have attacked him.

 

[Lujack]

Interesting, so Christ was wrong when he said the that the thought, essentially, was as good as the act? If you hate you’re brother you’ve committed murder, if you look at a woman with lust you’ve committed adultery…why do His words not apply to homosexuals?

You’ve never noticed that the Church differentiates between sexual desires and lust?

 

[fix]

The Catechism calls a homosexual orientation a trial, not sinful. That’s my church document supporting that view.

Not a sin, but the inclination is not ordered rightly.

 

[latinmasslover]

Very true, which is why I put the term “gay lifestyle” in quotes, just like you did. It’s an unbelievably stupid term because there is no one “gay lifestyle”. That brush is way too broad.

Not really a stupid term, most people know that the “gay lifestyle” is referring to an “*active *gay lifestyle,” and we all know what is meant by “active.”

Nor do I wear my sexuality as some “badge of honor”. I have been honest to those people in my life that deserve to know. Everyone else doesn’t have a clue and they don’t need to have a clue. Why would I want to “bring that attention to myself”? Because I was tired of lying to the people I loved for 28 years. I was tired of being set up by my friends and constantly being asked why I wasn’t dating or married yet. I was tired of hiding a part of me that I didn’t choose to have, just for the sake of others.

Your previous posts seemed to imply that there’s no problem with “shouting it from the rooftops.” Close friends and family ought to know, for the reasons that you mentioned but also to help you in times of temptation, to encourage you to stay chaste.

I have read a number of books on different saints. I can’t think of ONE that didn’t make their sinfulness well known through either what they wrote or said. St. Francis being a perfect example.

I missed that, what sin/s did he proclaim to the public? I highly doubt any brought it up of their own volition. If addressed, they probably admitted it, but with shameful remorse, not as a matter of fact. Just my guess, but I am open to hearing of a contrary instance.

Exactly. There are times when it’s appropriate. Which leaves me wondering why the question of why a chaste homosexual would be honest was even asked.

It would depend upon the person asking and why.

My agenda? You said, “don’t you have bad desires to declare to the public?” Feel free to put that into context for me.

Oh, yeah. Your post had implied one thing, so I being a smart-arse.

No. Actually, I take offense at people assuming I’m full of a certain sinful tendency that I should be ashamed of. I’m offended by what is automatically assumed when someone says they have a homosexual orientation.

It is a desire that, if acted upon or imagined, is sinful. Just like adultery, just like fornication, and murder, idol worship, stealing…the list goes on. For the sake of argument, let’s say some are born gay: that doesn’t make them evil, and I don’t think that anyone here has said that. Engaging in those acts are wrong, imagining those acts are wrong, approving either is wrong. Just as it would be if the desire were for murder, or adultery, or fornication…

Right, “not all”. Which is exactly why we shouldn’t make assumptions.

So I assume you wouldn’t want to be bunched in with the “gay rights” activists? That was the point I had attempted to make.

It was more of a rhetorical question. The point simply being that it is so dangerous to paint something with such a broad brush. There is a great danger if we allow ourselves to only see and react to one aspect of a subject like this. We end up looking right over the heads of those that want help in order to focus on those that don’t.

An excellent point, and I agree to a large extent. We have to keep in mind that we’re not trying to justify a sin, or a sinful tendency, which is what has happened in the name of charity. We have to be firm but not cruel. It’s a fine line but not impossible to stay on.

love my bro in Christ anyway:hug1:

 

[latinmasslover]

The Catechism calls a homosexual orientation a trial, not sinful. That’s my church document supporting that view.

I never said that the homosexual “orientation” is sinful. I said that desiring a sin is sinful, any sin, whether gay or straight, white or black, male or female.

I didn’t say they aren’t different from a man’s feelings for a woman, I said they were no different from a man’s extramarital sexual desires for a woman.

I apologize, I misread that.

And admitting oneself to be a chaste homosexual is shouting from the rooftops?

Making it common knowlege is more what I was referring to, not telling the “necessary” people. I should’ve been more specific.

Anyone who has ever read Augustine knows about his sinful life.

I admit that I’m not familiar with St. Augustine; please give a reference for when he, of his own volition, vocally announced his sin/s.

A chaste homosexual would only raise that fact in an appropriate context, such as right here!

No argument.

Augustine willingly made his sinfullness more public than Kolbe300 has, and he does not deserve to be attacked for it in the way you have attacked him.

What attack are you referring to? The bullets flew both ways, based on a slight misunderstanding - on both sides. Whether or not that was the only misunderstanding has yet to be seen, but I think it’s pretty clear now what we all meant…

:grouphug: ?