B
bones_IV
Guest
Kaninchen, are your intentions to deceive and mislead the flock?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
K
Kaninchen
Guest
So, next time any individual Catholic anywhere threatens anybody, I’m safe in characterizing all Catholics as being just like him/her on the basis that my silence on the subject merely helps the oppressor rather than the victim?Silence never helps the victim only the oppressor.
T
Tom317
Guest
Nor is there evidence that it was not a group. We do know that the Srchbishop has received a lot of hate mail since making his remarks. That is a fact, not guess work.Indeed - if there were evidence of it then the group ‘voting’ for it could be condemned. If there emerges evidence for it, the group should be condemned.
We don’t even know if it was the work of an agent provocateur (see the linked article in post 1). There was no evidence in that post that would enable anybody to characterize an entire group.
K
Kaninchen
Guest
My intentions are to complain when people characterize entire sets of people on the basis of the actions of individuals.Kaninchen, are your intentions to deceive and mislead the flock?
B
bones_IV
Guest
When a group of people fails to condemn violence it is only encouraging the oppressors. Just like when we had people in the Middle East calling for His Holiness’s death in response to the Regensberg speech he gave. Hence the true nature of Islam revealed.So, next time any individual Catholic anywhere threatens anybody, I’m safe in characterizing all Catholics as being just like him/her on the basis that my silence on the subject merely helps the oppressor rather than the victim?
K
Kaninchen
Guest
In which case, the characterization of the group should have awaited evidence.Nor is there evidence that it was not a group. We do know that the Srchbishop has received a lot of hate mail since making his remarks. That is a fact, not guess work.
T
Tom317
Guest
Fine, but you do realize you are guilty of the same thing? When you condemn the OP with horrible remarks like “gays eat babies and boil kittens.”Well, I’ll stop arguing with you because you agree with my point about characterizing sets on the basis of individuals.
It is sometimes difficult to see that we are using the same tactics that we are condemning in other people.
K
Kaninchen
Guest
We shall just have to decide to differ since there is no way that either of us can, even partially, convince the other.When a group of people fails to condemn violence it is only encouraging the oppressors. Just like when we had people in the Middle East calling for His Holiness’s death in response to the Regensberg speech he gave. Hence the true nature of Islam revealed.
B
bones_IV
Guest
Are you going to tell me that the gay lifestyle is not scandalous? The gay militants want control of the Catholic Church in case you haven’t noticed. If someone disagrees with their lifestyle they hound him for it. Why are the gay militants all of a sudden above criticism?My intentions are to complain when people characterize entire sets of people on the basis of the actions of individuals.
T
Tom317
Guest
And, your statements that it was an individual was premature, you do not know it was an individual, this could be a very well planned action with many people behind it, or it could just as easily be one person. It could be gays, straights or a mixture. Your guess is every bit as good as the OPs, and the OPs guess is every bit as good as yours–neither of you KNOW, and you are both guilty of saying things without evidence. So, why is it you are right even though you have been mean and inaccurate, yet the OP is somehow condemned by you because the OP was mean and inaccurate?In which case, the characterization of the group should have awaited evidence.
See the pattern here?
B
bones_IV
Guest
Tom,Fine, but you do realize you are guilty of the same thing? When you condemn the OP with horrible remarks like “gays eat babies and boil kittens.”
It is sometimes difficult to see that we are using the same tactics that we are condemning in other people.
In America there is a bill on the floor of Congress that if ratified will make it,"illegal"for priests to condemn homosexual behavior from the pulpit.
They could be arrested,in the USA, for speaking the truth.
God is getting very angry.
T
Tom317
Guest
He has a point that we should not take this action and then codemn an entire group, just as he should not throw horrible assumptions about “gays eat babies and boil kittens,” without more knowledge and he should not be saying it is an individual when it might very well be a group.Are you going to tell me that the gay lifestyle is not scandalous? The gay militants want control of the Catholic Church in case you haven’t noticed. If someone disagrees with their lifestyle they hound him for it. Why are the gay militants all of a sudden above criticism?
The authorities say they do not know, so how can we know?
The bottom line: An Archbioshop had his life threatened for voicing an opinion…that is the real story and if I were you, I would keep people on that point because that is the news.
F
fix
Guest
The case in question is that you have said threads about the gay agenda may be characterized as “gays eat babies”. That is a gross mischaracterization and an attempt to vilify posters who present Church teaching.Or with a difference, as the case may be.
K
Kaninchen
Guest
You don’t think that my “babies and kittens” line wasn’t calculated do you?It is sometimes difficult to see that we are using the same tactics that we are condemning in other people.
When I’ve read threads on gays (and other groups), I’ve seen them start “ain’t it awful” and go on to make all sorts of outlandish statements. I’ve said nothing, since I’m not a lesbian and it’s not a subject that really interests me.
Then I thought, when I read the op, of Niemöller’s famous “first they came” sequence.
T
Tom317
Guest
I know all of this and I agree with you. The bill does not actually say anything about Priests, but your point still holds true and yes we are about to embark on a period of persecuting…imo. However, the point the Archbishop was theatened for having an opinion–that is the news of this thread.Tom,
In America there is a bill on the floor of Congress that if ratified will make it,"illegal"for priests to condemn homosexual behavior from the pulpit.
They could be arrested,in the USA, for speaking the truth.
God is getting very angry.
K
Kaninchen
Guest
She has a point - the rabbit (“Kaninchen”) is, in this case, female.He has a point
T
Tom317
Guest
It is a horrible thing to say and you should apologize. If you expect others to rise about sinful behaivor, you must set the example, or just bow out.You don’t think that my “babies and kittens” line wasn’t calculated do you?
When I’ve read threads on gays (and other groups), I’ve seen them start “ain’t it awful” and go on to make all sorts of outlandish statements. I’ve said nothing, since I’m not a lesbian and it’s not a subject that really interests me.
Then I thought, when I read the op, of Niemöller’s famous “first they came” sequence.
T
Tom317
Guest
Ooops, sorry about that. “She has a point…”She has a point - the rabbit (“Kaninchen”) is, in this case, female.
K
Kaninchen
Guest
Or not.It is a horrible thing to say and you should apologize. If you expect others to rise about sinful behaivor, you must set the example, or just bow out.
T
Tom317
Guest
Humility is a profoundly important trait. Insulting others never helps get a point across. All you had to do was bring up the obvious point that we should condemn an entire group of people…that is a point well made and well taken if propose through love and respect. But, when you try to make the point while insulting an entire group of people, you come across as a hypocrite.Or not.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.