What was your biggest disagreement on CAF

  • Thread starter Thread starter commenter
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
“No instead…” and “They’re both…”

Which is it 🙂
It’s both. Traditionalists can harp about ideological purity, liberals can harp about how unaccomidating and Pharisaical people are. They’re two sides of the same coin.
 
Can’t say I can name a specific subject that was the biggest disagreement.

Evolution would be near the top.
Election year politics are close to the top as well.

I have noticed an increase in incivility as CAF comes to a close.

There will be one poster that vehemently disagrees, and attacks not just the argument, but anyone close to it as well as the person making it.
Then there are 5 to 10 cheerleaders that follow along in rapid succession that don’t contribute, but simply mock.

Any hope of a reasonable discourse is tossed.
 
Last edited:
I’ve disagreed with and fought with everyone on every subject here. I’m not intentionally trying to be difficult it’s just that I’m, by nature, a very disagreeable and rude person. Yet, people still Like me… This makes me angry 😠

Now, go away!
 
Last edited:
Then there are 5 to 10 cheerleaders that follow along in rapid succession that don’t contribute, but simply mock.
…I wouldn’t say it’s not a contribution, being mocked helps me realize when I’m being ridiculous
 
I had disagreement with Protestants on certain issues, …
I think the biggest issue is probably the Holy Trinity – for some that call themselves Christian are unitarian or binatarian.
 
Last edited:
OK, I’ll stir the waters since I haven’t seen this one. My biggest frustration has been in the area of liturgy, and especially sacred music. Vatican II and subsequent popes say we should be chanting the Mass, at least sometimes (as in, more than never), yet people find reason after reason to ignore this. And, for the record, I’m not a Latin Mass Catholic, but I am sick to death of the 4-hymn sandwich Mass.
 
Unilateral nuclear disarmament. Almost no one agrees with this idea.
 
Ah. I knew Protestants tended to accuse us of “worshipping” Mary, but this is the first I’m hearing of fellow-Catholics saying that too. I guess living in Protestant-majority countries has caused some to internalize some of their ideas.
 
Articulating that Islam is more a political ideology than a religion of peace has been a steep upward climb for me at CAF although all the evidence necessary to prove my point is in plain view.

By the time I could freely publish such things here without penalty, Pope Frances had already agreed to an interfaith Abrahamic Family House in Abu Dhabi.

My view of the situation hasn’t changed. The Abrahamic Family House is based on wishful thinking on one side and an exercise of deception on the other. Many Catholics will soon be lead into dangerous complacency and false doctrine …one foot is already in that door.


All the usual naysayers can take the grumbling to another thread. This thread is about “What was your biggest disagreement on CAF?”
 
Last edited:
I’ll stay quiet for now on my biggest disagreements. But I will note that roughly a year or so before the forum changed platforms, a couple of new people joined, immediately inserted themselves and posted constantly, and the flavor of the forum changed entirely.
 
The biggest issue of disagreement that I ever had was regarding the death penalty and desperate goal of Ender and one or two others to push a square peg into a round hole. Who knew that a common easily understood word like “inadmissible” would throw them all into a tailspin. 🤣
In fairness, this honestly fails to do sincere justice to Ender’s case. While acknowledging his posts can easily be mistakenly perceived as obsessively repetitive :grinning_face_with_smiling_eyes:, they do address a genuine controversy: is the death penalty (A.) inadmissible in principle; or (B.) inadmissible in practice? One alternative conforms with Catholic teaching while the other does not. We now return to our regularly scheduled topic . . . 😜
 
I’m surprised that the two regular topics which I got involved in and stirred up about haven’t been mentioned yet:
  1. “I didn’t know that I am meant to confess sins by kind and number. I’ve got that now, but what do I do about my past confessions? “,
Or posters who would ask “was my confession good because while I was in there I said I did [sin X] in early October, but thinking about it now, I think it was closer to mid-October…”
 
The whole NSDAP business is part of the truly Orwellian process:
Most people have a very superficial understanding of history. The fact that NSDAP has “Socialist” in it’s title means squat. It is like when East Germany was called the German Democratic Republic or North Korea is officially the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. These were two of the most complete police states in human history.

Yes, in the 1920s there were serious factions in the NSDAP that were working class and opposed to capitalism (but fought in the streets against real communists and left socialists). But Hitler was on the the “national” train, but not the “socialist” one. By mid-1934, most of the prominent “socialists” in the NSDAP were 6 feet in the ground or had changed their ideological outlook (Josef Goebbels is one of those who went from the left wing of the NSDAP to the right during the 1920s). Once he was in power, and no longer needed the SA, Hitler was determined to get the support of the industrialists who controlled the factories he would need for military production and the conservative German military officers
 
Last edited:
Now I remember who you were! I thought your posts sounded familiar. I assume you were banned?

Another of my disagreements are the easy ability of banned posters to return over and over again…who can forget “VirusesAreDead” or any idea his/her other combinations? 😂:hugs::hugs:

I do think a banned poster should be allowed a pardon once, though. We all have bad days…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top