Pope sends direct message to Ben

[molly bloom]

You'd be better off asking why Canada would award me a degree in the first place. .

I agree. Can't help thinking that with my grammar school education in history (which I don't have a degree in and didn't study at university) I still show you up, time and again. Good old grammar school, inculcating in me a knowledge of the Congress system, the New Model Army, Cromwell's Western Design, the Speenhamland system and methods used to pay the expenses of British Empire in the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars.

I earned it.

You certainly 'earned' something. A measure of incredulity, in my case.

The difference between the Rome of the Punic war and the Rome of the 4th century is the birthrate of Roman citizens was too low to sustain military losses.

Hogwash. You're simply yoking two things together and wishing they come to 5. You have failed to show that any of a disparate number of other reasons are responsible for Roman failure in Western Europe. I note you don't mention the Eastern Roman empire, for instance. You also don't mention, amongst other things, the propensity for Romans shipping foodstuffs in lead containers, the difference in size of urban settlements between the Western Roman Empire and the Eastern, the difference in the populations of barbarians bordering the two halves, et cetera...

No, you just typically airily assert that tolerance of some non-heterosexual behaviour was responsible. How very you, and how very stupid.

The only thing that stopped Justinian from keeping Italy and restoring the Empire is the devastating plague of Justinian.

That and religious dissent, his megalomania, his jealousy of Belisarius, and opposition from people in the West, amongst other things.

There were plagues.

Wow. Who knew ? Who knew there was a book published several years ago called 'Justinian's Flea' and that I discussed the likely disease vectors and how it may have originated with, if I recall correctly, lord of the mark ?

Late to the party again, Sister Bendy.

I hate to break it to you but there's extensive commentary on this by scholars of the time of the manpower losses suffered by the Empire.

Names and works please, and exact quotes, otherwise you're as usual, wishing facts into existence.

[Ben Kenobi]

To my mind, so is the modern Catholic Church. it's directly and indirectly responsible for the deaths of more people than Obama's two governments, has financial links to right wing crooked politicians in Italy and of course the Mafia, and was responsible for the cover up of institutionalized paedophilia in its own organisation and its various schools, colleges, et cetera.

And let's not forget the use of slave labour in Eire's Magdalen laundries.

Given the toll of abortion - the Church will be one of the few voices in the wilderness acknowledged as opposing the forces of baby butchery.

And you chose to join it, Sister Bendy of Apartheid, ! Great discernment on your part.

Indeed. I'm firm in the conviction that when all the others have fallen away to apostasy that the Catholic church will remain. That is why I ended up leaving. I have since been proven correct in my assessment as the congregation I left has already proven intransigent.

[Ben Kenobi]

how many wars in the 17th Century did England fight against the Dutch ? And how many did it win ? And during which one was England supposedly 'conquered' by the Dutch ?

The one in which England capitulated and William of Orange ruled England. Yes, they fought the Dutch and the Dutch won the war in the end.

And England finally earned Europe's respect again under the Protestant Commonwealth- after two fairly useless Stuart monarchs. As for the Catholic Emancipation shtick- really, what utter a-historical nonsense.

You're forgetting the time when England attempted to place an Englishman on the HRE throne. But then, that would be actual historical evidence contrary to your Catholic prejudice that England was a backwater until Elizabeth I. The Angevins owned more of France than France.

[Ben Kenobi]

Two lies that need to be nailed quickly- William of Orange was invited to come over by English politicians. He happened to be married to a certain Mary Stuart, who was closely related to her father, who was James II, the Catholic King of England who did so much to lose his throne. William also was descended from a Stuart...

And how exactly does that warrant the usurpation from the Stuarts? If Mary Stuart has a claim to the throne, then so does James Francis Edward Stuart, and all of his descendents. In any case - the merit of this move was proven when the line immediately died out and they had to cobble some other puppet.

You are aware that Electress Sophia is only the third highest extant line of descent from Charles I?

At no point was the kingdom of England a subsidiary part of the United Provinces

Nonsense. It's no difference from your handwringing when Mary married Philip, King of Spain. England was a Dutch Fief until it became a Hanoverian fief.

in fact there had been talk in Elizabeth I's time of her becoming a ruler of the Dutch, or at least appointing Leicester as a Viceroy.

Which is why the irony is stunning that England would be ruled by the Dutch.

This is what happens when naked prejudice takes priority over fact and balance.

What prejudice? The prejudice arguing that Catholics were not free to vote and worship when England was a fief of the Dutch? That a Catholic heir was somehow unfit for the throne? The prejudice against Catherine of Braganza (who was a fine queen), and her husband James II and their son the 'Old Pretender'?

Tell me about prejudice and I'll show the 'bedpan' rumor. That's prejudice. Calling the 'Glorious Revolution' an unjustified usurpation is the truth.

[Ben Kenobi]

The idea that you are a history teacher is really quite profoundly disturbing to me: every time I have been reminded of this, I wonder what did Texas or Texans, ever do to deserve such an inhumane punishment ?

You'd be better off asking why Canada would award me a degree in the first place. Short answer - I earned it. I took 36 credits in my final year - 6 courses in history all at the same time to meet my graduation requirements for a Bachelor of Arts majoring in History. My degree is 50 percent sciences (Physics, math, Chemistry) in that order, 25 percent Arts electives (English, Philosophy, Economics), in that order.

I love how you airily link a society's toleration of anything other than man on top missionary position heterosexual sex with a 'decline in the birthrate'

Never said anything about the missionary position. The difference between the Rome of the Punic war and the Rome of the 4th century is the birthrate of Roman citizens was too low to sustain military losses. By the time of Stilchilo - they were making do with barbarians which raises the question - "where were all the Romans?"

noticeably failing to substantiate this with any examples from the historical record.

The only thing that stopped Justinian from keeping Italy and restoring the Empire is the devastating plague of Justinian. There were plagues. The Empire was never quite the same after the Antonine Plagues (after which they had massive disruption and the Crisis of the third century, followed by the Cyprian plague.

I hate to be the one to have to break this startling news to you, but history isn't normally taught by wishing 'facts' into existence sans proof.

I hate to break it to you but there's extensive commentary on this by scholars of the time of the manpower losses suffered by the Empire.

Also: birthrates rise during and after wars. Clearly, the god you imagine loves us so much must have a real hard on for conflict and human suffering.

It's also why China is going to be devastated. 40 years of the one child policy - if the US wanted to cripple China - they couldn't have done it better had they tried.

[molly bloom]

A nation ruled by the Dutch But I guess that's what happens when you become a fief of the Dutch. .

Two lies that need to be nailed quickly- William of Orange was invited to come over by English politicians. He happened to be married to a certain Mary Stuart, who was closely related to her father, who was James II, the Catholic King of England who did so much to lose his throne. William also was descended from a Stuart...

At no point was the kingdom of England a subsidiary part of the United Provinces- in fact there had been talk in Elizabeth I's time of her becoming a ruler of the Dutch, or at least appointing Leicester as a Viceroy.

This is what happens when naked prejudice takes priority over fact and balance. You should really go work for Faux News- you have the facility for deceit down pat.

[molly bloom]

They weren't. They were conquered by the Dutch.

Sure they were. Quick quiz- how many wars in the 17th Century did England fight against the Dutch ? And how many did it win ? And during which one was England supposedly 'conquered' by the Dutch ?


Really, you're more stupid than I ever imagined.

[molly bloom]

They owned an Empire under the Angevins. And it wasn't until after Catholic emancipation that things really took off for the Victorian era. Coincidence, I think not.

And England finally earned Europe's respect again under the Protestant Commonwealth- after two fairly useless Stuart monarchs. As for the Catholic Emancipation shtick- really, what utter a-historical nonsense.

[molly bloom]

Though, declaring a King to be "Defender of the Faith" and then turning around and not granting him an annulment (which was kind of common in those days among the princely-caste) was a bit silly (Yes, I realize the Pope was scared to death of the Spanish at the time).

He had good reason- the troops of the (Catholic) Holy Roman Emperor- also then king of Spain- had sacked Rome. This had good and bad effects- good, in that Rome could be rebuilt and refurnished with fine architecture and art, bad, in that people died and much was destroyed, good, in that fugitive artists and artisans spread High Renaissance work throughout Europe, bad, in that it showed Popes up to be venal temporal rulers...

[molly bloom]

Yes, it has, and there are good reasons for it. Drops in the birthrate have been devastating in the past.

The idea that you are a history teacher is really quite profoundly disturbing to me: every time I have been reminded of this, I wonder what did Texas or Texans, ever do to deserve such an inhumane punishment ?

I love how you airily link a society's toleration of anything other than man on top missionary position heterosexual sex with a 'decline in the birthrate'- noticeably failing to substantiate this with any examples from the historical record. I hate to be the one to have to break this startling news to you, but history isn't normally taught by wishing 'facts' into existence sans proof.

Also: birthrates rise during and after wars. Clearly, the god you imagine loves us so much must have a real hard on for conflict and human suffering.

[molly bloom]

Obamacare is a massive scam.

To my mind, so is the modern Catholic Church. it's directly and indirectly responsible for the deaths of more people than Obama's two governments, has financial links to right wing crooked politicians in Italy and of course the Mafia, and was responsible for the cover up of institutionalized paedophilia in its own organisation and its various schools, colleges, et cetera.

And let's not forget the use of slave labour in Eire's Magdalen laundries.


And you chose to join it, Sister Bendy of Apartheid, ! Great discernment on your part.

[Ben Kenobi]

There's a simple solution: stop being so wrong all the time.

You know what's awesome? A 50'' pizza.

[Lorizael]

Is everyone else here as bored with this topic as I am?

There's a simple solution: stop being so wrong all the time.

[Ben Kenobi]

He wants to think he's Jesus

Hispanic folks rule.

[Ben Kenobi]

Sorry, If I had to resort to getting entertainment by taunting people to hate me that would be the ultimate proof that I have no life or friends or women. That would be very sad.

I don't see how it's less constructive than watching TV. And it's interactive too!