I've gotten another jury summons

[Ming]

Then it behooves rah to stop criticising the Catholic church, if religion is a private matter.

A person's religious beliefs should be a private matter... attacking a flawed institution is fair game... those are two different things so your argument is meaningless

I don't think he actually believes that, it's just convenient for him now.

Again... MIND READER BEN... you have no clue what he thinks or believes... so stop trying to make crap up.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Do most Americans think that it's unacceptable for the UK to have a Queen? Or do they just think it's quite quaint and they want to visit?

Some for the former, some for the latter. There is very little middle ground (of course I tend to occupy that middle group, so the former group think I'm disloyal to the ideals of the US, no really, and the latter think I should be more excited about things like the royal baby). I tend to think having a Constitutional Monarchy isn't all that bad, due to the focus on the country being on the figurehead, which tends to mitigate attempts to crown the elected President, which leads to things like opposing the President's agenda is seen as "un-American" - the former set think that view is un-American. I can't really seem to win, though I'm fine with that (I'm a Christian first anyways, so I don't care that people don't see me as patriotic enough, because I'm usually not anyways ).

[Ban Kenobi]

Yeah, of course, no-one's ever going to change to having a constitutional monarchy from a Republic these days.

Do most Americans think that it's unacceptable for the UK to have a Queen? Or do they just think it's quite quaint and they want to visit?

Most Americans don't care how you run your country.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Ah, so you can't question extremism or wrongdoing without presenting your own entire life up for interrogation? What an interesting worldview it is that you and Ben appear to share.

This is kind of the basis for an intellectually honest conversation. Not saying Ben is intellectually honest, but if you tear something down, you are expected to state what your alternative is. Just because Ben is intellectually dishonest, doesn't mean everyone should be as well.

His own business.

Not if you say someone's Catholicism isn't proper and claim that you are a Catholic yourself (insinuating therefore that you do know what Catholicism is about, even if you fall short).

[Ming]

I'm still waiting for Ben to actually come up with some proof to support yet another of his BS statements...

GOOD LUCK WITH THAT!

[rah]

Saying someone is a jerk is much different than saying their Catholicism isn't proper. I don't believe I have ever said his wasn't proper. I have said that he hides behind it and that he is a dishonest jerk. I don't think we'll find many people that disagree with that here.

[kentonio]

This is kind of the basis for an intellectually honest conversation. Not saying Ben is intellectually honest, but if you tear something down, you are expected to state what your alternative is. Just because Ben is intellectually dishonest, doesn't mean everyone should be as well.

It is not intellectually dishonest to oppose a position without presenting an opposing position you are happy to be critiqued on. You could argue that it weakens the case of the person doing the opposing (I disagree however) but it's not dishonest.

Not if you say someone's Catholicism isn't proper and claim that you are a Catholic yourself (insinuating therefore that you do know what Catholicism is about, even if you fall short).

If memory serves, Rah comments on the Catholic church in general rather than Ben's personal views, due to Ben's aggressive and endless attacks on Rah's beliefs. Commenting on the church in general gives no-one the right to attack his personal views. Disagree with what he says sure, but this endless assault of things he has repeatedly said he wants to remain private is offensive, creepy and approaching ban-worthy IMHO.

[Ban Kenobi]

Not if you say someone's Catholicism isn't proper and claim that you are a Catholic yourself (insinuating therefore that you do know what Catholicism is about, even if you fall short).

If someone is constantly talking about their Catholic beliefs then they make it fair game. That doesn't obligate anyone else to present their beliefs.

[Imran Siddiqui]

If someone is constantly talking about their Catholic beliefs then they make it fair game. That doesn't obligate anyone else to present their beliefs.

If you are saying their beliefs aren't true Catholicism and just his distorted version of Catholicism, then I think one is obligated to indicate what they consider to be actual Catholicism... and if one is Catholic, that necessarily means their own beliefs. Otherwise, its just throwing rocks.

[Ban Kenobi]

If you are saying their beliefs aren't true Catholicism and just his distorted version of Catholicism, then I think one is obligated to indicate what they consider to be actual Catholicism... and if one is Catholic, that necessarily means their own beliefs. Otherwise, its just throwing rocks.

Clearly if someone criticizes Ben for using religion as a pretext to be a hateful bigot, they think actual Catholicism involves not doing so.

[Imran Siddiqui]

If memory serves, Rah comments on the Catholic church in general rather than Ben's personal views

I seem to remember some "that's not Catholic" stuff towards Ben, but regardless of that, if one says they are a practicing Catholic, and criticizes the Catholic Church on doctrine, I have no issues with an orthodox Catholic asking what doctrine does that person believe in. I think that, in and of itself, opens yourself up to that asking. I'm a Lutheran, and if I criticized my Lutheran denomination (the ELCA), I would almost expect someone to ask me what I believed - even if those folks weren't ELCA themselves (and if they were, I'd expect it even more).

[MikeH]

Most Americans don't care how you run your country.

Finally something Americans and Brits have in common.

[MikeH]

Clearly if someone criticizes Ben for using religion as a pretext to be a hateful bigot, they think actual Catholicism involves not doing so.

Yeah, exactly. I think it's clear he chose to be a Catholic and converted because he felt their hateful bigotry most closely matched his.

[kentonio]

I seem to remember some "that's not Catholic" stuff towards Ben, but regardless of that, if one says they are a practicing Catholic, and criticizes the Catholic Church on doctrine, I have no issues with an orthodox Catholic asking what doctrine does that person believe in. I think that, in and of itself, opens yourself up to that asking. I'm a Lutheran, and if I criticized my Lutheran denomination (the ELCA), I would almost expect someone to ask me what I believed - even if those folks weren't ELCA themselves (and if they were, I'd expect it even more).

You can ask someone whatever you want, but if they tell you they consider that private and you continue to keep digging and sniping at them then you're being a complete *****. Peoples right to privacy is more important than someones butt-hurt feelings because someone disagrees with their views on the church.

[Imran Siddiqui]

You can ask someone whatever you want, but if they tell you they consider that private and you continue to keep digging and sniping at them then you're being a complete *****. Peoples right to privacy is more important than someones butt-hurt feelings because someone disagrees with their views on the church.

We're on a freaking message board where the whole point is to discuss our opinions. Right to privacy, my ass.

Really, do we do this with people's political beliefs? Someone goes after you for your politics and then say their own political beliefs are private and that's just taken as is? Give me a break.