# The 'P'-man goes pro-choice?



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

"Divorce and abortion are choices... which sometimes develop in difficult and dramatic circumstances... and are a source of profound suffering for those who take such decisions. "

https://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=080405192022.q4z4aoz6&show_article=1


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

Thought you were talking about me there for a minute


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Wayfarer said:


> Thought you were talking about me there for a minute


LOL narcisistic today are we?


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

Ksinc,

Your misleading thread title and your new moniker for the Pope have lulled me out of semi-retirement. The Catholic position on abortion remains unchanged and despite the fact that you were raised in an anti-Catholic enviroment as a youngster (by your own admission) you might accord the leader of the Catholic Church a bit more respect than to call him the "P"-man- how about Papa Ratzi if you feel the need to be glib? But do as you see fit.

Karl


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

ksinc said:


> LOL narcisistic today are we?


Well, I am the P-bomb, no? :icon_smile_big:


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Wayfarer said:


> Well, I am the P-bomb, no? :icon_smile_big:


Yes, yes you are.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Karl89 said:


> Ksinc,
> 
> Your misleading thread title and your new moniker for the Pope have lulled me out of semi-retirement. The Catholic position on abortion remains unchanged and despite the fact that you were raised in an anti-Catholic enviroment as a youngster (by your own admission) you might accord the leader of the Catholic Church a bit more respect than to call him the "P"-man- how about Papa Ratzi if you feel the need to be glib? But do as you see fit.
> 
> Karl


Fantastico!

Will you go right back to work lying through your teeth and insulting others or will you ease back into it?


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

Ksinc,

Did you not once admit that as a child you were not allowed to associate with Catholics? Perhaps I am wrong, though you are clearly not the product of a Jesuit education. I am not insulting you, just merely suggesting that you not be so flip in your moniker for the Pope and that you not mislead with your thread titles. Again merely a suggestion, and a futile one at that, as reason holds little currency with you in these matters.

Karl


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

Ksinc,

Just to refresh your memory-



ksinc said:


> As children, we weren't allowed to hang out with Catholics it's hard for me to picture them.


Karl


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Karl89 said:


> Ksinc,
> 
> Did you not once admit that as a child you were not allowed to associate with Catholics? Perhaps I am wrong, though you are clearly not the product of a Jesuit education. I am not insulting you, just merely suggesting that you not be so flip in your moniker for the Pope and that you not mislead with your thread titles. Again merely a suggestion, and a futile one at that, as reason holds little currency with you in these matters.
> 
> Karl


#1 For someone speaking about education you sure do love to prove how stupid you are quite often or is it just a complete lack of conscience and integrity? Clearly, I was inquiring if you were going to take up the pursuit of your past exploits and did not accuse you of lying or insulting me in this thread.

#2 Here is exactly what I said in a previous conversation. Do you need an English translation?



> https://askandyaboutclothes.com/community/showpost.php?p=702719&postcount=99
> I guess Catholics would include a lot better cuisines: French, Italian, etc. That does seem like an obvious mistake.
> 
> As children, we weren't allowed to hang out with Catholics it's hard for me to picture them.
> ...


You're too easy. You really should wise up (and maybe grow a pair). A sense of humor and of your place wouldn't hurt you much either.

If you think you can twist me being a Protestant and voting for a Mormon while pointing out the blatant hypocrisy of my Church of Christ relatives into some sort of religious bigotry of my own - perhaps you can do something simpler like solve the energy crisis first?


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Karl89 said:


> Ksinc,
> 
> Just to refresh your memory-
> 
> ...


As Wayfarer so frequently says. QED.

P.S. welcome back!


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

Ksinc,

Don't you have to go and explain away dinosaurs or defend the Confederacy or are you more comfortable making threats over the internet? 

Nevertheless I bid you goodnight and will refrain from commenting on your next insipid post.

Karl


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

Actually, One could infer 'P Man' as refering to Pope Shenouda of the Coptic Church. As to the Holy Father, who I recognise as the Bishop of Rome ; It would be folly to not be aware of his positions and comments than any other world leader. And to this specific comment? Has he said anything new? I know few who see divorce and abortion as a singular positive experience; Catholic,Coptic, Orthodox,Jew, Mormon or even Festivarian.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Kav said:


> Actually, One could infer 'P Man' as refering to Pope Shenouda of the Coptic Church. As to the Holy Father, who I recognise as the Bishop of Rome ; It would be folly to not be aware of his positions and comments than any other world leader. As to this specific comment? Has he said anything new? I know few who see divorce and abortion as a singular positive experience.


I admit I'm not a frequent observer of Rome's edicts, but that was not my past impression of their stance. I thought the statement sounded a touch more accepting and compassionate towards them; almost as victims than I think of as normal, but perhaps not. It just seemed odd to me which is why I *asked the question.*

Kav, if my calling him the 'P'-man bothered you (though it seems it did not); I am happy to apologize to you. I couldn't think of what I could call him and I thought it was clear without being overt since we do use P-bomb here as part of the approved local dialect. No harm was meant. I was just asking because as I understood this one was supposed to be a bit of an old-fashioned hard-liner. Thus, I expected more fire-and-brimstone.


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

I wasn't bothered, though Karl was. And since you extended an apology to me, why not be catholic in it's offering and include Karl? Christians are supposed to 'hate the sin and not the sinner.' I think this Pope is a pleasant suprise. He was supposed to be some Got Mitt Unes Kraut and is showing great insights- if we listen to him with open souls. I had an interesting 'experience' recently. A greek family held a funeral for their grandfather. In two years I had never met these people. I suppose you could call them 'deathbed orthodox.' I'm at the church, helping my Priest as impromptu usher and greeter. This lady shows up, obviously a Catholic Nun and friend of the family. First she gets upset we don't have an Alter. I had to explain it was behind the screen and would be visible once the Royal Doors were opened. Then she starts giving orders. I politely, but firmly had to remind her this was an Orthodox church and I would handle the logistics of the service. She was a little put back, but joined the family- as she should have. The Priest arrives and the service is conducted. Meanwhile,one of our own matriarchs, a greek born lady in her 80s who watched nazi paratroopes land in her village gives me a triple kiss and said " I am so glad a male orthodox was here to represent the church." I've got two years committed, and this lifelong cradle orthodox is looking to me to fullfill an old male hierarchical duty.I think there are our opposites in the RC, trusting what this Pope is doing.


----------



## JRR (Feb 11, 2006)

ksinc said:


> "Divorce and abortion are choices... which sometimes develop in difficult and dramatic circumstances... and are a source of profound suffering for those who take such decisions. "
> 
> https://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=080405192022.q4z4aoz6&show_article=1


Don't see where any pro-choice thoughts pop up in the article.


----------



## KenR (Jun 22, 2005)

Karl,

Welcome back!

Where does this leave annulments? They are sanctioned by the Church, and are the religious side of a Catholic's divorce proceedings.


----------



## jackmccullough (May 10, 2006)

ksinc said:


> "Divorce and abortion are choices... which sometimes develop in difficult and dramatic circumstances... and are a source of profound suffering for those who take such decisions. "
> 
> https://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=080405192022.q4z4aoz6&show_article=1


I don't get it. You may have a hard time finding someone who is more opposed to the Catholic Church than I am, but this clearly doesn't express a pro-choice position held by the Pope. From my many years of studying Catholic theology, it is clear that they consider everything they consider a sin a choice; if you haven't made a choice, you haven't sinned, regardless of whether you objectively did something that violated what they view as God's law. Thus, his characterization of divorce and abortion as choices is fundamental to their decision that they are sins. Choices they abhor, but choices, no less.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

In the opening lines of the referrenced article the Pope claims divorce and abortions are offensive to God. Can't help but wonder if the Pope would conclude the acts of pedophile priests are offensive to God of if he (the Pope) feels God might find the efforts of the Church to protect the rights (give me a break!) of the offending priests and cover up their crimes to be offensive. The Church, as an institution, has many ills that need addressing, as well as the "questionable" actions of their parrisioners!


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

jackmccullough said:


> I don't get it. You may have a hard time finding someone who is more opposed to the Catholic Church than I am, but this clearly doesn't express a pro-choice position held by the Pope. From my many years of studying Catholic theology, it is clear that they consider everything they consider a sin a choice; if you haven't made a choice, you haven't sinned, regardless of whether you objectively did something that violated what they view as God's law. Thus, his characterization of divorce and abortion as choices is fundamental to their decision that they are sins. Choices they abhor, but choices, no less.


Well, usually consider them crimes against God and Man not choices. "Choices" just seems like an oddly vague word to use knowing the political meaning of the word. Nothing of the true victims of abortion was said. I just found it unusual. Again, that's why I asked. Thanks.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Kav said:


> I wasn't bothered, though Karl was. Christians are supposed to 'hate the sin and not the sinner.' I think this Pope is a pleasant suprise. He was supposed to be some Got Mitt Unes Kraut and is showing great insights- if we listen to him with open souls. I had an interesting 'experience' recently. A greek family held a funeral for their grandfather. In two years I had never met these people. I suppose you could call them 'deathbed orthodox.' I'm at the church, helping my Priest as impromptu usher and greeter. This lady shows up, obviously a Catholic Nun and friend of the family. First she gets upset we don't have an Alter. I had to explain it was behind the screen and would be visible once the Royal Doors were opened. Then she starts giving orders. I politely, but firmly had to remind her this was an Orthodox church and I would handle the logistics of the service. She was a little put back, but joined the family- as she should have. The Priest arrives and the service is conducted. Meanwhile,one of our own matriarchs, a greek born lady in her 80s who watched nazi paratroopes land in her village gives me a triple kiss and said " I am so glad a male orthodox was here to represent the church." I've got two years committed, and this lifelong cradle orthodox is looking to me to fullfill an old male hierarchical duty.I think there are our opposites in the RC, trusting what this Pope is doing.


Interesting insights. Thanks.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Kav said:


> since you extended an apology to me, why not be catholic in it's offering and include Karl?


[email protected]!

Kav, you're a wild man! Stay crazy!


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

eagle2250 said:


> In the opening lines of the referrenced article the Pope claims divorce and abortions are offensive to God. Can't help but wonder if the Pope would conclude the acts of pedophile priests are offensive to God of if he (the Pope) feels God might find the efforts of the Church to protect the rights (give me a break!) of the offending priests and cover up their crimes to be offensive. The Church, as an institution, has many ills that need addressing, as well as the "questionable" actions of their parrisioners!


Yeah, that's a great point.

I can't remember how old I was at the time (maybe 13 or 14), but I vividly remember what the Elders and Pastors of our fine Southern protestant church (my Father being one of them) did when they found a pedophile Sunday school teacher around six year old girls ......

The Vatican's moral authority on defending innocents is rather weak.


----------



## yachtie (May 11, 2006)

ksinc said:


> Yeah, that's a great point.
> 
> I can't remember how old I was at the time (maybe 13 or 14), but I vividly remember what the Elders and Pastors of our fine Southern protestant church (my Father being one of them) did when they found a pedophile Sunday school teacher around six year old girls ......
> 
> The Vatican's moral authority on defending innocents is rather weak.


No weaker than any other religion these days- there's drunks and pedophiles in every creed. It's the message that counts, not the messenger. 
It's a rather an odd statement you're making. For years the RC's were the only Christian church beating the drum on abortion- so how do you come to your conclusion? If it's sicko priests not being booted that you're commenting on, that's the purview of the local bishop, not the Holy See.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

yachtie said:


> No weaker than any other religion these days- there's drunks and pedophiles in every creed. It's the message that counts, not the messenger.
> It's a rather an odd statement you're making. For years the RC's were the only Christian church beating the drum on abortion- so how do you come to your conclusion? If it's sicko priests not being booted that you're commenting on, that's the purview of the local bishop, not the Holy See.


Yachtie, on some points we will have to disagree, but yes that is partly what I am commenting on.

I do believe the messenger counts when it comes to moral authority. Can someone say the correct thing? Yes, but they do not have moral authority simply because of their message IMHO.

I did not intend to make a relative comparison to other creeds; and you won't find me defending other creeds. I largely agree with you. I was only speaking to my own Father and those we recognize as Elders who have demonstrated moral authority. Again; believing the messenger counts in such matters.

I came to my opinion on the RC's moral authority by starting with history such as the inquisition/expurgations and carrying forward through what I will call the 'jurisdictional excuse' for "sickos" to which you referred. I don't think you can say mine is an intellectually untenable or hypocritical position, but perhaps you can. I do not believe it is. I truly find it incredulous and laughable that someone that honestly thinks they are the _Vicar of Christ_ or of _Saint Peter_ would recognize such a feeble, internal jurisdictional boundary as sacred where others in their position freely violated the authority and jurisdictions of Kings and free people.

If I made claim to both the moral and positional authority that the Bishop does; I would use it to defend those for whom Jesus said the Kingdom of God belongs. If that meant removing all implicated/accomplice local Bishops, so-be-it.

Just my opinion. Any Priest touching a child should be booted, turned over to the authorites, and then treated like any other man that touches a child. IMHO I believe that should be an automatic death sentence. I am more than happy to throw the first stone and I can do so with a clear conscience before God for it.

Just for added context to my views I'll just add: I have great respect for individual people of faith; for I am one. I separate that from the great distaste I have for the Institutional Church in all its forms; not just the RC one. We currently meet in a local 'home church' with Elders as I personally believe the Bible indicates is the proper thing. I do not believe or recognize any religious titles or authority above that because they are not in the Bible. I have no reason to believe Brother Ratzinger isn't a fine man, a true servant, and man of God. I just don't go beyond that point with anyone. As outlined previously, I have issues with the moral authority of the institution he heads.


----------



## brokencycle (Jan 11, 2008)

I don't see how you came to the conclusion the Pope went pro-choice: he mearly has stated that abortion and divorce are sins; however, the Catholic way is forgiveness, and there is no need for people to judge others critically for their choices - they will be judged soon enough.


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

I think this Pope has made it clear about predatory priests. I imagine there are some very delicate political machinings going on. It would be nice though, A big Mercedes pulls up to Cardinal Mahoney's Office and these german priests emerge to the theme music from THE GREAT ESCAPE. Mahoney steps out and a priests barks to all the bowing illegal aliens at the Plaza Church ' You vill no longer bow, He ist no longer zie Cardinal of Los Angeles."'And Mahoney turns to two Tony Alamo followers "Well, it looks like you will see Heaven before I will." And he disappears to exile in 29 Palms.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

brokencycle said:


> I don't see how you came to the conclusion the Pope went pro-choice:


Neither do I; since I made no such conclusion.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Kav said:


> I think this Pope has made it clear about predatory priests. I imagine there are some very delicate political machinings going on. It would be nice though, A big Mercedes pulls up to Cardinal Mahoney's Office and these german priests emerge to the theme music from THE GREAT ESCAPE. Mahoney steps out and a priests barks to all the bowing illegal aliens at the Plaza Church ' You vill no longer bow, He ist no longer zie Cardinal of Los Angeles."'And Mahoney turns to two Tony Alamo followers "Well, it looks like you will see Heaven before I will." And he disappears to exile in 29 Palms.


Well, you certainly have a way, don't you? 

IMHO I see a distinction between what I will characterize as advocacy and defending; I think only one really involves "delicate political machinings", but that is just an opinion. I would certainly hold that as evidence of my feelings towards the spiritual impotency of the institutional church. Why should such a matter require delicacy?

I personally expect far more from someone claiming to be the _Vicar of Christ or Saint Peter_. Again; just an opinion. Jesus did not stand outside the Temple and advocate for the removal of money changers through careful diplomacy.


----------



## yachtie (May 11, 2006)

ksinc said:


> Well, you certainly have a way, don't you?
> 
> IMHO I see a distinction between what I will characterize as advocacy and defending; I think only one really involves "delicate political machinings", but that is just an opinion. I would certainly hold that as evidence of my feelings towards the spiritual impotency of the institutional church. Why should such a matter require delicacy?
> 
> I personally expect far more from someone claiming to be the _Vicar of Christ or Saint Peter_. Again; just an opinion. Jesus did not stand outside the Temple and advocate for the removal of money changers through careful diplomacy.


A couple of points: As viscerally satisfying as it would be to stuff Mahoney into a limo and whisk him away, :aportnoy: the question to ask is which would be the better path?- that or working for Roger's conversion of heart? If (at least according to Catholic theology) he's a successor to the Apostles, then giving a bishop the boot is not something to be done lightly. I, for one, don't have all the facts so I'd just be guessing.

Yep, Jesus didn't advocate for removal of the money changers by careful diplomacy, yet he did exercise diplomacy on behalf of the obviously guilty adulteress- hmm, go figure.

Regarding abortion and its victims both living and dead ( yes I do consider the woman to often be a victim also) kindness, healing, repentence and forgiveness is surely a better way than just writing them off as irredeemable.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

yachtie said:


> A couple of points: As viscerally satisfying as it would be to stuff Mahoney into a limo and whisk him away, :aportnoy: the question to ask is which would be the better path?- that or working for Roger's conversion of heart? If (at least according to Catholic theology) he's a successor to the Apostles, then giving a bishop the boot is not something to be done lightly. I, for one, don't have all the facts so I'd just be guessing.
> 
> Yep, Jesus didn't advocate for removal of the money changers by careful diplomacy, yet he did exercise diplomacy on behalf of the obviously guilty adulteress- hmm, go figure.
> 
> Regarding abortion and its victims both living and dead ( yes I do consider the woman to often be a victim also) kindness, healing, repentence and forgiveness is surely a better way than just writing them off as irredeemable.


Fair enough.

I think we are at the point where we will just continue to re-inforce our previous views regarding the institutional church. NTTAWWT. I do appreciate your explanation of 'booting an apostle.' I also appreciate that for devout followers of the RC Church it seems like a complicated matter and conveniently it does not to me. What were those old novels 'Brotherhood of the Rose'? Send them to see Mahoney and Associates. 

I only disagree with your last point in that there is one sinner and one innocent victim IMHO. Does the sin also do damage to the sinner? Yes. Are they "a victim?" Not IMHO, but that's just my perspective on self-destructive behaviors. I also agree kindness, healing, repentance, and forgiveness are the way to deal with the sinner. I have advocated that before in previous threads regarding "hating the sin, not the sinner." My question was only regarding the use of the word "choice." Which still seems like an odd word for a pro-Life person to use. C'est la Vie.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Coincidentally, I just rec'd the following email. I will not be bought!  



> THE UNITED NATIONS ORGANISATION
> In Conjunction with the International Monetary Fund WORLD BANK FACT-FINDING & SPECIAL DUTIES OFFICE LONDON, UNITED KINGDOM.
> TEL: +447011137792
> FAX: +448709126328
> ...


----------



## yachtie (May 11, 2006)

^^^ Nigerians in the UK? Those e-mails keep getting better and better LOL!

Agreed re differing opinions. I agree that they're culpable for their actions and use "victim" advisably. Too often in these situations it's the parents, boyfriends, or Planned Parenthood propaganda that induces them to make that decision. Those people then split- leaving the wreckage.


----------



## Mike Petrik (Jul 5, 2005)

ksinc said:


> My question was only regarding the use of the word "choice." Which still seems like an odd word for a pro-Life person to use. C'est la Vie.


Properly understood, the word "choice" is not really all that odd since, strict Calvinists notwithstanding, sin is always a choice. In today's political environment the word is popularly used to describe "legal choice," which is plainly not with the Holy Father was discussing. Under Catholic moral theology any unwarranted taking of an innocent human life, including via abortion, is a seriously immoral act and therefore an affront to God. Since it is a fundamental purpose of government to protect innocent life, Catholics believe that the "choice" of abortion should not be a legal one. I hope that clears that up.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Mike Petrik said:


> Properly understood, the word "choice" is not really all that odd since, strict Calvinists notwithstanding, sin is always a choice. In today's political environment the word is popularly used to describe "legal choice," which is plainly not with the Holy Father was discussing. Under Catholic moral theology any unwarranted taking of an innocent human life, including via abortion, is a seriously immoral act and therefore an affront to God. Since it is a fundamental purpose of government to protect innocent life, Catholics believe that the "choice" of abortion should not be a legal one. I hope that clears that up.


Thank you.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

yachtie said:


> ^^^ Nigerians in the UK? Those e-mails keep getting better and better LOL!
> 
> Agreed re differing opinions. I agree that they're culpable for their actions and use "victim" advisably. Too often in these situations it's the parents, boyfriends, or Planned Parenthood propaganda that induces them to make that decision. Those people then split- leaving the wreckage.


I certainly agree with the concept of 'victims of planned parenthood, et al.'


----------



## brokencycle (Jan 11, 2008)

ksinc said:


> Neither do I; since I made no such conclusion.





> *The 'P'-man goes pro-choice?*


That is your title.

Also, despite not being Catholic, I think calling the Pope the "'P'-man" to be offensive and inflammatory. But that again, I think it is wrong to refer to the President of the United States as "Bush" instead of "Mr. Bush" or "President Bush" regardless of your opinion. That is a whole other matter, and certainly your Constitutional right allows you to do the above.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

brokencycle said:


> That is your title.
> 
> Also, despite not being Catholic, I think calling the Pope the "'P'-man" to be offensive and inflammatory. But that again, I think it is wrong to refer to the President of the United States as "Bush" instead of "Mr. Bush" or "President Bush" regardless of your opinion. That is a whole other matter, and certainly your Constitutional right allows you to do the above.


*The 'P'-man goes pro-choice? *

So, that little squiggly thing on the end means the preceding sentence fragments are a statement of conclusion to you. My sakes ...

I have duly noted your faux-outrage as a non-Catholic over the term 'P'-man. You may equally note that I have referred to him as the Bishop, Brother Ratzinger, and Mr. Ratzinger in the rest of the thread. I think that speaks for itself. I also explained (as if it had to) "P-bomb" has a long history here in the Interchange and is in fact one member's forum participation descriptor. So, I think a sense of the local humor goes a long way in this regard.

My Constitutional rights clearly have nothing to do with it, but that would take volumes to explain.

However, I am in agreement on calling Bush either Mr. Bush or President Bush when addressing him. Just as I would not address their Bishop by saying "Hey 'P'-man, wasabe?" However, saying "Bush or W was elected in 2000" for instance is not offensive in the least IMHO. I am used to referring to people by their last name and it happens to me all the time. I am never offended by that, but I have been offended by similar things myself. All it normally takes is asking "Please call me X." and a "Sure thing X." and we all move happily along. Unless someone says "no" then I have had an issue. Perhaps that's a regional thing. I don't know.

I do know no one has legitimately asked, "Could you please refer to my Bishop as Mr. Ratzinger intead of 'P'-man if you don't like to say the 'P'-word?"

Karl can't legitimately ask that because when I asked him a similar question he acted like a schmuck. Which is why he got what he got and will continue to get. (You might also note I did not treat Kav or anyone else the same way.)

Anything else I can help you with today? Hopefully, that answer reconciles the situation to your satisfaction and we can move on.


----------



## Mike Petrik (Jul 5, 2005)

As many of you may have guessed, I'm a pretty serious Catholic. Not a good one, mind you, that's a lot harder. And for the record, I took no offense whatsoever at the reference to the "P-man." While I do agree that contemporary Americans have too eagerly discarded useful and civil formalities, let's not lose perspective here. Since no offense was intended, I don't see why any should be taken. By all accounts, His Holiness has a great sense of humor, and would have likely chuckled at the title. Now please do not misunderstand me. The folks who took exception to the reference seemed for the most part motivated by trying to protect the feelings of others, either the Holy Father himself in some abstract way, or especially Catholics in general. That motivation is grounded in a fine and noble impulse. But in this particular case, I think we should all just be a little more light-hearted with each other. No harm, no foul, in my view. Everyone had good intentions; let's all cut each other a break. I bet that's what B16 would suggest.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

Why is it an insult to The Pope?


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Mike Petrik said:


> As many of you may have guessed, I'm a pretty serious Catholic. Not a good one, mind you, that's a lot harder. And for the record, I took no offense whatsoever at the reference to the "P-man." While I do agree that contemporary Americans have too eagerly discarded useful and civil formalities, let's not lose perspective here. Since no offense was intended, I don't see why any should be taken. By all accounts, His Holiness has a great sense of humor, and would have likely chuckled at the title. Now please do not misunderstand me. The folks who took exception to the reference seemed for the most part motivated by trying to protect the feelings of others, either the Holy Father himself in some abstract way, or especially Catholics in general. That motivation is grounded in a fine and noble impulse. But in this particular case, I think we should all just be a little more light-hearted with each other. No harm, no foul, in my view. Everyone had good intentions; let's all cut each other a break. I bet that's what B16 would suggest.


Thanks. I appreciated your response to the question too. Helped explain the choice of words to me.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

Hey, at least no one has called him a Papist. :devil:


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

I consulted with my favourite RC priest on this matter, Father Quido Sarduchi. We both noticed his striking resemblance, sans goatee with Colonel Sanders and how well they both wear white. Father commented how my clothing smelled almost as strong as his tobacco permeated cassock. I countered I had come from one of several orthodox liturgies as we move into Holy Week. I confessed retrieving a beeswax candle stub from the trash to wax a sticky zipper.He was horrified at such sacrilage, opining a good Catholic, meaning the Western Church would sell them on EBAY claiming the twisted forms looked like the virgin mother. We both mentioned the events in Texas and the 401 children being claimed as the largest ever rescued by a State. Father demurred, reminding me as a former Anglican we both were part of such wholesale rescues of pagan canadian indian children a few generations back. We had to cut our conversation short, he had his duties. I received his blessings, and loaned him $1 for a new BIC, after he refused a beeswax candlebut and paper mathces from the ROCOR people. I drove home listening to Canticles of Ecstacy by Hildegaard von Bingen, my magnet icon of St John of the ladder sliding down the mirror everytime I hit a speedbump.


----------



## brokencycle (Jan 11, 2008)

ksinc said:


> *The 'P'-man goes pro-choice? *
> 
> So, that little squiggly thing on the end means the preceding sentence fragments are a statement of conclusion to you. My sakes ...
> 
> ...


I'm not outraged, or pretending to be. And no, I don't think a question mark makes something a conclusion; however, the title lends itself to more "I can't believe the Pope has gone pro-choice" than "Does this mean the Pope has gone pro-choice?"

I don't see why their needs to be an argument over this, but I believe the title may have led to said arguments.  I, myself, did not mean to inflame the conversation any further.

As for the "P-man" allusion, I must plead ignorance.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

brokencycle said:


> I don't see how you came to the conclusion the Pope went pro-choice ...





ksinc said:


> Neither do I; since I made no such conclusion.





brokencycle said:


> *The 'P'-man goes pro-choice? * That is your title.
> Also, despite not being Catholic, I think calling the Pope the "'P'-man" to be offensive and inflammatory...





ksinc said:


> So, that little squiggly thing on the end means the preceding sentence fragments are a statement of conclusion to you. My sakes ...
> I have duly noted your faux-outrage as a non-Catholic over the term 'P'-man...





brokencycle said:


> I'm not outraged, or pretending to be. And no, I don't think a question mark makes something a conclusion; however, the title lends itself to more "I can't believe the Pope has gone pro-choice" than "Does this mean the Pope has gone pro-choice?"
> 
> ... I don't see why their needs to be an argument over this


So, why are you arguing? The only two arguments have been with you and Karl (which I have explained).

Well before your false accusation was leveled I had already apologized to those concerned and had explained my intent by saying "... It just seemed odd to me which is why I *asked the question.*" I had further and quite candidly explained my motive, my opinion, and the basis for that opinion.

I politely told you in my first response "I made no such conclusion."

After that you still persisted in your error, and I went well out of my way to post a personal reply to you solely on the basis of personal courtesy inspite of the fact you aren't even a Catholic. I agreed with you in large part on the issue of respecting leaders and their titles pointing out that I had modified my behavior towards their Bishop in this very thread even though I had no intent or had not initially disrespected him.

When I said "Hopefully, that answer reconciles the situation to your satisfaction and we can move on" I was sincere. Apparently, it did not. Well, I have nothing else to offer you. So, whatever else you want just ain't gonna happen. I think you're just being inhospitable at this point, but I forgive you.  I am moving on.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

Wayfarer said:


> Hey, at least no one has called him a Papist. :devil:


or called him a Pap Smear.


----------



## yachtie (May 11, 2006)

Howard said:


> or called him a Pap Smear.


Now THAT"S offensive.


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

Shoves Howard into a cart with several frost bite inducing cans of frozen lime juice under his crotch.Ties him in with several t shirt bagies and bungee cart straps. Tosses in a plastic Virgin Mary and shoves him into trafic with a wave and laugh. Several nuns from Saint Boniface's are rounding the corner in a Doge step van, singing 'Dominic a nika nika...'


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

yachtie said:


> Now THAT"S offensive.


and dumb


----------



## Jolly Roger (Apr 26, 2007)

Wayfarer said:


> Hey, at least no one has called him a Papist. :devil:


Hey, show some respect.

He's the Papist _in Chief_.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

yachtie said:


> Now THAT"S offensive.


Sorry about that joke everyone,I take it back.I was just trying to add in some of my own jokes.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

Jolly Roger said:


> Hey, show some respect.
> 
> He's the Papist _in Chief_.


LOL. Or just, "da Papa".


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

We forgive you howard, but you must repeat hail Marys while dragging 10 pathmark carts around the building.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

Kav said:


> We forgive you howard, but you must repeat hail Marys while dragging 10 pathmark carts around the building.


What are hail Marys?


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

Howard said:


> What are hail Marys?


Hail Mary, full of grace! the Lord is with thee; blessed are thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus. Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners now and at the hour of our death. Amen.


----------



## Jolly Roger (Apr 26, 2007)

Howard said:


> What are hail Marys?


Don't you watch football?


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

Anyone for a chorus in german of " I don't care if it's dark or scary, long as I got my Virgin Mary- glowing on the dashboard of my car. I don't care if it rains or freezes, long as I got my plastic Jesus..." I bet Papa Benedict knows it.


----------



## Preu Pummel (Feb 5, 2008)

Man.

This thread was pure dook from end to end, false premise to utter insanity and onward.


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

To late for a refund Preu. You might as well lean back and enjoy. I am big, it's the threads that got small.


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

Preu,



Preu Pummel said:


> Man.
> 
> This thread was pure dook from end to end, false premise to utter insanity and onward.


Don't be too harsh. After all, Ksinc has to play to his strengths.

Karl


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Preu Pummel said:


> Man.
> 
> This thread was pure dook from end to end, false premise to utter insanity and onward.


We appreciate your positive contribution.


----------



## Jolly Roger (Apr 26, 2007)

Karl89 said:


> Don't be too harsh. After all, Ksinc has to play to his strengths.
> 
> Karl


And of course our resident clerical fascist has to rise to the bait.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

Laxplayer said:


> Hail Mary, full of grace! the Lord is with thee; blessed are thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus. Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners now and at the hour of our death. Amen.


But I'm Jewish.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

Jolly Roger said:


> Don't you watch football?


No I don't,I'm a wrestling fan.


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

O.K. Howard, quick, besides GOLDBERG, name jewish wrastlers. No, Samoa Joe is out.


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

Howard said:


> But I'm Jewish.


You asked what a Hail Mary is, Howard. I was just answering you.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

Kav said:


> O.K. Howard, quick, besides GOLDBERG, name jewish wrestlers. No, Samoa Joe is out.


There's Barry Horowitz,Ric Flair and The Ultimate Warrior.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

Laxplayer said:


> You asked what a Hail Mary is, Howard. I was just answering you.


Oh Ok I'm sorry I thought you had to be Christian to sing Hail Mary.


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

Howard said:


> There's Barry Horowitz,Ric Flair and The Ultimate Warrior.


The Nature Boy is still wrestling? How old is he now, about 60? Wooooo!


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

Laxplayer said:


> The Nature Boy is still wrestling? How old is he now, about 60? Wooooo!


No he just had a retirement match with Shawn Michaels at Wrestlemania 24 and lost,he's about 63.


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

JR,



Jolly Roger said:


> And of course our resident clerical fascist has to rise to the bait.


I see you enjoy a little Reductio ad Hitlerum in the afternoons. If objecting to calling the Pope the "P"-man makes me a clerical fascist then you have a suprisingly low threshold for what constitutes fascism. But so be it - I have been called worse.

Karl


----------



## Jolly Roger (Apr 26, 2007)

Karl89 said:


> If objecting to calling the Pope the "P"-man makes me a clerical fascist...


No, your ridiculous touchiness over that little bit of mundanity is just a _symptom_ of your ideological disease.



> But so be it - I have been called worse.
> 
> Karl


I'm sure you have.


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

Howard said:


> No he just had a retirement match with Shawn Michaels at Wrestlemania 24 and lost,he's about 63.


I remember watching Ric Flair and the Four Horsemen (Flair, Ole and Arn Anderson and Tully Blanchard) on the NWA.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Not my headline "Pope Ground Zero prayer seeks terrorists' redemption"

https://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSL1079181020080410?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=0

As far as I can tell that is referring to the two lines:

" ... God of peace, bring your peace to our violent world: peace in the hearts of all men and women and peace among the nations of the earth.

"Turn to your way of love those whose hearts and minds are consumed with hatred. ..."

However, I'm not really sure in the larger context he's seeking redemption for the terrorists. It seemed more like he was speaking about those who may be filled with hatred because the lost a loved one and seeking revenge. As his next line is "God of understanding, overwhelmed by the magnitude of this tragedy, we seek your light and guidance as we confront such terrible events."

Just my opinion. He is speaking all about the victims for the most part. I thought it was a pretty good prayer myself and I don't pray for the terrorists ... I pray for our soldiers.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

Laxplayer said:


> I remember watching Ric Flair and the Four Horsemen (Flair, Ole and Arn Anderson and Tully Blanchard) on the NWA.


What's your favorite Flair moment?


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

Howard said:


> What's your favorite Flair moment?


Oh, I dunno...he's always been entertaining to watch. He plays a good villain. I remember his feuds with Bret Michaels, Mick Foley and Sting. I haven't watched wrestling in years though.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Preu Pummel said:


> Man.
> 
> This thread was pure dook from end to end, false premise to utter insanity and onward.





Karl89 said:


> Preu,
> 
> Don't be too harsh. After all, Ksinc has to play to his strengths.
> 
> Karl


The only "false premise" belong to you two. If I was a Catholic I'd be far more worried about my religion being associated with liars. Karl you are perennial. What's your Bishop think about that? Frankly, if I'd been b*tch-slapped as often as you have, I'd stop begging for it. Perhaps you could try earning respect instead of talking out of the side of your mouth all the time?


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

Laxplayer said:


> Oh, I dunno...he's always been entertaining to watch. He plays a good villain. I remember his feuds with Bret Michaels, Mick Foley and Sting. I haven't watched wrestling in years though.


Do you think Flair ever had a bad feud?


----------

