What A Discusting Bunch Of.....

[Luigi]

[quote name='Hasan' timestamp='1330552058' post='2394640']
He wasn't attempting satire against Catholicism but against Santorum, because of his similarly offensive and exaggerated against Muslims, homosexuals, and others.



Well it was posted under humor, he explained his purpose, and his family is Catholic. So somehow I doubt he was attempting to incite hatred against his family.
[/quote]

When he explained his purpose, I thought he was just being satirical.

[4588686]

[quote name='Luigi' timestamp='1330552213' post='2394642']
When he explained his purpose, I thought he was just being satirical.
[/quote]

Well, now you know.

[4588686]

[color=#282828][left][i][color=#000000][font=Georgia, Century, Times, serif]It's traditional at this point for me to half-apologize, to say that I'm sorry if anybody was offended, but I really don't mind if anybody was offended. I hope they will now think twice before they question the faith of progressive Christians, or Mormons or Muslims. I doubt they will.[/font][/color][/i][/left][/color]


[color=#000000][font=Georgia, Century, Times, serif]I also think his reasoning is off here since there is no reason to assume that only those offended were guilty of the same sort of rhetoric that Santorum throws around so frequently. [/font][/color]

[Annie12]

[quote name='Hasan' timestamp='1330553145' post='2394652']
[left][i][color=#000000][font=Georgia, Century, Times, serif]It's traditional at this point for me to half-apologize, to say that I'm sorry if anybody was offended, but I really don't mind if anybody was offended. I hope they will now think twice before they question the faith of progressive Christians, or Mormons or Muslims. I doubt they will.[/font][/color][/i][/left]



[color=#000000][font=Georgia, Century, Times, serif]I also think his reasoning is off here since there is no reason to assume that only those offended were guilty of the same sort of rhetoric that Santorum throws around so frequently. [/font][/color]
[/quote]



"an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" - Gandhi
If he has a fight to pick with Santorum she shouldn't pick it with the Church. The Church isn't responsible for what comes out of his mouth. I can just say that in my case I am offended when anyone disrespects any religion. The worship of God should not be attacked by anyone. And just so you know, I have a LDS friend ( she doesn't like to be called a Mormon so I respect that). I actually have very few friend who are the same religion as me. This man should have conducted himself with much more maturity. He was being anti-catholic whether or not he intended it to be. The bottom line it what he said what wrong and it offended many people. It's not really a matter of opinion.

[4588686]

[quote name='Annie12' timestamp='1330559705' post='2394739']
"an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" - Gandhi
If he has a fight to pick with Santorum she shouldn't pick it with the Church.[/QUOTE]

He didn't pick a fight with the Church. He presented it as a deliberate misrepresentation or exaggeration of the Church to satirize Santorum's similar treatment of other groups. I can certainly understand why you find his satire offensive but it isn't an attack if he isn't seriously presenting it as an accurate depiction of what Catholics believe or do. By your logic Jonathan Swift should have left those poor Irish kids out of his beef with the British.

[QUOTE]The Church isn't responsible for what comes out of his mouth.[/QUOTE]

That's more or less true.

[QUOTE][b]I can just say that in my case I am offended when anyone disrespects any religion.[/b] The worship of God should not be attacked by anyone. And just so you know, I have a LDS friend ( she doesn't like to be called a Mormon so I respect that). I actually have very few friend who are the same religion as me.[/QUOTE]

Ok. Do you tell your LDS friend what you think of her religion? I mean you must believe that Joseph smith was a fraud. While you can hold this opinion without having any animosity for Mormons I wouldn't call this a respectful opinion to hold.

[QUOTE]This man should have conducted himself with much more maturity. He was being anti-catholic whether or not he intended it to be. The bottom line it what he said what wrong and it offended many people. It's not really a matter of opinion.
[/quote]

How is his parodying of Catholicism to satirize Santorum anti-Catholic? And his statements being wrong is quite a matter of opinion. Unless you want to objectively prove that his opinion, which you clearly don't respect, how hateful, is wrong

[4588686]

I'm not trying to discount your offense. I don't think his satire was well done. He didn't really effectively scathe Santorum and he offended a lot of people in the process. I don't think he should apologize as I'm just generally sick of people apologizing because somebody on the internet got their feelings hurt. But you chalking up a poorly done satire of a Presidential candidate as 'awful hatred' seems almost hysterical. And It just gives fuel to people like Brother Adam who is setting up to point out how uniquely and cruel Catholics in this country are persecuted. It was bad. It was offensive. But you're an adult and there's no rule that anybody has to respect your particular sensitivities. This is a fee country. You don't have to read shiitake mushroom satire on a third rate news site by a fourth rate writer if you don't want to. I'm just sick of people looking for reasons to be offended. Santorum shouldn't apologize for his idiotic claim that Obama's environmental policies amounted to a 'phony theology.' He should be mocked and not taken seriously for it, but his idiotic opinion does not constitute 'hate speech' against Obama. Franklin Grahm should have to apologize or pointing out that Obama is a Christian. I mean, who really believes that Obama's 'faith' is a centerpiece of his life?

People just need to grow up and get over it. If you want to live in a free country with the free exchange of ideas then you are going to offend people. I'm personally offended that you believe that homosexuality is a grave disorder of human nature and that gay relationships are unnatural. I also find it offensive that you think that I, and everyone else, am deserving of hell and will arrive their upon my death unless I am included in your Church. You hold a lot of opinions that I find offensive. But I don't ask you to apologize for it. Because you have a right to hold those views and as long as you're not going to try to trample on my rights, the ay your Church is currently attempting to trample on the rights of gay people everywhere, I really don't care what you believe or have any compulsion to apologize for it. I'd rather just argue with you over those beliefs or ignore them. But I wouldn't dream of making you apologize for them.

Edited March 1, 2012 by Hasan

[BigJon16]

Haters gonna' hate. So what? If he wants to be wrong and make a fool of himself, than so be it. Why should I take offense? What he says is obviously wrong, so why be bothered? I know the Truth that is the Church, and if he doesn't want to accept that, then it's his loss. If anything, I feel sorry for the guy.

[Hubertus]

[quote name='BigJon16' timestamp='1330566413' post='2394794']
Haters gonna' hate. So what? If he wants to be wrong and make a fool of himself, than so be it. Why should I take offense? What he says is obviously wrong, so why be bothered? I know the Truth that is the Church, and if he doesn't want to accept that, then it's his loss. If anything, I feel sorry for the guy.
[/quote] I pity the fool.

[BigJon16]

[quote name='Hubertus' timestamp='1330566823' post='2394798']
I pity the fool.
[/quote]

Precisely, my dear Watson.

[Winchester]

[img]http://images.channelone.com/img/life/sports/track-discus-photos.jpg[/img]

[Luigi]

I don't think he should apologize as I'm just generally sick of people apologizing because somebody on the internet got their feelings hurt.
[b]But that sixteen-year-old girl who got her feelings hurt by looking at a banner in a high school can ask for not only an apology but to have the offending speech removed, huh? Sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander. It's got to work both ways or it's discriminatory. [/b]

But you chalking up a poorly done satire of a Presidential candidate as 'awful hatred' seems almost hysterical.
[b]About like a sixteen-year-old girl getting her panties all up in a knot over the words "Heavenly Father," and "Amen," huh? Sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander. Hysteria breeds hysteria. [/b]

But you're an adult and there's no rule that anybody has to respect your particular sensitivities.
[b]Unless you're an atheist in a public high school, or any other person who holds liberal beliefs. Sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander. If lack of respect is gonna be the ground rule, then it's got to work both ways and nobody has to respect anybody else's beliefs or lack thereof. [/b]

This is a fee country. You don't have to read shiitake mushroom satire on a third rate news site by a fourth rate writer if you don't want to.
[b]Like that sixteen-year-old girld didn't have to read the banner in her high school, huh? Sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander. Ignoring disagreeable writing has to work both ways or it's discriminatory. [/b]

[b]Furthermore, whether I read it or not, I have to live with the fallout from the people who [i]do[/i] read it, repeat it, act on it, take it to the next level, etc. The damage is done whether I read it or not. [/b]

I'm just sick of people looking for reasons to be offended.
[b]Me, too. I think we all are. [/b]

People just need to grow up and get over it. If you want to live in a free country with the free exchange of ideas then you are going to offend people.
[b]In which case, nobody should be able to take anyone else to court for what they've said, which means 'hate speech' is just another invention of the left to shut up the right. Sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander - everybody's got to grow up, or nobody does. The writer offended us, we're offending him in return - fair's fair, right? [/b]

[4588686]

[quote name='Luigi' timestamp='1330580177' post='2394865']
I don't think he should apologize as I'm just generally sick of people apologizing because somebody on the internet got their feelings hurt.
[b]But that sixteen-year-old girl who got her feelings hurt by looking at a banner in a high school can ask for not only an apology but to have the offending speech removed, huh? Sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander. It's got to work both ways or it's discriminatory. [/b]

But you chalking up a poorly done satire of a Presidential candidate as 'awful hatred' seems almost hysterical.
[b]About like a sixteen-year-old girl getting her panties all up in a knot over the words "Heavenly Father," and "Amen," huh? Sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander. Hysteria breeds hysteria. [/b]

But you're an adult and there's no rule that anybody has to respect your particular sensitivities.
[b]Unless you're an atheist in a public high school, or any other person who holds liberal beliefs. Sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander. If lack of respect is gonna be the ground rule, then it's got to work both ways and nobody has to respect anybody else's beliefs or lack thereof. [/b]

This is a fee country. You don't have to read shiitake mushroom satire on a third rate news site by a fourth rate writer if you don't want to.
[b]Like that sixteen-year-old girld didn't have to read the banner in her high school, huh? Sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander. Ignoring disagreeable writing has to work both ways or it's discriminatory. [/b]

[b]Furthermore, whether I read it or not, I have to live with the fallout from the people who [i]do[/i] read it, repeat it, act on it, take it to the next level, etc. The damage is done whether I read it or not. [/b]

I'm just sick of people looking for reasons to be offended.
[b]Me, too. I think we all are. [/b]

People just need to grow up and get over it. If you want to live in a free country with the free exchange of ideas then you are going to offend people.
[b]In which case, nobody should be able to take anyone else to court for what they've said, which means 'hate speech' is just another invention of the left to shut up the right. Sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander - everybody's got to grow up, or nobody does. The writer offended us, we're offending him in return - fair's fair, right? [/b]
[/quote]

Honest to God, I don't know what about this you find elusive. A school is a state institution. The author here is a private citizen. If a school displayed a banner that had the text of this article on it alone then you could sue the have it removed, and you would be quite within your constitutional rights to do so and any attempt to intimidate you from petitioning the courts by atheists groups would be the same sort of thuggery that I find repulsive. There is an immense difference constitutionally between an endorsement or disparagement of religion by the state and the endorsement or disparagement of religion by a private citizen. I pointed this out to you numerous times in the other thread and you seem like a perfectly smart man so the only conclusion that I can come to is that for some reason you don't want to understand the distinction.

Edited March 1, 2012 by Hasan

[Luigi]

Honest to [b]GOD[/b]? But I thought... oh, never mind.

[4588686]

[quote name='Luigi' timestamp='1330581964' post='2394871']
Honest to [b]GOD[/b]? But I thought... oh, never mind.
[/quote]

It's a colloquialism.

[Basilisa Marie]

The problem with his original piece is that many Catholics experience exactly that kind of treatment, in all seriousness, from people who have a very perverted view of Catholicism. So even if it is intended as satire, it's easy to see how many Catholics can be so offended by it, because it's NOT as clear as it should be that it's satire.

What disgusts me is his "apology." A decent human being could have taken a step back, realized that what he wrote was pretty much the same thing loads of people write in all seriousness, and at least ACKNOWLEDGED that fact. He doesn't have to be sorry. It'd just be nice if he'd actually acknowledge that loads of people actually mean those things he said.

The worst part? Yeah, his article was satire, but if you read the comments section, most people who find it funny don't find it funny because of satire, they find it funny because Catholics are crazy, cannibalistic child abusers. THEY don't get it either.

I don't like Santorum, and my palm hits my face whenever he opens his mouth. He very much reminds me of a person who's just starting to do apologetics on the internet - what he believes is pretty good, but how he says it is terrible and opens the door wide open for his opposition, especially for organizations like the Huffington Post.