Is Cathlocism Worse Than Islam?

Page 11 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

whm1974

Diamond Member
Jul 24, 2016
9,436
1,567
126
Clearly not murdering people is said in the old books. You cant say that there are not any morals in the texts. The problem is that those same books often contradict themselves, or advocate things that are horribly immoral. There is some good in there too, its just that the bad shit is there so we should not look to it as our guide.
And how do those books define murder?
 

Younigue

Diamond Member
Feb 5, 2017
5,888
1,446
106
I was doing some bible reading the other day and came across where Jesus said that love covers a multitude of sins. Too bad that church folks want to point fingers at everybody who doesn't agree with them rather than seeking a peaceful path of engagement with them which would allow for a productive dialog with an exchange of ideas.
No one wants peace. They want what they want.
I know I have no tolerance for hate & regressive thinking. I don't believe it's possible to have reasoned or productive conversation with people who approach conversation with the concept of superiority of one race over another, one gender over the other, one religion over another, one sexuality over another. Who believe somehow that their rights are more important than the rights of all humans. Who believe hurting the masses will give them an advantage worth having.

But I think I (maybe) get what you're saying... If only the "christian" religious would practice what Jesus preached. But nah, they can't. They're very stuck in being superior and right to recognize they've become evil in their efforts for salvation. If God is as wrathful as the "good book" suggests... They're doomed.
 
Last edited:

Puffnstuff

Lifer
Mar 9, 2005
16,148
4,847
136
But I think I (maybe) get what you're saying... If only the "christian" religious would practice what Jesus preached. But nah, they can't. They're very stuck in being superior and right to recognize they've become evil in their efforts for salvation. If God is as wrathful as the "good book" suggests... They're doomed.
If I'm honest I struggle with it too, however, you'll never see me trying to deceive another person for personal gain especially where the gospel is concerned.
 
Reactions: Younigue

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
898
126
But I think I (maybe) get what you're saying... If only the "christian" religious would practice what Jesus preached. But nah, they can't. They're very stuck in being superior and right to recognize they've become evil in their efforts for salvation. If God is as wrathful as the "good book" suggests... They're doomed.

Is that not how almost every person in a religion acts? Inherently they believe their religion is the right one, and thus the others are wrong.
 

Younigue

Diamond Member
Feb 5, 2017
5,888
1,446
106
Is that not how almost every person in a religion acts? Inherently they believe their religion is the right one, and thus the others are wrong.
The minister at my mom's church was an amazing man. He accepted all and loved all. Truly something beautiful to behold. <--- that same minister was fired because his congregation were a bunch of low I.Q., low life, backwards, needy, dicks. His ways made them uncomfortable enough they needed to get new/old blood in his place to make them feel comfortable with their judgement/superiority toward others. My mom left that church when they fired him. She was also an accept and love them all kind of person. I was too until Cult45.

Any way, for the most part yes, that has been my experience with religious people.
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
898
126
The minister at my mom's church was an amazing man. He accepted all and loved all. Truly something beautiful to behold. <--- that same minister was fired because his congregation were a bunch of low I.Q., low life, backwards, needy, dicks. His ways made them uncomfortable enough they needed to get new/old blood in his place to make them feel comfortable with their judgement/superiority toward others. My mom left that church when they fired him. She was also an accept and love them all kind of person. I was too until Cult45.

Any way, for the most part yes, that has been my experience with religious people.

Pretty much the same as mine.
 

greatnoob

Senior member
Jan 6, 2014
968
395
136
You’re welcome noobie! I am here for the lulz. Thank you for providing them.

We’ve already seen you for the useless retard that you are, no need to tell us the obvious. The day you stop regurgitating the same old dumb conservative talking points is the day we’ll take you seriously. Also it might be a good time to start reading comprehension & critical thinking lessons because you’re turning into a complete joke with your recent posts here. You can’t make a point without some sort of insane premise or a fallacy attached to your argument, making you look very stupid when somebody has to explain t to you over multiple pages, sort of like your buddy realibrad who also isn’t capable of understanding words or context. Lol
 

Starbuck1975

Lifer
Jan 6, 2005
14,698
1,909
126
We’ve already seen you for the useless retard that you are, no need to tell us the obvious. The day you stop regurgitating the same old dumb conservative talking points is the day we’ll take you seriously. Also it might be a good time to start reading comprehension & critical thinking lessons because you’re turning into a complete joke with your recent posts here. You can’t make a point without some sort of insane premise or a fallacy attached to your argument, making you look very stupid when somebody has to explain t to you over multiple pages, sort of like your buddy realibrad who also isn’t capable of understanding words or context. Lol
Who is this “we” you speak of. There are a number of intelligent posters I enjoy exchanging ideas with. You are not one of them. If it takes you multiple pages to explain yourself, maybe the retard you seek is in the mirror. Your rants are certainly a spectacle to behold.
 

urvile

Golden Member
Aug 3, 2017
1,575
474
96
Is Catholicism worse than Islam? The first thing I do when I ask myself such a question is what does my question assume. Well the first thing I notice is that I am asking if one thing is as bad or worse than something I have already assumed is bad. And then I remind myself, what if my assumption is wrong. What if, for example, neither what I have taken as a given is bad nor the thing I want to compare it too to see if its worse aren't either of them bad or even good. Then I remember that one of the most important things I know, the only thing in fact, is that I don't know anything but used to think I did. My guess is that you may have the same problem as I do even if you may not know it, because that was just one of a shitload of other assumptions you made.

Brilliant. I truly love your work sunshine. The bolded sentence in particular is an absolute gem.
 

urvile

Golden Member
Aug 3, 2017
1,575
474
96
It's always interesting to see who gets truly butthurt. Over the well established fact that the catholic church facilitates pedophilia on a world wide and industrial scale. It's interesting but also sad. These are real kids having their lives destroyed by the catholic priests that sexually abuse them with out fear of repercussions. Sad.
 

urvile

Golden Member
Aug 3, 2017
1,575
474
96
In case you are wondering why I am posting this is why. Blame the Scots! You have to blame someone right? Just not the pedos in the Catholic church. If you are defending them....well that's for you to live with.

 

greatnoob

Senior member
Jan 6, 2014
968
395
136
Who is this “we” you speak of. There are a number of intelligent posters I enjoy exchanging ideas with. You are not one of them. If it takes you multiple pages to explain yourself, maybe the retard you seek is in the mirror. Your rants are certainly a spectacle to behold.

The guy who made a comparison of Catholic's holy figure to an extremist terrorist group from a third-world shithole, a dismissed Hollywood actor and even unrelated wars from a thousand years ago (seriously?) said unironically. If you weren't such a dense moron and if you could actually read (not selectively, though you excel at that!), I wouldn't have had to repeat the same point in a constantly watered down form.

I mean for fucks sake, I had to use examples suitable for a teen in ESL and simplified English for you to finally grasp the points made and then even despite that, to top it off, for all that effort, you didn't even bother answering a single point raised - just a meme and the typical conservatard "I'm just here to troll lulz" response when you realised you couldn't defend your original stance.

Don't fool yourself, you are a typical dishonest conservative we can all see that from your posting pattern in these types of threads. You don't bring any value into a discussion, and this thread is one of many where we have seen you make absurd claims and comparisons only for you to get called out and offer a bottom of the barrel laughably incoherent counterargument. You are like your good pal realibrad, so congrats buddy, you seem very proud of derailing this thread. Would you also care to tell us how your comparison to ISIS is related to the topic at hand now? This time try answering with a valid premise and without playing stupid.
 

Starbuck1975

Lifer
Jan 6, 2005
14,698
1,909
126
The guy who made a comparison of Catholic's holy figure to an extremist terrorist group from a third-world shithole, a dismissed Hollywood actor and even unrelated wars from a thousand years ago (seriously?) said unironically. If you weren't such a dense moron and if you could actually read (not selectively, though you excel at that!), I wouldn't have had to repeat the same point in a constantly watered down form.

I mean for fucks sake, I had to use examples suitable for a teen in ESL and simplified English for you to finally grasp the points made and then even despite that, to top it off, for all that effort, you didn't even bother answering a single point raised - just a meme and the typical conservatard "I'm just here to troll lulz" response when you realised you couldn't defend your original stance.

Don't fool yourself, you are a typical dishonest conservative we can all see that from your posting pattern in these types of threads. You don't bring any value into a discussion, and this thread is one of many where we have seen you make absurd claims and comparisons only for you to get called out and offer a bottom of the barrel laughably incoherent counterargument. You are like your good pal realibrad, so congrats buddy, you seem very proud of derailing this thread. Would you also care to tell us how your comparison to ISIS is related to the topic at hand now? This time try answering with a valid premise and without playing stupid.
For a guy asserting a mastery of the english language, brevity is not your strength.

I don’t think you understand the topic. The topic is a comparison of Islam and Catholicism in terms of which is worst. The OP used priests as a data point. That is just one data point. If we are going to compare religions, the scope of that discussion includes both representation and behavior.

I’ve also asserted its a futile comparison.

You jumped into the conversation with a bone to pick, triggered yourself into a corner and have been flailing around ever since.

If the OP posed the question, “Why are Catholics such hypocrites”, I wouldn’t be debating the premise of the thread at all.

I anxiously await your wall of text response.
 

greatnoob

Senior member
Jan 6, 2014
968
395
136
For a guy asserting a mastery of the english language, brevity is not your strength.

I don’t think you understand the topic. The topic is a comparison of Islam and Catholicism in terms of which is worst. The OP used priests as a data point. That is just one data point. If we are going to compare religions, the scope of that discussion includes both representation and behavior.

I’ve also asserted its a futile comparison.

You jumped into the conversation with a bone to pick, triggered yourself into a corner and have been flailing around ever since.

If the OP posed the question, “Why are Catholics such hypocrites”, I wouldn’t be debating the premise of the thread at all.

I anxiously await your wall of text response.

This is a funny post considering you just said I didn’t understand the topic at hand. I did and I explained it to you many times how far fetched your comparisons were and even now it seems like you’re too dense to understand. That or you’re playing stupid because you know how stupid your comparisons were, how obvious it is you’re arguing in bad faith and that you’ve only further detailed this thread just as I said you would.


You jumped into the conversation with a bone to pick, triggered yourself into a corner and have been flailing around ever since.
Written vaguely like a dishonest conservatard. What bone was I picking? I called you out on your whataboutism which you haven’t bothered responding to. ‘Triggered yourself into a corner’ how exactly? I wasn’t the one who derailed the thread, made multiple bizarre comparisons with even more absurd assumptions based solely on the thread’s title lol. ‘Flailing around’ how? I explained exactly to you multiple times, with examples and different forms why your assumptions, premises and your entire argument was wrong. The one flailing around would be you, not only did you try to brush it off as a joke when you couldn’t respond to my point but you’ve been playing stupid and are now creating vague accusations like this entire paragraph I quoted. I told you exactly what you did wrong but you’ve just accused me of doing all the things you’ve done yourself without pointng to any specifics.

You again, didn’t answer anything I asked of you. Are you getting the point yet? Or do I have to keep dumbing it down for you?
 

urvile

Golden Member
Aug 3, 2017
1,575
474
96
What the hell is “Cathlocism”? It’s difficult to want to even debate in this ridiculous thread if you can’t even spell catholicism correctly.

I know streaming is the rage these days with the millenials but you shouldn’t rely on a Netflix miniseries as the basis for any theological guidance.

You are correct I didn't spell Catholism correctly. I can spell pedophile, catholic priest and touching up little boys correctly though. Does that make up for it? This thread has nothing to do with theological guidance and everything to do with catholic priests raping children. Then having their superiors cover it up. Amen.

To be honest with you though if you want to defend the sexual assault of children that would be between you and your perverted, fucked up catholic god. Amen.
 

whm1974

Diamond Member
Jul 24, 2016
9,436
1,567
126
You are correct I didn't spell Catholism correctly. I can spell pedophile, catholic priest and touching up little boys correctly though. Does that make up for it? This thread has nothing to do with theological guidance and everything to do with catholic priests raping children. Then having their superiors cover it up. Amen.

To be honest with you though if you want to defend the sexual assault of children that would be between you and your perverted, fucked up catholic god. Amen.
As far as I know the RCC does not consider itself accountable at all to the rest of the World. Come to think of it didn't various Popes and Councils declared that the RRC has both Spiritual and Temporal Authority given to it God over the entire World during it's history?

Perhaps it is long overdue for secular nations to show the RCC that in fact it does not any Authority at all and it can be and will be held accountable for it's harmful actions.
 

greatnoob

Senior member
Jan 6, 2014
968
395
136
I did answer your question

You don’t have one, but you think you do

I don’t think you can possibly dumb down the conversation any more than you already have

You haven't answered me at all. No need to be dishonest I'm going to show it right here with all of our posts to make sure your shit and deflect tactic is obvious to all.

Here's the point, I've made and repeated to you throughout the entire thread. You see when I call you a dense retard, it's because of things like this:

When it comes to Trump and his bandwagon you and a few other idiots here dash straight into the “both sides” BS rhetoric. Then when the topic changes to Christian pedos, suddenly you’re all cured from bothsideitis and now Kevin Spacey, crusades from a thousand years ago and ISIS (a terrorist organisation) are your baseline for the whataboutism we’ve seen so far in this thread. Pretty low bar, but I have to admit I love seeing this dramatic change of your beloved logical fallacy.

This was in response to your stupid comparisons to Spacey...
Spacey and Singer just went underground until this blows over, kind of like how the Catholic church reassigns priests facing accusations. Singer’s been partying it up in Dubai and Spacey is starting to work the PR game. Also, Spacey and Singer are simply the poster children of an industry in deep denial of its systemic problems, kind of like the Catholic church.

... your even dumber comparison to a terrorist group:
When I deployed to the Balkans, we protected ethnic minority Muslims from Christians, Christians that did some pretty horrific things.

Yet fast forward a few years to Afghanistan, and coalition forces had to look the other way at the widespread sexual abuse that was culturally accepted by “the good guys” we were helping to fight the arguably worst Taliban. Many of the warlords and tribal elders had an affinity for young boys.

And up until recently, ISIS exhibited pure inexcusable evil, such as beheading journalists on social media, not to mention widespread abuse of women and young girls.

this comparison only a true retard like you could come up with, took it to the next level...
Now compare and contrast that to the refugee camps in Syria that currently contain hundreds if not thousands of teenage girls pregnant with the babies of ISIS fighters, refugees that no Islamic or Western nation will take out of fear that these young women were not only raped but also radicalized.

I called you out on your whataboutism - because you clearly didn't even try to make a valid comparison relevant to the topic at hand:
Your post above shows exactly the stupidity I explained. In fact your whataboutism went as far as to call another user a theoretical pedo:

Your response:

I called you out on your stupid comparisons:
Unsurprising response considering you've set the bar pretty low for pedophile priests, that you have to reach at ISIS to make a comparison, LOL indeed. I wouldn't be surprised if you started raving about pizzagate and Hillary and that these Christian pedophiles are somehow the doing of Democrats. Still no condemnation from you, just whataboutism. Not surprised at all.

You thought your comparisons including "the Crusades, the Ottoman Empire, the divine right monarchies of Europe, Vlad the Impaler, the Spanish Inquisition, 9/11" were valid because you read the title of the thread, but completely missed the topic at hand, you even included "pedophile priests" in your list ironically not realising that was the point made in the original post you obviously didn't read:
I will explain it again because you are slow. No one is defending pedophile priests. But this thread does ask the question if Catholism is worst than Islam. Posing such a question assumes a comparison, which requires criteria. In making that comparison, some have used history as a gauge. Others are pointing to more recent events. ISIS is a reasonable data point, as are the Crusades, the Ottoman Empire, the divine right monarchies of Europe, Vlad the Impaler, the Spanish Inquisition, 9/11 and yes pedophile priests as well.

I asked you whether you read the actual post and not just the title of the thread:
Read the original post again, because you clearly haven't. I see no comparison to Islam or even a mention of it but if you want to go with the thread title only and completely miss the entire point that OP was making (about pedophile priests, if you bothered to read it), then by all means go ahead. Just realise that would make you the slow one for missing the point 3 times in a row.

Here is when you doubled down on your ignorance. You (wrongly) thought the thread was just another Christianity vs Islam because you obviously didn't read the original thread post:

Because the thread title posed a question that inherently requires a comparison, a comparison I’ve already stated is pointless.

Now, if you were paying attention you'd have realised you didn't make any valid comparisons to Islam, but instead Hollywood actors, terrorist groups and crusades from 1000s of years ago. How is this related to pedophile priests in your mind? I don't know :
If you think Kevin Spacey and ISIS are good comparison points, then you're the one dancing. You reek of desperation when you post bizarre examples like those, so maybe instead of doubling down this time how about you stop your deflection attempts and address the real problem: pedophile Catholic priests raping children. This is the 3rd time I've told you to get on topic off from your unhinged and laughable comparisons to terrorists from third-world shitholes.

Not only did you not realise your comparisons to Islam (you posted NONE) weren't related to the thread, but you kept talking about the thread title (clearly you didn't read the thread):

Then why mention Islam in the thread title if not to invite a comparison? If the OP wanted to have a discussion around pedophile priests, there would be no need to mention Islam at all.

You’ve triggered yourself into a corner. Good luck!

I explained it to you again, that your examples don't make sense to the topic at hand and that they're not valid EVEN if you thought this was another one of those Islam vs Christianity threads. I asked you how you thought your comparisons were valid to the thread's topic (pedophile catholic priests having authority in their religion and being able to get away with it) and how ISIS and catholic priests were equivalent in your mind:

This is the 4th time I’m repeating myself: you have gone off on a completely different tangent with extreme/weird whataboutisms with terrorists and Hollywood actors (who are they representing again? Islam?) in contrast to Catholic PRIESTS - you know, a representative of the faith. Can you highlight how they’re equivalent? Your baseline is so low that it seems like you shitted out whatever first came to mind to desperately deflect away from the original topic at hand - which I’ll add you had barely discussed until I called it out.

Then in order for your bizarre comparisons to work you decided that there should be no baseline for any comparisons. So in your eyes Catholic Pedophile Priests who represent Christianity could be compared to an extremist terrorist group that didn't represent Islam itself and is condemned by its followers.
The OP never set parameters for the comparison, so you don’t get to assert “authoritative representative” to limit the discussion to whatever point you think you are making.

I again make your invalid comparisons apparent to you again and ask you how your stupid comparisons, at all, make sense:
Sounds like you actually, because you admitted to not reading anything apart from the title lol. You didn't answer my question. How are ISIS and Kevin Spacey (who aren't authoritative representatives of Islam) a good comparison point to OP's focus, Catholic priests (who in fact are authoritative representatives of Christianity)? I'm asking this to make it obvious to you how you aren't really concerned about the topic at hand. You're just here to deflect the discussion away from the original focus (your stupid equivalences are evidence of that).
Of course, you dodge my question again, I go ahead and explain it to you again. I call you out on your bullshit excuse that absurd comparisons like yours were valid because you weren't told otherwise by OP (lol that was hilarious) to which I explain to you that any bizarre assumptions or premises automatically invalidate your point. Nobody in their right mind would think a condemned group of terrorists not endorsed by Muslims is a representative of Islam unlike Catholic priests who actually ARE a representative of Catholic Christians. You purposely kept missing this point and I called you out on it asking for an answer to this specific point:

You didn’t answer my question at all but I’m not surprised in the least with your track record of selective reading Now you’re just throwing shit hoping it sticks.

Why did you intentionally miss the part (You keep doing this) where I explained to you ISIS - a fringe terrorist group which Muslims do not consider as their authoritative representative - are not comparable to priests - which Christians DO consider their authoritative representative? The crap you wrote here is based on the laughable assumption that Muslims have placed ISIS on equal footing as to how Catholics have placed their priests. That’s a bizarre thing to think and I’m sure you’re smart enough to know better than that. In case you haven’t understood: ISIS is condemned by Muslims because they are an extremist terrorist group, priests are on the other hand are looked at as holy role models. You have compared a terrorist organisation to priests and are stupid enough to think that is a valid comparison in the context of what’s being argued here. It isn’t.

The fact you’ve even admitted that making stupid equivalancies like these are fine to you because you haven’t been told otherwise, proves my point: you are only here to deflect away from the topic at hand even if it means making nonsensical comparisons with equally stupid assumptions.

Tell me how this comparison works in your mind? Should we be lowering the bar this much and comparing priests to fringe terrorist groups? Or is it your shitty attempt at deflection like your Spacey comment you’ve now backtracked on?

This time try not to dodge what I’ve said to you.

You thought, by me showing you why your comparison was invalid, that I was adding my own criteria for you to follow (fucking lol):
Because “authoritative representative” is a criteria you asserted to support your argument but is not a requirement to make a comparison.

I explain to you once again that there is no criteria being set by me other than asking you to explain to me why your comparison makes sense when all you were doing was comparing apples to oranges:

Jesus are you dense. In plain English I’m telling you your comparisons are invalid. Do you understand why? I could come up with a BS argument similarly as stupid as yours: 6’5 White Males are rapists because [insert actor here] may have play roled as a rapist in a film. Your baseline for comparison is almost at the level of other unsubstantiated and stupid claims conservatards make up to the point where they can easily be brushed off without a second thought. You are reaching way too hard with the examples you’ve given because not only do you have to look outside of first world countries but you have to reach so far as a fucking terrorist group to make a comparison at all! How many times do I have to rephrase and repeat this to you?

I’ve added NO criteria of my own, that’s me pointimg out to you how easily dismissable your comparisons are. I’ve explained to you that you can’t compare apples to oranges because one is not similar to the other. Unless of course you are saying priests and terrorists are one and alike and are seen similarly in status/character/role to both of their respective religions. Absurd, I know but THAT is the comparison you’ve made and you are stupid enough to defend after so many rules I’ve pointed it out to you. Now think about that instead of dodging it with a BS answer like “there were no criterias so I can come up with any shitty comparison I like because nobody said otherwise.”

At this point you’re just admitting that you’re arguing in bad faith and just for the sake of arguing, again proving my initial point. You dont give a flying *** about what op has posted you’re just here to shit out whatever comes to mind to deflect from actual discussion. Stop your stupid act and let’s see an actuall answer as to why you think a comparison between ISIS and priests sits congruent in any state of mind. I’m sure you’re not stupid enough to dismiss the fact one is a terrorist organisation condemned by its religious followers while the other is revered for its holy status by its religious group. Then again you’re not very bright so I wouldn’t be surprised if that was the best example you could shit out.

Then again, you completely miss what I say (selective reading?) and ask me the same thing despite me going out of my way to explain and tell you NOBODY set any criterias except for comparisons to be valid and your premises to hold up (see above quote) where yours obviously didn't (I'll repeat it for the 100th time again, ISIS and Kevin Spacey are not representative of Islam, Catholic Priests are!):

Show me where the OP set those parameters for the comparison and I will gladly concede the point, and then you won’t have to repeat yourself.
I’ve explained this to you so many times, you dense imbecile: there are no criterias but to be arguing in good faith (which you’re clearly not and I’ve proven beyond doubt by this point) youd have to make a valid comparison unlike the bizarre ones you’ve made in this thread. Your comparisons are invalid. Now feel free to respond to the rest of my post that you unsurprisingly didn’t bother to read. I’ll take it you’ve conceded on the rest because I sure as hell cant see any reasonable person argue that priests and terrorists are the same, which is the invalidating premise of your comparison. Now try again, answer the question or don’t.


Of course you dodged it once again. Once you realised yourself your comparisons weren't valid and your entire argument was nonsense this is the typical conservatard "its only a joke bro" response I get:
You’re welcome noobie! I am here for the lulz. Thank you for providing them.

Now look at my original post to you and you'll see it fits well. You've done nothing but play stupid, lie, dodge and argue in bad faith.

Your baseline is so low that it seems like you shitted out whatever first came to mind to desperately deflect away from the original topic at hand - which I’ll add you had barely discussed until I called it out.
Thanks for proving my point for me. You’re not here for a discussion, you’re here to deflect with your whataboutism.
The fact you’ve even admitted that making stupid equivalancies like these are fine to you because you haven’t been told otherwise, proves my point: you are only here to deflect away from the topic at hand even if it means making nonsensical comparisons with equally stupid assumptions.



Executive Summary (TL;DR):



In case you're still wondering whether OP was making a general comparison of Islam vs Christianity or if it was specifically about catholic priests raping kiddies, here's your answer:
You are correct I didn't spell Catholism correctly. I can spell pedophile, catholic priest and touching up little boys correctly though. Does that make up for it? This thread has nothing to do with theological guidance and everything to do with catholic priests raping children. Then having their superiors cover it up. Amen.

To be honest with you though if you want to defend the sexual assault of children that would be between you and your perverted, fucked up catholic god. Amen.

This is instead what you asserted this thread was about (if you were wondering why I call you a retard who isn't capable of reading comprehension this is why) despite OP saying otherwise - see above:
But this thread does ask the question if Catholism is worst than Islam.

If the OP wanted to have a discussion around pedophile priests, there would be no need to mention Islam at all.
The OP propositioned a question as his thread title and then asserted priest pedophilia as evidence

Now that you know this without any doubt what this thread is about, can you answer my question that you've so craftily dodged throughout multiple pages: How is your comparison of Kevin Spacey, ISIS and crusades from more than 1000 years ago remotely valid or even relevant to Catholic priests raping children? And when did the aforementioned start to represent Islam?

Don't dodge it this time around you dishonest dropkick.
 

Starbuck1975

Lifer
Jan 6, 2005
14,698
1,909
126
You haven't answered me at all. No need to be dishonest I'm going to show it right here with all of our posts to make sure your shit and deflect tactic is obvious to all.

Here's the point, I've made and repeated to you throughout the entire thread. You see when I call you a dense retard, it's because of things like this:



This was in response to your stupid comparisons to Spacey...


... your even dumber comparison to a terrorist group:


this comparison only a true retard like you could come up with, took it to the next level...


I called you out on your whataboutism - because you clearly didn't even try to make a valid comparison relevant to the topic at hand:


Your response:


I called you out on your stupid comparisons:


You thought your comparisons including "the Crusades, the Ottoman Empire, the divine right monarchies of Europe, Vlad the Impaler, the Spanish Inquisition, 9/11" were valid because you read the title of the thread, but completely missed the topic at hand, you even included "pedophile priests" in your list ironically not realising that was the point made in the original post you obviously didn't read:


I asked you whether you read the actual post and not just the title of the thread:


Here is when you doubled down on your ignorance. You (wrongly) thought the thread was just another Christianity vs Islam because you obviously didn't read the original thread post:



Now, if you were paying attention you'd have realised you didn't make any valid comparisons to Islam, but instead Hollywood actors, terrorist groups and crusades from 1000s of years ago. How is this related to pedophile priests in your mind? I don't know :


Not only did you not realise your comparisons to Islam (you posted NONE) weren't related to the thread, but you kept talking about the thread title (clearly you didn't read the thread):



I explained it to you again, that your examples don't make sense to the topic at hand and that they're not valid EVEN if you thought this was another one of those Islam vs Christianity threads. I asked you how you thought your comparisons were valid to the thread's topic (pedophile catholic priests having authority in their religion and being able to get away with it) and how ISIS and catholic priests were equivalent in your mind:



Then in order for your bizarre comparisons to work you decided that there should be no baseline for any comparisons. So in your eyes Catholic Pedophile Priests who represent Christianity could be compared to an extremist terrorist group that didn't represent Islam itself and is condemned by its followers.


I again make your invalid comparisons apparent to you again and ask you how your stupid comparisons, at all, make sense:

Of course, you dodge my question again, I go ahead and explain it to you again. I call you out on your bullshit excuse that absurd comparisons like yours were valid because you weren't told otherwise by OP (lol that was hilarious) to which I explain to you that any bizarre assumptions or premises automatically invalidate your point. Nobody in their right mind would think a condemned group of terrorists not endorsed by Muslims is a representative of Islam unlike Catholic priests who actually ARE a representative of Catholic Christians. You purposely kept missing this point and I called you out on it asking for an answer to this specific point:



You thought, by me showing you why your comparison was invalid, that I was adding my own criteria for you to follow (fucking lol):


I explain to you once again that there is no criteria being set by me other than asking you to explain to me why your comparison makes sense when all you were doing was comparing apples to oranges:



Then again, you completely miss what I say (selective reading?) and ask me the same thing despite me going out of my way to explain and tell you NOBODY set any criterias except for comparisons to be valid and your premises to hold up (see above quote) where yours obviously didn't (I'll repeat it for the 100th time again, ISIS and Kevin Spacey are not representative of Islam, Catholic Priests are!):





Of course you dodged it once again. Once you realised yourself your comparisons weren't valid and your entire argument was nonsense this is the typical conservatard "its only a joke bro" response I get:



Now look at my original post to you and you'll see it fits well. You've done nothing but play stupid, lie, dodge and argue in bad faith.







Executive Summary (TL;DR):



In case you're still wondering whether OP was making a general comparison of Islam vs Christianity or if it was specifically about catholic priests raping kiddies, here's your answer:


This is instead what you asserted this thread was about (if you were wondering why I call you a retard who isn't capable of reading comprehension this is why) despite OP saying otherwise - see above:





Now that you know this without any doubt what this thread is about, can you answer my question that you've so craftily dodged throughout multiple pages: How is your comparison of Kevin Spacey, ISIS and crusades from more than 1000 years ago remotely valid or even relevant to Catholic priests raping children? And when did the aforementioned start to represent Islam?

Don't dodge it this time around you dishonest dropkick.
You’re supposed to put the executive summary to the front, that way the reader can assess the quality of your argument. Yours is lacking.

Also, you forgot my first post in the thread which should put the whole conversation in perspective for you. You invested this much time in summarizing the thread, might as well go for accuracy.

I don’t need a book report to know that you are wrong. What is the thread title?
 
Last edited:

greatnoob

Senior member
Jan 6, 2014
968
395
136
You forgot my first post in the thread which should put the whole conversation in perspective for you. I don’t need a book report to know that you are wrong. What is the thread title?

Ah, yet another dodge, backpeddle and the "it was just a prank bro" deflect now that you've realised you have nothing else to stand on and that you can't respond. It only took you multiple pages to finally realise your stupidity (I actually still doubt you do) and that you were completely wrong about the premise of the thread. Not only did I explain to you multiple times what the thread was about (again backed up by OP explicitly now disagreeing with it being a Islam v Christianity thread that you thought it was) but you are back to the "but the thread title" fuckery which I've already adressed multiple times. Was it my fault you were too much of a dumbfuck to read the original thread post? How dense and stupid are you old man?

Let me repeat what you said and contrast that with what the OP said the thread was about once more:
This thread has nothing to do with theological guidance and everything to do with catholic priests raping children. Then having their superiors cover it up.

This entire time you've asserted and argued the opposite:
If the OP wanted to have a discussion around pedophile priests, there would be no need to mention Islam at all.

You said you answered my question, I don't see any answers, just countless misses, dishonesty, lies, retard-level arguments and backpeddling. So let's hear an answer to the question I've asked you multiple times fucktard:
How is your comparison of Kevin Spacey, ISIS and crusades from more than 1000 years ago remotely valid or even relevant to Catholic priests raping children? And when did the aforementioned start to represent Islam?

I want to make it obvious to others how your shit and deflect tactics work. So far we're at
1) "it's just a prank bro" x 2
2) misrepresenting what the thread was about - you failed pretty hard when OP clarified exactly what it was about
3) pedantry
4) invalid arguments / wrong assumptions and premises - ISIS is not a representative of Islam, the fact I have to keep spelling it out for a dense fuck like you makes it seem like you're suffering some sort of mental illness
5) whataboutisms to unrelated events/people - crusades and holy wars are relevant to pedophile priests how exactly?
6) thread derailing
7) playing stupid - I'd wager you are stupid
8) selective reading / not responding to points made
9) straight out lying - I haven't seen you answer any of the points I've made. You just deflect and run

I realise you're going to keep this stupid act so I'll keep pressuring you to answer so others can see the dishonest conservatard that you really are.
 

Starbuck1975

Lifer
Jan 6, 2005
14,698
1,909
126
Ah, yet another dodge, backpeddle and the "it was just a prank bro" deflect now that you've realised you have nothing else to stand on and that you can't respond. It only took you multiple pages to finally realise your stupidity (I actually still doubt you do) and that you were completely wrong about the premise of the thread. Not only did I explain to you multiple times what the thread was about (again backed up by OP explicitly now disagreeing with it being a Islam v Christianity thread that you thought it was) but you are back to the "but the thread title" fuckery which I've already adressed multiple times. Was it my fault you were too much of a dumbfuck to read the original thread post? How dense and stupid are you old man?

Let me repeat what you said and contrast that with what the OP said the thread was about once more:


This entire time you've asserted and argued the opposite:


You said you answered my question, I don't see any answers, just countless misses, dishonesty, lies, retard-level arguments and backpeddling. So let's hear an answer to the question I've asked you multiple times fucktard:
How is your comparison of Kevin Spacey, ISIS and crusades from more than 1000 years ago remotely valid or even relevant to Catholic priests raping children? And when did the aforementioned start to represent Islam?

I want to make it obvious to others how your shit and deflect tactics work. So far we're at
1) "it's just a prank bro" x 2
2) misrepresenting what the thread was about - you failed pretty hard when OP clarified exactly what it was about
3) pedantry
4) invalid arguments / wrong assumptions and premises - ISIS is not a representative of Islam, the fact I have to keep spelling it out for a dense fuck like you makes it seem like you're suffering some sort of mental illness
5) whataboutisms to unrelated events/people - crusades and holy wars are relevant to pedophile priests how exactly?
6) thread derailing
7) playing stupid - I'd wager you are stupid
8) selective reading / not responding to points made
9) straight out lying - I haven't seen you answer any of the points I've made. You just deflect and run

I realise you're going to keep this stupid act so I'll keep pressuring you to answer so others can see the dishonest conservatard that you really are.
I love it when you talk dirty. What is the thread title?
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |