[
](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=7159532&postcount=409)
Look’s like your goin’ there yourself!
CMC
Oh, let’s play the bible quote game.
Judge not, lest ye shall also be judged.
Searches only point to a Bishop Updike as a possibility, but since the guy I found is a Mormon it can not be, so I can confidently say: be fruitful and multiply with yourself Updike!
for with the same measure that you use they shall measure to you in return
I can live with that.
CMC
“Don’t assert something is true unless you’ve made the least effort to see if it is actually is true. At least not more than once.”
I’m Unitarian now. I get to make up my own scripture.
Isn’t it great we have free will? Some of us Catholics take the faith seriously. If you were to do something to earn excommunication, and you have faith in the Church, you know damn well you’re going to hell. If you really don’t give a shit about it, it won’t bother you so much. In which case you can join another church and seek salvation in whatever form you want.
I’ll never understand the animosity towards Catholics. Sure, we’ve made some mistakes in the past, but we can’t all be Jesus. If the strict rules don’t appeal to you and you don’t like the Pope, find a denomination you’re comfortable with.
But when people start ragging on the Pope, expect a fight from Catholics. It’s deeply personal to us, more than non-Catholics and “recovering Catholics” can understand. You’re more likely to get away with insulting our mothers.
Anyway, that’s my 2 cents. Carry on.
Quick, everyone, he’s getting away! Get him! Tie him down and make him post here at least a dozen times!
I see you’re still banging on about “liberals profess to be full of tolerance”. Thanks for replying to my spiel about the dumbity* of labels, but do you have any comment on “intolerance of intolerance”? Do you still think that it’s ‘a bit rich’ for tolerant people to pile on to a bigot? (which is what Martin most certainly is, regardless of which conservatives/liberals/pastafarians/flusswoobles might or might not be)
*I’m feeling superneologismic today
Which, eventually, and after quite some excursions, brings us back to the subject of the OP. 
DINGDINGDINGDING!!! KAPLOOEY!!!
That’s my ironymeter exploding, folks.
Who on earth was dissing the Pope? I mentioned him earlier, but I’m not Catholic. Where in this thread is there anti-Catholic sentiment? Who gives a fuck? We were dissing Martin --perhaps he is a Pretender to the papacy. (this is devolving in my mind to a Monty Python skit).
Miller -I wasn’t aware of that, but that’s my ignorance. Thanks for the info.
To tie the thread together:
Liberals, conservatives AND catholics agree that Martin Hyde frequently posts in a manner which suggests that his fingertips have been figuratively grafted to his anus.
Go go gadget jerkface!
:O!
I must be misreading…
Nope, that’s what it says. Well, when you can get all those groups to agree on something, I think it tells us a little bit about Martin Hyde.
He’s a uniterer, not a dividerer! 
Fuckin’ A right he does.
Do I deserve to be hated? Maybe, maybe not. Depends by whom, don’t it?
By Martin? Sure. I’ve given him reason.
By, say, (to pick a name at random)Brainglutton? Only if he’s someone who feels a deep love for Martin.
See, because I’ve given one and not the other a reason.
Now, your best boy Martin has gone ahead and said that large groups of people were a cancer on society and that the death penalty is appropriate for someone who steals $26. And that’s just in the last day or so. And, he apparently believes this shit. Because if he didn’t, he’d be a troll.
So, yes, he does deserve to be hated. So does Pat Robertson. So does David Duke.
-Joe
Yep, and so do they think you deserve to be hated…and on and on it goes, just like I said.
Then, when enough mutual hatred is in the air, we have bad consequences of the type that it’s always been my impression causes the left to revile hatred. Or is that only when the hatred is aimed at things the left favors, as many of the posts to this thread seem to indicate?
(And as an aside, I must say that I find it most amusing to observe how this has evolved into a thread full of lefties advocating for hate. It’s been my impression over the last few decades that hatred was supposed to be a hallmark of small-minded, bigoted conservatism. Now I find that the issue isn’t really hatred – it’s just that the right was merely hating the wrong things. You guys might want to be more specific about these things in the future so as not to gain the reputation of being the political philosophy opposed to hate.)
Oh, give it a rest, already. You’ve tried your best to turn this into some sort of political screed against liberals, but were unsuccessful.
I don’t see any lefties here advocating for hate–what a way to paraphrase.
Frankly, if you DON’T “hate” David Duke (or at least hold him in contempt) that says far more about you than it does about Merjeek. Are you tolerant of Mr Duke? Are you sympathetic to his views? If you are indeed tolerant, then welcome to the liberal side of the aisle. See, we are tolerant too–in that we admit to his right to free speech. There is no “right to approval of disgustingly racist views”, so Mr Duke gets full disapproval, even hate. Can you say the same? You say you’re a-religious, so it is not religious scruples that hold you back from admitting to such a strong feeling.
For me, I wouldn’t put David Duke and our own dear marty on the same level, but it’s all a matter of opinion.
I gotta hand it to ya, SA --you’re one great conservative. You stay on message, no matter how irrelevant that message is. You might want to examine the illogic of the message someday. I notice that you never did address my questions re what exactly is the Right tolerant of and how is the left intolerant, but perhaps it’s easier to stay “on message” than to critically think.
Frankly – and though you may find this laughable – I was trying to do you a kindness. I had quite the lengthy response written up, but you had reached such a point by then that I could see things were really getting to you so I wiped it out and instead posted my comment stating that I hadn’t intended to bait or mock you. Yes, you started out resonably enough (comments about agreeing with me and that you must therefore be ‘febrile’ notwithstanding ) and I felt I was responding in kind. When it became obvious that either I was unintentionally overstating my case to you, or that you were taking what I was saying much too seriously, I decided to back off, as although I disagree with you quite wholeheartedly on many issues, I still think of you as being quite a good person and I didn’t want to intentionally upset you – which by that time would have been the case no matter what I’d said.
I hope this isn’t directed at me. I’m not ragging on Catholicism, I’m ragging on peoples’ hypocrisy and ignorance.
Jesus, no one is bashing Catholics here. We’re bashing Martin Hyde’s using Catholicism as an excuse to be a bigot and Updike’s total ignorance of canon law.
But you’re being intolerant!
Bad liberal! Bad! Now go have an abortion and hump someone of the same sex and we’ll let you back in the coven.
-Joe
Oh, and how do I now resist?
Sorry, Frank , I dont’ think I can.
Stay tuned.
That’s mighty white of you, Starving A
:rolleyes:
I’m slow, but catching up fast. So anyone who disagrees with your preconceived notions is unreasonable? I’m all for peace and love (latent hippie in me) but I choke on patronizing. I wonder what “point” I had reached? We females tend to reach so many points. Must be that time of the month. :rolleyes:
umm… who’s judging whom here? :rolleyes:
This is fun!