Apparently self-pity and passive-aggressiveness are the Church’s new cardinal virtues:
Good Lord… :rolleyes: :smack:
More of these criminals need to be sent to prison.
AMEN!
Actually, I’d like to see the next bishop who compares his “suffering” to Jesus be actually scourged, fitted with a crown of thorns, then crucified. Put your money where your mouth is.
No kidding. The fucking lowest form of idolatry is self-worship.
Pretty much all criminals need to be punished in accordance with the law.
But I’m not sure I understand what crimes Mahoney committed.
But I’ll save you some time – maybe you meant “crimes” in some nebulous sense that doesn’t include “acts prohibited by the criminal code.” Like “It’s a crime the way the Academy ignored ‘Dumb and Dumber’ at Oscar time.”
Was that it?
Or maybe this is another one of those, “Well, he’s a bad guy, so really, any accusation against him should be permitted; any defense of any accusation is the same as defending him against all criticisms. You say he’s not a criminal, Bricker, so you must be in favor of molesting little boys!”
Is that it?
Welcome to the Bricker show everybody! Don’t forget to tip your waitress!
That’s right, everyone - Poor poor Cardinal Mahoney has not been convicted of a crime, therefore he is a little lamb, innocent of all moral turpitude, and nobody, NOBODY, should every say anything bad about him. If they do, he will pray that God forgives them for being so very, very cruel to him. Poor man.
I think you already know the answer, Counselor. :dubious:
Perhaps you will someday realize just what and who you’ve been so hysterically defending, out of the habitual unquestioning institutional loyalty you have to both the church and the party you were raised in that has prevented you from ever learning a normal, human sense of morality and personal responsibility. Or perhaps not, which frankly is the way to bet.
Just in case anyone is lazy and doesn’t feel like linky-clicking, the relevant passage:
But but but… He has not been convicted!
And can you specify the precise charges that should be laid against him AND can you predict what his defense team will say (in exact words)??
Hmmmmmm???
That’s precisely it. And to further strengthen your analogy, I’m going to edit the IMDB listing to include the fact that the Academy helped cover up the rapes of children while they filmed “Dumb & Dumber.” Because without that crucial “fact” it would appear to the casual observer that your analogy is fucking idiotic.
Learn to read.
Seriously, how do you possibly remember to breathe? I’m picturing you have a little alarm to remind you.
I’m not saying that no one should anything bad about him. Far from it – I called his conduct despicable.
But it’s not criminal. Surely you can see that there’s a difference between calling someone a criminal, and simply saying anything at all bad about him? I mean, the letters in the words are shaped differently – shouldn’t that be something you could manage to notice?
A comment of : “That fucker should be in jail” Is not the same thing as “I believe that there is a reasonable chance of prosecution and eventual conviction under statute 234:45 of the Federal code”
But then you knew this. It’s the game you always play. It’s tiresome honey, and everyone knows how it goes by now.
If only there were a similar law in California to Missouri’s:
Try to stay calm.
Now, explain, calmly, the reasoning behind calling Mahoney a criminal.
Is it the use of “criminal” in some larger, metaphoric sense? Some sense beyond “he violated criminal law?”
Then that’s fine. I get that.
Was that it?
Bricker, I wrote a bunch of nasty shit about you, but instead, just let me ask - do/did you know any victims of pedophile priests? I do. Several years back, my father sent me an article from the local paper about a long-retired priest from our parish who had recently been revealed as a predator. It named two good friends of mine from grade school in the list of victims. I had to sit down & cry for a while.
A little while after that, I found out that the priest who my mother grew up with, and had been a long time family friend, and who I was fucking NAMED AFTER, had also just admitted preying on some children. My father, who had at the time recently lost his wife of 50+ years, said to me, SAID TO ME - “I’m glad your mother isn’t alive to hear this.”
So here’s the nasty shit again - fuck you, and fuck all the apologists for these worthless excuses for human beings who covered this all up for years. Law, Krol, Bevilacqua, Mahony - I actually hope there is a hell, with a brilliantly sadistic Satan in charge, to think up new eternal punishments for these monsters.
Bricker are you really playing wordplay semantics to defend a person who protected child abusers? Really?
If so you need a new hobby.
Sorry for the aside but, will you kindly be more respectful to us believers? I know you people like to strut him about as satirical ammunition, but just FYI the polite way to evoke his name on a forum is thusly: F_M.
Also, if you were a true believer, rather than someone looking to score points, you’d know that “sweet” is NOT an accurate description of our heavenly father, blessed be his noodely appendages.
“Savory” in, in fact, correct.
Is this a court room? It’s not? Shut the fuck up, then.