Indeed, this thread is pretty sad. My guess is he needed the ego boost after having his ass handed to him in the Pope thread. Where in he argued it was some how okay for the Catholic Church to expect (with threats of hell-fire) a 9 year old rape victim to die because her rapist impregnated her with twins, and she was too young to carry the pregnancy.
Since we’re bring up old stuff in this thread.
Hey Bricker, how’d that Bushy Chaney thing work out fer ya?
You know the guy who got hundreds of thousands killed over WMDs he hallucinated while ignoring the huge economy wrecking crises.
How does it feel to know how much pain your chosen republicunt candidate caused for the country? You know, the one you personally rooted for.
How might things have turned out if Bush “the decider” decided to worry about fixing America instead of killing Arabs and cushy deals with Blackwater (now Xe)?
Since you’re so omniscient, you must have have saw that coming. Thanks for all the debt and unemployment Bricker.
.
Guy made a hyperbolic prediction. Guy was wrong. Guy got called on it. Lesson is not to make hyperbolic predictions, or if you do, be right about them, or, if you’re wrong, expect to be called on them.
That would be indicative of the quality of your reasoning, all right.
Pope thread started: 05-20-2010, 05:15 PM
This thread started: 05-20-2010, 11:22 AM
Your usual keen insight at work.
And of course, your keen insight is coupled with an equally keen abilty to read. Needless to say, I never wrote anything like that.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!
Yes. Because the specific prediction about the results of one law, in arguing against it, are precisely equal to general support for a candidate. Well done.
Or… man up and admit that you were in error, which to date Steve MB has not done.
But he was attacking a conservative-favored law, so his heart was in the right place… so it’s all good. No one should be held accountable under those circumstances.
Here’s a prediction: Tao’s Revenge’s reply will NOT take resposnibility for this error. He won’t say anything, not even, “Yeah you’re still a prick, but I was wrong about this one thing.”
Unless, possibly, he reads this spoiler first and has an attack of shame.
Way off, man! I can’t believe you think that. Events in the next 18 to 24 months are going to prove you so wrong. Oh, the humble pie you’ll have to choke down!
Well played, Bricker. A little obsessive maybe, but well played nonetheless.
Incorrect. I asked **Bricker **of his opinion on that particular case, and he agreed that an abortion was appropriate. Of course, by doing so he also excommunicated himself, and I haven’t had a chance to see his reaction to that yet. But let’s please stick to castigating him for the retarded shit he has *actually *said.
According to the link I posted, yes, you did: any Catholic who believes that direct abortion is ever acceptable under any circumstances is automatically excommunicated. And you said that it was okay for the nine-year-old girl to get an abortion of her rape-induced twins. Which is in direct conflict with the Church. So, enjoy your lack of Eucharist.
Well Bricker it seems I did misread it, but that doesn’t change the fact that your political ideology was completely and utterly incompetently wrong. Nor that I’m not the only one who finds your position ambiguous at best.
You actually start this thread after 8 years of crowing for torturing, trillion dollar war-hundreds of thousands dead over nothing, trashed economy over failed economic ideology Bush? Really? Really? You couldn’t see a muppet with a Carl Rove’s hand up it’s butt was bad news? Are you daft?
But you got one thing right 3 years ago. Good job Bricker. That’s very special. Gold star for you.
No, any Catholic who gets an abortion or performs an abortion is automatically excommunicated. Merely believing that abortion is acceptable isn’t excommunicatable.
I don’t agree with Bricker on much of anything, but I do agree that it was perfectly fine and appropriate to post this thread. We’re supposed to be in the business of fighting ignorance, right? Is there a statute of limitations on how far we can go back to fight said ignorance? Three years doesn’t seem like a long time at all. Hell, if the board were around when the Valdez spill happened 20 years ago and someone predicted that everything would be perfectly back to normal by now, I’d hope someone one go back and point out that said prediction was not correct (I don’t have the cites handy, but something cited in another thread mentioned that there’s still oil up there).
Bricker, you and I probably differ on 99% of the issues discussed on this board, but starting this thread is not one of them. Well done.
And just to clarify matters, here is the relevant section.
I notice, though, that this article was published on May 20, 2004. Why, there couldn’t possibly be any connection with the then-current flap about John Kerry’s support for abortion rights, could there?
Thank you for reposting. I must have missed the first iteration.
My first comment is that article is written by someone named “Ronald L. Conte Jr.” He provides the following biography on the site you linked to:
He has no academic credentials is canon law. I do. He’s not a bishop or a priest. His opinion of whether a particular belief constitutes apostasy or heresy is his own, not given any weight by any church authority. Even if his words were accpted as completely accurate, I deny that my assertion constitutes obstinate refutation or a revealed truth. More to the point, I deny his conclusions.
I took the question seriously enough to bring to my diocesan Bishop. Having described my belief and providing him a link to Conte’s article, he agrees that my actions here do not incur any sanction, excommunication or otherwise.
I have to say my detector went off somewhat when I saw the “2004” date on the article and I thought back to the controversy over Kerry and his support for abortion rights.
Where did you study canon law, Bricker? There can’t be that many places left in the US that offer courses.