If Bill Donohue claims Catholics have a status like Blacks, that tells me he feels Catholics are not just a religion, but a tribe. (Obviously they’re not a race.)
From that viewpoint, a Catholic like Colbert would have latitude to say what a non-Catholic like Maher or a lapsed Catholic like George Carlin would not, because they show no allegiance to the tribe.
[QUOTE=Beware of Doug]
From that viewpoint, a Catholic like Colbert would have latitude to say what a non-Catholic like Maher or a lapsed Catholic like George Carlin would not, because they show no allegiance to the tribe.
[/QUOTE]
Isn’t Maher a lapsed Catholic?
OK, but my point stands.
I don’t factcheck after midnight local time.
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
I’m sorry, what? What is the “thing that I don’t care about?”
[/QUOTE]
Religion, you have contempt for it, so you think it should be fair game. It is all fake, so it doesn’t matter what you say about it. The devout religious person would of course reject your premise, as one doesn’t choose God, God being real and all.
[QUOTE=mswas]
Religion, you have contempt for it, so you think it should be fair game. It is all fake, so it doesn’t matter what you say about it. The devout religious person would of course reject your premise, as one doesn’t choose God, God being real and all.
[/QUOTE]
It’s fair game because it’s just an opinion, and all opinions are fair game.There’s a difference between criticizing what someone believes and mocking what they inherited genetically.
mswas, I was almost to point where I had a good opinion of you. Not that you’d care what my opinion is, was, or ever could be.
FUCK YOUR SHITASS MURDERING CULT, in ALL of its manifestations. Forever and ever, Amen.
[QUOTE=mswas]
Religion, you have contempt for it
[/QUOTE]
What is “offensive” is inherently selective. All I gather from the OP is that whatever Colbert is saying, in the context he’s saying it, and considering the source, does not offend Donohue or his constituents OR that Donohue is doing a bad job representing his constituents. Either way, sounds like an internal affairs matter for the CL.
Is Abe Foxman a “hypocrite” for not condemning Woody Allen (The Onion | America's Finest News Source.) or Jackie Mason? I think one would look pretty R.O.-philic if one made that claim.
[QUOTE=Liberal]
I still haven’t seen a good argument for the notion that a person chooses his beliefs. They remind me of arguments that people can choose their sexual orientation. Diogenes, for example, might be hard pressed if I challenged him to believe that Jesus Christ is his savior. Can he choose to believe that? I don’t think so, any more than I can choose not to. I wouldn’t even know how to go about making such a choice. Do I squint and grunt real hard until the choice has been made? Do I just declare it like some imprimatur? But then what happens when I feel like I’m lying — that the declaration contradicts what I actually believe? Am I choosing anything that way? I don’t think so. I believe what I do because of what I’ve experienced, and I reckon **Diogenes ** does too. I suppose the argument could be made that I chose my experiences, or at least some aspects of them. But anti-gays argue that gays can make choices in their “lifestyle”, like the choice of celibacy. Now, it’s true that I cannot possibly choose to be Caucasian, since I can’t change my DNA. But I would hope that if science ever progresses to the point where we can choose our race, people will not argue that the choice of one over another will have any bearing on how honest or hypocritical the person choosing is. I don’t think there is any way to make any sort of value judgment about anyone else simply because of the fact that we can’t live any life other than our own.
[/QUOTE]
But doesn’t that logic apply to any position a person can hold? The logic there would seem to hold equally well for any idea a person could profess, from the wholly innocuous (“My life experience leads me to the inexorable conclusion that The Phantom Menace was a really bad movie.”) to the inarguably pernicious (“My life experience leads me to the inexorable conclusion that blacks are inherently lazy and criminal.”) Can anyone be held responsible for the opinions they hold, or are our thoughts and beliefs entirely the product of circumstance, beyond our ability to control?
[QUOTE=Miller]
The logic there would seem to hold equally well for any idea a person could profess, from the wholly innocuous (“My life experience leads me to the inexorable conclusion that The Phantom Menace was a really bad movie.”) to the inarguably pernicious (“My life experience leads me to the inexorable conclusion that blacks are inherently lazy and criminal.”)
[/QUOTE]
Come now. The difference there is not that one assertion is innocuous, but that it is true.