William Hyde <wthyde1953@gmail.com> wrote in
news:d72959ac-c7fa-47cc-929d-20ed5ad89853n@googlegroups.com:

> On Thursday, September 8, 2022 at 12:13:18 PM UTC-4, Paul S
> Person wrote:
>> On Wed, 7 Sep 2022 11:16:26 -0700 (PDT), William Hyde
>> <wthyd...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >On Tuesday, September 6, 2022 at 12:51:35 PM UTC-4, Paul S
>> >Person wrote:
>
>> >> On Mon, 5 Sep 2022 12:44:41 -0700 (PDT), William Hyde
>> >> <wthyd...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >On Monday, September 5, 2022 at 12:59:22 PM UTC-4, David
>> >> >Johnston wro
> te:
>> >> >> On 2022-08-02 1:45 a.m., Charles Packer wrote:
>> >> >> > On Mon, 01 Aug 2022 09:19:48 -0700, Paul S Person
>> >> >> > wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Actually, recent efforts to criminalize even the
>> >> >> >> mention of abor
> tion on
>> >> >> >> the Internet by at least one Republican-controlled
>> >> >> >> State suggest
> s that
>> >> >> >> their Ministry of Truth is, at least for now, up and
>> >> >> >> running.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > The noise generated by politicians firing potshots at
>> >> >> > free speech masks a more insidious undermining of it in
>> >> >> > which our so-called free press itself is complicit: the
>> >> >> > acceptance of
>
>> >> >> > social media as arbiters of public speech.
>> >> >> Let me ask you something. In the days before the internet
>> >> >> what was
> the
>> >> >> means by which someone could get a large audience for
>> >> >> their attempt
> s to
>> >> >> convince people that the Earth was flat or FDR planned
>> >> >> Pearl Harbor
> ?
>> >> >
>> >> >Just a few weeks ago, every house on my street received a
>> >> >"nicely bou
> nd" if not exactly nicely printed, book that on the surface
> seemed to be one written for Americans, about American politics
> (had a nice if cliched picture of the Capitol reflected in water
> on the cover). It was, in reality, an anti-Catholic tract and I
> was struck with a sense of nostalgia that these bigots had
> apparently never heard of the internet.
>> >> Any indication when it was written? This was a lot more
>> >> common way back when and this could be a reprint of
>> >> something written 100 years
>
>> >> ago.
>> >
>> >From the little I read it seems clear it was written, or
>> >perhaps just up
> dated post 1981, as president Reagan was mentioned.
>> >
>> >On the other hand its tone did make it sound like something
>> >from the pre
> -WWII era.
>> There is a long tradition of Pope-bashing in Protestant
>> circles, with certain well-known tropes.
>
> To be fair, in history many of them deserved worse.

To be fair, the same is true of many Protestants. And many
atheists, and many of every other walk of life that includes
billions of people.

Duh.

But don't let that stop your hate.

--
Terry Austin

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

On 9/8/2022 11:46 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> writes:
>> On Wed, 7 Sep 2022 11:16:26 -0700 (PDT), William Hyde
>> <wthyde1953@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tuesday, September 6, 2022 at 12:51:35 PM UTC-4, Paul S Person wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 5 Sep 2022 12:44:41 -0700 (PDT), William Hyde
>>>> <wthyd...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Monday, September 5, 2022 at 12:59:22 PM UTC-4, David Johnston wrote:
>>>>>> On 2022-08-02 1:45 a.m., Charles Packer wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mon, 01 Aug 2022 09:19:48 -0700, Paul S Person wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Actually, recent efforts to criminalize even the mention of abortion on
>>>>>>>> the Internet by at least one Republican-controlled State suggests that
>>>>>>>> their Ministry of Truth is, at least for now, up and running.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The noise generated by politicians firing potshots at free
>>>>>>> speech masks a more insidious undermining of it in which
>>>>>>> our so-called free press itself is complicit: the acceptance of
>>>>>>> social media as arbiters of public speech.
>>>>>> Let me ask you something. In the days before the internet what was the
>>>>>> means by which someone could get a large audience for their attempts to
>>>>>> convince people that the Earth was flat or FDR planned Pearl Harbor?
>>>>>
>>>>> Just a few weeks ago, every house on my street received a "nicely bound" if not exactly nicely printed, book that on the surface seemed to be one written for Americans, about American politics (had a nice if cliched picture of the Capitol reflected in water on the cover). It was, in reality, an anti-Catholic tract and I was struck with a sense of nostalgia that these bigots had apparently never heard of the internet.
>>>> Any indication when it was written? This was a lot more common way
>>>> back when and this could be a reprint of something written 100 years
>>>> ago.
>>>
>> >From the little I read it seems clear it was written, or perhaps just updated post 1981, as president Reagan was mentioned.
>>>
>>> On the other hand its tone did make it sound like something from the pre-WWII era.
>>
>> There is a long tradition of Pope-bashing in Protestant circles, with
>> certain well-known tropes.
>>
>> By the 50s some of the Protestant denominations were beginning to pull
>> in their horns, so to speak.
>>
>> My grandfather collected a lovingly-printed and laminated card in the
>> early or mid 50s which claimed that free speech rights were being
>> infringed on because the higher organizational level was insisting
>> that the author preach the Gospel to his congregation instead of
>> attacking the Pope.
>>
>> These would, I suspect, mostly have the mainstream denominations;
>> anti-RC rhetoric probably continued on in the others for a while. And,
>> clearly, some groups are keeping the flame alive.
>
> I know of a Lutheran, who married a RC in 1956 - his parents wouldn't go
> to the wedding.

Sitting at a friend's house, his family is catholic, parents are German
immigrants. Don't remember how we got there but at one point he calls
out to his mother, "do we know anybody for sure going to hell?". The
instant reply was "Martin Luther".

On Thursday, September 8, 2022 at 5:55:32 PM UTC-6, Jay E. Morris wrote:
> Don't remember how we got there but at one point he calls
> out to his mother, "do we know anybody for sure going to hell?". The
> instant reply was "Martin Luther".

As he was the author of "The Jews and Their Lies", it's hard for me to disagree.

Also, he accused Copernicus of trying to "overturn the whole science
of astronomy".

So, clearly, whatever the faults of the Roman Catholic Church at the time,
he did not represent an improvement. Even if loosening the Inquisition's
grip on power was still a positive development.

John Savard

In article <XnsAF0C9152CF814taustingmail@85.12.62.232>,
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> wrote:
>Jan 6 was some hillbillies who had a party that got out of hand,
>and did very minimal damage to anybody.

(Hal Heydt)
Dead is "minimal damage"?

> Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote in
> news:dbd57986-1037-4b60-b261-205d8fe1e5a4n@googlegroups.com:
snip
>>
>> It is the notion that non-Muslims, if permitted to live,
>> must have "dhimmi" status that has *led* to the blind
>> hostility to Israel, where the Jews successfully resisted
>> by force the imposition of such rule, that is the source
>> of the terrorist menace. Which is why this mentality is
>> a direct threat to the West.
>>

With regard to the subject, if Winston Smith is writing to newsgroups
his nom de plume could be Fourbricks but it would have to be a
relatively small newsgroup of some esoteric title of little consequence
in the real world and recompense would not be considered at this time.

On 9/09/22 09:19, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha wrote:
snip
>
> People like Jack Chick were reluctant to even admit Catholics were
> *human*.
>

Has science conclusively overturned that viewpoint?

Seriously, I had never heard of such a person before a quick web search
which showed diverse opinions on his sanity or saintliness. I might
pursue some of those later for entertainment.

On Thursday, September 8, 2022 at 11:46:23 AM UTC-5, Scott Lurndal wrote:

> I know of a Lutheran, who married a RC in 1956 - his parents wouldn't go
> to the wedding.

I knew someone whose mother wouldn't go to her wedding because her husband was not Korean.

djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote in news:rHx6vt.u05
@kithrup.com:

> In article <XnsAF0C9152CF814taustingmail@85.12.62.232>,
> Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> wrote:
>>Jan 6 was some hillbillies who had a party that got out of hand,
>>and did very minimal damage to anybody.
>
> (Hal Heydt)
> Dead is "minimal damage"?
>
Tha Antifa/BLM riots killed a lost more peole. On purpose.

--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

Titus G <noone@nowhere.com> wrote in
news:tfeb3q$usuu$1@dont-email.me:

> On 9/09/22 09:19, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha wrote:
> snip
>>
>> People like Jack Chick were reluctant to even admit Catholics
>> were *human*.
>>
>
> Has science conclusively overturned that viewpoint?

Has science conclusively proven you're human?
>
> Seriously, I had never heard of such a person before a quick web
> search which showed diverse opinions on his sanity or
> saintliness. I might pursue some of those later for
> entertainment.
>
If you've ever been an RPGer, the tract on D&D is hilarious.

(I met a reporter doing a story on roleplaying games at the height of
the "Satanic Panic" era. She made Jack Chick sounds nearly sane. She
wouldn't even talk to me because I wouldn't give her any bullshit.)

--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

On 9/8/2022 6:59 PM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> In article <XnsAF0C9152CF814taustingmail@85.12.62.232>,
> Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Jan 6 was some hillbillies who had a party that got out of hand,
>> and did very minimal damage to anybody.
>
> (Hal Heydt)
> Dead is "minimal damage"?

Did Dorothy never mention Terry Austin to you?

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

On 2022-09-08 14:17, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha wrote:
> Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote in
> news:dbd57986-1037-4b60-b261-205d8fe1e5a4n@googlegroups.com:
>
>> On Wednesday, September 7, 2022 at 4:31:20 PM UTC-6, Hal Heydt
>> wrote:
>>
>>> (Hal Heydt)
>>> Just a long abeyance.
>>
>> If I'm the one who wants to "nuke all the brown people",
>> how is it that _he_ is the one that thinks that BLM is
>> a more serious problem than the January 6 rioters?
>
> Because BLM and Antifa (who have a *lot* of crossover) attacked
> various federal and local offices _and burned many to the ground_,

This is simply a lie.

> and did so with an explicit goal of overturning a valid election.

As is this.

> Mind you, they didn't question the *validity* of the election, in
> fact they implicitly accepted it while trying to *volently* negate
> it.
>
> Jan 6 was some hillbillies who had a party that got out of hand,
> and did very minimal damage to anybody.

It may have been hillbillies who did the actually invading...

....but they were guided from on high.

On 2022-09-08 14:19, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha wrote:
> Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote in
> news:2p4khh1b0q3qqnghofldcf6i8plislsgri@4ax.com:
>
>> On Wed, 7 Sep 2022 11:16:26 -0700 (PDT), William Hyde
>> <wthyde1953@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tuesday, September 6, 2022 at 12:51:35 PM UTC-4, Paul S
>>> Person wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 5 Sep 2022 12:44:41 -0700 (PDT), William Hyde
>>>> <wthyd...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Monday, September 5, 2022 at 12:59:22 PM UTC-4, David
>>>>> Johnston wrote:
>>>>>> On 2022-08-02 1:45 a.m., Charles Packer wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mon, 01 Aug 2022 09:19:48 -0700, Paul S Person wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Actually, recent efforts to criminalize even the mention
>>>>>>>> of abortion on the Internet by at least one
>>>>>>>> Republican-controlled State suggests that their Ministry
>>>>>>>> of Truth is, at least for now, up and running.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The noise generated by politicians firing potshots at
>>>>>>> free speech masks a more insidious undermining of it in
>>>>>>> which our so-called free press itself is complicit: the
>>>>>>> acceptance of social media as arbiters of public speech.
>>>>>> Let me ask you something. In the days before the internet
>>>>>> what was the means by which someone could get a large
>>>>>> audience for their attempts to convince people that the
>>>>>> Earth was flat or FDR planned Pearl Harbor?
>>>>>
>>>>> Just a few weeks ago, every house on my street received a
>>>>> "nicely bound" if not exactly nicely printed, book that on
>>>>> the surface seemed to be one written for Americans, about
>>>>> American politics (had a nice if cliched picture of the
>>>>> Capitol reflected in water on the cover). It was, in reality,
>>>>> an anti-Catholic tract and I was struck with a sense of
>>>>> nostalgia that these bigots had apparently never heard of the
>>>>> internet.
>>>> Any indication when it was written? This was a lot more common
>>>> way back when and this could be a reprint of something written
>>>> 100 years ago.
>>>
>> >From the little I read it seems clear it was written, or perhaps
>>> just updated post 1981, as president Reagan was mentioned.
>>>
>>> On the other hand its tone did make it sound like something from
>>> the pre-WWII era.
>>
>> There is a long tradition of Pope-bashing in Protestant circles,
>> with certain well-known tropes.
>
> "It's better to be wrong with God than right with the Pope."
>>
>> By the 50s some of the Protestant denominations were beginning
>> to pull in their horns, so to speak.
>>
>> My grandfather collected a lovingly-printed and laminated card
>> in the early or mid 50s which claimed that free speech rights
>> were being infringed on because the higher organizational level
>> was insisting that the author preach the Gospel to his
>> congregation instead of attacking the Pope.
>>
>> These would, I suspect, mostly have the mainstream
>> denominations; anti-RC rhetoric probably continued on in the
>> others for a while. And, clearly, some groups are keeping the
>> flame alive.
>
> People like Jack Chick were reluctant to even admit Catholics were
> *human*.
>

So kind of like what you espouse about Democrats?

On 2022-09-08 20:30, Ninapenda Jibini wrote:
> djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote in news:rHx6vt.u05
> @kithrup.com:
>
>> In article <XnsAF0C9152CF814taustingmail@85.12.62.232>,
>> Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Jan 6 was some hillbillies who had a party that got out of hand,
>>> and did very minimal damage to anybody.
>>
>> (Hal Heydt)
>> Dead is "minimal damage"?
>>
> Tha Antifa/BLM riots killed a lost more peole. On purpose.
>

Another lie.

On 2022-09-08 20:32, Ninapenda Jibini wrote:
> Titus G <noone@nowhere.com> wrote in
> news:tfeb3q$usuu$1@dont-email.me:
>
>> On 9/09/22 09:19, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha wrote:
>> snip
>>>
>>> People like Jack Chick were reluctant to even admit Catholics
>>> were *human*.
>>>
>>
>> Has science conclusively overturned that viewpoint?
>
> Has science conclusively proven you're human?

That would be easier for you, wouldn't it?

In article <tfedo5$v1mr$2@dont-email.me>,
Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>On 9/8/2022 6:59 PM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>> In article <XnsAF0C9152CF814taustingmail@85.12.62.232>,
>> Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Jan 6 was some hillbillies who had a party that got out of hand,
>>> and did very minimal damage to anybody.
>>
>> (Hal Heydt)
>> Dead is "minimal damage"?
>
>Did Dorothy never mention Terry Austin to you?

(Hal Heydt)
She did. Plus back when I was posting, he was active then. So
no real surprises. I was just curious to see if he was willing to
define "minimal damage" to include deaths.

On 9/09/22 16:25, Alan wrote:
> On 2022-09-08 20:32, Ninapenda Jibini wrote:

As you haven't yet figured it out for yourself, I have chosen myself to
inform you that Jibini does not reply to your simplistic one or two line
negations of his outrageous statements and will not do so no matter how
appropriate and righteous your protestations are.

What will you do if he finds out that Zuckerburg has publicly stated
that Arsebook censored all the details from Hunter Biden's damaged
laptop from discussion after advice from the FBI to beware of Russian
disinformation PRIOR to the election? Would that have meant a Trump
victory if disclosed?
Even worse, he may read extracts from Ashley Biden's diary, (misplaced
in a drug rehabilitation centre), which detail her teenage nymphomania
whilst showering with her father.
(The NYT reported on the successful prosecution of those who sold it.)
As an apparent supporter of the US Democrat party, you could be in for a
good kicking if he finds that stuff out and you persist in empty abuse.

On 9/09/22 15:32, Ninapenda Jibini wrote:
> Titus G <noone@nowhere.com> wrote in
> news:tfeb3q$usuu$1@dont-email.me:
>
>> On 9/09/22 09:19, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha wrote:
>> snip
>>>
>>> People like Jack Chick were reluctant to even admit Catholics
>>> were *human*.
>>>
>>
>> Has science conclusively overturned that viewpoint?
>
> Has science conclusively proven you're human?

I wish to adhere the group's unanimous demand for respectful and polite
replies but in this instance I throw caution to the whims and accuse you
of personalising a generalisation which, even with irrefutable evidence
you may possess, suggests a violation of my privacy which could possibly
cause the ethical in this group to view you with disfavour. You have
been warned.

>>
>> Seriously, I had never heard of such a person before a quick web
>> search which showed diverse opinions on his sanity or
>> saintliness. I might pursue some of those later for
>> entertainment.
>>
> If you've ever been an RPGer, the tract on D&D is hilarious.
>
> (I met a reporter doing a story on roleplaying games at the height of
> the "Satanic Panic" era. She made Jack Chick sounds nearly sane. She
> wouldn't even talk to me because I wouldn't give her any bullshit.)
>

I watched a little on youtube and found it more disturbing than
entertaining.

On Friday, 9 September 2022 at 02:57:24 UTC+1, Quadibloc wrote:
> On Thursday, September 8, 2022 at 5:55:32 PM UTC-6, Jay E. Morris wrote:
> > Don't remember how we got there but at one point he calls
> > out to his mother, "do we know anybody for sure going to hell?". The
> > instant reply was "Martin Luther".
> As he was the author of "The Jews and Their Lies", it's hard for me to disagree.
>
> Also, he accused Copernicus of trying to "overturn the whole science
> of astronomy".

Was that supposed to be bad?

> So, clearly, whatever the faults of the Roman Catholic Church at the time,
> he did not represent an improvement. Even if loosening the Inquisition's
> grip on power was still a positive development.
>
> John Savard

On Friday, September 9, 2022 at 4:22:26 AM UTC-6, Robert Carnegie wrote:
> On Friday, 9 September 2022 at 02:57:24 UTC+1, Quadibloc wrote:

> > Also, he accused Copernicus of trying to "overturn the whole science
> > of astronomy".

> Was that supposed to be bad?

Yes: what he meant was that it showed that Copernicus was clearly wrong,
being a crackpot not to be taken seriously.

John Savard

Robert Carnegie wrote:
> On Friday, 9 September 2022 at 02:57:24 UTC+1, Quadibloc wrote:
> > On Thursday, September 8, 2022 at 5:55:32 PM UTC-6, Jay E. Morris wrote:
> > > Don't remember how we got there but at one point he calls
> > > out to his mother, "do we know anybody for sure going to hell?". The
> > > instant reply was "Martin Luther".
> > As he was the author of "The Jews and Their Lies", it's hard for me to disagree.
> >
> > Also, he accused Copernicus of trying to "overturn the whole science
> > of astronomy".
> Was that supposed to be bad?

There was a quote from around that time, with someone mocking the idea that the whole Earth was swinging around but asking if these people rode in a carriage and thought the scenery was flowing past their window. I was just like, "But, but, but..."

--
-Jack

djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) writes:
>In article <XnsAF0C9152CF814taustingmail@85.12.62.232>,
>Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> wrote:
>>Jan 6 was some hillbillies who had a party that got out of hand,
>>and did very minimal damage to anybody.
>
>(Hal Heydt)
>Dead is "minimal damage"?

Don't respond to Terry's trolling, please.

On 9/8/2022 10:07 PM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> In article <tfedo5$v1mr$2@dont-email.me>,
> Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>> On 9/8/2022 6:59 PM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>>> In article <XnsAF0C9152CF814taustingmail@85.12.62.232>,
>>> Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Jan 6 was some hillbillies who had a party that got out of hand,
>>>> and did very minimal damage to anybody.
>>>
>>> (Hal Heydt)
>>> Dead is "minimal damage"?
>>
>> Did Dorothy never mention Terry Austin to you?
>
> (Hal Heydt)
> She did. Plus back when I was posting, he was active then. So
> no real surprises. I was just curious to see if he was willing to
> define "minimal damage" to include deaths.

Okay, just wanted to make sure you were going into it with some idea who
you are engaging with. Carry on.

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

On Thu, 8 Sep 2022 18:57:21 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca>
wrote:

>On Thursday, September 8, 2022 at 5:55:32 PM UTC-6, Jay E. Morris wrote:
>> Don't remember how we got there but at one point he calls
>> out to his mother, "do we know anybody for sure going to hell?". The
>> instant reply was "Martin Luther".
>
>As he was the author of "The Jews and Their Lies", it's hard for me to disagree.

Yes, he was. The traditional excuse is that he was old and cranky. But
he was also a man of his times.

>Also, he accused Copernicus of trying to "overturn the whole science
>of astronomy".

I don't doubt it, but I do not recall ever hearing it before.

Luther was educated in one of the Scholastic traditions. A fair amount
of what I have read presupposes a knowledge of Scholasticism which I
do not have. The footnotes help a bit.

>So, clearly, whatever the faults of the Roman Catholic Church at the time,
>he did not represent an improvement. Even if loosening the Inquisition's
>grip on power was still a positive development.

Only in astronomy and anti-Semitism.

But in his primary field (theology), things were more positive. Well,
from the Lutheran perspective, anyway.
--
"In this connexion, unquestionably the most significant
development was the disintegration, under Christian
influence, of classical conceptions of the family and
of family right."

On Thu, 8 Sep 2022 13:23:53 -0700 (PDT), William Hyde
<wthyde1953@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Thursday, September 8, 2022 at 12:13:18 PM UTC-4, Paul S Person wrote:
>> On Wed, 7 Sep 2022 11:16:26 -0700 (PDT), William Hyde
>> <wthyd...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >On Tuesday, September 6, 2022 at 12:51:35 PM UTC-4, Paul S Person wrote:
>> >> On Mon, 5 Sep 2022 12:44:41 -0700 (PDT), William Hyde
>> >> <wthyd...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >On Monday, September 5, 2022 at 12:59:22 PM UTC-4, David Johnston wrote:
>> >> >> On 2022-08-02 1:45 a.m., Charles Packer wrote:
>> >> >> > On Mon, 01 Aug 2022 09:19:48 -0700, Paul S Person wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Actually, recent efforts to criminalize even the mention of abortion on
>> >> >> >> the Internet by at least one Republican-controlled State suggests that
>> >> >> >> their Ministry of Truth is, at least for now, up and running.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > The noise generated by politicians firing potshots at free
>> >> >> > speech masks a more insidious undermining of it in which
>> >> >> > our so-called free press itself is complicit: the acceptance of
>> >> >> > social media as arbiters of public speech.
>> >> >> Let me ask you something. In the days before the internet what was the
>> >> >> means by which someone could get a large audience for their attempts to
>> >> >> convince people that the Earth was flat or FDR planned Pearl Harbor?
>> >> >
>> >> >Just a few weeks ago, every house on my street received a "nicely bound" if not exactly nicely printed, book that on the surface seemed to be one written for Americans, about American politics (had a nice if cliched picture of the Capitol reflected in water on the cover). It was, in reality, an anti-Catholic tract and I was struck with a sense of nostalgia that these bigots had apparently never heard of the internet.
>> >> Any indication when it was written? This was a lot more common way
>> >> back when and this could be a reprint of something written 100 years
>> >> ago.
>> >
>> >From the little I read it seems clear it was written, or perhaps just updated post 1981, as president Reagan was mentioned.
>> >
>> >On the other hand its tone did make it sound like something from the pre-WWII era.
>> There is a long tradition of Pope-bashing in Protestant circles, with
>> certain well-known tropes.
>
>To be fair, in history many of them deserved worse.
>
>>
>> By the 50s some of the Protestant denominations were beginning to pull
>> in their horns, so to speak.
>
>Oh, well before then. But the attitude lingered, and apparently still does. There are a few
>fundamentalist churches around here where the pope is not loved (where you can also
>learn that evolution is a lie and global warming an Atheist/Chinese conspiracy). Though one is
>a mosque.
>
>It's interesting that non-Christians have their own opinions on this. Muslims inevitably tell me
>they prefer Protestantism, while non-Christian east Asians seem to prefer Catholicism.

So, apparently, does Hollywood: anytime a not-explicitly-religious
major film needs a religious component, it is inevitably RC.

Something to do with impressive bling, I suppose.

>The newspaper used to have a "100 years ago today" feature. In 2011 it noted that in 1911 Protestant churches were allowed in Spain. When I was born this was more current affairs than history. But now it is safely in the past. We progress.
--
"In this connexion, unquestionably the most significant
development was the disintegration, under Christian
influence, of classical conceptions of the family and
of family right."

On Fri, 9 Sep 2022 17:22:29 +1200, Titus G <noone@nowhere.com> wrote:

>On 9/09/22 16:25, Alan wrote:
>> On 2022-09-08 20:32, Ninapenda Jibini wrote:
>
>As you haven't yet figured it out for yourself, I have chosen myself to
>inform you that Jibini does not reply to your simplistic one or two line
> negations of his outrageous statements and will not do so no matter how
>appropriate and righteous your protestations are.
>
>What will you do if he finds out that Zuckerburg has publicly stated
>that Arsebook censored all the details from Hunter Biden's damaged
>laptop from discussion after advice from the FBI to beware of Russian
>disinformation PRIOR to the election? Would that have meant a Trump
>victory if disclosed?
>Even worse, he may read extracts from Ashley Biden's diary, (misplaced
>in a drug rehabilitation centre), which detail her teenage nymphomania
>whilst showering with her father.
>(The NYT reported on the successful prosecution of those who sold it.)
>As an apparent supporter of the US Democrat party, you could be in for a
>good kicking if he finds that stuff out and you persist in empty abuse.

Sounds like something Trump said.

Are you being paid to push his nonsense?

And when, exactly, would you have the FBI warn social media/news
companies of the danger of Russian bots spreading Trump Talking
Points? After the election, when the damage (if any) has already been
done?

Complaining about that warning is like complaining that someone was
told to close the barn door /before/ the horses got out.
--
"In this connexion, unquestionably the most significant
development was the disintegration, under Christian
influence, of classical conceptions of the family and
of family right."