"If a child molester argues that it is wrong to molest a child, are you going to disagree?'

But he doesn't so argue. Just as the preist doesn't so argue.

What you are trying so hard to ignore are the FACTS of the situtation. Yoiu want to make this into a  about logical principles. I don't blame you. What else have you got?

Trouble is the FACTS wont' allow that.

And yes the bible is largely fiction. Beganning with "In the ..." and ending with "Amen".

And no there are no "miracles" Only events for which we have, as yet, no natural explanation.

Ed

Paladin: But if you want to go find your local sex offender and ask for advice about child raising- go for it.

Ed: That's not a logical argument, Paladin. / If a child molester argues that it is wrong to molest a child, are you going to disagree?

You misunderstand Paladin's argument.  He's arguing about the credibility of the source of the advice.

Obviously if you want to be told that geriatric homosocial autocracy is a terrific idea, you ask a member of the Roman Catholic hierarchy.  The odds of your getting the answer you want are optimized.  The odds of your getting an honest and objective assessment are likewise diminished.

May 24, 2012 -- 12:24AM, Blü wrote:

Ed

Paladin: But if you want to go find your local sex offender and ask for advice about child raising- go for it.

Ed: That's not a logical argument, Paladin. / If a child molester argues that it is wrong to molest a child, are you going to disagree?

You misunderstand Paladin's argument.  He's arguing about the credibility of the source of the advice.

Obviously if you want to be told that geriatric homosocial autocracy is a terrific idea, you ask a member of the Roman Catholic hierarchy.  The odds of your getting the answer you want are optimized.  The odds of your getting an honest and objective assessment are likewise diminished.

No, you'll get an argument with logical merit or not which can then be objectively assessed.

May 25, 2012 -- 10:47PM, Blü wrote:

Adelphe

No, you'll get an argument with logical merit or not which can then be objectively assessed.

I acknowledge there's a terrorist organization of uppity women who so threaten the Vatican that it's been forced to slam a total blackban on discussing their ghastly heresies.

I've "objectively assessed" your argument as without "logical merit."

btw, just curious--by what name is this terrorist organization known?

That aside, no, ask an ordained male and odds are you'll get a rationalization why geriatric homosocial autocracy is the only way to fly.  The higher you go in the hierarchy the more reliable this becomes, so that if you ask the pope, only joyous affirmation is possible.  (Meine verdammte Eid! as Razzo bubbled.)

lol

Well I, personally, reject the argument for the primacy of the Roman pontiff over all of Christianity, but I have no problem with them establishing their own method of governance in their own tradition and would side with him in, um..."Don't let the door hit you on the arse on your way out!"

May 26, 2012 -- 10:00AM, Blü wrote:

Adelphe

by what name is this terrorist organization known?

The Vatican speaks of them only by oblique codenames, like They're Just Pretending to be Catholics, How Dare They Talk To Us Like That and If You Think I'm Going to Let Women Compete Again Me for my Cardinal's Hat You're Just Fucking Deluded.

ROFL

The fear is that if you give 'em an inch they'll call a spill and vote Mary onto the Trinity.

Didn't JPII already do that?  Musta replaced that Holy Spirit thing.  Not sure what it does, anyway.  This is better.  Can now lather over a mother- or wife- figure he never had and look pious doing it.