New catholic scandal

Hold on a sec....are you telling us that you didn't know that hovering your mouse cursor over the jeer/cheer would tell you who voted that way? Do you hate learning that much that you didn't bother to investigate it? Does your aversion to knowledge go that deep as to effect your immediate surroundings?

Thanks Hooah. If I could split my rating for you, I'd give both a cheer for apprising me and a jeer for the meanspirited personal attack, but, alas, since that's impossible you get a thank you for info and a jeer for unwarranted personal attack.

Do you have any idea what's in the link you provided for convent brothels?ABE You seem to know the religious affiliation of all of your friends and aquaintances. I haven't a clue about most of mine. I wonder what that means.Edited by Trixie, : To add last paragraph

You hover the mouse over the red jeer icons.
So yes - I do know it is you that is jeering without replying.
And we all know what you think of people that jeer without responding... "What does that tell us? It is indicative that the jeers were biased and unwarranted. It is indicative that the message was irrefutable."
Considering how many biased and unwarranted jeers you have applied without a reply, you must have encountered many many messages which you were unable to refute. So, when we don't reply you call us trolls and when we do reply you call us trolls.
I think you don't actually know what a troll is. Hypocrisy noted. And nor does anyone else.
I would ask you for evidence of indiscriminate jeering, but I know that you don't 'do' evidence.
I also don't think you know what 'indiscriminate' means.Edited by Panda, : No reason given.

When the message contains no thread substance it tell us that there was no forward moving substance in the jeered message that warranted a response.

Why did no-one ever mention this before?

I am certain, now, that Buz has weekly, perhaps daily, buzwords (pun intended) that he learns at random and is hell bent on mashing them into every post, context be damned. He doesn't learn the definition of these words, but he does have some sort of bookmark system so he can copypasta the Mirriam-Webster definition.

quote:

---

There's a notorious pack of you trolls who troll me with substance-less nothingness, preventing the threads from moving forward and I get blamed by admins for it.

---

No Buz, the Exodus thread, for instance, stalled because you kept on repeating the same old points instead of dealing with the rebuttals. That isn't anybody else's fault.

quote:

---

Trolls can expect jeers when they deserve them. I don't jeer indiscriminately, by any means.

---

OK, so you now have an explanation for why your post was jeered without replies.

They have. There's plenty out there if you look for it to corroborate the books which I've cited. You know what you all tell me. Read up and do the research.

A quote from buz's latest source What has the 9th century got to do with what this archbishop has said? Are you claiming that its still going on?Your original source was about an RC priest agreeing with the Women's Institute that brothels should be legalised and regulated, his argument being that, while he doesn't agree with prostitution, this might help to alleviate problems in the area in question, eg safety for women in the sex industry,getting prostitutes off the streets. It was this that you provided as a source for convent brothels and it has absolutely nothing to do with convent brothels, neither has it anything to do with the topic at hand.

how about you do your own research and compile the data, and reference you argument with data that can be verified?it is not on us to do your work for you.

If you want to communicate effectively with Buz, you need to stop using words he doesn't understand: research, data, facts, reason, argument, etc.Carry on.

Don't forget about them being the No-Fun Police....

Trixie, what I have been citing works to support my on topic Message 6.

quote:

---

What's been going on behind the purple curtains for centuries in the convent brothels, the confessional booths, etc is coming into the lights.
For eye openers read Behind The Purple Curtains, 1950 by Walter Montano and Fifty Years In The Church Of Rome by Father Chiniquy, etc.

---

I alluded to the brothels of which have been behind the purple curtain etc. My late link to Dr Adequate does not all pertain to the ninth century. Did you read all of it? Some of the homosexual child molesting and now this; not unlike what has been going on in closets behind the purple curtain for centuries.Trixie, I'm not expecting you to agree, but your false allegations that it is unrelated to topic are unfounded.

Buz, the topic is "New Catholic Scandal" and it's about comments made by an archbishop in his Xmas sermon.The topic is NOT "Every Scandal Ever To Hit the Catholic Church", nor is it "Let's Bash the Catholic Church". Your initial comment which garnered so many Jeers and which you don't feel deserves jeers is what prompted me to explain to you why I jeered it - off topic, citation which didn't support what you cited it for. End of. If you don't like my explanation, so be it, but it's MY explanation.