<p>Heh, good catch, Hanna.</p>
<p>To anyone who has participated in this thread: So then, is it ok to comment on other people’s (rude) comments about your faith?</p>
<p><wink></wink></p>
<p>Actually, Hanna, that was a poor catch. Had you participated in the thread you would have realized I was quoting CGM. Next time, instead of trying to trip me up or “catch” me howabout you stick with the issues.</p>
<p>You were quite offended by that, I take it (as was Curmudgeon); however no one finds it necessary to apologize for the blatant bigotry directed at the Catholic religion and evangelical Christian religion on this thread.</p>
<p>So what else is new here on cc?</p>
<p>hh, since your were so kind as to mention my name , would you care to point out examples of MY “blatant bigotry” “on this thread”? 
Pretty please?</p>
<p>Nah, sorry, I wouldn’t care to, since I don’t have the time to go back to dig up all of your hilarious comments. If you have the time, you could quote your posts which point to your tolerance of the beliefs of evangelicals, though.</p>
<p>Oh wait. I will offer this gem: <if you=“” must=“” know,=“” sunlight=“” kills=“” some=“” nasty=“” germs.=“” nature’s=“” antiseptic,=“” as=“” it=“” were.=“” let’s=“” get=“” out=“” in=“” the=“” light.=“”></if></p>
<p>You know, I’m a far-left Christian, but I found Da Vinci Code (book, didn’t see the movie) kinda silly. I characterize it as the “giggly schoolgirl” view of the Bible “Oooh, wouldn’t it be cool if they DID IT?” I mean, why is someone’s sex life so important to everyone, two thousand years later-is that what really matters? Not to mention that Brown gets his theology so wrong–like overlooking all the strong women prominently discussed in the Gospels and Acts.</p>
<p>and anyway, hh. I have been very reserved. You don’t know how many times I’ve wanted to ask golani after one of his absurdisms whether he was for real or a new character from Borat creator Sasah Cohen. BUT in keeping with the spirit of tolerance you and you alone have fostered , I have resisted. That’s something, right? ;)</p>
<p>hh, you can read better than that, can’t you? The analogy was to “secrets” that needed to be brought out in the open, not hidden. Read it in context. It helps with understanding.</p>
<p>Anyway, I’m sorry you didn’t appreciate my attempts at levity, but you weren’t my intended audience. The tenor on this thread was altogether too tit for tat for my taste so I attempted to change it. So sue me.</p>
<p>“that was a poor catch. Had you participated in the thread you would have realized I was quoting CGM.”</p>
<p>Perhaps it was your failure to use quotation marks that played some role in the confusion.</p>
<p>I take it you were speaking in your own voice when you acknowledged that I am, in fact, a Jew? Do you stand by your statement that I am not “self-respecting”?</p>
<p>hanna , go back an check. golani clearly intended to say something very similar to cgm’s paraphrase. I would have paraphrased as follows : you cannot call yourself a Jew if you have a Christmas tree.</p>
<p>Here’s one of golani’s quotes. There are more. </p>
<h1>103 No real self respecting Jewish family would put a Christmas tree in thier home. You must note, a Christmas tree and a tree for decoration are two very different things. The former represents Chrisitianity and an adherence to it. That tree celebrates a Christian holiday, and in affect those Jews who put up a Christmas tree reject the teachings of Judaism.</h1>
<p>golani also said he personally could care less what people do in the same post. Did y’all catch that?</p>
<p>Please enlighten me, cur–what “secrets” were you referring to? Went over my head I guess. Please elaborate.</p>
<p>Don’t feel bad, Hanna, according to many here no “self-respecting” or at least “thinking,” human being would be a Catholic, either. 
—</p>
<p>I tried to explain how a religious person could come to golani’s conclusion in my analogy about how a Catholic who never goes to church would not be thought a Catholic by one who does. Did y’all catch that?</p>
<p>If I remember (I’m not going to use my time now looking) I was asking you something about tolerance, and how far that tolerance went and you were hesitating to answer my questions. I was “egging you on”. (What does “egging you on” mean btw ? That phrase seems suddenly odd to me. )</p>
<p>Your comments about my tolerance were <em>snide</em>, cur. As you well know. Some people believe others go to hell–it’s part of their religion (not mine, but others’). You are not tolerant of that belief. Pure and simple. (Even though it has been around for centuries, you are of the enlightened here.)</p>
<p>I don’t think one has to be a rocket scientist to think that some people might think a CHRISTMAS tree is somehow related to Christmas, which relates to Christianity. Just another thought.</p>
<p>
And this would be an example of your definition of tolerance? Hey, just asking. (What if Catholic #1 approached Catholic #2 and reproached them about it? Just trying to learn the tolerance game. ) </p>
<p>And I will have to defer to your much greater knowledge of “snide” comments.</p>
<p>I am not judging the PERSON, or the person’s CHOICES, just stating a FACT.
These things, however, are not FACTS in the world of people who don’t follow the LAW of the religion.
Certainly you get that don’t you? Or deliberately not?</p>
<p>Wow. I get that you are angry with me for making you look intolerant. </p>
<p>Who gave you the right to decide what is fact about a particular religion?</p>
<p>What about somebody who almost keeps all the Catholic laws, but just not those on contraception? Are they non-Catholics or is just non-attendance at services that makes a Catholic not a Catholic in your mind?</p>
<p>Gosh, if I didn’t know what I was supposed to do to be a part of my religion, that would be kind of silly, wouldn’t it?</p>
<p>A person who does not attend mass or do certain things required of the religion (for instance, also confession and Holy Eucharist once a year) is not following the laws of the Church.</p>
<p>I am not personally judging the person, just as golani wasn’t. It is just a statement of fact.</p>
<p>Nice way to try to put me on the defensive, though. ;)</p>
<p>Believe me, I can see how some people believe all of the world’s major religions are intolerant. I get that. Perhaps you are one of those people. Many people posting here seem to be.</p>
<p>I do believe you have to at least go to church to be a Catholic. In my parish, the belief is that if you miss mass and don’t go to confession, you can’t receive communion. Maybe not all parishes are like that, I don’t know.</p>
<p>Those are the rules. Rules. A word many people do not like to hear. Sorry. That’s how it is. </p>
<p>Thanks, but that’s the extent to which I’m debating Catholic doctrine, since it’s been thoroughly discredited on this thread already (for which I’m still waiting for an apology).</p>
<p>I think your efforts to make ME the bigot are rather lame, cur. </p>
<p>Also, mean.</p>
<p>Surely you jest that any Catholic would approach another and judge them or “reproach” them.</p>
<p>That is ridiculous. Who cares what another person believes (except for some on this thread, including you, apparently).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But you are implicitly judging that person’s relationship with his chosen religion, aren’t you? They are not following the “law” of the religion therefore they are not Catholic or Jewish? Do you judge them as non-Catholics for not following the laws of the church on contraception? You have to admit that a substantial percentage of Catholics in America fail to follow or even believe in the Catholic position on contraception.</p>
<p>Me, mean? I don’t think so. I’d never say they aren’t Catholics and Jewish just because they don’t follow all the rules. There sure are a lot of them and they change from time to time, don’t they?</p>