newbie

No, I think you are insecure in your own faith if you feel you need to make ridiculous claims (Me a bigot? I think not). Or maybe you can't accept the fact that "one of your own" has fallen. Aaah, the joys of being agnostic. Cheerio.

I can use alliteration all I want betsy. Sorry if my poetic license is so troubling for you.

Seems like alliteration is lost on you. That's okay. I keep forgetting you Christian types have to have everything in black and white.

Mercer is hilarious and I'm glad he aired those little segments. They have absolutely nothing to do with any feelings of jealousy or inferiority to the U.S. They just show, from the street, how little educated the yanks are in regards to their northern neighbour.

Maybe the Catholics will take 'em.

I was warned not to feed the trolls. Should have listened.

Hmm, you're obviously not a Catholic betsy. The only ignorance and anger I"ve seen in this thread seem to be pouring out of your keyboard. But that's okay. I suggest getting it all out, and I"ll continue to cite hyprocricy wherever I see it.

Betsy, Dunno if you read my edited post but I still have a problem with a pedophile priest preaching the "correct" word of God while abusing children, and being protected by a Bishop and other Priests. Can't help but judge a bit there.

So in your world preaching the word is good enough. I take it then you would accept whole-heartedly a gay minister, or a divorced one, perhaps an ex-con? Hey, what about a Muslim convert?

First of all, no one is angry here. A little frustrated, maybe. Never mind to be judged. By whom? And no, the Pope is not held to a higher standard by anyone who counts in this issue. I thought I made it very clear that it's not your opinion that matters here. Don't imagine I'm wrong about that....I'm not. You're just another one of us. In the eyes of God. Nay-saying does not an argument make. You're wrong and I'm right. It's just that simple. No argument. Your argument has no merit, either logically or philosophically. Let alone, religiously. You gotta be kidding. "You're wrong and I'm right."? Methinks you've been on the playground too long. So if the Pope isn't held to a higher standard, then why bother listening or showing up at church. Don't you Christian types like to have a minister/preacher you can feel is at least following the word of God? But in your books, I guess it obviously doesn't matter. edited: And another thing, thoughts like yours fostered the kind of behaviour that caused irreversible shame, guilt and pain on thousands of abused boys and girls who thought their Priest was next to God.

Besty, betsy, now who's angry? Are you saying the Pope isn't held to any higher standards than a walk-in Christian? If so, why preach then? These faulty leaders are major hypocrites and fall back on "they'll forgive me" when they falter. As for judgement (you seem to have more than enough to go around), I'll judge hyprcrisy anytime I see it. I do not know Dick Dewert, but his "sin" is to be judged. My play on words was just that - to mean a preacher out of the pulpit. Man, you do take things a little too literal.

It was a play on words Betsy. And as far as the "human" thing, most Christians use the "he's only human" line when one of their leaders exhibits a moral transgression. These heads of the church are held to a higher standard, particularly when they preach against the very impropriety they engage in.

I would challenge that a bit. I consider myself agnostic and hold out that there might be a God. I probably lean a bit more towards there being this enitity, but find all theories as to his/her existence inconclusive. I think your premise is a bit too black and white IMHO.

Dick Dewert resigned his post as one of Canada's leading evangelists, to follow in the footsteps of Bakker, Swaggart, and Haggard. Let the "he's only human" spin begin. http://www.canada.com/edmontonjournal/news...25-a969d05b4d38

Tell that to a Mormon or J.W. Mormons can be excommunicated and J.W.'s are disfellowshipped for disobedience. Catholics can be thrown out as well for serious and flagrant violations. 1) Mormons aren't Christians 2) Anyone can be excommunicated for serious violations, so what? Kinda hard to respond since you're defining who a Christian is. Better throw the Catholics in to. Someone once told me they weren't Christians either. Sheese.

Tell that to a Mormon or J.W. Mormons can be excommunicated and J.W.'s are disfellowshipped for disobedience. Catholics can be thrown out as well for serious and flagrant violations.

Certainly, the Bible, which I define to include only the Old Testament, does not. I think the point is missed. The bible defines the faith hence the beliefs. For example, I think it's fair to say that Jevhovah's, Mormons, Jews, Seventh Day Adventists, Fundamentalist Christians et al all believe that they are the "chosen ones" and that their brand of religions is the right and true one. But if everyone used the King James there would be less open to interpretation than there is today.

That is far from true on so many different levels. First off, the bible doesn't say anywhere that Catholics are saved but anglicans are not. Secondly, Rome doesn't say that Catholics are saved but Anglicans are not. Well, I'll grant you the Catholic church doesn't necessarily feel that way anymore, but their bibles are different and smack of exclusivity. The Mormons and J.W.'s undoubtedly exercise religious isolationism and believe that they are "right" and others are not.

I think that's a terribly irrational view unsubstaniated by anything in the Bible. If that was my feeling on religion, I'd be turned off too. But the Bible is the problem geoffrey, ala Catholic Bible, New World Translations (J.W.'s), Book of Mormon (so-called additive to the King James) and on and on. And these religions or Christian variants believe essentially what cybercoma has described hence the incompatibility.

The hostages were freed on the same day that Reagan was inaugurated. Surely Reagan doesn't get the credit for freeing them? Carter brokered the deal. Another attempt was made prior but the mission failed.

I think too many forget his accomplishments. But having said that I think Carter wasn't a good president because he was too good for that office.

Gee August, how would you guess? Yeah, a few more sources might be appropriate.

Wow, that sounds definitive. Newbie, where do you stand right now? Do you believe in God at all? Are you just against religion? Or are you just attempting humour like the "second chance" humor you gave back there? I may be wrong, but you seem to be angry. That anger is what's fueling your views. That's the trouble with the written word - subtlety is difficult to detect. I am certainly not angry. I just don't feel it's productive to always bring the Devil into the equation as justifcation for man's destructive behaviour. Man is responsible for his actions, period. To drag in a mythical entity as cause is ridiculous. And as far as God is concerned, I am an agnostic.

Not to mention the Native treaty claims that would come flooding in.

Second chances? God gives us 80 years to figure things out, screwing up many times along the way. Or how about 70 x 7 screw ups every day being the number of times Jesus said to forgive someone? Obviously my humour was not recognized. I promise to place a smiley face next time.