I've noticed that myself. Some Mormon freeper was claiming there's a conspiracy here to ban people "just for being Mormon". I certainly don't think that's the case... you can be openly Mormon and post all you want on here, but it's certainly acceptable to bash Mormons. (I was even attacked for pointing out that a lot of Mormon families do a better job practicing what they preach than Christian families -- e.g. no sex outside of wedlock, etc., and accused of being a Mormon supporter even though I think Mormonism a wacky cult)
Criticizing Jews and Protestant beliefs as a whole is a big no-no here. I was flamed for simply pointing out the fact that MOST American Jews are extremely liberal and pro-Dem,so it was delusional to think the Jewish vote was "in play" for Romney. I was told that was "offensive" to all the wonderful Jewish conservative freepers and that I should have to "apologize" for my comments, but I was right. Obama got 70% in 2012. Apparently it is also now taboo to mention anything bad Ariel Sharon did as Prime Minister. We're supposed to pretend he's pure as driven snow and never sold out of this country (ironically just a few weeks ago, there were constantly complaints of biased saintly portrays of Nelson Mandela on FR)
>> But it is OK if you are born again to bash a Calvinist or vice-versa. That's when I like to break out the popcorn, sit back, and enjoy the fireworks. <<
True as well. I don't believe in either camp's ideology, so for those food fights, I just watch quietly and enjoy the show.
>> Y'all probably aren't reading enough of Religion Forum threads. If you had, you would not be making such a ridiculous statement. <<
I usually avoid the religious threads precisely BECAUSE of those types of fights breaking out. When I do post, I get drawn into them. The rules also make no logical sense. A post asking about whether an evangelical Democrat has truly been born again is an "open threads", but a thread about ALL Christian Churches promoting amnesty from the pulpit is for the "Evangelical caucus" ONLY and I'm not "allowed" to post there. Bizarre stuff.
>> Non-Catholic/Mormon Christians are regularly criticized by Catholics/Mormons here - often being told we are going to hell because we aren't Catholic/Mormon <<
The interesting thing about the Catholic bashing is its always one extreme or the other. Either the Catholic Church is bad and unChristian because they supposedly are too cozy with other religions and think everyone is getting to heaven and being an atheist is A-OKAY with the "liberal marxist Pope", OR, the Catholic Church is bad and unChristian because they ONLY accept Catholics as a legit faith and think all other religious and other Christian denominations are "going to hell" and thus want to force everyone to become Catholic.
I wish the bashers would make up their minds. It reminds me of liberals mocking the right because some conservatives want to make MLK Jr. out to be a staunch "card-carrying Republican", whereas other conservatives want to convince everyone he was a "perverted anti-American communist". It looks silly and it certainly hurts our side when we have people saying polar opposite things like that. (not to say the left isn't just as bad with the some of the wildly different things they've put out there to trash our side)
I've thought the same thing but have never found the words to say it as you have.
I don't know of anyone (save one person who is now banned) who has said "X are going to hell because they are X and not us." I don't. So if that's the definition of "bashing" then there is no bashing around here, against or by Catholics.
What is ALSO bashing, however, is to say, "[Denomination X] doesn't read the Bible. They are against Scripture. In fact, virtually everything they do and believe is contrary to the Word of God". That's bashing and "[Denomination X]" is usually the Catholic Church/Catholics.
That's bashing because everyone loves the Bible. Whether or not they read it correctly is immaterial to this point; it's still a personal insult to say to another, "You aren't reading the Bible as God intends". By implication, that's saying, "You're a hard hearted stubborn jerk".
Which is why I never say those words directly, and even when I do imply that, I don't claim an entire group of people are doing it, just a particular person (usually the one I'm talking to), and I'll then couch such an implication with, "this is how I see it", "this interpretation seems more reasonable" or some such.
If someone is wrong in their interpretation of Scripture, the loving thing to do IS to tell them. But such an endeavor shouldn't start off with the salvo, "You are ignoring God's Word" (or "twisting" it or anything like that. Not the OPENING salvo at least)
Debates about the Bible should never be approached with an air of superiority (it is the Word of God after all, something given in love, so should be shared in love). This applies to anyone reading this, Catholic or not.
I'm sorry others around here don't see that. I really am.
Much more constructive dialog could be achieved if everyone remembered two facts: one, only the Holy Spirit converts (not you, the person reading this now) and two, this form of communication can not and should not be relied upon as a substitute for real evangelization.
A supplement yes, but not a substitute. It seems to me sometimes some get all hot and bothered because they are trying to fulfill the great commission here, solely on the Internet. And that's not possible.
If everyone remembered those two facts, we wouldn't put so much stock into "proving the other guy wrong" and "getting the last word", which are the primary reasons there is so much hostility in the subject of religion.