Posted on 10/10/2014 12:54:43 PM PDT by Diogenes99
Hmmm....
Signed up today to pimp an anti-Catholic blog? Wonder what their previous screen name was?
That’s another topic, as you have to know.
The point is that if people post things that are critical or any religious group or figure, and what they post doesn’t violate any rules, then it is a personal attack to tell them they’re “bashing” or a “basher.” It’s not discussing the article, but accusing the other poster of bad motives.
I also have no problem accepting an anonymous story. People can lie using their own name - the media does all the time - and the fact that their account is anonymous can simply be kept in mind.
Four year old blog posts that allege misconduct 50 years ago?
Somebody signed up today just to post this blog entry?
Time to switch on the radar and figure out what old screen name got banned and why they think sneaking back in to start flame wars is acceptable, right?
Of course not.
Joins FR October 10, 2014 and first post is Catholic-bashing? Ten to one this is some character that got the boot in the last few days. As far as the story goes, move along, nothing to see here.
Funny how quick some are to jump to the support of a newby who just signed up today. No need to check for veracity. Better to just like the allegation based on “who” the accused is.
Just signed up today to pimp a blog?
Everybody needs a hobby, right?
Most of us here at Free Republic are posting anonymously.
And yes, there is no problem with accepting that someone has written an account anonymously. That is something to keep in mind, as I said, but people can lie under their own names, or assumed names that one doesn’t even know are false. If one writes an anonymous account, and there is something in it that authorities want to check into, or it attracts great notice, then they may lose their anonymity. If not, then I will simply consider what’s said on what can best be determined to be its merits.
IBTZ!
you must have really been a joy to live with. In my ...let's see, 10 years of Catholic school, including 3 years of highschool, I had 1 Nun who treated me poorly and she thought that she was doing the right thing at the time. The Nuns are just people in unusual uniforms, there is nothing at all which made them different from anyone else or any other group of women. They tended not to toletate a lot of your bullsh** and that is probably what bothered you....too bad!!!
So are you saying you categorically dismiss anonymous accounts only for being anonymous?
Again, what about the posters here? Many people tell personal stories related to the articles. What about those? Do you dismiss them all because they’re anonymous, too?
And there was “Primary Colors,” a book on the Clinton administration that was originally anonymous. I never read it, but if I had when the author wasn’t known, again I would have just taken his anonymity into account in evaluating his claims.
Yep. That’s the way all the English prep schools used to be, and most of them were Church of England. For that matter, when I attended prep school here in the US back in the 50s, they had corporal punishment with split baseball bats wielded by the sixth form prefects.
Sounds to me like this jerk signed up for Free Republic just to post this misinformed, lying, four-year-old piece of Catholic bashing.
I don’t think we need any more folks who come here just for the Catholic bashing, and nothing else. If Protestant, Catholic, and Jewish conservatives can’t work together to straighten out our country’s mess, then it will only get worse.
This is the wrong venue for that manner of porn.
More people have been attacked by nuns than by great white sharks??
Yes.
Thanks!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.