[Polycarp]

I know at least one of the Admin Moderators is a Catholic, and is fair handed.

However, I also know that at least one is rabidly anti-Catholic, and gleefully censors Catholics/Catholic threads by banishing them to the Religion Forum and other abuses of their censorship powers.

The fact that they do it routinely leads me to believe Jim Robinson approves of their anti-Catholic censorship.

And the fact that One_Particular_Harbour, now known as the consumate anti-Catholic bigot Chancellor Palpatine, provides legal counsel to Free Republic, solidifies my opinion that this Forum has become institutionally anti-Catholic.

[perform_to_strangers]

One_Particular_Harbour, now known as the consumate anti-Catholic bigot Chancellor Palpatine

OPH == CP??? When did that happen? I didn't even know OPH was banned. I waste far more time here than I should, but FR still feels like a soap opera I watch once a year.

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

I know at least one of the Admin Moderators is a Catholic, and is fair handed.

Oddly enough, if the Moderator in question is a Thomist Catholic, I could believe that a Roman Catholic could be reasonably "even handed".

(Thomists aren't necessarily compromisers, they just have a "long view" of the Church, since they still believe in a form of Predestination -- basically, an Augustinian belief in predestination combined with a Thomistic belief in the organic invincibility of the Church of Rome. Essentially, a Thomist Roman Catholic would be charitably willing to lose his arguments against flint-sharpened Calvinist Logicians for a thousand years, since -- between his Augustinian belief in predestination and his Thomistic belief in the organic invincibility of the Church of Rome -- he believes that God will "work it out for the good of Rome" in the ultimate end.)

However, I also know that at least one is rabidly anti-Catholic, and gleefully censors Catholics/Catholic threads by banishing them to the Religion Forum and other abuses of their censorship powers.

Don't throw yourself too much of a Pity Party. We on the Calvinist Squad have our equal suspicions of "Anti-Calvinist" bias -- including Suspensions and Bannings.

Of course some of the Calvinists occasionally say things that "aren't too friendly", so to speak. Neither did CatholicGuy, for that matter -- he wasn't too "friendly" in some cases.

But I would never have banned him, if it were up to me. There's a difference between a Passionate Disputant and a Disruptor. A big difference.

I have a sneaking suspicion that one of the Moderators is a "We're all Christian; can't we all get along?" Rodney King type. Me, I understand that Theological Debates are conducted along lines of black and white... Can we get along? OF COURSE NOT!! We have already identified the areas in which we "get along" (The Nicene Creed, the Athanasian Creed, et cetera); any further debates concern matters where we disagree!! And disagree quite frankly, in terms of black and white.

When the Religion Forum was established, I think that you called it a "religious ghetto", Polycarp. I disagreed with you then. I considered it to be a "side room" where persons of sincere Religious Convictions could argue forthrightly amongst ourselves, even if we agreed together on the News Forum (on Pro-Life issues, etc.)

But if one of the Moderaters is attempting to impose a "We're all Christian; can't we all get along?" regime upon the Religion Forum, them I must retract my prior disagreement with you.

• Because in that case, it is NOT a place where "Religious Persons" can take our legitimate (but rather specific) theological disagreements away from the general News/Activism Forum.
• In that case, it really is just a "Religion Ghetto", adapting itself to the Lowest Common Denominator. "Can't we all just get along"?

The fact that they do it routinely leads me to believe Jim Robinson approves of their anti-Catholic censorship.

And me, I have suspected that Jim Robinson's extended family includes both Mormons and Roman Catholics, on account on what I have seen as the "Anti-Calvinist" bias.

Maybe we should stop blaming Jim Robinson, and ask the Moderators not to turn the Religion Forum into a "can't we all just get along" Religious Ghetto.

There should have been NO problem with "CatholicGuy" discussing the application of Thomist "Just War" Theory on the Religion Forum. That's what the Religion Forum is intended for. It's not a bloody "religious ghetto" (or at least it is not supposed to be), it's supposed to be a place for Religious People to discuss Religious Principles (such as the Thomist "Just War" Theory) before we post on the main "News/Activism" Forum.

And the fact that One_Particular_Harbour, now known as the consumate anti-Catholic bigot Chancellor Palpatine, provides legal counsel to Free Republic, solidifies my opinion that this Forum has become institutionally anti-Catholic.

I am almost certain that "the consumate anti-Catholic bigot Chancellor Palpatine" is not One_Particular_Harbour.

One_Particular_Harbour, if you remember, was a hard-core Eastern Orthodox, for crying out loud (which accounted for his Anti-Catholicism). "Chancellor Palpatine" is not.

If you must know, I believe that "Chancellor Palpatine" is the (non-calvinist, non-Magisterial, independent) Protestant formerly known as "Darth Sidious" (check the Screen Names, fer cryin' out loud).

But do me a (personal) favor, Polycarp -- and don't seek his banning by the Powers That Be. Palpatine's anti-Catholicism may be "over the top" (a common failing of non-Magisterial Protestants who don't even understand the Magisterial Reformers' disagreements with Rome), but I enjoy reading his Political Postings and would hate to see him Banned again.

Best, OP