Comments posted organically
SelectSmart.com Homepage
Transgender people can’t be baptized unless they’ve ‘repented,’ Catholic diocese says

By HatetheSwamp
December 9, 2021 8:03 am
Category: Religion

(5.0 from 1 vote)
SelectSmart.com SelectSmart.com SelectSmart.com

Share
Rules of
the Post

Rate this article
5 Stars
4 Stars
3 Stars
2 Stars
1 Star
0 Stars
(5=best, 0=poor)

“The experience of incongruence in one’s sexual identity is not sinful if it does not arise from the person’s free will, nor would it stand in the way of Christian Initiation,” reads the document. “However, deliberate, freely chosen and manifest behaviors to redefine one’s sex do constitute such an obstacle.”

Based on what the Roman Catholic Church has always stood for, this is the position it has to take. As the biblical book, Romans says, according to my paraphrase, every human being is born with sin...a natural opposition to the will and way of God. There's no particular shame in experiencing "incongruence in one's sexual identity."

The question always is, how do you live. The greatest commandment, according to Jesus, is to love God.

Clearly, this message is counter culture...in the West...though not in most of the rest of the world. The message will be unpopular on the American coasts, where the following of the teachings and example of Jesus is considered rubbish anyway.

Still,...truth.


Cited and related links:

  1. washingtonpost.com

Comments Start Below


The views and claims expressed by contributors are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views and beliefs of SelectSmart.com. Not every statement made here can be assumed to be a fact.
Comments on "Transgender people can’t be baptized unless they’ve ‘repented,’ Catholic diocese says":

  1. by Donna on December 9, 2021 9:14 am
    There have been cases where a person has committed suicide because they believed they were doomed to hell for being gay or transgender. Ironically though, suicide is considered a mortal sin.



  2. by Curt_Anderson on December 9, 2021 9:50 am
    HtS,
    Do you disagree that at least some of the teachings of Jesus are rubbish?

    For example, Jesus was not an opponent of slavery as indicated by Matthew 18:21-35, Matthew 20:20-28 and Matthew 24:36-51.

    I'm surprised that Jesus hasn't been canceled and statues of him removed already.


  3. by HatetheSwamp on December 9, 2021 9:58 am

    Curt,

    I said rubish, i.e., rube-ish, not rubbish.

    The most clear commentary on Jesus and slavery et.al., is in the letter of Paul to the Galatians which is, almost certainly, the easiest extant Christian writing:

    "There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus."


  4. by Donna on December 9, 2021 10:03 am
    That doesn't change what Curt said.


  5. by Curt_Anderson on December 9, 2021 10:06 am
    You said (wrote) "rubbish".


    "There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus".

    Apparently your Jesus doesn't recognize sexual differences or sexuality.


  6. by HatetheSwamp on December 9, 2021 10:06 am

    Obviously, Donna, I can't begin to imagine the inherent pain and struggle connected to "incongruence in one's sexual identity," as the statement describes it.

    Nevertheless, I agree that repentance, as difficult as it may be to achieve, is the response that is true to the life and teachings of Jesus.

    But, you know that.


  7. by HatetheSwamp on December 9, 2021 10:22 am

    Yeah. Jesus was the original feminist. Gloria Steinem had nuthin on Him.

    He was oblivious to sexual differences. He did, however, acknowledge gender differences.


  8. by Donna on December 9, 2021 11:22 am
    Paul and I think some apostles believed that women should be subserviant to their husbands.


  9. by islander on December 9, 2021 2:46 pm

    "Transgender people can’t be baptized unless they’ve ‘repented,’ Catholic diocese says" ...Hate

    And Orthodox Jewish people can't have real bacon and eggs for breakfast. What's your point?




  10. by HatetheSwamp on December 9, 2021 3:17 pm

    And, they can't eat cheeseburgers...ever! Don't join that religion, for sure!


  11. by HatetheSwamp on December 9, 2021 4:45 pm

    Donna,

    I think you'll look a long time before you find the notion that women should be subservient to anyone anywhere in the Bible.


  12. by islander on December 9, 2021 4:50 pm

    Hate,

    As long as it's Kosher, Jewish people can eat cheeseburgers. Catholics can eat any kind of cheeseburger except on Friday, then they have to eat a fish sandwich.

    Protestants can't dance, drink, or play cards and Mormons have to wear special undergarments. Are you poking fun at the different religions? Is that what this thread is all about?


  13. by georges on December 9, 2021 9:03 pm
    We can probably argue the definition of subservient. But I would say Christianity is definitely patriarchal, in the best sense of the word.

    Servants should obey their masters, children should obey their parents, women should obey their husbands, people should obey their rulers, all should obey God.

    A message wh*te people struggle with.


  14. by georges on December 9, 2021 9:08 pm
    islander,
    Kosher cheeseburger doesn't exist. Unless you count the fake processed vegan crap among cheeses 😄


  15. by Curt_Anderson on December 9, 2021 9:34 pm
    Georges,
    You are correct. When I was a teenager I was invited to dinner at home of Jewish friend. In retrospect I think they may have Orthodox Jews, certainly observant Jews. I made the faux pas of requesting milk with dinner which included meat. I learned then that milk and meat are not to be ingested together.

    I guess that "meat" means mammalian meat. I guess that's why lox and cream cheese gets a pass.


  16. by georges on December 9, 2021 10:19 pm
    Yes, it comes from a verse that says don't boil a kid in its mother's milk, from which they've extrapolated that you shouldn't eat any (mammal) meat with dairy.

    I'm surprised they stopped you from drinking milk with dinner though. From what I understand it doesn't apply to non-Jews.


  17. by Curt_Anderson on December 9, 2021 10:26 pm
    "I'm surprised they stopped you from drinking milk with dinner though. From what I understand it doesn't apply to non-Jews." --Georges

    Unbeknownst to me, my friend had told his parents that I was Jewish.


  18. by HatetheSwamp on December 10, 2021 3:33 am

    As long as it's Kosher, Jewish people can eat cheeseburgers. Catholics can eat any kind of cheeseburger except on Friday, then they have to eat a fish sandwich.

    Protestants can't dance, drink, or play cards and Mormons have to wear special undergarments. Are you poking fun at the different religions? Is that what this thread is all about?


    In Orthodox Judaism, eating dairy and meat in the same meal is forbidden. Trust me, I know. I lived in Israel during a summer when I was in college. Eating the diet was part of the job.

    As a lifelong Protestant...until recently...thanks for telling me about the prohibition on dancing and cards. I never knew.


  19. by HatetheSwamp on December 10, 2021 3:44 am

    We can probably argue the definition of subservient. But I would say Christianity is definitely patriarchal, in the best sense of the word.

    georges,

    Donna claimed that the Bible teaches that women should be "subservient" to their husbands. It doesn't.

    I entirely agree that, in time, as Christianity became institutionalized, it became patriarchal. However, there's strong reason to believe that one of the people accepted as an apostle among first century Christians was a woman. In the Jesus days, and among very early disciples, the Way wasn't patriarchal.


  20. by georges on December 10, 2021 4:40 am
    Hate,
    This is probably just a point we disagree on.

    I think we can say for sure that the church treated women with a surprising amount of respect and inclusion. We know they served as apostles, prophets, deacons, etc.

    There's also indications that Priscilla was considered more prominent than Aquila as far as their ministry went.

    But I don't see any uprooting of men as head of the family. If anything it's re-enforced with passages like Ephesians 5.
    bible.oremus.org


  21. by HatetheSwamp on December 10, 2021 4:55 am

    Do you know that, in the Greek text, the word for "submit" is not present.

    My take on life among early disciples is that the notion of headship itself was turned upside down. "Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ." (Eph. 5:21)


  22. by Donna on December 10, 2021 6:55 am
    Bill, notwithstanding your objection to the word "submit", Paul very clearly invokes a double-standard regarding husbands relationships with their wives.

    From Ephesians 5:

    21Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.

    22Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. 23For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, His body, of which He is the Savior. 24Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

    25Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave Himself up for her 26to sanctify her, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, 27and to present her to Himself as a glorious church, without stain or wrinkle or any such blemish, but holy and blameless.

    28In the same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29Indeed, no one ever hated his own body, but he nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church. 30For we are members of His body.d

    31“For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.”e 32This mystery is profound, but I am speaking about Christ and the church. 33Nevertheless, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.


  23. by HatetheSwamp on December 10, 2021 7:10 am

    Yeah, Donna. I knew what it said all along. There's a huuuuuuuuuge difference between being subservient and submitting.

    And,...thank you for your integrity in beginning your quote with verse 21.

    Incidentally, in the Greek text, the word for submit is not in verse 22. In fact, there's no form of a verb in that clause.

    Without writing a book: Jesus submitted to the Father in becoming human and, well, submitting to the cross. It's the duty of every FOLLOWER of Jesus to follow Him in submitting....men AND women. That's what verse 21 commands.

    As I said to georges, since Jesus, the notion of authority has been turned on its head, turned upside down. Every disciple submitting...to everyone.

    Your suggestion that Christianity gives men the right to "lord" it over women is just plain wrong.

    I acknowledge that when the church became institutionalized, the notion that husbands ruled the home took over...

    ...but you won't find that in the example and teaching of Jesus, or in the life of His first followers.


  24. by Donna on December 10, 2021 7:25 am
    Are you including Paul when you say "His first followers"?

    Paul very clearly states that the husband "is the head of the wife". He called on husbands to love their wives, but not to submit to them. Paul also decreed that women should be silent in matters of the church. That's some pretty serious male chauvinism there.


  25. by Donna on December 10, 2021 7:28 am
    There are churches today that don't allow women to serve on their church councils. Apparently that policy is prevalent in evangelical megachurches. They didn't get that from anything Jesus said - it's all from Paul's words, which supposedly were inspired by "God".


  26. by HatetheSwamp on December 10, 2021 7:46 am

    Donna,

    You are making the arguments that tickle off the tongues of all fundamentalist misogynists.

    Certainly, the head of every wife is her husband. And, the head of every husband is Christ.

    Read Philippians 2 beginning with verse 5. As I said to georges, Jesus turned upside-down the notion of what headship is. Jesus "made Himself nothing." He took "the nature of a servant." He "humbled Himself."

    That's what the Head of the husband is and did. That's the pattern of what the head of a wife does.

    Again, you're not alone in seeing misogyny here. But, looking honestly at what Jesus did and taught and how His first followers lived, it's clear that you are in error.


  27. by Donna on December 10, 2021 7:56 am
    "Certainly, the head of every wife is her husband."

    Wow, you really think that? The wife can't be the head of her husband?

    I don't see either the husband or wife as being the "head" of the other.


  28. by HatetheSwamp on December 10, 2021 8:00 am

    Obviously.

    But, then, what that you think comes from what Jesus taught and how He lived?

    I'm not aware that you identify as a disciple of Jesus.

    Correct me if I'm wrong.


  29. by Donna on December 10, 2021 8:12 am
    "Obviously" what?



  30. by HatetheSwamp on December 10, 2021 8:57 am

    Obviously you don't have a biblical view of human relationships.


  31. by Donna on December 10, 2021 11:36 am
    Of course I don't view human relationships the same way ancient desert dwellers did.

    I agree with a lot of what Jesus said, but not everything. And I don't believe that the "God of Abraham" if "he" existed/exists at all was/is the creator of the universe.

    But that's getting away from the original discussion which was about how Jesus and/or his early disciples viewed the role of women. Clearly Paul viewed a woman's place as being beneath that of a man's.


  32. by HatetheSwamp on December 10, 2021 11:44 am

    Jerusalem had a population of about half a million and it's in the mountains, not in the desert.

    What you think you know about Paul's views, based on what you have contributed to this exchange, is rooted in uninformed myth. But, you do seem determined to remain uninformed.


  33. by Donna on December 10, 2021 12:02 pm
    I didn't attend Jesus college as you did, but I've read the entire Bible, some parts of it numerous times, and I've taken part in many Bible study groups. I don't understand how anyone can deny that Paul viewed a woman's role as beneath that of a man's. You would probably say that he saw men and women as having different roles, but I think Paul's pronouncement that women should be silent in matters of the church is a clear indication of his male chauvinism. Even America's Founders didn't allow any women to vote, so it hasn't been only Christians who have historically seen women as a sort of second class human.


  34. by HatetheSwamp on December 10, 2021 12:22 pm

    "Jesus college," how demeaning. How sanctimonious. Sadly, typical.

    I am, by training, a student of history.

    By the standard of the day, Jesus elevated the place of women...radically...audaciously.

    Virtually every Christian renewal movement has elevated women to a place of stark equality with men.

    Nearly always in the past, until Western culture itself also elevated women, those new Christian movements liberated women with such zeal that the culture was offended. The earliest roots of feminism in the US is with the same evangelical Protestants who pushed for the freedom of slaves.

    Those new Christian movements captured the spirit of the teachings and example of Jesus. That's fact...

    ...no matter how blindly you chose to deny.


  35. by Donna on December 10, 2021 12:36 pm
    Give me examples.


  36. by HatetheSwamp on December 10, 2021 1:00 pm

    Of what?


  37. by Curt_Anderson on December 10, 2021 2:06 pm
    Donna,
    You didn't really expect that HtS would provide any examples, did you? HtS will do anything to elude and evade to avoid giving you a straight answer.


  38. by HatetheSwamp on December 10, 2021 3:20 pm

    Huh


  39. by Donna on December 10, 2021 5:18 pm
    Curt, I suspected that he wouldn't provide examples, so I called his bluff.




  40. by Donna on December 10, 2021 5:22 pm
    "Virtually every Christian renewal movement has elevated women to a place of stark equality with men. Nearly always in the past, until Western culture itself also elevated women, those new Christian movements liberated women with such zeal that the culture was offended."

    You must have had examples in mind when you wrote that, Bill. I'd like to hear you elaborate.


  41. by georges on December 10, 2021 7:19 pm
    Well we can start with the first Christian renewal, the beginning of Christianity itself 🙂


  42. by Donna on December 10, 2021 11:51 pm
    This doesn't have much to do with this discussion, but it's so bizarre I just had to post it.

    Pastor Who Was Pushed Out Of Church After Performing In Drag On HBO Show Raises Money For Living Expenses

    A pastor from Indiana was forced to leave his job after facing backlash for appearing at a drag queen event.

    Reverend Craig Duke, who has been a Newburgh United Methodist minister for three years, says he was “bullied out” of the church after receiving an influx of emails attacking him.

    “You have thrown NUMC under the bus to elevate a minority of individuals,” one of the emails addressed to Duke said.

    A following email said that Satan must be pleased with the discord of LBTQ rights, according to Duke.


    msn.com


  43. by HatetheSwamp on December 11, 2021 4:15 am

    Donna,

    As examples, most prominently, the Methodists, in their early days, didn't have clergy as is typical of most counter culture Christian movements. But, women were regularly elevated to positions of influence. In fact, stodgy established church types were vehement in their criticism of Methodists, even to the point of implying immorality, because Methodists granted women freedom not fashionable in the larger culture.

    Parachurch organizations focusing on social reform typically had vigorous female leadership in their early days. In fact, Catherine Booth, is still considered the co-founder of the Salvation Army. Later on, frequently, women's involvement in leadership of these organizations was suppressed, not as much in the Salvation Army as others.

    The truth is, in the American British colonies, later the US, women were often assumed to exist in equality with men.

    Two factors skew appreciation of this undeniable truth.

    One is that, in time, often with only one generation, as the movement became enculturated, the role of women was suppressed.

    The other, and I think that, especially to people like you, Donna, and Curt and isle...and, you are representative of millions in America,...the movements in which this is true can be fairly described as "populist." They are not respectably religious. Their people didn't attend or teach at the Divinity Schools at Harvard or Yale or Columbia. They didn't pray at Presidential Inaugurations. But, the movements they led were vigorous and growing rapidly.

    Interestingly, two characteristics of these groups predominated. They easily accepted the equality of the sexes.

    And, even more radically, the equality of the RACES. In these populist Christian religions black and white preachers often worked side by side...especially in the early years.

    As is the case with much religious history, the best documented is the more recent. There's a whole discipline of Pentecostal history among American religious scholars. The work of those scholars demonstrates everything that I've been saying. If you still doubt me, I can refer you to a classic book that is reasonably short and certainly reasonable for someone as serious a thinker as you.

    But, Donna. We've stumbled on something that I know about. In fact, I probably know more about this than anything I know.

    What you think about Jesus and Christianity is common knowledge. However, it's wrong. It's mythical. It's easy to believe. But, it's not rooted in reality.


  44. by HatetheSwamp on December 11, 2021 4:20 am

    Well we can start with the first Christian renewal, the beginning of Christianity itself 🙂

    Preach it, georges!


  45. by HatetheSwamp on December 11, 2021 4:26 am
    Donna et.al.,

    Here's a very brief article.
    sites.uw.edu


  46. by Donna on December 11, 2021 6:38 am
    "Additionally, Quaker women were allowed to hold power by becoming leaders and preachers within the church (Alexander, 2018)."

    Good on the Quakers. Women had full equality in the church my family was active in, the Maryland Synod Lutheran Church.

    With that said, what I said about Paul stands. There's a bloc of Christianity that seem to follow the teachings of Paul more than they do the teachings of Jesus.


  47. by HatetheSwamp on December 11, 2021 7:13 am

    With that said, what I said about Paul stands. There's a bloc of Christianity that seem to follow the teachings of Paul more than they do the teachings of Jesus.

    What you said about Paul is crap!

    Paul's the one who said, that in Christ there is neither male nor female. It's from Paul's letter to the Romans that we know that early followers of Jesus acknowledged an apostle who is a woman.

    Your take on Paul is absolutely wrong.


    What you are right about, however, is that there's a bloc of Christianity that uses his writings to support misogyny. About that there can be no doubt.

    But, here's the world-class irony:

    Donna, You are among the most egregious abusers of the writings of Paul. You, based on this discussion, willfully, misinterpret his writings to turn him into a hater of women, which he ain't.


    The truth is that he was an advocate of the equality of women, and not only in word. He considered women his equal coworkers. His way of life proves your abuse of him.

    You need to repent of your Paolophobia.


  48. by Donna on December 11, 2021 8:25 am
    "You need to repent of your Paolophobia."

    I'm not afraid of Paul. You need to use words and suffixes correctly.

    "Donna, You are among the most egregious abusers of the writings of Paul. You, based on this discussion, willfully, misinterpret his writings to turn him into a hater of women, which he ain't."

    You also need to stop lying. I never said that Paul hated women.

    But clearly you're wrong about Paul.

    First Corinthians 14:33–35 states, “As in all the congregations of the saints, women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church”(ESV). In 1 Timothy 2:11–12, there is a similar instruction: “A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. . . . She must be quiet.”



  49. by HatetheSwamp on December 11, 2021 9:07 am

    Ah, yes! Are you familiar with the term "proof texting?"

    It's the practice of take a preconceived idea, in this case about the Bible, and finding words that will prove the idea you'd already formed is correct.

    So:

    First Corinthians 14:33–35 states, “As in all the congregations of the saints, women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church”(ESV).

    In 1 Timothy 2:11–12, there is a similar instruction: “A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. . . . She must be quiet.”


    There's no doubt that the 1 Corinthians passage, for certain, is Paul's.

    Those are words that support your preconceived condemnation of Paul.

    The question for you is this:

    How, if you are correct in your understanding of those words, do you account that Paul believed that, in Christ there is neither male nor female?

    How do you account for his reference in Romans to Junia in which he honors her as one of the apostles.

    How do you splain Paul's reference to his ministry companion, Priscilla, as a "fellow worker" along with her husband Aquila. How do you account for Paul's claim that she and he were so universally revered that all the gentile churches "are grateful for them?"


    Paul is acknowledged by Christians and non-Christians alike to have had a first class philosophical and theological mind. He's also accredited to have been the primary force in driving the spread of Christianity throughout much of the Roman Empire over the course of only about 30 years.

    To understand someone of that brilliance and accomplishment takes some careful and nuanced thinking.

    Your suggestion that he simply was a misogynist, based on the brief passages you quoted, doesn't splain the totality of the man, in my opinion.


  50. by Donna on December 11, 2021 11:53 am
    How do you explain the Bible verses I posted? Paul was very clear that women were to have no authority over men.

    But actually I give Paul a break. Paul was a product of his time. Throughout history, generally speaking, men have treated women like they're children. Many still do. In fact I've been the recipient of that kind of attitude. One time, after speaking with an older man about politics, he told me "You're pretty smart for a woman". It doesn't seem to matter whether the men who do that are religious or not.


  51. by HatetheSwamp on December 12, 2021 4:20 am

    This is a sticky problem.

    I will say that, while I can see a number of ways to understand those brief passages, in light of all that is known about Paul, your suggestion that they prove Paul was a misogynist who oppressed women simply can't be supported in light of other things Paul wrote and did. Clearly Paul was not a misogynist. If anything, by our standards, he was a feminist, even a radical feminist.

    What we know about Paul, from New Testament writings that, even the most cynical scholars accept as genuinely being from Paul, makes it clear that he accepted women as his colleagues and worked alongside of them comfortably and without reservation...and praised them.

    What people like you and me sometimes forget is that, before Christianity became institutionalized, "going to church" was an extremely small part of the life. Hebrews 10 has a brief, significant, appeal to followers of Jesus suggesting that they not give up meeting together "as some are in the habit of doing..."

    Going to church was a small part of the life of believers in that day. Clearly, based on that Hebrews line, some believers back in the day, didn't do it at all.

    So,...

    ...your passages have to do with what happens in the small part of Christian living that was "going to church."

    Why were women to be silent then? I have no firm, settled, opinion.

    It may be that this was a setting in which people who were not Christians would encounter Christians. The Book of James encourages cautious behavior when a person not familiar with who believers are and what they do might be present.

    For women to speak publicly would have been brazen and offensive among both Jews and gentiles at that time in history.

    Something like this is the most likely explanation.

    What I do know is, as I've said, Paul accepted women and worked with them in apostolic roles. Also, I recalled since earlier in this thread that the Book of Acts notes that Paul hung out with female prophets.

    So, how do you put this all together Donna?

    How do you splain Paul's lifestyle which included his acceptance of and praise for women in crucial Christian leadership roles as apostles and prophets...whom he acknowledged as colleagues?


  52. by georges on December 12, 2021 5:05 am
    Donna,

    Those particular verses are not easy to interpret. For reasons listed by Hate.

    If they obviously meant what you say, I would be fine with it. But I don't think they do.


  53. by Donna on December 12, 2021 7:26 am
    What Paul said is very easy to interpret unless you don't want it to be easy to interpret, georges.

    "So, how do you put this all together Donna?"

    I already said. Paul was a product of his time. Women in general were relegated to second-class status. With few exceptions, that has been a constant throughout human history. For that reason, I give Paul a break.



  54. by HatetheSwamp on December 12, 2021 7:30 am

    Nah.

    How is a man who set up a leadership team with women in prominent positions of influence a typical man of the first century Semitic world?


  55. by Donna on December 12, 2021 7:46 am
    Well, for example, Abraham Lincoln freed the slaves, but he was still a racist.


  56. by HatetheSwamp on December 12, 2021 8:14 am


    Right!

    I've been asking you for you to define what you mean by the term "racist" for quite a while now.

    You never answer.

    That little tap dance aside, how is Paul's elevation of women to roles of influence and prominence typical of men in the first century Semitic world?


  57. by Donna on December 12, 2021 9:49 am
    A racist is someone who treats, thinks of, or responds to someone differently, often negatively, because of their perceived race.

    I'm not an expert on the first century Semitic world. You tell me.



  58. by HatetheSwamp on December 12, 2021 10:03 am

    There's no basis in fact for your assessment of Paul as merely a man of his time.


    Your definition of a racist makes the term insignificant and is a dangerous abuse of language.

    So, because I generally believe that white man can't jump, I'm in the same category as, say, David Duke.



  59. by islander on December 12, 2021 12:06 pm
    ”So, because I generally believe that white man can't jump, I'm in the same category as, say, David Duke.

    At least in so far as the definition of racist goes you appear to be in the same category as David Duke.



    :”Racism is the belief that groups of humans possess different behavioral traits corresponding to inherited attributes and can be divided based on the superiority of one race over another.”  Wikipedia

    Be sure to check out the linc

    youtube.com


  60. by HatetheSwamp on December 12, 2021 12:15 pm

    In your quote, isle, the part that comes after the word "and" makes all of the difference. Donna doesn't include it in her definition.


  61. by Donna on December 12, 2021 12:30 pm
    Whatever, Bill. You're going to twist whatever I say however I say it. Frankly I don't give flying fuck what Paul said.


  62. by HatetheSwamp on December 12, 2021 1:09 pm

    Isle,

    Great video.


  63. by HatetheSwamp on December 12, 2021 1:11 pm

    Twist, Donna?

    That's what you call it when truth is on my side. And I demonstrate it.


  64. by Donna on December 12, 2021 2:10 pm
    Whatever Bill. I don't care enough about the issue to put that much time and energy into it. Sheri has almost completely given up debating, and I've cut back quite a bit. Most of it doesn't matter, and people rarely change their minds on anything.


Go To Top

Comment on: "Transgender people can’t be baptized unless they’ve ‘repented,’ Catholic diocese says"

* Anonymous comments are subject to approval before they appear. Cookies Consent Policy & Privacy Statement. All Rights Reserved. SelectSmart® is a registered trademark. | Contact SelectSmart.com | Advertise on SelectSmart.com | This site is for sale!

Find old posts & articles

Articles by category:

SelectSmart.com
Report spam & abuse
SelectSmart.com home page


From our contributors:
Display Order:

Christine McVie, Fleetwood Mac singer-songwriter, dies aged 79
Music by HatetheSwamp     November 30, 2022 12:32 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Donna (6 comments) [26 views]


FLA & CRT: Sometimes it helps to know what the hell you are talking about.
Education by Curt_Anderson     November 30, 2022 11:19 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Curt_Anderson (10 comments) [58 views]


Florida Judge rules to protect Floridians from the governor's attack on the First Amendment
Education by Donna     November 19, 2022 7:15 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Donna (70 comments) [694 views]


GOP county's refusal to certify election results could flip result of Arizona House seat...
Humor by Donna     November 30, 2022 7:47 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (4 comments) [46 views]


Mitt Romney calls Trump a ‘gargoyle’ over ‘disgusting’ meeting with Kanye West and Nick Fuentes
Politics by Curt_Anderson     November 29, 2022 1:08 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (13 comments) [187 views]


MAGA cult member threatens to kill fact checkers for ''defamation and slander" of Trump
Religion by Curt_Anderson     November 28, 2022 10:28 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (20 comments) [350 views]


Tulsi Gabbard and Riley Gaines on the perils facing ORGANIC Women in a Woke age.
Sports by HatetheSwamp     November 29, 2022 6:11 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Donna (12 comments) [112 views]


Oath Keepers Leader Convicted of Sedition in Landmark Jan. 6 Case
Law by Curt_Anderson     November 29, 2022 3:12 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (8 comments) [104 views]


Ketanji Brown Jackson swipes at Biden DOJ during SCOTUS immigration case
Law by HatetheSwamp     November 30, 2022 3:20 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: (0 comments) [20 views]


World Cup USA game thread
Sports by HatetheSwamp     November 29, 2022 11:49 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (5 comments) [27 views]


Religion selectors, pages, etc.