Lil Red Posted February 6, 2009 Share Posted February 6, 2009 +J.M.J.+ i don't agree with some of her views (she is pro-abortion), but she is at least a honest left leaning liberal. i was reading her recent column and someone asked about the Fairness Doctrine: [quote]If there's anything that demonstrates the straying of the Democratic Party leadership from basic liberal principles, it's this blasted Fairness Doctrine -- which should be fiercely opposed by all defenders of free speech. Except when national security is at risk, government should never be involved in the surveillance of speech or in measuring the ideological content of books, movies or radio and TV programs. Broadcasters must adhere to reasonable FCC regulations restricting obscenity, but despite the outlandish claims of Democrats like Sen. Charles Schumer, there is no analogy whatever between pornography and political opinion. Nor do privately owned radio stations have any obligation to be politically "balanced." They are commercial enterprises that follow the market and directly respond to audience demand. The Fairness Doctrine is bullying Big Brother tyranny, full of contempt for the very public it pretends to protect.[/quote] [url="http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/2009/01/14/obama/index1.html"]It's on page 2 of her column[/url] (i've just excerpted here). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted February 6, 2009 Share Posted February 6, 2009 [quote name='Lil Red' post='1773948' date='Feb 6 2009, 02:47 PM']+J.M.J.+ i don't agree with some of her views (she is pro-abortion), but she is at least a honest left leaning liberal. i was reading her recent column and someone asked about the Fairness Doctrine: [url="http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/2009/01/14/obama/index1.html"]It's on page 2 of her column[/url] (i've just excerpted here).[/quote] I just hate it when I love that woman! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil Red Posted February 6, 2009 Author Share Posted February 6, 2009 [quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1773953' date='Feb 6 2009, 11:52 AM']I just hate it when I love that woman! [/quote] +J.M.J.+ me too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TradMom Posted February 6, 2009 Share Posted February 6, 2009 +Praised be Jesus Christ! I find it very interesting that a moderator would choose to post an excerpt from an article written by a very well known "former" Catholic (whom is now an atheist), lesbian (who speaks honestly about living with her partner and raising a child), pro-choice writer. Her honesty is refreshing but not helpful for those wanting to deepen their spiritual life. Camille Paglia is an excellent writer, but certainly not appropriate for this website. I am sure you could have found a Catholic writer (or at least one who holds respect for the Holy Roman Catholic Church) with the same opinion. I would urge all those on this website who consider themselves Catholic to avoid her writings. If there was ever a thread that is inappropriate, this would be one. At the very least, more information (other than "left leaning liberal" and "pro-abortion") should have been given about her so readers could have been better informed before going to her column. TradMom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted February 6, 2009 Share Posted February 6, 2009 [quote name='TradMom' post='1773986' date='Feb 6 2009, 03:38 PM']+Praised be Jesus Christ! I find it very interesting that a moderator would choose to post an excerpt from an article written by a very well known "former" Catholic (whom is now an atheist), lesbian (who speaks honestly about living with her partner and raising a child), pro-choice writer. Her honesty is refreshing but not helpful for those wanting to deepen their spiritual life. Camille Paglia is an excellent writer, but certainly not appropriate for this website. I am sure you could have found a Catholic writer (or at least one who holds respect for the Holy Roman Catholic Church) with the same opinion. I would urge all those on this website who consider themselves Catholic to avoid her writings. If there was ever a thread that is inappropriate, this would be one. At the very least, more information (other than "left leaning liberal" and "pro-abortion") should have been given about her so readers could have been better informed before going to her column. TradMom[/quote] The general feeling for Camille is that even the devil can tell the truth sometimes. She is the only person from the other side of the feminist/abortion who doesn't play the political correctness name to obfuscate the truth. I vehemently disagree with her positions, but she gets grudging respect for her honesty. Every sinner is capable of conversion, but especially one who already respect truth. Being a catholic doesn't give you license to hide from the enemy or miss the occasional glimmer of honesty from the other side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted February 6, 2009 Share Posted February 6, 2009 And you miss the point that its posted BECAUSE she is an honest non-catholic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thessalonian Posted February 6, 2009 Share Posted February 6, 2009 They don't like it either because it would force them to put conservatives on air america radio and ironically on public TV and Radio as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dominicansoul Posted February 6, 2009 Share Posted February 6, 2009 [quote name='TradMom' post='1773986' date='Feb 6 2009, 02:38 PM']+Praised be Jesus Christ! I find it very interesting that a moderator would choose to post an excerpt from an article written by a very well known "former" Catholic (whom is now an atheist), lesbian (who speaks honestly about living with her partner and raising a child), pro-choice writer. Her honesty is refreshing but not helpful for those wanting to deepen their spiritual life. Camille Paglia is an excellent writer, but certainly not appropriate for this website. I am sure you could have found a Catholic writer (or at least one who holds respect for the Holy Roman Catholic Church) with the same opinion. I would urge all those on this website who consider themselves Catholic to avoid her writings. If there was ever a thread that is inappropriate, this would be one. At the very least, more information (other than "left leaning liberal" and "pro-abortion") should have been given about her so readers could have been better informed before going to her column. TradMom[/quote] moderators don't have moderators to moderate them..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil Red Posted February 6, 2009 Author Share Posted February 6, 2009 +J.M.J.+ [quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1773990' date='Feb 6 2009, 12:47 PM']The general feeling for Camille is that even the devil can tell the truth sometimes. She is the only person from the other side of the feminist/abortion who doesn't play the political correctness name to obfuscate the truth. I vehemently disagree with her positions, but she gets grudging respect for her honesty. Every sinner is capable of conversion, but especially one who already respect truth. Being a catholic doesn't give you license to hide from the enemy or miss the occasional glimmer of honesty from the other side.[/quote] amen. as i've said before, it's helpful to know your enemies tactics and arguments to refute them accurately. [quote name='thessalonian' post='1773994' date='Feb 6 2009, 12:53 PM']They don't like it either because it would force them to put conservatives on air america radio and ironically on public TV and Radio as well.[/quote] that's not the point of her article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil Red Posted February 6, 2009 Author Share Posted February 6, 2009 [quote name='dominicansoul' post='1773998' date='Feb 6 2009, 12:55 PM']moderators don't have moderators to moderate them.....[/quote] +J.M.J.+ uh, wrong! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted February 6, 2009 Share Posted February 6, 2009 [quote name='dominicansoul' post='1773998' date='Feb 6 2009, 03:55 PM']moderators don't have moderators to moderate them.....[/quote] ah, yes we do. Mods mod mods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
osapientia Posted February 6, 2009 Share Posted February 6, 2009 [quote name='TradMom' post='1773986' date='Feb 6 2009, 03:38 PM']+Praised be Jesus Christ! I find it very interesting that a moderator would choose to post an excerpt from an article written by a very well known "former" Catholic (whom is now an atheist), lesbian (who speaks honestly about living with her partner and raising a child), pro-choice writer. Her honesty is refreshing but not helpful for those wanting to deepen their spiritual life. Camille Paglia is an excellent writer, but certainly not appropriate for this website. I am sure you could have found a Catholic writer (or at least one who holds respect for the Holy Roman Catholic Church) with the same opinion. I would urge all those on this website who consider themselves Catholic to avoid her writings. If there was ever a thread that is inappropriate, this would be one. At the very least, more information (other than "left leaning liberal" and "pro-abortion") should have been given about her so readers could have been better informed before going to her column. TradMom[/quote] Dear TradMom, Praised be Jesus Christ! I want to support this post of yours 100%. Ms. Paglia hardly seems an appropriate source of information/quotes/truth for the Phatmass population in general. To me, Phatmass has set a standard - mostly done by the moderators from what I can tell - regarding what is acceptable for posting. Only a day or so ago I read a post on a controversial Abbey - the poster was only suggesting that we view the photos of the beautiful architecture of this Abbey - I went to the Abbey's site, did a little research and came back to send a reply to the original poster only to discover that the post had been removed. I simply concluded that this post did not meet with the standards set by the PM ownership and moderating team. I can only guess this may be because this community MIGHT be a Sedevacantist group which is not in Communion with the Roman Catholic Church. It seemed so to me when reading their site but I do not have confirmation of such and none was given here on PM. I think that one could arrive at the same conclusion when considering either Ms. Paglia or a SV group. Yes, it is true that not everything she says is a lie or against the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church - this would be true of any Sedevacantist group as well - not everything they teach is a lie or against the Roman Catholic Church....yet neither Ms. Paglia nor a Sedevacantist is IN COMMUNION with the Roman Catholic Chuch. I wonder why it is, then...that it is acceptable to retain posts about Ms Paglia but not about a Sedevacantist Group? I think this is a fair question. I find it most disconcerting that only certain types of dissenters are also considered truth tellers. How much truth does a dissenter have to tell to be considered a truth teller? If 80% of what they say is true are they telling the truth? What about 70%? 30%? 20%? This isn't really about whether or not one is a sinner and can be converted - we are all sinners and can be converted - including the Sedevacantist and Ms Paglia. I guess I'm simply at a loss to understand why one is OK and not the other. Thanks TradMom. Pax Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil Red Posted February 6, 2009 Author Share Posted February 6, 2009 +J.M.J.+ the difference is that Camille Paglia is not claiming to represent the fullness of Catholic teaching - sedevacantists are. that is why one is okay and not the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TradMom Posted February 6, 2009 Share Posted February 6, 2009 +Praised be Jesus Christ! Thank you for the clarification. I suppose it would be fine to post links to Anton La Vey here since he did not claim to represent the Roman Catholic Church? Very interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted February 6, 2009 Share Posted February 6, 2009 [quote name='osapientia' post='1774026' date='Feb 6 2009, 04:18 PM']Dear TradMom, Praised be Jesus Christ! I want to support this post of yours 100%. Ms. Paglia hardly seems an appropriate source of information/quotes/truth for the Phatmass population in general. To me, Phatmass has set a standard - mostly done by the moderators from what I can tell - regarding what is acceptable for posting. Only a day or so ago I read a post on a controversial Abbey - the poster was only suggesting that we view the photos of the beautiful architecture of this Abbey - I went to the Abbey's site, did a little research and came back to send a reply to the original poster only to discover that the post had been removed. I simply concluded that this post did not meet with the standards set by the PM ownership and moderating team. I can only guess this may be because this community MIGHT be a Sedevacantist group which is not in Communion with the Roman Catholic Church. It seemed so to me when reading their site but I do not have confirmation of such and none was given here on PM. I think that one could arrive at the same conclusion when considering either Ms. Paglia or a SV group. Yes, it is true that not everything she says is a lie or against the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church - this would be true of any Sedevacantist group as well - not everything they teach is a lie or against the Roman Catholic Church....yet neither Ms. Paglia nor a Sedevacantist is IN COMMUNION with the Roman Catholic Chuch. I wonder why it is, then...that it is acceptable to retain posts about Ms Paglia but not about a Sedevacantist Group? I think this is a fair question. I find it most disconcerting that only certain types of dissenters are also considered truth tellers. How much truth does a dissenter have to tell to be considered a truth teller? If 80% of what they say is true are they telling the truth? What about 70%? 30%? 20%? This isn't really about whether or not one is a sinner and can be converted - we are all sinners and can be converted - including the Sedevacantist and Ms Paglia. I guess I'm simply at a loss to understand why one is OK and not the other. Thanks TradMom. Pax[/quote] You are certainly entitled to your opinion, however we don't think its the function of catholics to hide their heads in the sand concerning the doings of the outside world. Camilla Paige never claims to be catholic, the SSPX does, and therein lies the difference. The Church has set a list of demands for the SSPXers to rejoin the Church, when the Church accepts them back, so will we. Any religious site that doesn't rep the church doesn't get linked to Phatmass. We also do not publicly discuss moderating decisions on the boards so please take any further discussion to pm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now