Droopy wrote:And what "unwarranted" assertion was that?
You suggested that abstinence and fidelity were the sum total of the church's teachings on sexuality. Thus, it stands to reason that there's something wrong with those of us who find the church's teachings damaging.
Did I? I said I was not in the habit of casting pearls before swine. That's all I said.
Yup, you did say that. You also said that I wallow (there's that swine reference again) in self-serving grandeur, but in reality I am no more than an immature high school student.
You don't understand the use of the term "swine" in the sense of that biblical verse, do you? Well I won't go into that now, as that would be casting...oh, never mind.
Yes, Loran, I understand the use in the Bible. I suppose what I found odd was the combination of the extended metaphor (which you used about as subtly as a ball-peen hammer) and your retreat from the position you staked out. As I said, you ran away from your argument but hurled insults over your shoulder. Unimpressive.
In any case, your long history of passive aggression against both the Church and those who defend it has been long noted. You try hard to be civil? Well, yes, on one level...
Even if that were true, I'd rather try to be civil, even on one level, than act like an ass on every level. Kindness is apparently passé in certain right-wing circles because you, at least, don't even try any longer. There are certain things I admire about you, but this is not one of them.