Had2,

Thank you. Prior to responding, it is necessary to identify what appears to be a willful lack of comprehension on your part.

In my post to Midgie on 8/4, I explicitly state:

"tearing people and/or their beliefs down is not only not enjoyable, but counter
to my desire to see people live happy, healthy and productive lives. Which, for
some people, is inclusive of a faith."


Your interpretation:

"Really for starters you are stereotyping. And BTW what makes you think us
Catholics don't live healthy and fulfilling lives?"


As you compare the two statements side-by-side, can you identify where I asserted that Catholics do not live healthy and fulfilling lives?

Our next exchange features you inserting another random statement, presumably a horrific misinterpretation of my response to CLK, also from 8/4. I wrote:

I could not possibly stereotype my lack of desire to tear down the beliefs of
others, nor did I insinuate, in any way, that Catholics do not live healthy and
fulfilling lives.


Your response:


 


Good glad to hear it.Just to add the Catholic faith does not reject
science.

http://www.catholiclab.net/TheCatholicLaboratory/About_Us.html


http://ncbcenter.metapress.com/app/home/main.asp?referrer=default

 

As you compare those statements side-by-side, can you identify where I asserted that the Catholic faith rejects science?

A clear pattern is developing. Which is unfortunate, as it inhibits any meaningful discussion. Moving on...

My response to this was:


Had2, Thank you for the links. I will check them a bit later when I have
time. While it is encouraging that you are glad to hear that I did not say
Catholics do not lead healthy and fulfilling lives; I am compelled to ask why
you interpreted my post in such a manner when I clearly stated the opposite. 
Further, I did not make any reference to the Catholic Church rejecting science.
I did refer to believers arriving at belief not due to scientific study, but
through other utilities. As a whole, Christianity (Catholic or Protestant) runs
at odds with "science" much more than any other religion. Which poses no problem
for many believers because, as I noted, the utility of the belief is of far
greater importance.



Please take note of three items:

1. Did I inform you that I would check the links when time permitted?
2. Did I ask you why you interpreted my previous post in such a manner?
3. Did I also state that there was no reference to the Catholic Church rejecting science?

A part of your response (obviously I will not quote its entirety due to length...)


Uh NO! That is not true, with the Catholic faith. If you click on the
links I posted you would have known that. But since we are on the topic of who
runs at odds with each other let me tell you what happened at a
University in Italy a few years back.



Again you miss the point. And...here we are. It is plausible that I should not have referenced a paper which supersedes your understanding. For that I apologize. In the future, if your comprehension will be strained with each post, perhaps it is best if we do not attempt to communicate. I explained what I meant by "at odds." If you did not understand, simply ask for clarification and I will explain it to you. Your introduction of a list of scientists who are also believers is nothing more than a census which is completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand.


If you don't want to provide us with those so called "bumps" with "science"
you claim the Catholic Church has had then why on earth should I take you
seriously?



That is not a concern of mine, as you have shown yourself to be unable or unwilling to understand what is written.












"Stupidity is the basic building block of the universe."

Zappa