Steve, you never had a problem understanding Fred Bartlett's rhapsodies. You may have a mental block that prevents you from understanding what I write. Perhaps you purposely obfuscate in order to have an argument. Perhaps something else motivates you. Regardless of your inability or unwillingness to understand my messages, I certainly do not want your smoke screens to cause misunderstanding to any third party. Let me be clear(er).
My understanding Fred versus understanding you isn't about any mental block. It is about the difference in the logic that Fred employed as compared to the confusing muddle of words you sometimes put forth in the place of logic. I have no problem rebutting your muddles without ever resorting to obfuscation. My motivation is simple: I point out what I see as logical problems in what you've written, because I enjoy unpacking fallacies. And it isn't that I misunderstand or am unwilling to understand what you've written, but that you apparently don't like seeing your errors pointed out.
As to calling what I've written a smoke screen... that's nonsense and as to you being "clearer" - I wish you would.
Here is something wierd (and an example of not being clear). In post #13, you quote yourself: "MEM: The fact of the matter is that we are all sinners. ..." that quote is taken from Post #8, then you put a quote of mine right under it, as if I were replying to that statement: "SW: Mostly we just talked about factors that favored Catholic priests engaging in child molestation. ..." which is from post #12. Did you mean to indicate that I was replying to your quote? That wouldn't be honest.
When you say, "The fact of the matter is that we are all sinners" that is YOU saying that. If you want to be clearer, and did not mean to say those are your beliefs, then say, "The church believes that we are all sinners."
Let me show you another example of a failure to be clear.
We all sin. If you are truly remorseful, you confess your sin, receive absolution, and perform penance. This is recognized in law in many jurisdictions (though not Utah). The confessional, the doctor's office, the lawyer's office, in therapy with your psychiatrist or psychologist, those are all special relationships
You say "We all sin" and you say it in a way that implies this is fact as opposed to mouthing the words of the church. Then you go off into how the church handles priests who sin, and you talk about the confessional where one recieves absolution, and then you roll right into the doctors office and the lawyers office, in therapy, and tie these all up with saying they are special relationships under the law.
Tell me - are you unable to see how you have floated from one concept to another in a way that is lacking in a logical connection that stays true to the issue being discussed? The issue Bill and I were dicussing had to do with anything the Catholic church does that might account for more child molestation. Don't you see that you would have been agreeing with Bill and me had you phrased it like this, "The church believes that we are all sinners, and they prefer to accept confession and to grant absolution, even though some people believe that might permit more child molestation."
My points about Tammy Fae and the GOP highlighted the fact that your interest in pedophile priests was without philosophical context.
You have a very strange mind. Bill and I were discussing any psychological, cultural, legal quirks might exist that would make Catholic priesthood more open to child molestation. Do you think that I'm somehow required to frame pedophilia in philosophical terms?
You never cared about pedophilia.
I could answer this in two ways.
1. "So What!" or,
2. "You're totally wrong." I've had clinical training in understanding pedophilia and as a psychotherapist I ran therapy groups for sex offenders for over a year for child protective services.
...your favoring the Republican Party prevented your[sp] from connecting the dots in what you would call a "floating abstraction" to condemn Mitt Romney as an advocate of perversion.
Really? Are you becoming unhinged?