(Waiting to see when idiots like Steve Hays is going to publically [sic] condemn the Boy Scouts as a corrupt organization...but I still do not have much confidence in his ability to make the necessary logical distinctions regarding the Church and her membership in her)
So Steve, when are you going to condemn the Boy Scouts as a corrupt organization? Or is it that your condemnations only extend to Catholics?
1.While we’re on the subject of idiocy, it’s unintentionally revealing that a Catholic epologist defends the Roman church by comparing his denomination to the BSA.
The BSA has been corrupted insofar as militant liberals have insisted that the BSA accept sodomite Scout leaders into its ranks. So, by Alexander’s own argument from analogy, the Roman church and the BSA have both been corrupted by homosexual leadership.
(BTW, I don’t know the degree to which that subversive effort has been successful.)
And why does a Catholic epologist happen to think I’d have a problem with that comparison, exactly? Wouldn’t his invidious comparison be problematic for the Catholic position rather than my Protestant alternative?
2.Moreover, I’m on record condemning the corruption of the BSA by the coercive social agenda of militant liberals. But a brain-donor like Alex can’t be bothered to check whether or not I had a public position on the BSA before he trotted out his comparison–as if I’d blink in the face of his example.
Indeed, I used to receive regular updates from Hans Zeiger about efforts by militant liberals to subvert the BSA.
And I still receive updates from the American Civil Rights Union, with whom he’s affiliated.
3.As to distinguishing the Church from her membership, we’re talking about corruption from the top down. Benedict XVI can’t plead plausible deniability. To the contrary, he’s been a central player in this entire scandal, as he and other “princes” of the “one true church” colluded to stonewall the legal authorities. As the saying goes, a fish rots head first.