And just so that people don't accuse Matthew of playing favorites, I was banned for about a year.  I was only unbanned because I e-mailed Matthew about some matter and he said he couldn't recall why I was banned, and I honestly couldn't remember either, and then he unbanned me.  But I respect the ban, and if Matthew wanted to ban me again, there would be no hard feelings. 

I get it.  I can get frustrated, but my frustration is always of the logical and not emotional variety.  I barely have feelings, to be honest.  I'm more like a Vulcan, to a fault, and my wife has likened me to a Vulcan.  There are many benefits to that, but also some drawbacks.  In any case, I get extremely intellectually irritated by bad logic, faulty reasoning, fallacies, intellectual dishonesty due to agendas, confirmation bias, etc.  That's why I get set off by posters like dxcat, where there's zero objectivity and painting everything as white and black, due to some jingoistic programming to which he's succuмbed, or Sean Johnson who likes to use ad hominems and various tactics that bear no resemblance whatsoever to actual logic.  If people aren't presenting their argument where there's at least an implicit syllogism, I have no use for it.  I think it was in one of the newer Star Trek series where there was the woman playing Uhura who was humming in a tense situation.  So Spock notices this and tells her, "I find that the most effective way to relieve tension is by the application of rigorous logic."  And my wife immediately burst out laughing, points at me, and shouts, "That's youuuu!".  In any case, my posting persona bears little resemblance to my actual personality, since when I write/type, the only thing that matters to me is the content of what I'm posting, the substance.  In real life, I'm a very quiet and soft-spoken guy, slow to anger, hold no grudges, and my speaking style is rather different than my writing style.

And it's not really a difference of opinion regarding subject matter that elicits my stronger reactions.  I've exchanged very civil posts with BoD proponents such as Arvinger and ByzCat3000 and never had cross words for either one of them.  I've exchanged civil posts with Globe earthers.  But the ones I have no use for are those who simply ridicule the subject, use it as an ad hominem without having proven a thing or without even displaying that they have done even the most rudimentary amount of study into the subject, or the various Johnsonian tactics.  So I've called some of these out explicitly ... which I needn't go into here.  I know that Matthew agrees with Sean on some of the matters I get into heated arguments with the latter over, but I've never really exchanged cross words with Matthew, though I have expressed disagreements.  That's because Matthew doesn't employ the same types of anti-logical tactics that some of these other posters employ.

And I think also that part of why some of what I write comes across as hostile is due to the speed at which I type.  I've had people at work (when I wasn't remote) remark about my blazing fast typing.  I am actually very busy, though I've been criticized for making an average of 7 posts per day, but my posts literally take an average of probably 3-4 minutes to type.  For every one of these longer ones, like this one, I also make quite a few short one- or two- liners.  And this criticism is also an ad hominem, coming from individuals who perhaps make 3-4 post a day here (compared to my 7), but then also make 4-5 posts on other forums.  I've never been to these other forums.  CI is the only forum I've been active on, other than a short stint on the Catholic Answers forum, from which I was banned within 2 days, and not for the reasons some individuals here want me banned.  If I recall, one time it was for anti-Semitism and another time for being a sedevacantist.  Each of these 2 stints on that forum lasted no longer than 2-3 days.  I think I was motivated to serve as an apologist, as it were, for Traditional Catholicism, but they had no use from that there.

Thank you!

To answer your question: "No, because computers neither have souls, nor do they need a Day of Rest to free themselves from work to devote themselves more fully to the worship of God and the nurturing of the spiritual life."

Hey windbag: You do realize that you hold several of the most absurd, heretical, and flat out stupid propositions in traddyland, right?

One thing CI can count on is you showing up to drop a turd in the punch bowl any time your narratives feel threatened.

Watching you attempt to take the moral high ground is like watching Stalin pet his dog.

Sean, rarely do you argue based on substance, logic, and reason ... with a few notable exceptions.

I think I figured him out…



In Sean’s childhood, he watched a lot of Bart Simpson episodes and learned to talk “suburban trash-mouth” like the Jєω script writers who made the Bart Simpson character.

Do all your books feature thick cardboard pages?

... FSSP attendees ... grilled me and accused me of being a schismatic, outside the church, etc.