I really understand
 
And they babble and jabber.  Religion is holy.  You must respect religion.  What’s holy about the hive mind puke?  What merits respect?
 
No-one asks.  It’s one of the mantras jabbered by the mongs. 
 
Pervert ape-shit from 1912, certainly a long time ago, but don’t forget how old most of the cardinals are and that this began some 25 years ago.  Ratzinger was born in 1927 and my guess would be the puke below was pretty standard in his milieu.
 
It should be emphasized here that man owes his authoritative pre-eminence in society not to personal achievements but to the appointment of the Creator according to the world of the Apostle: "The man . . . is the image and glory of god; but the woman is the glory of the man" (1 Corinthians 11:7). The Apostle in this reference to the creation of the first human pair presupposes the image of God in the woman. As this likeness manifests itself exteriorly in man's supremacy over creation (Genesis 1:26), and as man as the born leader of the family first exercised this supremacy, he is called directly God's image in this capacity. Woman takes part in this supremacy only indirectly under the guidance of the man and as his helpmeet. It is impossible to limit the Pauline statement to the single family; and the Apostle himself inferred from this the social position of woman in the Church community. Thus her natural position is assigned to woman in every form of society that springs necessarily from the family. This position is described by St. Thomas Aquinas with classic clearness (Summa theol., I:92:1, ad 2um). This doctrine, which has always been maintained by the Catholic Church, was repeatedly emphasized by Leo XIII. The encyclical "Arcanum", 10 February, 1880, declares: "The husband is ruler of the family and the head of the wife; the woman as flesh of his flesh and bone of his bone is to be subordinate and obedient to the husband, not, however, as a hand-maid but as a companion of such a kind that the obedience given is as honourable as dignified. As, however, the husband ruling represents the image of Christ and the wife obedient the image of the Church, Divine love should at all times set the standard of duty". 
 
The second branch of the woman question, which of necessity follows directly after that of gaining a livelihood, is that of a suitable education. The Catholic Church places here no barriers that have not already been established by nature. Fénelon expresses this necessary limitation thus: "The learning of women like that of men must be limited to the study of those things which belong to their calling; The difference in their activities must also give a different direction to their studies." The entrance of women as students in the universities, which has of late years spread in all countries, is to be judged according to these principles. Far from obstructing such a course in itself, Catholics encourage it. This has led in Germany to the founding of the "Hildegardisverein" for the aid of Catholic women students of higher branches of learning. Moreover, nature also shows here her undeniable regulating power. There is no need to fear the overcrowding of the academic professions by women.  
In the medical calling, which next to teaching is the first to be considered in discussing the professions of women, there are at the present time in Germany about 100 women to 30,000 men. For the studious woman as for others who earn a livelihood the academic calling is only a temporary position. The sexes can never be on an equality as regards studies pursued at a university.  
The third branch of the woman question, the social legal position of woman, can, as shown from what has been said, only be decided by Catholics in accordance with the organic conception of society, but not in accordance with disintegrating individualism. Therefore the political activity of man is and remains different from that of woman, as has been shown above. It is difficult to unite the direct participation of woman in the political and parliamentary life of the present time with her predominate duty as a mother. If it should be desired to exclude married women or to grant women only the actual vote, the equality sought for would not be attained. On the other hand, the indirect influence of women, which in a well-ordered state makes for the stability of the moral order, would suffer severe injury by political equality. 
 
Catholic Encyclopaedia (1912): Women 
 
More Nazi puke:
 
Obedience 
Please help support the mission of New Advent and get the full contents of this website as an instant download. Includes the Catholic Encyclopedia, Church Fathers, Summa, Bible and more — all for only $19.99... 
Obedience (Lat. obêdire, "to hearken to", hence "to obey") is the complying with a command or precept. It is here regarded not as a transitory and isolated act but rather as a virtue or principle of righteous conduct. It is then said to be the moral habit by which one carries out the order of his superior with the precise intent of fulfilling the injunction. St. Thomas Aquinas considers the obligation of obedience as an obvious consequence of the subordination established in the world by natural and positive law. The idea that subjection of any sort of one man to another is incompatible with human freedom — a notion that had vogue in the religious and political teachings of the post-Reformation period — he refutes by showing that it is at variance with the constituted nature of things, and the positive prescriptions of the Almighty God. It is worthy of note that whilst it is possible to discern a general aspect of obedience in some acts of all the virtues, in so far as obedience stands for the execution of anything that is of precept, it is contemplated in this article as a definitely special virtue. The element that differentiates it adequately from other good habits is found in the last part of the definition already given. Stress is put upon the fact that one not only does what is actually enjoined, but does it with a mind to formally fall in with the will of the commander. It is in other words the homage rendered to authority which ranks it as a distinct virtue. Among the virtues obedience holds an exalted place but not the highest. The distinction belongs to the virtues of faith, hope and charity which unite us immediately with Almighty God. Amongst the moral virtues obedience enjoys a primacy of honour. The reason is that the greater or lesser excellence of a moral virtue is determined by the greater or lesser value of the object which it qualifies one to put aside in order to give oneself to God. Now amongst our various possessions, whether goods of the body or goods of the soul, it is clear that the human will is the most intimately personal and most cherished of all. So it happens that obedience, which makes a man yield up the most dearly prized stronghold of the individual soul in order to do the good pleasure of his Creator, is accounted the greatest of the moral virtues. As to whom we are to obey, there can be no doubt that first we are bound to offer an unreserved service to Almighty God in all His commands. No real difficulty against this truth can be gathered from putting in juxtaposition the unchangeableness of the natural law and an order, such as that given to Abraham to slay his son Isaac. The conclusive answer is that the absolute sovereignty of God over life and death made it right in that particular instance to undertake the killing of an innocent human being at His direction. On the other hand the obligation to obedience to superiors under God admits of limitations. We are not bound to obey a superior in a matter which does not fall within the limits of his preceptive power. Thus for instance parents although entitled beyond question of the submission of their children until they become of age, have no right to command them to marry. Neither can a superior claim our obedience in contravention to the dispositions of higher authority. Hence, notably, we cannot heed the behests of any human power no matter how venerable or undisputed as against the ordinances of God. All authority to which we bow has its source in Him and cannot be validly used against Him. It is the recognition of the authority of God vicariously exercised through a human agent that confers upon the act of obedience its special merit. No hard and fast rule can be set down for determining the degree of guilt of the sin of disobedience. Regarded formally as a deliberate scorning of the authority itself, it would involve a divorce between the soul and the supernatural principle of charity which is tantamount to a grievous sin. As a matter of fact many other things have to be taken account of, as the greater or lesser advertence in the act, the relatively important or trifling character of the thing imposed, the manner of enjoining, the right of the person who commands. For such reasons the sin will frequently be esteemed venial. 
https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11181c.htm 
 
Or the drivel puke about contraception. 
 
Might as well say you respect the 5G conspiracy theorists or the microchip inserted via the vaccine goons. 
 
Who at least have pseudo-arguments.  The decree of a being that doesn’t exist whom you claim doesn’t wish any opportunity missed for bringing another little Catholic into the world is not an argument.
 
But dirty animal traitors scum fascist politicians fall on their faces.
 
I have argued that the only people who should be prosecuted for treason are the elected representatives of the people because they are the only people with legitimate power; that no religious person however vile should be prosecuted because he or she has no power over the rest of us other than that kindly given him or her by Parliament.
 
Unless of course he or she exercise the power of the criminal and assault, threaten, blackmail.
 
The trouble with this is it would severely deplete the Parliamentary Labour Party and leave us with a one-party state.
 
Ah, the Vatican: the old whore who sold out love for power.  People have actually noticed, hence the Protestant and free worlds.  People have actually asked what their ape drool has to do with Jesus.
 
Christ, it’s a mad monkey.  What a crude, vulgar, ugly old brute you are, Bobbles.  Really, the absolute dregs.  You are most frightfully stupid. You can read, I trust.  A creature of extremely limited intelligence, unable to learn. 
 
And you think it impresses me, sly, cowardly, skulking around in the dark and squalor without the guts to say what your problem is, engineering assault on my spinal fusion, crippling me, this is supposed to convince me how wonderful you are, of your intellectual and moral superiority? You pathetic monkey.
 
Actually of course it’s supposed to terrorize me.  I am supposed to be petrified by arbitrary, unaccountable and therefore criminal power unleashed on my body.  To be in awe of the might and greatness of the sick monkey, the slobbering subhuman unleashing it.
 
After all, Blair and the rest of the filthy traitor Labour Party are.  See nothing wrong with terrorism as governance of the NHS.  I mean it’s relidjion ain’t it and reldjipn is holy. Labour does not tolerate people who are not liars, criminals, psychotics, self-obsessed, thugs, animals who greet words with violence, illiterate, ignorant, irrational, sly, cowardly, vindictive, corrupt, dishonest, sexually sick, degraded pointing put these qualities in those who are.
 
Labour has no concept of the sovereign liberty of the individual, assumes we all property to do and be and think and say and write what we are told is permitted us.
 
Labour, like the vomit called Doctor and Nurse, thinks permission from Master is required before one may speak.
 
Ah yes, the might, the might that controls entire nations, the might of a pathetic capering monkey in a paper hat prancing and posturing on top of a heap of skulls.  I’m king of the castle and you’re the dirty rascal.  Yah-boo, I’m God, see, I can do anything.  Here’s my magic book. I got Troof.
 
Doesn’t really matter if the book is the Bible, the Koran, Mein Kampf, Das Capital, the ape is the same.  Of course it doesn’t see itself as a prancing baboon, it sees itself as a man of cold steel.  A slobbering terrified child who has to control everything or it is frightened if everything does not reflect back its perfection and might.

Ooh, but where are me manners?  Ain't I gotta be respectful to my superiors set over me for my own good.

An animal, therefore, and a very sick one.  You appear to have a problem with sex, animal, subscribe to some convoluted tawdry, perverted and vicious cult of virginity.  So if your niece or your sister had sex outside marriage, you’d beat her? Just trying to get the hang of what passes for your mind.  And what would that achieve?   She has to be punished for breaking God’s Holy Law as invented by human perverts like you. She’s done something you disapprove of.  Well, so  what?  But of course your monstrous psychiatric disease throbs in your dirty monkey brain telling you she is your property, yours to control, you are the instrument of God’s wrath.   Is it true you can’t get it up without hurting a woman?  A prince of the church, doubtless.  To paraphrase Groucho, I should not wish to be a member of any club that you belonged to.  But they all suck your cock.  Really it must be sore with it.  You don’t actually understand people who don’t suck your cock, do you.  People who are civilized, not animal, capable of language and reason.  Your head of course is an inert concrete block,  In it a tickertape roll pours out the meaningless puke you drool: it is unacceptable; there must be obedience.  She must learn to do as she is told.  Why must I? Why does me being me upset you, you pathetic chimp, you grotesque inadequate unable to bear anyone not providing a mirror of your supposed greatness. Why should I instead be a part of you?  And why does your curdled and malfunctioning brain tell you what I do and think and say is down to you.  You are so funny.  You think I need your permission to think something, your permission to say it.  Even better, you don’t just think you represent God, you think you are God; human laws are meaningless to you.
 
As of course they are to the Labour Party.  That is the formal reason for rejection: Labour destroys the rule of law.  Labour only cares about laws criminalizing identifying criminals.
 
Why does it hurt you, ape, disobedience?  Come on, pervert kinky-boy, why do you feel threatened.  Let’s get really into this, animal.  I have a spinal fusion.  You command it be injured.  I object.  No-one else does, but then they are all lower than vermin, the scum of the earth, like you.  As I was saying, I object.  Come on, you dirty old pervert, why should I accept my spinal fusion being injured.  Why should I accept it is good and right my spinal fusion be injured, it accords with your will and of course in your dirty squirming worm-infested brain with God’s will.  I am therefore evil I do not accord with criminal assault.  But why should I assume your opinion is more valid than mine?  You have no evidence to back up your grotesque and ludicrous nutjob claim that injuring my spinal fusion is God’s will.
 
Thus the England of the Labour Party. And thus of course the England of pervert vermin such as Yong, Khwaja, Cohen, Porter.
 
Still dribbling on, are  you, you vile perverted old monkey.  She must obey!  You really think you can’t be questioned, don’t you, can’t be challenged, really believe you are without flaw, you cannot be wrong, misinformed, flawed in your reasoning, ignorant or of course evil.  Partly you think you can’t be questioned because you are psychopath, to whom challenge and so suggestion you are imperfect is an evil slur.  That’s a clearly defined pathology, you know.  Such knowledge has evaded the cream of London medicine.  Partly of course it is because you are very stupid, a very stupid, ignorant sick irrational old monkey, and you have no answers to anything.  Such as this:
 
What do you think would happen if you pervert nutjjobs attempted formallly to impose your primitive ape filth on this?
 
UK secularism on rise as more than half say they have no religion | Religion | The Guardian
 
Yes, you’ve got it You’ll all have your throats cut. 
 
Because you are a grotesque mentally sick monkey, a mad slobbering perverted vicious subhuman  you think I am trying it on, I must really understand I am your property subject to you and your dirty pervert death-cult.
 
No, ape, I do not really understand.  I really understand a rope could be put round your neck.  I really understand this is England in the C21st, a free, democratic, rational and civilized country. 
 
Oh what do I really think.  I think capital punishment can be restored by Parliament.  I think a former Prime Minister can be tried for treason and hanged as the depraved and evil brute he is attemptiong to overthrow democracy and replace it by the filth and corruption of trash, by the rule of psychopaths who think they are to be obeyed without question, by the rule of sexually diseased filthy smelly little perverts who think a woman’s body is property and a woman’s mind is a joke,
 
I’m thinking I have a message for the Irish government.
Now you know why the English loathed and despised the loathsome and despicable Catholic peasant.
Ireland has had a velvet revolution and rid itself of the rule of these creatures
But some sleight-of-hand was employed: you’ve got rid of them by exporting them.
We don’t  want your garbage.
 
Fly-tipping!  Kindly take the appalling McGuckins and McTiernans and O’Mahonys and Logans and Whelans back.
In Labour it is of course far worse than raping children or murdering gays to suggest that any of the creatures who have dumped themselves on these shores are not nice and not welcome as they put their jackboots up on the antique oak desks and strut around with the absolute insolence of an occupying army.  We’re going to do thing their way now, forget democracy, forget the rule of law, forget the sovereign liberty of the individual.
 
Maybe McDonnell could explain why   I’m supposed to crawl to the whore, the damaged animal, the fascist slut with its filthy  animal mouth full of priest cock, a jumped-up nothing who can neither learn nor reason, why  I’m supposed to say, oo yes, Miss Shiv, you know best, Miss Shiv, of course democracy is a joke, naturally you can break all the laws you like, Miss Shiv, of course I deserved to be crippled, Miss Shiv,it’s quite ridiculous for me to object, isn’tit, Miss Shiv.  Of course it was ever so funny how distressed and exhausted I was when my mum was dying, I do like to keep you amused, Miss Shiv,  Would you like a bayonet up your filthy arse, Miss Shiv.  That is the sort of fate that generally befalls insolent members of occupying armies.
 
Spastic bitch has of course mindless mantras of its own: everyone believes in God, everyone respects de holy Church.  You are in England, you dirty cunt
 
Previous Bobbles letters
Dear wannabe nemesis

 I think I shall call you Bobbles. It  has a deceptively friendly ring. It refers of course to that limp thing  between your  legs that bobbles up and down. Is it true you can only get  an erection by  beating up women? There are so many things I should like  to know about you.  What freaks you most, the Jew I'm not or the woman I  am? Can't take it from a  girl, huh? Women obey. Ain't that the truth,  now. Butter wouldn't melt in their  mouths. I prefer a mouth that turns  butter to petrol, myself. Can't take it  from a Jew. Can't take it from a Jew-girl. Apart from being a fascist and a  Jew-hater, are you also a  Holocaust-denier? Pause while I give a small wriggle 
of pleasure.  Doesn't this just get more and more interesting! Clap hands 
together  with girlish glee. How d'you cope with the 6 million non-Jews who 
died? I just want to know all about you. Of course there are many things I do 
  know. You think you have rights over me. You really believe you own me, I have 
no independent existence. I may do nothing that displeases you.  Poor Bobbles. I 
think you must be somewhat traumatized by now. Your God  told you so, I 
understand. People who have imaginary friends make such  interesting subjects of 
study. Is that why they're frightened of you,  because you've got an imaginary 
friend? You have to see it's a bit  weird. following the orders of someone who 
isn't there. Personally I  don't see how anyone can be frightened of a guy with 
a limp prick and no balls. After all, you're even frightened of me. Maybe you're 
just shy.  There's no need to be shy. I'd really like to meet you. I have a 
  repertoire of phrases of basic English to teach you: "Unhand me, you 
  poltroon!" That sort of thing. In modern English that's "Fuck off!" It's really 
funny how they all believe you. What d'you tell them? You have  it on the 
highest authority, the Prime Minister's personal  assurance...That no-one will 
touch me with a barge-pole. That the only  people who talk to me are an 
Australian elf called Megan Love and a  English cabby called Raymond Breakspear. 
That no-one hugs me, no-one  supports me. They'll still be bleating what a great 
man you are when the men in white coats come to take you away. It's a learning 
curve, you  see, Bobbles. There are so many things I have to teach you. You 
really  mustn't be a silly, do you see. People who assault other people get 
  assaulted back. I'm sure you dream of an improved version of the Third  Reich, 
but it's a fantasy, do you see. You're very imaginative, aren't  you. Woman is 
the new Jew, right? Right along with the old Jews. But you have to think of 
Irgun, Haganah, the Palmach. Even Jews got arms from  somewhere, with every 
man's hand against them. There are so very many  more of us, you see. Yuck, you 
must think, everywhere I go there are  these horrible women-things with no 
clothes on. Life must be very hard  for you. Poor Bobbles. You really need to 
get your head round the notion that I am not your private property. If you start 
to be silly, try to  force women to wear more clothes or try to tell them what 
they're  allowed to think and say and read and write, if you insist they are 
  subordinate to your imaginary friend, horrible things might happen to  you. If 
you had any balls, you could have them cut off. Of course it's  not going to 
come to that. There are so many interesting and indeed  imaginative ways of 
tackling this. An imaginative man yourself, of  course you'll approve. How about 
a full public investigation of how many feudal-retainers dominate medicine, 
cheerful peasant-women with  well-scrubbed faces bobbing curtsies to His 
Lordship, blindly  indifferent to their duty to a democratic state? That would 
be fun,  wouldn't it. You don't think so? But think of all the publicity you'd 
  get for your imaginary friend! Look, I have to go now. I'll write again  soon. 
Do try and think about what I have to say. I know thinking is  difficult for 
you, really I do. You'll get better at it with practice.
 
Shall we try again, Bobbles my sweet?
How can one possibly take seriously a creature  whose sole claim on one’s 
attention is that he has a large club with  which he does not hesitate to hit 
one, a creature so absolutely  ludicrous and devoid of the slightest grasp on 
sanity that he thinks to  demonstrate his intellectual superiority by hitting one, a creature who  has obviously never been anywhere near a university, never 
met an  educated person. Oh Bobbles that's just so you, isn't it, and you're a 
coward, too! All in all, old boy, you are the scum of the bloody  earth

Of course it wouldn't matter if I weren't surrounded by the diseased  prostrating themselves before you and eager to do thy will. Other sick   animals think I'm supposed to be frightened of or in awe of a sick  animal,  impressed by an ape wielding a club. You leave no mark on me bar the  obvious.

Anyone who thinks loonies are confined to Islam needs to get a  life. Bobbles and I know that. 

For approximately seventeen centuries men  acknowledged that authority comes only from God, and temporal rulers sought the  approval and the blessing of their bishops who, by divine right, ruled in their  dioceses as  successors of the Apostles. Then came the Philosophists. As always,  the  Power of Darkness used pride to achieve his aims, the pride of human   reason. As always he called the Light, Darkness and the Darkness, Light   (Isaiah 5:20). That is why the Medieval times are now referred to as the "Dark  Ages"; (in fact, the Dark Ages were pre-Medieval), and why  philosophism is  referred to as "Enlightenment". ...When the first battle had been won, the Devil  moved from the religious field into the  philosophical field, and conceived  Rationalism, which put human reason  before Revelation.
Satan’s Master Plan from The Catholic Treasure  Chest 

"First, the wearing of men's dress by women  affects the woman herself, by  changing the feminine psychology proper to women; second, it affects the woman as wife of her husband, by tending to vitiate  relationships  between the sexes; and third, it affects the woman as mother of  her  children by harming her dignity in her children's eyes . . . This  changing  of the feminine psychology does fundamental, and, in the long  run, irreparable  damage to the family, to conjugal fidelity, to human  affections and to human  society."
 That Difficult Question of Immodesty and Women Wearing Men's  Clothing  by Marian Therese Horvat, Ph.D.

When a woman is dressed immodestly, she becomes the temptress for men  Many women will say they wear the modern  fashions because they are more comfortable, and the weather is hot (Remember, it  is very hot in Hell). This brings us to the area of sports. Regretably, all too  many sports  are taboo for us Catholics, not that they are in themselves a sin  or a  near occasion of sin, but because of the skimpy attire that such sports   "require". Think of these sports and the clothes people usually wear  when  playing the following sports or activities: swimming, baton  twirling, tennis,  basketball, dancing (disco dancing and little girls  who take dancing lessons)  and gymnastics. Let us take swimming for an  example, since people usually wear  less clothes when swimming than any  other sport. Swimsuits have no sleeves,  have very low necklines, no  coverings for the legs and usually has the whole  back exposed. When we  think of the saying, "in proportion to the amount of  flesh exposed  mortal sin seems to increase", shouldn't we avoid the bathing  suits like the plaque? Do you think this suggestion is crazy? You say yes, then   let us ask another question. Do you prefer to have the mortal sin of  immodesty  on your soul and the untold number of mortal sins of your  being a temptress or tempter and causing others to sin? 

One might say that our little girls can't do  anything. You are wrong,  because, if you modify the costumes and attire that  the girls wear, in  most cases they can still participate if you are Catholic  enough to  stand up for the proper moral dress code. In addition to the   modifications, our girls can go bicycle riding and horse back riding if  they  have a full skirt and the skirt reaches at least to the middle of  the calf; 
and, of course, skating can be done in a skirt. Our girls  should be pursuing 
lady-like activities and hobbies which will prepare  them for marriage and their 
proper role as mother and wife. They should  be learning to sew, embroider, 
knit, crochet, cook, make rosaries, sing  good Catholic songs and other decent, 
patriotic songs, play musical  instruments (we'll need an organ player 
eventually for our chapel),  paint and draw. Above all they should be learning 
to talk, dress, sit,  walk, stand, kneel, stoop and act like a lady at all  times. Our girls  have many options open to them, if they will only pursue them 
in a moral decent manner.
http://www.catholicapologetics.info/morality/modesty/dress.htm

This guy had a real problem with living in the United States, bastion of  Protestantism and infidelity,  where Satan had ensured that the supreme  authority of the Church was rejected. 
  
Throw in a couple of Muslim loonies for good measure Made for each 
other, aren't they.

AI: You have misunderstood the reality. As a Muslim I believe Allah…created whole universe;  he created the UK. It doesn’t belong to you, it doesn’t belong to the Queen, it  doesn’t belong to the Anglo-Saxons…Allah has  put us on the planet earth to live wherever we want and implement the  Sharia rules.
  
Transcript of BBC interview with Abu Izzadeen

"As for those who cannot offer resistance or cannot fight, such as  women, children, monks, old people, the blind,  handicapped and their  likes, they shall not be killed, unless they actually  fight with words  [e.g. by propaganda] and acts [e.g. by spying or otherwise  assisting in  the warefare]. Some [jurists] are of the opinion that all of them  may be killed, on the mere ground that they are unbelievers, but they make an  exception for woman and children sind they constitute property for Muslims."--Sheikh Ahmad ibn Taymiyyah

Guess it's never occurred  to him he'll run into 24 inch-waist SAS

Now, pet, I imagine that in  what passes for your mind England and the  English like everyone else and  everywhere else belong to God. It’s a possibility. There is, however,  something in between England and  God in your model, is there not. You, little  you. You represent God and  rule England on God’s behalf. 

There are a  few problems here, as those nice young men in their clean white coats I’m sure  would be glad to explain to you. 

1) there is not one shred of evidence  for your conviction you carry out God’s will
2) If you do carry out God’s  will, then God is clearly a grossly  mentally disturbed being to whom no sane  and civilized person would give two seconds’ attention 
3) There is not one  shred of evidence for  the existence of this God of yours. You believe he  exists. Others do  not. What is not demonstrable cannot be binding. You must see  that. Some people believe this God exists. Others do not. They can’t both be  right and it is impossible for any individual to be bound by both beliefs.
 
So we have a situation here, Houston Control, where this fucked-up  baboon 
thinks he carries out God’s will. The territory he inhabits may  be summarized 
as the supreme authority of the Church which I must be  made to accept. The 
fruits of the independent exercise of the hearts and minds of humans are the 
work of Satan. This is to what Blair and the  rest of the New Labour rabble 
consider me subject. It's perhaps not so  much a question of why haven't they 
been arrested as of why haven't they been sectioned.
 
That which makes you look stupid, ludicrous, ignorant, irrational.
 
There is somewhere in literature or oratory a superb put-down I cannot unfortunately recall and can’t be bothered to hunt for.  It may be classical, it may be Churchillian, but the gist is: your refutation of my argument would be greatly enhanced by your having understood it