Talk:Joseph McCabe

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Religion Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
	This article falls within the scope of the Interfaith work group. If you are interested in Interfaith-related topics, please visit the project page to see how you can help. If you have any comments regarding the appropriateness or positioning of this template, please let us know at our talk page.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

[edit] 20th Big Blue book

I don't know this story, but if it is alleged that it was suppressed can we at least please have the citation for who alleged it and why the claim might be controversial? --Dannyno 19:23, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

The source was probably The Secular Web, though they don't provide any more information, nor do they give a source. Alan Pascoe 14:11, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

I think it has to go, it's drivel. McCabe wrote *far* more than 20 Big Blue books. Cooke plumps for 104 and according to this article: http://www.ffrf.org/fttoday/2003/oct/index.php?ft=verb, Haldeman-Julius estimated it at 122. There's a list of nearly 70 at http://library.indstate.edu/level1.dir/cml/rbsc/debs/bigblue.html. --Dannyno 11:23, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

This entry does not do justice McCabe's violent and vitriolic anti-Catholicism. I'm not Catholic, but this entry is a white-wash of a man whose life seems to have been fueled by an uncontrolled hatred for Catholicism.

Violent? Who did he kill? More seriously, if you want the article to reflect this allegation, you need a citeable source. --Dannyno 17:42, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

It's difficult to cite sources the way it's set up. I wanted to cite this, but the citation method this uses is unusually complicated.--T. Anthony 05:59, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

The violent was being used metaphorically. The vitriolic was more precise. I could understand if a radical Protestant said that "Rome Is The Natural Ally Of All Exploiters". However, coming from on atheist, it's raw demonization from someone who doesn't believe in demons.

It is? Could it not been seen as at least an arguable point of view, given the political facts of McCabe's day? Anyway, this is not a debating shop. Cite something if you have something to cite, and I'll cite Bill Cooke's defence for balance. --Dannyno 20:21, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

He seems to pretty consistently say the Catholic Church is a vast economic corporation he calls "The Black International", states it killed "hundreds of thousands" in the nineteeenth century alone, and "it played an active part over and over again on the side of the devil." Reading some of his stuff, I'd never heard of him before now, I don't see how that could be considered a merely rational critic of Papal politics or Church doctrine.--T. Anthony 05:13, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Cite something if you have something to cite. Otherwise, I'm sure there are plenty of other places to debate the issue where people are interested in your particular point of view. --Dannyno 21:31, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Anti-Catholicism"

I have deleted the "anti-catholicism" category from the article. The category explanation, if you look it up, says: "This is a category for organizations, theories, books, individuals, etc. who are notable for their connection to Anti-Catholicism. Adding this category to an article does not necessarily mean to imply that the subject of the article is anti-Catholic. The category also contains subjects that have documented or opposed anti-Catholicism and subjects that have been accused by notable individuals or organizations of engaging in anti-Catholicism." The reason I have deleted the category is because there is nothing at all in the article to connect McCabe to anti-Catholicism. Until there is, I cannot see a justification for the categorisation. So, again, if contributors have something they wish to write on this topic, please do so. But don't categorise until the article deserves it. --Dannyno 20:02, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

I quoted to you what he actually said and I can quote more. "Throughout these ten booklets, in which I have shown that the Church of Rome is the natural ally of the German, Japanese, and Italians, I have asked the reader to see it as primarily a vast economic corporation, the Black International, fighting for survival, in an age in which educated people despise its doctrines and all informed people loathe its methods." This is in fact what he was known for at the time and numerous sources call him such. Now you can take the position that Anti-Catholicism is good, so placing him as Anti-Catholicism is no worse than placing someone as anti-Communist, but to say he's not Anti-Catholic is completely out of touch with reality. Still you own this article now so do with it what you will.--T. Anthony 19:51, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

On second thought no one can own an article. Considering he agrees with calling Catholicism evil I think he'd be happy to be deemed against it. I'm putting the category back, but I'll find a source to justify it.--T. Anthony 20:02, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't think he was "anti-Catholic" in a malicious way, but what I think doesn't matter. All I want is for some actual sources to be cited which justify the categorisation. You had failed to do this. I see there now is something there, though they appear to be modern references, so I'm a bit happier, but only a bit. If they stand up when I've checked them properly, I'll find something to add for balance. --Dannyno 20:40, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

There might be a difficulty with what the category means to individuals. If Anti-Catholicism means hostility to the Roman Catholic Church as an organization, and opposing the philosophical beliefs of Catholicism, then he'd seem to self-identify as such. If Anti-Catholicism means a hostility to Catholics as people he may not fit that at all. I'm not sure which meaning it's using. I'd assumed it refers to both and therefore he'd fit. However talking to others it seems they believe it's more "hostility to Catholics", which he presumably would not fit.--T. Anthony 22:08, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I think you're right, but the explanation of the category (quoted above) seems to indicate that it doesn't really matter. --Dannyno 14:55, 21 June 2007 (UTC)