Reply Wed 5 Feb, 2014 05:51 pm
http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2014/feb/05/united-nations-denounces-vatican-sex-abuse-abortio/?

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/458082/Vatican-told-to-expose-and-remove-child-abusers-in-the-Catholic-Church-by-United-Nations

Well this should be fun.
*popcorn ready*
 
Jack of Hearts
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Feb, 2014 06:13 pm
@Calamity Dal,

Monkeys throw their poop.
The fun is throwing crap at the Catholic Church, and they'll forgive you.
Not seven times - they'll forgive you seventy times seven.
Who in the world would ever tell them to do that?

Lustig Andrei
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Feb, 2014 06:15 pm
@Calamity Dal,
Won't come to anything. Is the Vatican even a UN member? I doubt it.
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Feb, 2014 07:45 pm
@Jack of Hearts,
Would you mind not putting you posts in bold?. I am probably not the only one who doesn't read them for that reason. It's like you are hollaring at us.
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Feb, 2014 07:48 pm
@Lustig Andrei,
Also, odd timing. Finally a pope with some sanity..

Of course I agree the vatican has been basically absent re its behavior, immensely bad for what it shined on, let go, fought in many places in many ways.
0 Replies
 
Jack of Hearts
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Feb, 2014 05:43 am
@ossobuco,
I did not feel that you would be offended. It should be obvious I did not present my posts as to be read with every word being shouted.
It's a vision thing. If I could change my font, that would be helpful.
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2014 12:25 pm
@Lustig Andrei,
Lustig Andrei wrote:
Won't come to anything. Is the Vatican even a UN member? I doubt it.
They could be a member at large for simply agreeing with the UN purpose. Such a membership would allow access to the UN library and publications.
Interestingly, this agreement qualification was not part of the original UN articles. At one time, even the Watchtower Society was a member for the above purpose. When the agreement qualification was introduced, the JWs declined.
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  2  
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2014 12:29 pm
@Jack of Hearts,
Jack of Hearts wrote:
I did not feel that you would be offended. It should be obvious I did not present my posts as to be read with every word being shouted.
It's a vision thing. If I could change my font, that would be helpful.
There is a way to change the font, using the BBCode Editor with the heading 'Normal' Don't know if this would work for you. Just a possibility.
neologist
 
  2  
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2014 12:30 pm
@neologist,
I also have trouble reading small fonts
0 Replies
 
InfraBlue
 
  4  
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2014 12:40 pm
@Lustig Andrei,
Lustig Andrei wrote:

Won't come to anything. Is the Vatican even a UN member? I doubt it.

The Holy See has non-member Observer status at the UN. The only other entity that has that status is Palestine and is designated as "the State of Palestine" thereby.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  2  
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2014 12:47 pm
@Jack of Hearts,
Thanks for replying. Now I understand that it's a vision thing instead of shouting.
0 Replies
 
InfraBlue
 
  3  
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2014 12:49 pm
@Jack of Hearts,
Jack of Hearts wrote:

I did not feel that you would be offended. It should be obvious I did not present my posts as to be read with every word being shouted.
It's a vision thing. If I could change my font, that would be helpful.
Pressing the Ctrl and + keys on your keyboard will increase the text font in your internet browser without you having to increase the font in what you post on A2K.
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2014 01:10 pm
@InfraBlue,
Yeah. That too.
Jack of Hearts
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2014 05:21 pm
Re: the vision thing

It seems I have a few options, font size of my posts only, overall larger letters via windows 7, or HP screen brightness and sharpness settings - ah screw saving energy, light 'em up boys!
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Feb, 2014 06:31 pm
@neologist,
I dont get the the pov of this thread yet.
Jack of Hearts
 
  2  
Reply Mon 10 Feb, 2014 01:51 am
@ossobuco,
ossobuco wrote:

I dont get the the pov of this thread yet.
Calamity Dal posted links of a U.N. report that lambasts the Catholic Church. In part it says:
"In a devastating report, the U.N. committee also severely criticized the Holy See for its attitudes toward homosexuality, contraception and abortion...
The report read: "The committee is gravely concerned that the Holy See has not acknowledged the extent of the crimes committed, has not taken the necessary measures to address cases of child sexual abuse and to protect children, and has adopted policies and practices which have led to the continuation of the abuse by, and the impunity of, the perpetrators."


Obviously the UN report disagrees the Church should be able to establish it's own code of morality, i.e. practice religious freedom.
It also revisits the child abuse problems within the Church, and demands the Church do a number of things which would totally be against their interest.

Let me say right off - there is nothing that can defend child abuse - NOTHING!
To suggest that the Catholic Church turns a blind eye to pedophilia within it's ranks is widespread, and that is mostly based with the way it has handled it's pedophiles in the past, and refuses to be told how to handle them in the ever present.
It's my POV that Church practices do not make for an ideal environment to protect children - vows of chastity; secretive confessions; extraordinary high demand for trust; large private elementary educational system, to name just a few. I wouldn't go so far to say they foster an unhealthy environment, but it certainly can invite trouble.
Still, this is ever more complicated with this scandal breaking wide open years ago when "suppressed memories" arose to become a gold mine for trial lawyers. Advertising to any victims a possible high monetary settlement, had "victims" coming out of the walls. That a most unusual amount of male victims (which received, by far, the most lucrative settlements), than female victims is curious to say the least. I was taught by nuns for twelve years, and the sexual preference of a few was quite obvious, and decisively female - and the lack of accusations from that side of the fence I also find most curious.

Without a doubt, from day two, the most vile of crimes were perpetrated by priests upon children. The way the Church handled these scumbags was, and still is, never enough to please everybody - me included! It's just not going to happen. I believe the Church has, in recent years, made great strides in curtailing and preventing abuse - and will continue to do much more to protect our children, for there is IMO much more that can be done.

Hey Calamity Dal, get another bowl of popcorn and get into this: -
http://apnews.excite.com/article/20140209/DABRTR480.html
Large institutions just can't handle sexual crime, and nobody can make them.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » UN vs the Vatican
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 08/18/2019 at 09:24:37