When has religion irked you personally and why?

gozmo wrote:

Craven,

Please do not imagine I could be so craven as to imagine you deliberately interferred with the email. I mentioned it as a fact and thanks for the explanation. OK I think you are heavy handed here and a little imperious but I only play cards at the Bridge Club. I don't think this is a game at all.

dlowan,

You know I was using the reference to children and prison for effect. Your vague suggestion that it was otherwise is unkind. Please stop it . I admire you and do not want to be disillusioned.

LOL! Gozmo, I shall disillusion you no matter how much I might try to do otherwise. I had no sense of what you might have meant - but, I do know, that many who are reading this will have been sexually abused as children - the stats tell us this. I shall ALWAYS, knowing this, tell the truth re such things - to do less is betrayal.

If you agree, please explain your point. And remember, some who read this will be people who have suffered abuse, but never disclosed - yet.....

0 Replies

dlowan,

I am also in agreement with you. I am not happy with Mech but I will not accuse him of being anything other than ignorant. Right or wrong I have read into Craven's posts the implication that Mech is depraved and little better than if not a paedophile himself. I thought that and Craven's response to Frank very unfair. I really believe that Craven's manner has got in the way of Mech's education here. I think he should be left some room to manouvre. I sense a desire on his part to retreat from some views he has expressed but unfortunately a power struggle between he and Craven has complicated that retreat. I don't believe you are part of such a struggle and hence I view your posts differently to those of Craven. You have posted informed opinion and some facts. I think many men under-estimate the damage of sexual abuse. It seems to be in the nature of the beast. We do learn eventually.

0 Replies

OK, I meant we eventually put them in prison when they themselves offend so why not abandon them to that now rather than later after they offend. My intention was to highlight the fact that an abusee is still an abusee even after he becomes an abuser; still in need of help not abandonment. I presented the ridiculous as a device to highlight the ridiculous, not successfully it seems.

0 Replies

gozmo wrote:

Right or wrong I have read into Craven's posts the implication that Mech is depraved and little better than if not a paedophile himself.

You have an overactive imagination. I clearly stated to mechsmith that I did not ever assert that he is a pedophile and before this debate started it was done in PMs in which I cautioned very strongly against assuming mechsmith is a pedophile.

Quote:

I thought that and Craven's response to Frank very unfair.

I thought so as well and my statement that he had lost all stock with me was an overstatement.

But his subsequent insults did indeed lower said stock and perhaps irreversibly so. I had not said anything to him remotely similar to what he decided to say.

Quote:

I really believe that Craven's manner has got in the way of Mech's education here. I think he should be left some room to manouvre. I sense a desire on his part to retreat from some views he has expressed but unfortunately a power struggle between he and Craven has complicated that retreat. I don't believe you are part of such a struggle and hence I view your posts differently to those of Craven. You have posted informed opinion and some facts. I think many men under-estimate the damage of sexual abuse. It seems to be in the nature of the beast. We do learn eventually.

I think you have an overactive imagination.

0 Replies

The end result should be less child abuse. Threfore, the current abusers, whether they have themselves been victims and are therefore damaged or not, have to be taken from society. I don't really care if they are considered as patients or criminals, so long as they are never allowed to be near another child.

0 Replies

I wrote:

Quote:

If you think that a person can sexually assault a child simply out of stupidity, what would you call murder? Bad judgement?

aka- You replied:

Quote:

Phoenix, re your post of Dec 10 6:43

In some cases; yes. In the US it's often called manslaughter or negligent homicide and bears appropriate legal censures.

I am well aware of the difference between murder, and manslaughter or negligent homicide. I specifically used the word "murder" to make a point, and I do believe that I have made it!

0 Replies

There will be times, I am sure, when I will point out this thread as an example of how uneven the handling of matters in this forum can get.

I've been involved in threads -- one just this week -- where the venom and name calling have been 1/10th the amount found here -- and the threads have been locked by the zealous defenders of political correctness.

But here, the emperor is at work -- and this thing just drudges on and on.

I am embarrassed for all of you for your narrow-mindedness and inappropriate indignation. I would have expected much more from some of you -- but I guess disappointment is an unavoidable part of this activity.

For a long while I stayed out of this part of the thread in part because I correctly suspected that if I offered my opinion, I'd have the kinds of accusations that have indeed come my way from that jackass Craven.

I guess I should have kept my resolve and stayed out of the pissing match, but I feel better knowing that I did what I did.

I don't care what was in those messages to which I was not privy. I do know that Mech was being unjustly portrayed on the stuff he wrote here -- AND I KNOW GODDAM WELL ANY INFERENCE THAT I WAS DIRECTLY OR DE FACTO SUPPORTING CHILD ABUSE IN ANY FASHION WHATSOEVER is unmitigated bullshit.

Craven -- you are a goddam liar.

I take back the suggestion I made that you see a shrink. I doubt psychiatric treatment would help you. But I reinforce my suggestion that you see a proctologist about trying to get your head removed from your ass.

0 Replies

I'm personally done with this particular conversation. I think everyone has been a tad off-base. I think Mech used a bad model to present his argument. I think Mech's defense of his poorly shaped thesis was also fuel for the fire. If some want to continue battling over this, I will request that this thread be split. Personally, I would like to get back to the topic, which is irksome experiences with religion. I said to the bunny that I would watch for a bit more, but I'm fed up now. Get back on topic, and if you want to debate pedophilia, and apologist arguments for it, a new thread is in order.

0 Replies

Well, I was severely traumatised by the bad hymn singing in the church I was forced to go to, sometimes, as a child....

0 Replies

Was it the hymn or the singers?

0 Replies

Quick story that I've shared over at Abuzz a couple of times -- but I don't think I ever have here.

I went to public school -- and each Sunday, the public school kids had to go to Sunday school at St Bernards to insure that we got at least a modicum of religious instruction.

One day, Sister George says to the class (really trying to make an impression on kids she obviously considered heathens): "God is everywhere -- in every nook and cranny - in every space."

"Wow," says FA to himself, "...everywhere! Why that means...."

My hand shot up anxious to share the incredible thought that had just hit me like a brick.

Sister George calls on me:

"Well, if God is everywhere, Sister," sez I, "then he is everywhere in me. So I must be God."

Well -- I must say that Sister George's reaction to that insight certainly qualifies as an instance when religion irked me.

And the fact that she never ever called on me again no matter how often I raised my hand probably does too.

0 Replies

I don't have patience to go through the entire thread, so I apologize if I've posted this already. One thing that really irks me about the synagouge (misspelling intentional) that my folks belong to is that they charge for membership, AND based on your income. In addition, for the High Holidays, if you want familial non-members to attend services with you, you have to pay for 'tickets', as if it's an event anyone really cares about. When I 'came of age' and they started hounding me to join, I gave them a very simple "no."

0 Replies

Frank Apisa wrote:

I don't care what was in those messages to which I was not privy. I do know that Mech was being unjustly portrayed on the stuff he wrote here

On this I will have to disagree.

Quote:

-- AND I KNOW GODDAM WELL ANY INFERENCE THAT I WAS DIRECTLY OR DE FACTO SUPPORTING CHILD ABUSE IN ANY FASHION WHATSOEVER is unmitigated bullshit.

You claim mech's rationalization of pedophilia is "morally superior" and "rational".

I reaffirm that through your support for akamechsmith's posts you too are supporting his position which is that of an apologist for pedophilia.

Quote:

I take back the suggestion I made that you see a shrink. I doubt psychiatric treatment would help you. But I reinforce my suggestion that you see a proctologist about trying to get your head removed from your ass.

And I suggest you quit the ad hominems.

0 Replies

Craven, as per my earlier post, perhaps this thread should be split.

0 Replies

Frank Apisa wrote:

There will be times, I am sure, when I will point out this thread as an example of how uneven the handling of matters in this forum can get.

I'm sure you will and it will be given all the consideration it is due.

Quote:

I've been involved in threads -- one just this week -- where the venom and name calling have been 1/10th the amount found here -- and the threads have been locked by the zealous defenders of political correctness.

This is laughable. You are the number one insult and namecalling party here and you are saying you will complain that it wasn't locked?

That's absurd.

It's not locked because if it were you'd be whining about the fact that it was locked instead, saying that I locked it because of your insults to me etc.

0 Replies

Craven de Kere wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
There will be times, I am sure, when I will point out this thread as an example of how uneven the handling of matters in this forum can get.

I'm sure you will and it will be given all the consideration it is due.

Quote:
I've been involved in threads -- one just this week -- where the venom and name calling have been 1/10th the amount found here -- and the threads have been locked by the zealous defenders of political correctness.

This is laughable. You are the number one insult and namecalling party here and you are saying you will complain that it wasn't locked?

That's absurd.

It's not locked because if it were you'd be whining about the fact that it was locked instead, saying that I locked it because of your insults to me etc.

And Sister George must have mentioned the incident to the other nuns, because they weren't too anxious to call on me either.

When has religion irked you personally and why?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know