6
   

When has religion irked you personally and why?

 
 
caprice
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Jan, 2004 04:14 am
Wouldn't the more appropriate question be.... "Who, in the name of religion, has irked you personally and why?"

Religion per se has nothing to do with it. It's more the interpretation and practice of it. Wouldn't you all agree?
0 Replies
 
Wilso
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Jan, 2004 05:00 am
Condsidering the last 40 pages of this discussion, that's quite possibly true.

I did just think of a time. Last year, when a Catholic school in Sydney suspended a 10-year-old boy because his mother was in a defacto relationship. What a pack of scum.
0 Replies
 
gozmo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Jan, 2004 06:12 am
Wiso,

I am a Catholic, a non-believing Catholic but a Catholic by birthright, by baptism, by education, by association and enculturation. I'll have you know I am not scum nor are my family friends or the religious that I have known.
0 Replies
 
Wilso
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Jan, 2004 06:12 am
Then how would you describe the actions of that school?
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Jan, 2004 07:09 am
Inappropriate????

Over done???
0 Replies
 
gozmo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Jan, 2004 07:16 am
Wilso wrote:
Then how would you describe the actions of that school?


Illegal
0 Replies
 
Wilso
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Jan, 2004 07:17 am
gozmo wrote:
Wilso wrote:
Then how would you describe the actions of that school?


Illegal


Since when has that EVER made a difference to the Catholic church?
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Jan, 2004 08:01 am
I'm waiting for the Jehovah's Witness to ask if I believe in armageddon. My (as yet untried) response will be Yep, I'm a geddin' outta here.
0 Replies
 
gozmo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Jan, 2004 08:04 am
Wilso,

In your words "that's a crock of ****"
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Jan, 2004 09:51 am
gozmo, As an 'outside' observer of this exchange between you and Wilso, "that's a crock of ****" fits the catholic church - and all churches that harms children.
0 Replies
 
gozmo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Jan, 2004 10:00 am
c.i.

Do you agree with Wilso that I am scum?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Jan, 2004 10:21 am
No, you are not scum. "Scum" are people that harm children, and/or continue to support and protect those that they know have harmed children. Not all priests are scum, but those that have knowledge of pedophile priests that have harmed children, and continue to protect them are "scum."
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Jan, 2004 10:26 am
cicerone imposter wrote:
No, you are not scum. "Scum" are people that harm children, and/or continue to support and protect those that they know have harmed children. Not all priests are scum, but those that have knowledge of pedophile priests that have harmed children, and continue to protect them are "scum."


No, ci, "scum" is when a bunch of rugby players hook arm in arm and get ready to put the ball into pla....ahhhh...ahhhh....oh....that scrum.

Never mind!
0 Replies
 
Craven de Kere
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Jan, 2004 10:29 am
To me it's not the person or institution that is irksome, to me that's like saying racism is an irksome ideology depending on who holds it.
0 Replies
 
akaMechsmith
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Jan, 2004 04:34 pm
The irksome part often comes when we are expected to play with the rules (laws) which are designed by people who live in a universe populated by all manner of beings which cannot be shown to exist. In other words--- A Fantastic Universe.

A priest (or mullah) is not necessarily subject to the rules of society but rather he answers to a "higher law". Should he transgress he can go to confession (or to his knees if Protestant) and everything will be all right for eternity which is what really matters. Who cares if you sodomize a child, take money under false pretenses, beat your wife, or lie about things like baptism, heaven,circumcisions, and duties to God. You will be immediately forgiven and can start your sojurn in Paradise with a clean slate. And since Paradise lasts forever the forty or fifty years that you abuse Earth is but a fraction of a second considering the time you will exist in Heaven. You may as well rape the little girl, or play with the little boys penis if that is what your earthly body wants for gratification.

With a group of people that reason like that ( and that is what theology boils down to) what can we expect. Yet we let them make many rules that pertain to all of us. Most of them are acceptable and reasonable enough in a co-operative society. Some aren't.

Marrige laws are one, varying in irksomeness from state to state.
Doing "it" doggie fashion with your husband is still illegal in Massachussetts as far as I know. Be careful Craven Very Happy . The availiability of sex education and birth control information is widely restricted by some fantastic rules. I understand that it is a federal crime for a government health employee to discuss abortion with a pregnant girl. The practice of medicine is affected, (embryonic research). The practice of law (concept of fairness). Education. (How can you factually teach geology, astronomy or genetics in a world that is only 6400 years old?

The churches, and their members, live in a fantasy filled universe. It's stupid of us to allow those "fantasies" to go unquestioned in the name of political correctness and politesse. But it's more stupid when we allow them more or less free access to our children or our schools.

What do the more reasonable of us (Agnostics and Athiests) Very Happy expect.
Well, we are getting it Exclamation Exclamation And our Earth, and it's burden of humanity is worse off for it.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Tue 13 Jan, 2004 12:01 am
It would be hard to find anyone further out of the catholic church than I am, I, who am able to go on at length about my displeasures about it. Still, while my ears smile slightly to hear people agree with my points of view, I am still uncomfortable about seeing belief and believers mocked as scum, about the catholic church or any other religion. I wasn't evil scum when I was a believer and neither were many millions of others through history. I know many people in different religions are users, frankly slime, a human trait. And that the religions are compromised by it.

I think to categorize a religion as evil is something to be careful about.
0 Replies
 
Diane
 
  1  
Reply Tue 13 Jan, 2004 12:18 am
Amen, sister osso.
0 Replies
 
caprice
 
  1  
Reply Tue 13 Jan, 2004 02:17 am
Surely this topic can be debated more intelligently and more kindly, than by use of foul language and insults?

Regarding the boy who was suspended...I do think it highly unfair to punish a child for a situation he has no control over. It's also highly unlikely that those running the school will change their opinion overnight unless legally forced to do so. With that reality, I would think the best scenario for this family would be to move the child to another school.
0 Replies
 
Wilso
 
  1  
Reply Tue 13 Jan, 2004 02:40 am
Quote:
Bishop kept quiet over paedophile



The defence argues its case on Friday in the trial of a French bishop charged with concealing information that a Roman Catholic priest was sexually abusing young boys.
Monsignor Pierre Pican admitted on Thursday to the court in the northern town of Caen that he had concealed the priest's paedophile activities but said he would do the same again.

His defence argues that the secrecy of the confessional exempts him of the duty to report sexual crimes against children.

The priest, Father Rene Bissey, was sentenced to 18 years in prison last October for raping one boy and abusing 10 others in the 1980s and 1990s.

Professional secrecy

When asked during Wednesday's questioning whether, if the situation were repeated, he would denounce the priest, he answered: "Having consulted my conscience in this supreme decision, the answer is no".

"I would encourage him to give himself in. I would involve myself more personally in the case. But I am overwhelmed by the number of people who choose to confide in me, and they can do it because they know I have never turned anyone in," he said.

As the bishop of Bayeux-Lisieux in the Calvados region in northern France, he was in charge of the diocese where Bissey was a priest.

He learned of Bissey's offences in 1996 from the vicar general of Normandy, who had been approached by distressed parents.

He sent the priest on a retreat and sent him for psychiatric help and two years later transferred him to a nearby parish, where he was arrested.

The defence argues that the bishop did not know the full extent of the events and so could not judge their seriousness.

"You will see that he did not have full knowledge of the facts. We'll be explaining this... And then there was the situation of the priest who was on the verge of suicide," said his lawyer Bernard Blachard.

The bishop's lawyers also say he is protected by professional secrecy, though the prosecution says this legal notion does not apply to crimes against children.

Confession

The case has sparked a heated debate about how far the secrecy of the confessional in the Roman Catholic church should go.

Monsignor Pican denied knowledge of the priest's actions when called to testify at Bissey's trial last October, refusing to say more on the grounds that to do so would compromise his own case.

But at his trial Bissey said he had given detailed accounts to his confessors in the church.

Monsignor Pican's case could set a legal precedent and comes at a time when the Roman Catholic Church is reeling from a string of scandals concerning paedophile priests.

According to church officials in France, of the 25,000 priests nationwide, there are currently 19 under investigation for rape or sexual assault on minors.

In addition, 30 other priests have been convicted in recent years on the same charges, and 11 of them are serving prison sentences.

Monsignor Pican is the first bishop in modern French history to appear in the dock.



Quote:
I am overwhelmed by the number of people who choose to confide in me, and they can do it because they know I have never turned anyone in-Monsignor Pierre Pican



So do whatever you like. Kill, steal, rape children. Just go and confess, and then you can go on with your life knowing everything is OK. Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
Wilso
 
  1  
Reply Tue 13 Jan, 2004 02:43 am
Quote:
Confession: Pell admits $50k offer


SYDNEY Catholic Archbishop George Pell has admitted offering the family of two child sex abuse victims $50,000 if they kept silent about the assaults by a cleric.

According to Channel Nine's 60 Minutes program, the offer was made to the family of two girls abused by their local priest over six years from 1987, when they were just five years old.

The girls' parents, who did not want to be identified, told the program they met with Dr Pell, who was an auxiliary bishop in their area at the time.

They were later sent a letter from lawyers on behalf of Dr Pell saying they could either take $50,000 in compensation for the abuse of their oldest daughter, or take the matter to court where it would be "strenuously defended" by the church.

Dr Pell initially told 60 Minutes he had offered them nothing at all, but on being presented with the letter admitted he had.

"I offered them nothing," he said at first.

"They were free to go into a process..."

He then corrected himself.

"I offered them 50 grand in compensation according to the publicly acknowledged procedure," Dr Pell said.

"They chose not to accept that."

Dr Pell admitted that had they accepted the compensation, they would have been bound not to publicly disclose the abuse.

"There is a requirement that they don't talk about it and most of them are happy not to," he said.

Dr Pell also admitted the clause was inserted to protect the reputation of the church.

"Many of them (victims and their families) don't want to be subjected to publicity and of course it's shameful for the church," he said.

But the parents of the girls involved, known only as "Garry" and "Elizabeth", said the church had been of no support to them at all.

"We came out (of the meeting with Dr Pell) feeling worse than when we went in," Elizabeth said.

They also said that when shown a photo of their daughter with blood streaming down her forearms after she slashed her wrists, Dr Pell was impassive, saying only: "Oh, she's changed, hasn't she?"

But Dr Pell said he could not recall seeing the photo at all.

"I've got no recollection of that," he said.

The much-anticipated program also aired the allegations of David Ridsdale, who was abused by his priest uncle Gerald Ridsdale.

David Ridsdale claimed that when he turned to Dr Pell for help in early 1993, Dr Pell tried to buy his silence.

"I started to get a sense he was insinuating things," Mr Ridsdale told 60 Minutes.

He said Dr Pell then used the exact words: "I want to know what it will take to keep you quiet."

Dr Pell, who admitted to knowing Gerald Ridsdale very well but said he had been unaware he was a paedophile, said he may have offered to help David, but did not offer any bribe.

"I couldn't, would never have said that," he said.

"I had no capacity to offer him anything, anywhere...

"His recollection is wrong."

Chris MacIsaac, president of the Broken Rites support group for victims of sexual abuse in the church, said attempting to silence victims was common in the hierarchy of the church.

"All bishops, not just Archbishop Pell, have always aimed to prevent church victims from talking to the media," he said in a statement.

"Victims who accepted payment usually believed that this was to keep them away from the media."

Earlier today a group of 70 young Catholics protested outside Channel Nine's northern Sydney studios over the airing of tonight's broadcast, saying Dr Pell was a victim of trial by media.

AAP
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

700 Inconsistencies in the Bible - Discussion by onevoice
Why do we deliberately fool ourselves? - Discussion by coincidence
Spirituality - Question by Miller
Oneness vs. Trinity - Discussion by Arella Mae
give you chills - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence for Evolution! - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence of God! - Discussion by Bartikus
One World Order?! - Discussion by Bartikus
God loves us all....!? - Discussion by Bartikus
The Preambles to Our States - Discussion by Charli
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/18/2024 at 02:52:08