Ongoing religious scandals

ISAW

robindch wrote: »

Don't want to come across to pedantically here, but the thread title is "Ongoing religious scandals" and as such, the thread is really intended to keep together all the news related to the ongoing scandals within religion.

That's really the main reason why most of the stories in this thread about ongoing scandals avoid those that don't involve religion.

See my earlier point about "religion" becoming "Roman, Catholic clergy"
One exception to posting the RCC has been proffered -scientology- but no reference given. In any case I dont regard Scientology as a religion nor would mainstream religions.
Im quite happy to debate that issue as part of this thread since before I posted extensively on the internet debating Holocaust denial and claims about WMD in Iraq and astrology and other kooky subjects, one of my main posting subjects was scientology.

Galvasean wrote: »

Feel free to post them up yourself if you feel they are being underrepresented.
FWIW, there have been quite a few articles linked to about abuse in Scientology (which to the best of my knowledge is an atheistic religion).

What I feel is beside the pôint.
Just examine all the posts in this thread up to now and tell me how many were not about roman Catholics?
And I don't view picking on Protestants or Jews or whatever is a preferable substitute to picking on roman Catholics.

It paints a clear picture of anti Catholic and anti christian posters.
If they were so concerned about "religion" in general then why don't they post about that?


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/21/us/21beliefs.html?_r=2&pagewanted=1&sq=zen&st=cse&scp=2

Shimano was originally appointed till 2012

http://buddhism.about.com/b/2011/02/10/another-zen-master-scandal.htm
http://www.tantricnews.com/sex-abuse-scandal-rocks-tibetan-buddhism.html

Cossax wrote: »

Abuse may not be going on and covered up by the RCC in Ireland at this very moment in time

If abuse is not going on i fail to see how it is being covered up.

If you meant "may be going on and covered up by the RCC" you do realise that this is the basis of both conspiracy theories and Incitement to hatred?

I mean try this "abuse which nobody knows about may be going on and covered up by the Jews/blacks/ atheists/homosexuals". Do any of them seem a valid debating issue to you ?

Oh and look up "argument from ignorance" would you? You will find it under "logical fallacy"

Delirium

ISAW wrote: »

What I feel is beside the pôint.
Just examine all the posts in this thread up to now and tell me how many were not about roman Catholics?
And I don't view picking on Protestants or Jews or whatever is a preferable substitute to picking on roman Catholics.

It paints a clear picture of anti Catholic and anti christian posters.
If they were so concerned about "religion" in general then why don't they post about that?


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/21/us/21beliefs.html?_r=2&pagewanted=1&sq=zen&st=cse&scp=2

Shimano was originally appointed till 2012

http://buddhism.about.com/b/2011/02/10/another-zen-master-scandal.htm
http://www.tantricnews.com/sex-abuse-scandal-rocks-tibetan-buddhism.html

"picking on"?? You really think it's "picking on" Roman Catholics to post information about crimes committed by RCC priests?

"Won't someone think about the children child abusers!?!?" :rolleyes::rolleyes:

The main reason that the RCC is posted more often is because a lot of the stories happen in Ireland.

ISAW

koth wrote: »

"picking on"?? You really think it's "picking on" Roman Catholics to post information about crimes committed by RCC priests?

I do if you highlight a tiny minority of priests out of context as if they represent something extraordinary in relation to the population in general or to other religions.

The main reason that the RCC is posted more often is because a lot of the stories happen in Ireland.

You must be joking! Few abusers mentioned are Irish in Ireland. the thread is also mentioning and making an issue of mentioning abusers abroad but again exclusively or almost exclusively Roman Catholics -asz if they represented anything extraordinary in relation to religion or to society in general. There are thousands of convicted abusers in Ireland per annum but
the numbers of priests over a century is in the dozens. the same four or five from decades ago are continually dragged up as if they represent something about the roman Catholic church.
they dont.

And how come the thread is posting no cases (other than face one) about priests in Ireland in the last ten years and how come posters post about abuse NOT in ireland?

"Won't someone think about the children child abusers!?!?"

Touché!
If you really care about the victims then why don't you post about the other 99% plus of non clerical child abusers?
dont you care about the victims of more than 99% of abusers who are not priests?

Penn

ISAW wrote: »

What I feel is beside the pôint.
Just examine all the posts in this thread up to now and tell me how many were not about roman Catholics?
And I don't view picking on Protestants or Jews or whatever is a preferable substitute to picking on roman Catholics.

It paints a clear picture of anti Catholic and anti christian posters.
If they were so concerned about "religion" in general then why don't they post about that?

Because a) this is Ireland which is predominantly a Catholic country, which means that most of the scandals we hear about here happen in Ireland or are related to the Catholic Church, b) most of us were raised Catholic, which means that we are more likely to read about scandals about the Catholic Church (same way when people go on holidays to Spain for example, they look for news about Ireland rather than news about Spain), and c) religious scandals which happen in Ireland (most likely being related to the Catholic Church due to their prominence in this country) quite possibly happen in someone here's own locality as most of us still reside in Ireland (or come from Ireland at least).

Delirium

ISAW wrote: »

I do if you highlight a tiny minority of priests out of context as if they represent something extraordinary in relation to the population in general or to other religions.

"out of context"?? The stories are about clergy that have abused children. I fail to see how linking to reports of the abuse are out of context.

You must be joking! Few abusers mentioned are Irish in Ireland. the thread is also mentioning and making an issue of mentioning abusers abroad but again exclusively or almost exclusively Roman Catholics -asz if they represented anything extraordinary in relation to religion or to society in general. There are thousands of convicted abusers in Ireland per annum but
the numbers of priests over a century is in the dozens. the same four or five from decades ago are continually dragged up as if they represent something about the roman Catholic church.
they dont.

You really don't get what this thread is about. It's hightlighting religious scandals, i.e. crimes committed by clergy of religious groups. And it's not limited to just Ireland.

You're essentially complaining about something that this thread isn't.

And how come the thread is posting no cases (other than face one) about priests in Ireland in the last ten years and how come posters post about abuse NOT in ireland?

Again, for those at the back of the class, this thread isn't limited to Ireland.

Read that a couple of times, and try and let it sink in this time.

Delirium

ISAW wrote: »

Touché!
If you really care about the victims then why don't you post about the other 99% plus of non clerical child abusers?
dont you care about the victims of more than 99% of abusers who are not priests?

Because that would be off-topic for this thread.

Penn

ISAW wrote: »

Touché!
If you really care about the victims then why don't you post about the other 99% plus of non clerical child abusers?
dont you care about the victims of more than 99% of abusers who are not priests?

Because this is "Ongoing RELIGIOUS scandals" on an Atheism & Agnosticism forum, not "Let's talk about every bad thing that ever happens in the world" on a General Discussion forum.

Why don't you post about all types of abuse, like adult rape? Don't you care about those victims? What about spousal abuse? Don't you care about a man beating his wife? What about murder victims in New York who are robbed and killed for their wallets? Don't you care about them ISAW? Why don't you care about them?

ISAW

Penn wrote: »

Because a) this is Ireland which is predominantly a Catholic country, which means that most of the scandals we hear about here happen in Ireland or are related to the Catholic Church,

Not really. Over 90% of people born and bred in Ireland say they are Catholic.
at the highest level of clerical abuse Less than 1% of pedophiles were priests.
Less than 0.01% of pedophiles convicted in the last ten years are priests.

I would posit there is a scape goat mentality to attack Fianna Fail/bankers/priests or whatever for errors others committed and continue to commit. just as there was to attack Saddam Hussein and Iraq. While they were mistakes committed it is blown out of proportion.

b) most of us were raised Catholic, which means that we are more likely to read about scandals about the Catholic Church (same way when people go on holidays to Spain for example, they look for news about Ireland rather than news about Spain),

Fair enough -but why not look to the majority of abusers i.e. the over 99% who are not priests and are still offending? why spend so much media attention on Islamamofascists Arabs Jews or on Roman Catholic clergy if they are not the problem anymore?

and c) religious scandals which happen in Ireland (most likely being related to the Catholic Church due to their prominence in this country) quite possibly happen in someone here's own locality as most of us still reside in Ireland (or come from Ireland at least).

And again so what? i agree the church and people should ensure they don't happen again. But why continually post about priests from the 1970s when hundreds of cases happen caused by non priests in 2012?

why are you not interested in the current non priest cases? Are they not Irish too, are they not in your locality?

Newaglish

ISAW, I don't get how you constantly argue that there are loads of abusers and reprimand others for focusing on abuse carried out by RCC priests. Surely the rate of abuse by priests should be less than the general population, if not zero? Shouldn't we expect a higher moral standard from them? Religious people do seem to enjoy the notion that morals come from religion and they are awfully religious people, one would think.

ISAW

Penn wrote: »

Because this is "Ongoing RELIGIOUS scandals" on an Atheism & Agnosticism forum,

But you are goin in circles. It isnt "religious". i have suggested it is practically only Romanb catholic. atheistic religions like Buddhism are mentioned; Until i just did in the last page or so.

not "Let's talk about every bad thing that ever happens in the world" on a General Discussion forum.

No but the point is child sexual abuse is not endemic to the roman Catholic church.
There is evidence that other religions historical have a higher level of child abuse.
And the levels of Catholics clerics abusers are historically tiny compared to outside of religions.
and those levels are currently as near zero as cant be measured because the RCC responded to its own niave mistakes.

Why don't you post about all types of abuse, like adult rape?

I do but here im confining myself to child particularly to pedophile sexual abuse.

Don't you care about those victims? What about spousal abuse? Don't you care about a man beating his wife? What about murder victims in New York who are robbed and killed for their wallets? Don't you care about them ISAW? Why don't you care about them?

i do care about them but I again would posit they are not posted because people interested in attacking Catholic clergy wont post about them because again such za tiny percentage of rape/murder/wife beater offenders are catholic clergy.

ISAW

Newaglish wrote: »

Surely the rate of abuse by priests should be less than the general population, if not zero?

Agreed. and you evidence it isnt is? for about 1000 child sex cases per year for the last ten years Im not aware of any they were RC clergy. are you? thatsq one in ten thousand even if you find one!

Shouldn't we expect a higher moral standard from them?

Not necessarily. I suggest Clergy would argue are not necessarily holier than non clergy.

Bannasidhe

ISAW wrote: »

Not really. Over 9% of people born and bred in Ireland say they are Catholic.
at the highest level of clerical abuse Less than 1% of pedohhiles were priests.
Less than 0.01% of pedophiles convicted in the last ten years are priests.

I would posit there is a scape goat mentality to attack Fianna Fail/bankers/priests or whatever for errors others committed and continue to commit. just as there was to attack Saddam Hussein and Iraq. While they were mistakes committed it is blown out of proportion.



Fair enough -but why not look to the majority of abusers i.e. the over 99% who are not priests and are still offending? why spend so moch media attention on Islamamofascists Arabs Jews or on Roman Catholic clergy if they are not the problem anymoer?



And again so what? i agree the church and people should ensure they dont happen again. But why continually post about priests from the 1970s when hundreds of cases happen caused by non priests in 2012?

why are you not interested in the current non priest cases? Are they not Irish too, are they not in your locality?

ISAW - I genuinely cannot understand how you can defend an organisation which claims to provide not just moral guidance to society but the path to eternal salvation but whose hierarchy protected people who raped children and in some cases moved these rapists to positions which allowed them to continue their appalling crimes.
It does not matter what percentage of priests are paedophiles.
It does not matter if these rapes occurred 1 year, 5 years, 10 years or 20 years ago.

The only thing that matters is that this happened and was covered-up.

Had the church immediately handed those engaged in the abuse of children over to the civil authorities for prosecution - no spin, no cover-ups, no transfers to other districts then most people here would have praised their swift action and willingness to act to protect children.
Instead, the RCC tried to protect itself above all.

How can you, as a follower of Jesus, not be demanding that the RCC - a church which claims to act in his name - not be demanding justice for the victims of priests and officials who enabled children to to abused to repent, atone and make true reparation? You seem to prefer to quibble about dates and percentages - I cannot understand for the life of me how you are not furious that these men are not thrown out of your church and made to face the full rigour of the law.

the_syco

ISAW wrote: »

And again so what? i agree the church and people should ensure they don't happen again. But why continually post about priests from the 1970s when hundreds of cases happen caused by non priests in 2012?

why are you not interested in the current non priest cases? Are they not Irish too, are they not in your locality?

Probably because we're in the Religion & Spirituality forum.

Sarky

Why continually bring up the Holocaust when it happened in the 1940's? Don't be such a hypocrite, ISAW.

joseph brand

Newaglish wrote: »

ISAW, I don't get how you constantly argue that there are loads of abusers and reprimand others for focusing on abuse carried out by RCC priests. Surely the rate of abuse by priests should be less than the general population, if not zero? Shouldn't we expect a higher moral standard from them? Religious people do seem to enjoy the notion that morals come from religion and they are awfully religious people, one would think.

I'd like to add to that, the fact that priests claim that god speaks to them. If, hypothetically, god is speaking to these 'men of the cloth', are they not terrified of hell? The answer is no. Therefore, I call shenanigans.

A voice speaks to me from within, occasionally. But I know it's me.

"Hey Kev, you need to stop drinking whiskey at 4am in house parties, it ruins your whole Sunday". (voice inside my head)
Some religious people, I reckon, would mistake this for 'god's' voice.

ISAW

koth wrote: »

"out of context"?? The stories are about clergy that have abused children. I fail to see how linking to reports of the abuse are out of context.

In the context of a 95% plus religious society and a few percent atheists why is constantly posting about a dozen priests who were abusers over 40 years ago so important? We dont base our views of all Germans today on the context of the errors of Nazi Germany not that the RCC was ever comparable to them.

You really don't get what this thread is about. It's hightlighting religious scandals, i.e. crimes committed by clergy of religious groups. And it's not limited to just Ireland.

the IRELAND bit was argued in the context of Penns comment about things specific to ireland. How are you highlighting "religious scandals" . All I see are Catholic church
related posts referring to things from decades ago. i have no objection to discussing thiese; But put them in context.

They dont represent the Chursh worldwide.
They are referring to a tiny minority of clergy and of abusers.
There is no evidence of a worldwide coverup conspiracy by the Vatican.

koth wrote: »

Because that would be off-topic for this thread.

Not in the context of the post to which i was respo,nding which specifically asked "why dont you post about adult rape"?

Bannasidhe wrote: »

ISAW - I genuinely cannot understand how you can defend an organisation which claims to provide not just moral guidance to society but the path to eternal salvation but whose hierarchy protected people who raped children

wher is your evidence that the Vatican protected or had a pôlicy to protect child abusers and to avoid the legal procedures of a state?

and in some cases moved these rapists to positions which allowed them to continue their appalling crimes.

where is your evidence that the Vatican protected or had a pôlicy to protect child abusers and to allow them to continue their appalling crimes?

It does not matter what percentage of priests are paedophiles.
It does not matter if these rapes occurred 1 year, 5 years, 10 years or 20 years ago.

so it doe not matter if it is happening today?
and if most of the abuse today were clergy that would not latter to you and you would not be interested in that?
But as it happens the abuse isnt by clergy today. So it comes as no surprise to me you claim the level does not matter since the current level is zer or as near to it as can be measured.
all that seems to matter to you is pointing out the tiny percentage of offenders from decades ago who were clergy. the vast majority of victims of all the other offenders dont matter at all as far as you are concerned?
why are you only concerned for victims of abuse only when they are of priests from decades ago? why is that such a special interest?

The only thing that matters is that this happened and was covered-up.

and you evidence the vatican or a church wide conspiracy to cover up abuse is?

Had the church immediately handed those engaged in the abuse of children over to the civil authorities for prosecution - no spin, no cover-ups, no transfers to other districts then most people here would have praised their swift action and willingness to act to protect children.
Instead, the RCC tried to protect itself above all.

ll admit there is evidence some bishops (i reckon roughly about tenish in ten thousand bishops) erred [none were abusers themselves but some did in some cases move some priests -again the cases are i believe in the tens) in some but not all cases and did fail to act appropriately and that they did this in consultation with police civil service etc. at that time i.e. it was not restricted to the few Church hierarchy concerned. There isnt evidence as far as I can see for a Vatican coverup or policy to subvert justice. In addition the church reacted to the problem changed and implemented new policies to prevent the problem happening again. they did this in advance of the state which still continue to lag.

How can you, as a follower of Jesus, not be demanding that the RCC

i never claimed to be a christian -please leave my personal beliefs out of this.

- a church which claims to act in his name - not be demanding justice for the victims of priests and officials who enabled children to to abused to repent, atone and make true reparation? .

As I stated the church acted in advance of oithers and in terms of compensation made (without legal court requirements and evidence as demanded elsewhere) offers in excess of other non chruch state tribunals e.g UK australia.

the_syco wrote: »

Probably because we're in the Religion & Spirituality forum.

Again the point about "adult rape" was raised by another poster. i was only replying to him.

Sarky wrote: »

Why continually bring up the Holocaust when it happened in the 1940's? Don't be such a hypocrite, ISAW.

Again see my above point about German,s today

joseph brand wrote: »

I'd like to add to that, the fact that priests claim that god speaks to them. If, hypothetically, god is speaking to these 'men of the cloth', are they not terrified of hell? The answer is no. Therefore, I call shenanigans.

1. they dont claim that. any who did hear such voices would probably be under investigation.

2. a vanishingly small minority of evil vile abusive priests from decades ago dont represent christians or clergy.

Delirium

ISAW wrote: »

In the context of a 95% plus religious society and a few percent atheists why is constantly posting about a dozen priests who were abusers over 40 years ago so important? We dont base our views of all Germans today on the context of the errors of Nazi Germany not that the RCC was ever comparable to them.

And I don't base my opinions on Catholics based on child abusing RCC clergy. Again, the reason the stories are posted is because they are on-topic for this thread.

the IRELAND bit was argued in the context of Penns comment about things specific to ireland. How are you highlighting "religious scandals" . All I see are Catholic church
related posts referring to things from decades ago. i have no objection to discussing thiese; But put them in context.

But we are talking about them in context. The stories are about clergy that abused children. No one is changing dates of the abuse, or claiming the priests abused more. We just link the reports of the abuse and comment on the stories.

They dont represent the Chursh worldwide.
They are referring to a tiny minority of clergy and of abusers.
There is no evidence of a worldwide coverup conspiracy by the Vatican.

Never said they represent the church worldwide.

Not in the context of the post to which i was respo,nding which specifically asked "why dont you post about adult rape"?

Actually yes it is, as you're complaining about the content of this thread!

Galvasean

Wow, that's a lot of 'whatabouery'...

marienbad

ISAW if you feel there are abuse cases from other religions that have been missed then why don't you post them and correct this imbalance you see here ?

MrPudding

Galvasean wrote: »

Wow, that's a lot of 'whatabouery'...

It's what he does best.

MrP

Galvasean

marienbad wrote: »

ISAW if you feel there are abuse cases from other religions that have been missed then why don't you post them and correct this imbalance you see here ?

I asked him that yesterday and he went on an 'anti Catholic bias' rant.
I don't think he is interested at addressing the imbalance at this stage, just complaining.

Corkfeen

So we should ignore the abuse and sweep it under the carpet as it would be anti-Catholic to mention it? What a warped value system... Only a few pages back we were discussing the liberal priests who ended up under investigation so quickly by the Vatican. The Vatican covered up the abuse but investigated the liberals, good to see that their morality isn't out if whack or anything....

ISAW

koth wrote: »

Actually yes it is, as you're complaining about the content of this thread!

Im noit
1. Im explaining how Irish and clergy relates to a broader context of victims.
2. I m replying to someone complaining about "why dont you refer to adult abuse".

I dont but I am aware that much much more adult abuse occurs. However it occurs maybe for different reasons. If for example we were discussing the phenomenon of adult abuse or of say mugging i would not see a point of discussing a muggings committed by black people or homosexuals unless there was a specific reason why singling out blacks or homosexuals mug people as distinct from any other group.

Im happy to discuss religious abuse but as I have stated it seems to be restricted to Roman Catholic clergy and doesn't seem to acknowledge the vast majority of abuse is non religious. that makes the context highly suspicious.

ISAW

Galvasean wrote: »

I asked him that yesterday and he went on an 'anti Catholic bias' rant.
I don't think he is interested at addressing the imbalance at this stage, just complaining.

And I replied to it

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=78212894&postcount=1052

I dont think you seem interested in reading replies to your requests and acknowledging them.

Not alone that I specifically PM yu with several links relating to atheistic groups which persecuted people in the name of spreading atheism and attacking religion

Delirium

ISAW wrote: »

Im happy to discuss religious abuse but as I have stated it seems to be restricted to Roman Catholic clergy and doesn't seem to acknowledge the vast majority of abuse is non religious. that makes the context highly suspicious.

It's not restricted to the RCC clergy, this has been stated multiple times. It's the "ongoing religious scandals" thread.

If you want to offer up links to stories of other religious groups engaged in criminal activity, go right ahead.

robindch

ISAW wrote: »

you are goin in circles.

ISAW

Corkfeen wrote: »

So we should ignore the abuse and sweep it under the carpet as it would be anti-Catholic to mention it?

I nevre stated we should.
We should acknowlegdge it is a tiny fractin of pedophile abuse.
the church should - and has in advance of the state and victims groups who are still playing catch up - respond to such abuse.

What a warped value system... Only a few pages back we were discussing the liberal priests who ended up under investigation so quickly by the Vatican. The Vatican covered up the abuse but investigated the liberals, good to see that their morality isn't out if whack or anything....

What a warped rationality. what abusers did the Vatican cover up? what system or policy of "cover up" do you allege the Vatican had? And assuming you cant prove it but still believe it exists anyway do you suggest the vatican still have this policy? Or that the Vatican responded to cases of clerical abuse?

ISAW

koth wrote: »

It's not restricted to the RCC clergy, this has been stated multiple times. It's the "ongoing religious scandals" thread.

If you want to offer up links to stories of other religious groups engaged in criminal activity, go right ahead.

See my reply which immediately precedes your post and follow the references back.

Delirium

ISAW wrote: »

See my reply which immediately precedes your post and follow the references back.

so you've posted a non-RCC story and you weren't warned against posting it or infracted etc.

You used the thread as it's meant to be used, what's the problem?

ISAW

koth wrote: »

It's not restricted to the RCC clergy, this has been stated multiple times. It's the "ongoing religious scandals" thread.

If you want to offer up links to stories of other religious groups engaged in criminal activity, go right ahead.

I know it isnt restricted. What i mean is the posts made by posters are restricted to posts about Roman Catholic clergy.

1079 posts
excluding the one I posted about Buddhism or about atheism as a religion

How many of them about abuse by religious other than roman catholic clergy?
do you not see my point?