The Clerical Child Abuse Thread (merged)

Fanny Cradock

I did. And I can't decide if you are dreadfully confused about what he was saying or if you are acting the maggot.

Jericho Smith

That all works well in good in theory but lets recap a few centuries of RCC involvement in ireland. The famine, the RCC did very little to help the dying people all over the country while they sat in luxury, the magdelene laundries no nothing was done really, industriel schools, no all the way up to the 1980s some were still open, the christian brothers, nope very little was done, the murphy,ryan, cloyne reports ..... im sorry but i have very little faith in them doing anything at all.

Its simple history really, it repeats itself.

Jericho
---End Quote---

Indeed and history teaches us that civilisations are doomed to collapse.

And that, by the way, is not a good thing for the people of collapsed civilisations.

No, the protection of the state requires a few sacrificial lambs and they will be sacrificed.

And the Church will have to do the same

then i put in my reply !!!!!!

Fanny Cradock

Please use the quote function located beside the reply button. I'm suggesting you don't understand what Himnextdoor was saying. Re-quoting your contribution and his doesn't begin to address this.

Jericho Smith

thanks mate, this is all new to me

Fanny Cradock

You should also read the charter.

PatricaMcKay

wolfsbane wrote: »

I'm not sure what you mean. Child sex abuse was seen as a vile offence/sin in the ordinary man's eyes throughout all my 60+ years. I take it I have been in a 'shame' culture? I'm sure some of the perpetrators also felt guilty about it. So it was both a 'shame' and a 'guilt' culture? Do you mean the authorities in the RCC did not regard it as a problem because it was covered up?
.

Im not the greatest at expressing myself clearly.

If you guilty about something you try and make up for what you have done wrong, if I rob a bank lets say part of feeling guilty and repenting is handing myself in for the crime, no? How many RC priests handed themselves in?

These children in the eyes of an evil society were seen as basically nothing. Therefore doing things to them was seen as okay as long as you dont get caught. The RCC hierarchy was clearly more interesting in not being shamed than its guilt in the eyes of God, as if God would just let such things pass.

Fallen nature isnt rational, sometimes its not rational at all.

I dont know you, but you seem to know the Gospel and take it seriously, and lets just say that what the Gospel teaches and what was going on are in very different worlds.

FISMA

Jericho Smith wrote: »

That all works well in good in theory but lets recap a few centuries of RCC involvement in ireland. The famine, the RCC did very little to help the dying people all over the country while they sat in luxury, the magdelene laundries no nothing was done really, industriel schools, no all the way up to the 1980s some were still open, the christian brothers, nope very little was done, the murphy,ryan, cloyne reports ..... im sorry but i have very little faith in them doing anything at all...

That's a nice cherry picked time interval you've chosen. Perhaps, you could rewind the clock back to pagan times, human sacrifice, and all.

I wonder what those people, especially the mothers, thought when the Church said - hey, no human sacrifice, no infanticide!

As for feeding the people. I personally would not be here if it were not for the CATHOLIC Church. No-one stood up to help my father's family get food except for the CATHOLIC Church.

So next time, think before you make a comment like "very little was done."

Just because you know very little, does not mean very little was done.

gigino

FISMA wrote: »

As for feeding the people.

Did it ever really help feed the people ? By encouraging large families it done more than others to fuel the unsustainable population explosion - created extra mouths in the world to feed ( world population is now something like 8 times what it was a few hundred years ago ) - and while money flowed to the Vatican not too much food was ever seen coming back in return.
Say what you want about the RCC, but its 90 billion plus assetbase ( gold, shares, property etc ) worldwide is not and never was used to feed the hungry.

FISMA

gigino wrote: »

Did it ever really help feed the people ?

Not sure if I can make the original statement any clearer, but I will try.

Yes, it did and does feed people. The Church helped my ancestors.


Stop by one of the thousands of Catholic soup kitchens or Church pantries if there are any further questions.

Blueboyd

This thing brought tears in my eyes.

himnextdoor

Blueboyd wrote: »

This thing brought tears in my eyes.

Yes but they give soup to old or homeless people.

PDN

gigino wrote: »

Did it ever really help feed the people ? By encouraging large families it done more than others to fuel the unsustainable population explosion - created extra mouths in the world to feed ( world population is now something like 8 times what it was a few hundred years ago ) - and while money flowed to the Vatican not too much food was ever seen coming back in return.

Nonsense. The primary reason why people in the developing world have large families is because they want to have someone to look after them in their old age. That is why, in poverty stricken nations, non-Catholics have just as large families as Catholics.

I would like to think that you personally really have a genuine compassion for the hungry and are actively involved in supporting projects to feed the starving. Unfortunately, in my experience, those who gripe about the Catholic Church in this regard frequently do nothing to help the world's hungry and are happy simply to exploit their plight as a stick to pursue their anti-church vendettas.

mcmoustache

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

No problem.

Though I am constantly surprised how often the statement "the State is also culpable" is misunderstood as "the RCC is less guilty because of the State's culpability".

Guilty as charged.

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Put simply. The individual abusers are guilty of crimes; the RCC is guilty of crimes; the State is guilty of crimes. The guilt of one doesn't diminish the guilt of the others.

I do agree that the State is guilty too but when the levers of power are controlled mostly by members of the RCC, I can't help feel as though the blame goes right back to the Church.

Take the simplified case of a Garda who upon receiving a report about a rape against a child by a priest, decides not to pursue the case any further.
The Garda, being an agent of the State, is either acting under the State's direction or his own. If the State had a policy of not pursuing these cases, then we can easily blame the State in much the same way that we blame Rome. If it didn't we can blame the individual Garda.

In this hypothetical case, where the individual is to blame, I would then look at what motivated the Garda to take that course of inaction. I'd be asking whether or not the Garda's Catholocism had anything to do with it. Traditionally, Catholics hold priests in very high regard. As Catholics, they are also devoted to the entire organisation. I (being a bit biased against the RCC, admittedly) would blame the RCC's beliefs for the failure of an agent of the State in this kind of case.

To me, it reduces to a question of whether the agent of the State and member of the RCC was acting for the State or for the RCC when such decisions were made.

Blueboyd

himnextdoor wrote: »

Yes but they give soup to old or homeless people.

Maybe so but I bet Jayzeus won't be giving much soup to the church when he returns.

himnextdoor

PDN wrote: »

Nonsense. The primary reason why people in the developing world have large families is because they want to have someone to look after them in their old age. That is why, in poverty stricken nations, non-Catholics have just as large families as Catholics.

I would like to think that you personally really have a genuine compassion for the hungry and are actively involved in supporting projects to feed the starving. Unfortunately, in my experience, those who gripe about the Catholic Church in this regard frequently do nothing to help the world's hungry and are happy simply to exploit their plight as a stick to pursue their anti-church vendettas.

That's not actually true... Old people were at one time in our 'race' as it is now in other races, valued by the community. They hold knowledge and information that is of value to all members of society.

Most couples don't have children in order to provide 'geriatric care', they have children because they are horny. (Or at least the man is.)

himnextdoor

PDN wrote: »

Nonsense. The primary reason why people in the developing world have large families is because they want to have someone to look after them in their old age. That is why, in poverty stricken nations, non-Catholics have just as large families as Catholics.

I would like to think that you personally really have a genuine compassion for the hungry and are actively involved in supporting projects to feed the starving. Unfortunately, in my experience, those who gripe about the Catholic Church in this regard frequently do nothing to help the world's hungry and are happy simply to exploit their plight as a stick to pursue their anti-church vendettas.

And could you explain why there are so many 'homes for the elderly' in Ireland, a Catholic country populated by people with a propensity to have large families in order that they may be looked after in their dotage by their offspring, which they aren't?

himnextdoor

PDN wrote: »

Nonsense. The primary reason why people in the developing world have large families is because they want to have someone to look after them in their old age. That is why, in poverty stricken nations, non-Catholics have just as large families as Catholics.

I would like to think that you personally really have a genuine compassion for the hungry and are actively involved in supporting projects to feed the starving. Unfortunately, in my experience, those who gripe about the Catholic Church in this regard frequently do nothing to help the world's hungry and are happy simply to exploit their plight as a stick to pursue their anti-church vendettas.

And okay, giving soup to poor people is a nice thing to do but giving soup to some and abusing others does not mean that 'soup-givers' are good.

himnextdoor

PDN wrote: »

Nonsense. The primary reason why people in the developing world have large families is because they want to have someone to look after them in their old age. That is why, in poverty stricken nations, non-Catholics have just as large families as Catholics.

I would like to think that you personally really have a genuine compassion for the hungry and are actively involved in supporting projects to feed the starving. Unfortunately, in my experience, those who gripe about the Catholic Church in this regard frequently do nothing to help the world's hungry and are happy simply to exploit their plight as a stick to pursue their anti-church vendettas.

Do you have genuine compassion for the hungry and are you Catholic?

Is that what is required for compassion, Catholicism?

himnextdoor

PDN wrote: »

Nonsense. The primary reason why people in the developing world have large families is because they want to have someone to look after them in their old age. That is why, in poverty stricken nations, non-Catholics have just as large families as Catholics.

I would like to think that you personally really have a genuine compassion for the hungry and are actively involved in supporting projects to feed the starving. Unfortunately, in my experience, those who gripe about the Catholic Church in this regard frequently do nothing to help the world's hungry and are happy simply to exploit their plight as a stick to pursue their anti-church vendettas.

The reason that poor, non-Catholic or 'under-developed' people have so many children is because 'SEX' relieves the tension of starving to death while the rest of the world watches.

himnextdoor

PDN wrote: »

Nonsense. The primary reason why people in the developing world have large families is because they want to have someone to look after them in their old age. That is why, in poverty stricken nations, non-Catholics have just as large families as Catholics.

I would like to think that you personally really have a genuine compassion for the hungry and are actively involved in supporting projects to feed the starving. Unfortunately, in my experience, those who gripe about the Catholic Church in this regard frequently do nothing to help the world's hungry and are happy simply to exploit their plight as a stick to pursue their anti-church vendettas.

And feeding the the poor has nothing to do with stopping, or at least doing what you can to stop, children being raped.

And that is the point: Children who are raped by Catholic clergy are less likely to find justice than any other child who is raped.

CiaranMT

Spamtastic himnextdoor. Saying the reason for bigger families in developing worlds is due to horniness is rubbish.

himnextdoor

CiaranMT wrote: »

Spamtastic himnextdoor. Saying the reason for bigger families in developing worlds is due to horniness is rubbish.

B******S!

Unless you think that contraception is inversely proportional to horniness.

'I'm drunk and erect, have you taken your pill?'; 'I'm drunk and erect and we have to trust me to withdraw'; 'I'm drunk and we can't afford more kids and there is no question of contaception, let's not have sex'...

Give me a break.

FISMA

himnextdoor wrote: »

Most couples don't have children in order to provide 'geriatric care', they have children because they are horny. (Or at least the man is.)

Sorry, but I just have to

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfYJsQAhl0

Epic Fail.

CiaranMT

himnextdoor wrote: »

B******S!

Unless you think that contraception is inversely proportional to horniness.

'I'm drunk and erect, have you taken your pill?'; 'I'm drunk and erect and we have to trust me to withdraw'; 'I'm drunk and we can't afford more kids and there is no question of contaception, let's not have sex'...

Give me a break.

Quality argument.

himnextdoor

FISMA wrote: »

Sorry, but I just have to

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfYJsQAhl0

Epic Fail.

I refer the honorable gentleman to the comment I made some moments ago; B******S!

Why do Ethiopians reproduce as they starve? Catholicism? Soup? Old age?

Comfort?

Really, wooly-minded, naive, sexually inadequate people should keep out of this thread.

This is real life children we're discussing and 'Dungeons and Dragons' are not of any real value to those children.

So either 'cop on' or get out.

himnextdoor

FISMA wrote: »

Sorry, but I just have to

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfYJsQAhl0

Epic Fail.

To be clear; you hold the view that couples reproduce in order to facilitate geriatric care?

himnextdoor

CiaranMT wrote: »

Quality argument.

You're right; being horny has nothing to do with sex and sex has nothing to do with conception.

You watch; sex-crime will increase at the same rate as hopelessness.

Numerous offspring are produced in order to increase the chances of one survivor. It has nothing to do with the survival of the parent. Duh!

himnextdoor

FISMA wrote: »

Sorry, but I just have to

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfYJsQAhl0

Epic Fail.

CiaranMT wrote:

Spamtastic himnextdoor. Saying the reason for bigger families in developing worlds is due to horniness is rubbish.

Do you deny that depressed people masturbate frequently?

Either or any of you?

I could name lots of species that produce young in large numbers and not one of them has anything to do with the survival of the parent.

I wonder, could celibacy cause depression? Hmm!!!

himnextdoor

himnextdoor wrote: »

Do you deny that depressed people masturbate frequently?

Either or any of you?

I could name lots of species that produce young in large numbers and not one of them has anything to do with the survival of the parent.

I wonder, could celibacy cause depression? Hmm!!!

In case you missed it; masturbation requires 'horniness'.

CiaranMT

You're quoting yourself now?