TIME TO SACK THE POPE

Joey the lips

fizzynicenice wrote: »

That IMO is totally dodging the question. I mean entirely.
I think you just didn't want to answer, as the premise of 'original sin' is the answer, and that ideal is ridiculous

The answer you ask for is simple... There is no one more rightious than god.... Its that simple... We are all sinners by this defination. Do you accept this... I doubt it.

However as you mention a newborn I imagine god sees no one as being more pure than a new born child. There for I doubt that god supported the chuch when it buried unbaptised children outside grave yards.

As for ideals being ridiculous.... This implies you do not support them fine.. if i revert to my orig question

Do you feel you have the right to tell a jew what in there tradition is wrong????

nicegirl

I think Brian Cowen should go first!!

The_Minister

Magenta wrote: »

Sure everyone knows that virgins get preggers :rolleyes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parthenogenesis

Yep.

Joey the lips

Thaedydal wrote: »

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.

Yes I seen that film as well. then there is the let he who as not sinned line and the prodical son line or indeed the devil on the mount line.

The point i would feel is that if the world was full of good men and I am sure women are included then we would still manage to find something to condem. its just human nature.

PeterIanStaker

Don't sack him

Yes, he should indeed be sacked, and the "holy" men who abused children should go to prison or be put up against the wall.

Neither scenario is likely, because the RCC has its own rules that are for its benefit, and its benefit only. They consider themselves above the law because they have both the flock and themselves convinced that a higher power decides these things.

We owe it to the future generations to get the RCC out of the schools.

Joey the lips

PeterIanStaker wrote: »

Yes, he should indeed be sacked, and the "holy" men who abused children should go to prison or be put up against the wall.

Neither scenario is likely, because the RCC has its own rules that are for its benefit, and its benefit only. They consider themselves above the law because they have both the flock and themselves convinced that a higher power decides these things.

We owe it to the future generations to get the RCC out of the schools.

What your saying is they belive in god and you dont.... this is why your thought does not count. You dont support the faith why would you care.

I keep on saying it.

PeterIanStaker

Don't sack him

I care because innocent people have suffered. And youre f***ing right I dont support the "faith".

dr.bollocko

Don't sack him

The_Minister wrote: »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parthenogenesis

Yep.

There are no known cases of naturally occurring mammalian parthenogenesis in the wild. However, in 1936 Gregory Goodwin Pincus reported successfully inducing parthenogenesis in a rabbit

Yep.

Joey the lips

PeterIanStaker wrote: »

I care because innocent people have suffered. And youre f***ing right I dont support the "faith".

Thank you for proving the worthless nature of this thread....


Any one for tennis...

Joey the lips

By the way for the record. I think its a disgrace that you can see who voted what in the pole and so would not take part in such a witch hunt.

Its another side to this childish debate that does actuall piss me off.

Nevyn

So what!
A person can believe that the flying spaghetti monster is their god and have faith in his noodly appendage and still know that the roman catholic church abused it's position and the trust placed in it to teacher and care for children and then did all they did cover it up, and know how wrong it is.

Doesn't matter if you are a member of the church or not, it is an atrocity and the laity needs to demand accountability from the church and those who are not in the church should be asking for the dept of justice to direct the dept of public prosecution to put together files on obstruction of justice asap.

PeterIanStaker

Don't sack him

Joey the lips wrote: »

Thank you for proving the worthless nature of this thread....


Any one for tennis...

and thank you for demonstrating the obstinacy and refusal to see sense that characterises, nay defines, the religious. Dig your own hole.

fontanalis

Joey the lips wrote: »

What your saying is they belive in god and you dont.... this is why your thought does not count. You dont support the faith why would you care.

I keep on saying it.

I think it's covering up for child rapists to protect the churches image he doesn't support.
Keep up the good fight, some day you'll realise they let you down.

uch

Never mind the sack., I'd bet he'd like a bit of tea-bagging

TheZohanS

Don't sack him

Joey the lips wrote: »

By the way for the record. I think its a disgrace that you can see who voted what in the pole and so would not take part in such a witch hunt.

Its another side to this childish debate that does actuall piss me off.

I made that poll, and I alone am responsible for it being public. I figured under the circumstances we should all be promoting transparency.

Dudess

But if he's sacked, he'll be replaced by another pope who'll just do the same as him.

Run_to_da_hills

Don't sack him

The Pope cannot be sacked, he is the appointed "Christs Vicar on Earth",
(Vicarius Fili Dei), Supposing the supreme head of the Christian Church who claims "infallibility". :rolleyes:

Remove that man from his position and some of his fellow officers and the Hierarchy will crumble like an upside down pyramid.

Dudess

Joey, people (generally speaking) are attacking the institution of the catholic church (and with good cause in fairness) not christianity or those who believe in god.
Equally, defending christianity and its followers but also being critical of the catholic church as an organisation, these are not mutually exclusive.

Fear Uladh

Don't sack him

Dudess wrote: »

Joey, people (generally speaking) are attacking the institution of the catholic church (and with good cause in fairness) not christianity or those who believe in god.
Equally, defending christianity and its followers but also being critical of the catholic church as an organisation, these are not mutually exclusive.

Exactly, thats how most level headed people are viewing it, at this stage it is a criminal organisation and should be stopped.

genericguy

Don't sack him

Joey the lips wrote: »

What your saying is they belive in god and you dont.... this is why your thought does not count. You dont support the faith why would you care.

I keep on saying it.

think of it this way - there's a school up the road from you, which your kids attend. the principal has been found to have hidden the fact that the majority of teachers have been systematically raping the arses of all the children in the school for the last ten years. your children were not victims, but your friend's children were.

would you like to see the principal sacked in this situation?

Joey the lips

TheZohan wrote: »

I made that poll, and I alone am responsible for it being public. I figured under the circumstances we should all be promoting transparency.

I totally disagree with you and I am not the one to make you see your error. Its wrong.

Dudess wrote: »

Joey, people (generally speaking) are attacking the institution of the catholic church (and with good cause in fairness) not christianity or those who believe in god.
Equally, defending christianity and its followers but also being critical of the catholic church as an organisation, these are not mutually exclusive.

I agree that this is the way it should be and if you follow the thread deep enough you can read this but a lot of the comments in fact most of the comments are a general attack

For my part I will explain. I think the events of the church is terriable, I think the church is wrong. i think its wrong that priests could beat the living daylights out of us and get away with it. I think it disgraceful as a country we stood by and watched this.

To be its not the church that was wrong but the whole state. I think the failure and the blind nature of the state contrubuted to this abuse.

The church. I believe the church is wrong to not allow priests marry. I believe that this will be the downfall of the church and I believe that this is greed by the church to protect its assets.

However all that being said. I cannot see a point or debalte here and granted it is afterhours. I cannot see a logical look at the church and this is why the debate fails. If people cannot look at the wrongs the failing and analysise it how do we go forward.

i am a catholic I have raised my kids as a catholic. I will ecourage my kids to seek the answers when there time is right but I will protect them and i will search all the answers I need to help my kids as they grow.

Joey the lips

genericguy wrote: »

think of it this way - there's a school up the road from you, which your kids attend. the principal has been found to have hidden the fact that the majority of teachers have been systematically raping the arses of all the children in the school for the last ten years. your children were not victims, but your friend's children were.

would you like to see the principal sacked in this situation?

Has it been proven.... If so I would expect the principle like the pope to be charged. If he is not then gtfo.

moonboy52

Don't sack him

Denial is not just a river in egypt!

landsleaving

Don't sack him

Sack the Pope and hire:

Joey the lips

moonboy52 wrote: »

Denial is not just a river in egypt!

You see what I meen dudess. absolutly no discussion just attack.

and for this poster...

Daniel was its brother.

genericguy

Don't sack him

Joey the lips wrote: »

Has it been proven.... If so I would expect the principle like the pope to be charged. If he is not then gtfo.

ah, the old "bible-basher shuffle"...

you have stated in your last post that you are aware that they value assets more than the flock, hardly an organisation worth basing your life upon. and you blame the state for allowing the abuses to happen. news for you buddy, it wasn't the state that repeatedly raped those children. your faith is misplaced, incorrect and dangerously ignorant.

moonboy52

Don't sack him

"It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." - Carl Sagan

landsleaving

Don't sack him

moonboy52 wrote: »

"It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." - Carl Sagan

Says you pal. Reality blows. I'm off to ride my unicorn across a rainbow. Hi-ho Starlight, away!

moonboy52

Don't sack him

Off you go as long as you do not start a religion based on unicorns that fly over rainbows.

Joey the lips

genericguy wrote: »

ah, the old "bible-basher shuffle"...

you have stated in your last post that you are aware that they value assets more than the flock, hardly an organisation worth basing your life upon. and you blame the state for allowing the abuses to happen. news for you buddy, it wasn't the state that repeatedly raped those children. your faith is misplaced, incorrect and dangerously ignorant.

My faith is not ignorent in fact the opposite by the fact that i am willing to listen and learn. I have learnt nothing new here as of yet.

I did not blame the state I said they had a part to play. can you not see that or do you need specific examples.

My point on the value of assets dates back to the 15th centry i think when the then pope outlawed marriage of priests to protect the churches assets. i have the right to say that is wrong without conceading that the church is finished.

Carry

Don't sack him

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheZohan View Post
I made that poll, and I alone am responsible for it being public. I figured under the circumstances we should all be promoting transparency.

Joey the lips wrote: »

I totally disagree with you and I am not the one to make you see your error. Its wrong.

Why?

Apart from the practicalities that a pope can't be sacked, why not vote/say openly what you believe in? Is it the old established Irish way that you only say what you think behind closed doors or behind someone's back?

The wording of the poll is unfortunate. But basically it asks if you wish the pope to go away or to stay.

I want to point out the case of the chairwoman (!) of the protestant-lutheran church in Germany. Comparable in the hierarchy to cardinal Brady in Ireland.
She was caught drink-driving.
She resigned as principal of the protestant church immediately without pressure because she felt she couldn't be a moral authority anymore. She is right. But her resignment showed that she believes in her own morals.
Which the Roman catholic church obviously doesn't.

moonboy52

Don't sack him

"The believer is happy. The doubter is wise."
- Hungarian proverb

Joey the lips

Carry wrote: »

Why?

Apart from the practicalities that a pope can't be sacked, why not vote/say openly what you believe in? Is it the old established Irish way that you only say what you think behind closed doors or behind someone's back?

The wording of the poll is unfortunate. But basically it asks if you wish the pope to go away or to stay.

I want to point out the case of the chairwomen (!) of the protestant-lutheran church in Germany. Comparable in the hierarchy to cardinal Brady in Ireland.
She was caught drink-driving.
She resigned as principal of the protestant church immediately without pressure because she felt she couldn't be a moral authority anymore. She is right. But her resignment showed that she believes in her own morals.
Which the Roman catholic church obviously doesn't.

You have not followed that part correctly. I questioned why the pole or the vote is not secret. The zohan has said it is because of transparency. I think this bull and helps form a lynch mob towards those that support the pope. What, this would not happen... Just like at the treatment to jakkas on some threads... it happens on boards.

Carry

Don't sack him

Joey the lips wrote: »

My point on the value of assets dates back to the 15th centry i think when the then pope outlawed marriage of priests to protect the churches assets. i have the right to say that is wrong without conceading that the church is finished.

It was 1022 that celibacy became part of canon law.
Learn your history.
Just nitpicking...

genericguy

Don't sack him

Joey the lips wrote: »

My faith is not ignorent in fact the opposite by the fact that i am willing to listen and learn. I have learnt nothing new here as of yet.

I did not blame the state I said they had a part to play. can you not see that or do you need specific examples.

faith by its nature means you are not willing to listen and learn.

and on saying the state had a part to play, let me ask you, who penetrated the boys? because the molestation didn't happen in leinster fcuking house. the state wouldn't have had a part to play if children had not been assaulted in the first place. where is your god when the innocents need protecting? you preaching here about supporting the faith encourages this shyte, and if you can't see that then you are not worth arguing with.

Joey the lips

moonboy52 wrote: »

"The believer is happy. The doubter is wise."
- Hungarian proverb

I can give you a link to a couple of sites with loads of proverbs.... You know its a chinese tradition... proverbs.... its forms part of there belief....

Jesus could you just not use your own words...all that education cost the state a lot.

Joey the lips

genericguy wrote: »

faith by its nature means you are not willing to listen and learn.

and on saying the state had a part to play, let me ask you, who penetrated the boys? because the molestation didn't happen in leinster fcuking house. the state wouldn't have had a part to play if children had not been assaulted in the first place. where is your god when the innocents need protecting? you preaching here about supporting the faith encourages this shyte, and if you can't see that then you are not worth arguing with.

So why are you argueing... Who funded set up and refused to listen to some of the earlier complaints against the church... Yes... the state. Its all there and all on record. Your just to blind to see it. As for the guilty. I never said i supported the guilty. In fact if you follow the thread I said the opposite. However this is a lynching and nothing else.

Carry

Don't sack him

Joey the lips wrote: »

You have not followed that part correctly. I questioned why the pole or the vote is not secret. The zohan has said it is because of transparency. I think this bull and helps form a lynch mob towards those that support the pope. What, this would not happen... Just like at the treatment to jakkas on some threads... it happens on boards.

You'r talking in tongues...

landsleaving

Don't sack him

Joey the lips wrote: »

I can give you a link to a couple of sites with loads of proverbs.... You know its a chinese tradition... proverbs.... its forms part of there belief....

Jesus could you just not use your own words...all that education cost the state a lot.

It's not education, it's called google!

I actually thought that proverb was quite a good one tbh.

/Gets back on unicorn.

Joey the lips

Carry wrote: »

You'r talking in tongues...

Thats exactly what I thought of you but thought it unfair to be critical so tried to point out that your quoting incorrectly. Still confused.... Forget it.

genericguy

Don't sack him

Joey the lips wrote: »

Thats exactly what I thought of you but thought it unfair to be critical so tried to point out that your quoting incorrectly. Still confused.... Forget it.

you're talking sheeeeite sir.

the government may have refused to act on the rapings of children in the care of the church, however, it was the church appointed men that did the raping, under pope after pope who was aware of it. and all under the direct supervision of the current pope who wrote the protocols for the suppression of allegations.

you are a denialist, and i hope you're happy on sunday when you accept your little wafer out of a potential rapist's hand.

Dudess

"Potential rapist" - not necessary, to be fair.

Joey the lips wrote: »

To be its not the church that was wrong but the whole state. I think the failure and the blind nature of the state contrubuted to this abuse.

The state did stand idly by, but the fault ultimately lies with the church - it is 100% accountable. It's not unreasonable to criticise it - practising catholics should realise that.

Carry

Don't sack him

Joey the lips wrote: »

Thats exactly what I thought of you but thought it unfair to be critical so tried to point out that your quoting incorrectly. Still confused.... Forget it.

Good grief. You didn't think anything of me, you're just thinking how to defend the indefendable - and get completely swivelled out of reality.
Do you ever really READ what's said here? Do you ever think before you argue?

Ah well, it's AH after all...

landsleaving

Don't sack him

I can't believe this whole thread has gone by without anyone posting:

Not advocating killing the pope btw, just thought someone would have posted it by now.

Joey the lips

Carry wrote: »

Good grief. You didn't think anything of me, you're just thinking how to defend the indefendable - and get completely swivelled out of reality.
Do you ever really READ what's said here? Do you ever think before you argue?

Ah well, it's AH after all...

i will explain it once more. You took 2 quotes by myself and the zohan where i was critical of his pole and made them into a story that had nothing to do with it... are you with us now.... post no 132 to be exact.

genericguy

Don't sack him

Joey the lips wrote: »

i will explain it once more. You took 2 quotes by myself and the zohan where i was critical of his pole and made them into a story that had nothing to do with it... are you with us now.... post no 132 to be exact.

nobody is with you, you're on another planet ffs.

Joey the lips

Dudess wrote: »

"Potential rapist" - not necessary, to be fair.

The state did stand idly by, but the fault ultimately lies with the church - it is 100% accountable. It's not unreasonable to criticise it - practising catholics should realise that.

I agree. But it is totally unreasonable for athiest and tbh those who dont give a dam about the church on this thread to spead all there time condeming the church without condeming the state.

This is my problem.

For example it was the develara years that mainly saw the abuse in many of these institutions... Has fianna fail ever been critical of this...no.. Why not...

Joey the lips

genericguy wrote: »

nobody is with you, you're on another planet ffs.

Thank you for your generous contrabution....

Carry

Don't sack him

Joey the lips wrote: »

i will explain it once more. You took 2 quotes by myself and the zohan where i was critical of his pole and made them into a story that had nothing to do with it... are you with us now.... post no 132 to be exact.

I wasn't aware that you were critisizing the pole of the Zohan. Is he a pole dancer then? Or what do you mean with the pole of the Zohan? Zohan? ZOHAN???

No, I'm not with you, never will be, thank god (sic!).

Sorry, just getting into AH-drive...
Everything else is too frustrating.

goat2

Don't sack him

Joey the lips wrote: »

I agree. But it is totally unreasonable for athiest and tbh those who dont give a dam about the church on this thread to spead all there time condeming the church without condeming the state.

This is my problem.

For example it was the develara years that mainly saw the abuse in many of these institutions... Has fianna fail ever been critical of this...no.. Why not...

answer
remember the church kept everything within the church, so it did not get out back in the day, the church ruled this country back then,