Violation of Human Rights? - Not being able to leave the Catholic Church

oppenheimer1

UglyBolloxFace wrote: »

So losing 50 Euro on a bet is a greater mistake to you than getting yourself into a seemingly lifelong membership with the cult that is the Roman Catholic Church?

That is astounding.

I will no longer be reading your posts after reading the above. Words fail me - your priorities are as messed up as the Church's.

Yes I would because my relationship with the church was easily (and has been) terminated. No longer going is good enough for me.

It doesn't matter what list my name appears on as actions speak louder than words.

MagicSean

UglyBolloxFace wrote: »

You all appear to becoming side-tracked. Child abuse is not the only reason I want to leave this church - the fact that I find the idea of an almighty BEARDED BLOKE IN THE FUCKING SKY watching over us offensive and disgusting is a big factor in my stance here.

I will never understand religion nor religious people. While I do of course respect their right to worship and believe in whomever they want, they will not and have no right to trap me into being a member of their cult.

So why are you giving them so much recognition and status

UglyBolloxFace

MagicSean wrote: »

So why are you giving them so much recognition and status

Don't you realise what I am trying to do - I am trying to remove this "status and recognition" by fully removing my name from their database.

As has been mentioned already by Starbelgrade and others, if the catholic church had nothing to fear and if people leaving the church was not a problem to them, then they wouldn't have removed the option to leave the church.

MagicSean

You are simply validating the control they claim over your life.

KeithAFC

UglyBolloxFace wrote: »

Don't you realise what I am trying to do - I am trying to remove this "status and recognition" by fully removing my name from their database.

As has been mentioned already by Starbelgrade and others, if the catholic church had nothing to fear and if people leaving the church was not a problem to them, then they wouldn't have removed the option to leave the church.

Become an Atheist Protestant...:pac:

Overheal

MagicSean wrote: »

You are simply validating the control they claim over your life.

It really doesn't matter what reasons an individual has for choosing to remove themselves from an organization. Who are you to criticize them? The only point being made here is that he has a fundamental right to do so, whether you agree with his reasons for doing so or not.

carfiosaoorl

Yahew wrote: »

True there are two arguments here. Should he have the right to renounce Catholicism. Answer: yes.

Should he also renounce Irish citizenship. Answer: yes.

Are you saying those things go hand in hand

starbelgrade

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

You've lived a privileged life if these three ceremonies are genuinely the three biggest mistakes of your life.

Or do you just simply thrive on hyperbole, like I suspect?

To deny someone their basic human rights is a very serious issue. No-one is comparing this to the likes of slavery or torture, but that does not mean that it is not important.

To not treat this as a serious issue & to say that the OP is exaggerating is akin to saying that a person who is mugged should consider themselves lucky that they were never raped.

The degrees for the severity of crimes are usually reflected in the punishment, however, in the eyes of the law, a crime is a crime regardless of the severity.

The same principal applies to breaches of human rights and the Catholic Church's clear refusal to allow people the freedom to choose whether or not they belong to their organisation is clearly a breach of the very founding principals of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

MagicSean

Overheal wrote: »

It really doesn't matter what reasons an individual has for choosing to remove themselves from an organization. Who are you to criticize them? The only point being made here is that he has a fundamental right to do so, whether you agree with his reasons for doing so or not.

What fundamental right? At worst they are in breach of data protection laws. But seeing as how they are their own country there is nothing you can really do about that.

timesnap

In fact it is the Catholic church's fault that they will not allow a person to leave.
it claims that all popes are descendants of Peter whom if one is to believe the bible said Christ appointed him as the one to be Gods rep on earth,asking peter to build his church upon this rock.
Christ never said it was compulsory to either join or leave that church.

even if Jesus was not the son of god the CC twisted everything it is believed he said to suit its own dubious agenda.

carfiosaoorl

starbelgrade wrote: »

To deny someone their basic human rights is a very serious issue. No-one is comparing this to the likes of slavery or torture, but that does not mean that it is not important.

To not treat this as a serious issue & to say that the OP is exaggerating is akin to saying that a person who is mugged should consider themselves lucky that they were never raped.

The degrees for the severity of crimes are usually reflected in the punishment, however, in the eyes of the law, a crime is a crime regardless of the severity.

The same principal applies to breaches of human rights and the Catholic Church's clear refusal to allow people the freedom to choose whether or not they belong to their organisation is clearly a breach of the very founding principals of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

I just had to thank this twice.

Yahew

carfiosaoorl wrote: »

Are you saying those things go hand in hand

Oh, FFS. If he wants to leave the Catholic Church because of abuse he should also forgo his citizenship because of the abuse. The State had final custodial responsibility for the care of those children.

Overheal

MagicSean wrote: »

What fundamental right? At worst they are in breach of data protection laws. But seeing as how they are their own country there is nothing you can really do about that.

Perhaps you didn't read the thread?

http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Article 18.

• Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

Article 20.

• (1) Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.
• (2) No one may be compelled to belong to an association.

PREAMBLE

Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,

Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,

Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,

Whereas it is essential to promote the development of friendly relations between nations,

Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,

Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in co-operation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms,

Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of the greatest importance for the full realization of this pledge,

Now, Therefore THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY proclaims THIS UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction.

starbelgrade

MagicSean wrote: »

What fundamental right? At worst they are in breach of data protection laws. But seeing as how they are their own country there is nothing you can really do about that.

The freedom to leave or discontinue membership in a religion or religious group —in religious terms called "apostasy"—is a fundamental part of religious freedom, covered by Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Yahew

starbelgrade wrote: »

The freedom to leave or discontinue membership in a religion or religious group —in religious terms called "apostasy"—is a fundamental part of religious freedom, covered by Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Probably those rights apply to countries, not to the data records of the Churches. Mormons baptise people after birth.

( Not that the universal declaration means anything anyway - in many countries apostasy is punishable by the State and the penalty is death).

UglyBolloxFace

MagicSean wrote: »

What fundamental right? At worst they are in breach of data protection laws. But seeing as how they are their own country there is nothing you can really do about that.

We'll see about that - I am determined to take this to court.

Overheal

Yahew wrote: »

Probably those rights apply to countries, not to the data records of the Churches.

When those data records are being brandished as proof and metric of your membership to their association, then yes, it's a very real violation of your Article 20 human rights. Whats more, they are using that data to their political advantage.

timesnap

Yahew wrote: »

The State had final custodial responsibility for the care of those children.

Spot on Yahew,the state was happy to turn the blind eye to what was going on and every word of Irelands Constitution was sent for approval to the CC before being included.

oppenheimer1

Overheal wrote: »

Perhaps you didn't read the thread?

http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Article 18.

• Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

Article 20.

• (1) Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.
• (2) No one may be compelled to belong to an association.

PREAMBLE
.........

A religion is not legally an association afaik - Article 20 is more about trade unions and political movements.

The RCC rules do not infringe on Article 18.

UglyBolloxFace

Yahew wrote: »

Oh, FFS. If he wants to leave the Catholic Church because of abuse he should also forgo his citizenship because of the abuse. The State had final custodial responsibility for the care of those children.

Read back on my other posts - I've already told you that the abuse is not the only reason I want to leave. I'm not reiterating here, again, so go back and find them if you're interested.

Yahew

UglyBolloxFace wrote: »

We'll see about that - I am determined to take this to court.

The only case you have is an organisation is keeping you on the books when you wanted out, possibly a data protection violation but nothing to do with the ( generally ignored) Universal Declaration.

Can you take Facebook to court too?

Or did they change that?

Yahew

UglyBolloxFace wrote: »

Read back on my other posts - I've already told you that the abuse is not the only reason I want to leave. I'm not reiterating here, again, so go back and find them if you're interested.

It seemed to be the major reason. Then you lost that argument and moved the goalposts. Until then there were allegories about the Nazi party making you a member, etc.

UglyBolloxFace

I think my main stumbling block may be the fact that the Vatican doesn't seem to recognise the Declaration of Human Rights:rolleyes:

So I'm going to have to find a way around that. Maybe by taking them to court via Ireland? I don't know. If there are any lawyers here with any input to give, let me know please.

Overheal

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

A religion is not legally an association afaik - Article 20 is more about trade unions and political movements.

The RCC rules do not infringe on Article 18.

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

Try again?

UglyBolloxFace

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

A religion is not legally an association afaik - Article 20 is more about trade unions and political movements.

The RCC rules do not infringe on Article 18.

They do violate Article 18 (Freedom of Religion).

Yahew

Overheal wrote: »

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

Try again?

Whats a specific French law gotta do with the Universal Declaration.

UglyBolloxFace

Yahew wrote: »

The only case you have is an organisation is keeping you on the books when you wanted out, possibly a data protection violation but nothing to do with the ( generally ignored) Universal Declaration.

Can you take Facebook to court too?

Or did they change that?

I have no issue with Facebook - they didn't harbour paedophiles nor do they expect me to believe in a bearded fairy in the sky.

Yahew

UglyBolloxFace wrote: »

They do violate Article 18 (Freedom of Religion).

Only States can do that. (And, by the way, plenty do despite the Universal Declaration, written as it happens, when more than half the world lived in dictatorships. The UD has an advisory role only).

The Irish State is not stopping you changing your religion, nor is the Catholic Church - you can become a muslim. All that's happening is the Catholic church is not allowing you to remove your name from their DB.

Which is wrong, but not a huge deal.

oppenheimer1

Overheal wrote: »

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

Try again?

A badly written wikipedia article that appears to be about France is not a great source.

What is an association in Irish law? Anyway does in matter when the UDoHR only applies to States?

UglyBolloxFace

Yahew wrote: »

It seemed to be the major reason. Then you lost that argument and moved the goalposts. Until then there were allegories about the Nazi party making you a member, etc.

I moved no goalposts. The fact of the matter is: the State does not try to prevent me from renouncing my citizenship. Whereas the church does stop me from renouncing their cult-like faith.

Now do you understand?

carfiosaoorl

Yahew wrote: »

Oh, FFS. If he wants to leave the Catholic Church because of abuse he should also forgo his citizenship because of the abuse. The State had final custodial responsibility for the care of those children.

He never said he wants to leave because of abuse and either way why should he give up his citizenship over what one government did. I am a citizen of Ireland I am loyal to this land not whatever government who happens to runs it or make the laws at this time.

Overheal

Yahew wrote: »

Only States can do that. (And, by the way, plenty do despite the Universal Declaration, written as it happens, when more than half the world lived in dictatorships. The UD has an advisory role only).

The Irish State is not stopping you changing your religion, nor is the Catholic Church - you can become a muslim. All that's happening is the Catholic church is not allowing you to remove your name from their DB.

Which is wrong, but not a huge deal.

To you. They use that data to influence Ireland politically.

partyatmygaff

UglyBolloxFace wrote: »

Do you suggest that US citizens should renounce their citizenship because of the Iraq War, because of the Contra debacle? Or how about the Waco Siege, whereby the State are believed to have been party to it.

Be realistic - if I were to renounce my citizenship, I would be stateless. How is that going to help?

Who's speaking in hyperbole now?

Should all Catholics worldwide renounce their religion and convert to another denomination just because a minute number (Out of the billions of Catholics that have ever lived) just so happened to be child abusers / cover up child abuse? Regardless of how high up someone in an organisation is they should not be able to taint the organisation as a whole. If I was a Catholic I would not renounce my religion but I would try and right the wrongs in its organisation.

UglyBolloxFace

carfiosaoorl wrote: »

He never said he wants to leave because of abuse and either way why should he give up his citizenship over what one government did. I am a citizen of Ireland I am loyal to this land not whatever government who happens to runs it or make the laws at this time.

That's a great point.

oppenheimer1

Overheal wrote: »

To you. They use that data to influence Ireland politically.

Its up to the State to recognise the data as spurious and not be influenced by it.

All sorts of organisations use fantasy statistics. Even our own government when it suits.

UglyBolloxFace

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Its up to the State to recognise the data as spurious and not be influenced by it.

All sorts of organisations use fantasy statistics. Even our own government when it suits.

Going around in circles here, but here goes - the government allow us an opt-out, but the church does not. That is it simply put.

UglyBolloxFace

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Should all Catholics worldwide renounce their religion and convert to another denomination just because a minute number (Out of the billions of Catholics that have ever lived) just so happened to be child abusers / cover up child abuse? Regardless of how high up someone in an organisation is they should not be able to taint the organisation as a whole. If I was a Catholic I would not renounce my religion but I would try and right the wrongs in its organisation.

As I've already mentioned several times now, the abuse is only one of many reason I want to leave. The other main reasons are the fact that I do not believe in this "God" they speak of, and I do not like being forced to be a member of an organisation, especially one I find so disgusting.

partyatmygaff

Overheal wrote: »

Article 18.

• Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

The thing is... do the Catholic church actually prevent you from changing your religion?

Sindri

starbelgrade wrote: »

The freedom to leave or discontinue membership in a religion or religious group —in religious terms called "apostasy"—is a fundamental part of religious freedom, covered by Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Ah yeah, but as UglyBolloxFace already pointed out the Vatican does not need to comply to that, and for obvious (relevant) reasons they opted out.

So morally yes he certainly has the right, but legally no.

He can't force the Church to comply to that, and the way the church has gone, I'm sorry to say, he will not.

MagicSean

Overheal wrote: »

To you. They use that data to influence Ireland politically.

How? We have our own more accurate list of the religious make-up of the country. Granted, there are more Jedi in the country than one might think but the census gives a genuine view of how many Catholics there are.

oppenheimer1

carfiosaoorl wrote: »

He never said he wants to leave because of abuse and either way why should he give up his citizenship over what one government did. I am a citizen of Ireland I am loyal to this land not whatever government who happens to runs it or make the laws at this time.

It wasn't one government, it was many governments. And these covered the entire political spectrum.

You cannot be loyal to a State if you are not loyal to the institutions that run the State.

OP only opened this thread to have a good Catholic bash, which is in vogue at the moment. Fair enough. However when the hypocrisy of not wanting to treat the other organisation (i.e. the State) with the same contempt for the same wrong doing is annoying. At least be consistent.

starbelgrade

Yahew wrote: »

Oh, FFS. If he wants to leave the Catholic Church because of abuse he should also forgo his citizenship because of the abuse. The State had final custodial responsibility for the care of those children.

While it is true that the State had final custodial responsibility for the care of those children, it is also true that the influence of the Catholic Church over the State has been huge - so huge, that back then, almost all the children in care were under the direct care of the Church.

They abused this power to a point beyond belief - not alone in the abuse of the children but in their subsequent cover-ups and denial.

It is almost unfathomable that now - the organisation that directly caused this abuse - are in direct control of 93% of our schools and have a significant influence not only over what is taught to the majority of our children, but to who they choose to teach to.

If this were not significant enough reason for not wanting to be listed as part of the Catholic Church, then I don't know what is.

No-one is denying that the State failed in their responsibilities to care for children, but that is not a good reason to renounce citizenship. You don't simply walk away from a problem like that - you change how the state operates, by pushing for changes in legislation on issues of child care & by making your government responsible for these issues.

It is equally as important that if you wish to remove the influence of the Church from the State & want to move towards a secular society, that at the very least you can express your will to leave their organisation.

And for me, it is also very important that if the Church is not removed from the control of our schools, that at the very least the State provides an alternative to Church run schools for every citizen who does not wish their child to be educated under their doctrine.

It's very easy to blame the State as if the State is some uncontrollable third party.. but let us not forget that the state is not the government - they are simply the legislators and arbitrators. We, the people are the State and the ultimate responsibilty for how this country is run and the extent of influence which the Church has over how it is run is and should be down to us.

TheChizler

One issue that hasn't been addressed here is that, is there even a register or list of members at all? Can you imagine the administrative difficulties in auditing that list every year? Cross-referencing birth certs against death records throughout different parishes in different countries in order to produce an up to date list would clearly be an impossible task. Defections, which are only comments on the baptism cert and 5 minutes of a priest's time, would furher complicate the process. If a membership list were created on the basis of baptism records alone it would be an ever increasing list, in the 10s of millions in Ireland. Surely a more practical approach would be to use already existing census figures, or even mass attendance figures.

That aside, in order to be officially considered a Catholic don't you have to follow the 5 Precepts of the Church? Confession once a year etc? If you don't follow these, in their eyes you can't be a Catholic.

However the thing I'd put it most down to is that it's a matter of belief. There is no way you can be considered a Catholic if you yourself don't believe you are one. Same goes if you are a non-believer. I don't consider myself a member of any religion, and I don't see how anyone can claim otherwise, apart from some Mormons, but they don't know me. Nobody can force you to believe something you don't. Surely believing that you can't leave the church is giving them the power over you that you were looking to escape in the first place?

To answer your question, I don't believe the Church are contravening this particular article. The right to freedom of religion lies solely with the individual, the only person who can stop you practicing, in private, is yourself.

timesnap

Can anybody clarify where the Universal law of human rights came from?
The Wiki article is fairly unclear other than vague reference's to France.

this is the problem sometimes on boards when a user choose's not to include country of their birth.

i have said in an earlier post that Irelands Constitution was sent line by line to the leading Catholic church figures for approval before Devalera would include it in the draft.

this type of issue varies so much by Country.

thanks

oppenheimer1

MagicSean wrote: »

How? We have our own more accurate list of the religious make-up of the country. Granted, there are more Jedi in the country than one might think but the census gives a genuine view of how many Catholics there are.

Jedi was not counted on the census last time. The last thing the CSO want are people taking the piss with an expensive survey. Anyone who puts down a non-specified religion will be considered "Other" and statistic reported as such.

I'd actually like people who take the piss with the census to be prosecuted.

partyatmygaff

UglyBolloxFace wrote: »

As I've already mentioned several times now, the abuse is only one of many reason I want to leave. The other main reasons are the fact that I do not believe in this "God" they speak of, and I do not like being forced to be a member of an organisation, especially one I find so disgusting.

Well, no one is really forcing you to believe in God nor to be an active member of the organisation. No one sensible could possibly associate with you with the Catholic church regardless of what the RCC have on file. Your opinion on the organisation nullifies the link imo.

starbelgrade

timesnap wrote: »

Can anybody clarify where the Universal law of human rights came from?

It was adopted by the UN Assembly after the Second World War .

Sindri

TheChizler wrote: »

One issue that hasn't been addressed here is that, is there even a register or list of members at all? Can you imagine the administrative difficulties in auditing that list every year? Cross-referencing birth certs against death records throughout different parishes in different countries in order to produce an up to date list would clearly be an impossible task. Defections, which are only comments on the baptism cert and 5 minutes of a priest's time, would furher complicate the process. If a membership list were created on the basis of baptism records alone it would be an ever increasing list, in the 10s of millions in Ireland. Surely a more practical approach would be to use already existing census figures, or even mass attendance figures.

That aside, in order to be officially considered a Catholic don't you have to follow the 5 Precepts of the Church? Confession once a year etc? If you don't follow these, in their eyes you can't be a Catholic.

However the thing I'd put it most down to is that it's a matter of belief. There is no way you can be considered a Catholic if you yourself don't believe you are one. Same goes if you are a non-believer. I don't consider myself a member of any religion, and I don't see how anyone can claim otherwise, apart from some Mormons, but they don't know me. Nobody can force you to believe something you don't. Surely believing that you can't leave the church is giving them the power over you that you were looking to escape in the first place?

To answer your question, I don't believe the Church are contravening this particular article. The right to freedom of religion lies solely with the individual, the only person who can stop you practicing, in private, is yourself.

I would be pretty certain there is in each parish/diocese.

People don't actually no this, which is amazing, but the Pope doesn't run the church (the lizard people do!!!)

But in all seriousness bureaucrats have a huge amount of influence in the Vatican hierarchy.

And some of the more liberal positions the church may have held, they don't, as they are getting a huge amount of converts in North America for their positions.

UglyBolloxFace

TheChizler wrote: »

One issue that hasn't been addressed here is that, is there even a register or list of members at all? Can you imagine the administrative difficulties in auditing that list every year? Cross-referencing birth certs against death records throughout different parishes in different countries in order to produce an up to date list would clearly be an impossible task. Defections, which are only comments on the baptism cert and 5 minutes of a priest's time, would furher complicate the process. If a membership list were created on the basis of baptism records alone it would be an ever increasing list, in the 10s of millions in Ireland. Surely a more practical approach would be to use already existing census figures, or even mass attendance figures.

That aside, in order to be officially considered a Catholic don't you have to follow the 5 Precepts of the Church? Confession once a year etc? If you don't follow these, in their eyes you can't be a Catholic.

However the thing I'd put it most down to is that it's a matter of belief. There is no way you can be considered a Catholic if you yourself don't believe you are one. Same goes if you are a non-believer. I don't consider myself a member of any religion, and I don't see how anyone can claim otherwise, apart from some Mormons, but they don't know me. Nobody can force you to believe something you don't. Surely believing that you can't leave the church is giving them the power over you that you were looking to escape in the first place?

To answer your question, I don't believe the Church are contravening this particular article. The right to freedom of religion lies solely with the individual, the only person who can stop you practicing, in private, is yourself.

Well put it this way, and this is only an example: in Germany there is a church tax, whereby workers pay 9% of their income tax (that is, 9% of the income tax they are liable for) to the church. This is taken out of their wage packet and sent directly to the church.

Now, if a person has been baptised (like me) starts working in Germany, but that person wants nothing to do with the church (again like me), and they put down on their tax form that they have no religion, they are technically engaged in tax evasion under German Federal Law.

Now, do you think this is fair? If that person wants to leave the church, regardless of the reason why they dislike the church, shouldn't they be allowed to? Why should they be, firstly, forced into remaining a member of an organisation they don't want to be a member of, and secondly, forced to pay hard-earned money from their salary to this same church?

This infuriates me.,

partyatmygaff

UglyBolloxFace wrote: »

Well put it this way, and this is only an example: in Germany there is a church tax, whereby workers pay 9% of their income tax (that is, 9% of the income tax they are liable for) to the church. This is taken out of their wage packet and sent directly to the church.

Now, if a person has been baptised (like me) starts working in Germany, but that person wants nothing to do with the church (again like me), and they put down on their tax form that they have no religion, they are technically engaged in tax evasion under German Federal Law.

That wouldn't actually happen though, would it? All you would need to do is ask the government to prove you're an actual practicing Catholic and that your presence wasn't just a clerical error or something of that sort. They'd check your local diocese and when no one recognises you or knows you it'll become obvious that you're not actually a Catholic.