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

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.

UglyBolloxFace

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

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.

Why do you recognise Catholicism but not Jedi? Why do you see Catholicism as a real religion but basically dismiss Jedi? Who are you to laugh at someone for identifying as Jedi?

Is it because of the power and wealth that the Catholic Church have?

Fundamentally what I'm asking is - who gave Catholicism the right to be a religion but not extend the same right to Jedi?

Catholicism and Jedi are very similar - they are both wholly and completely based on unrealistic fantasy.

oppenheimer1

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.

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.,

You do not have to pay church tax in Germany if you do not want to. If you are not registered as belonging to a church in state records, the same percentage is still taken and given to the State instead afaik. It may even be a higher rate.

There is no evasion.

UglyBolloxFace

partyatmygaff wrote: »

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.

You see, this brings us back to my original point - the Baptism (and the Communion/Confirmation) is the thing that proves you are a Catholic, regardless of whether you practice or not. And regardless of whether you do go to church or not, if you've been baptised, then you pay the church tax, because in the eyes of the Deutsch Government, you are a member of the Catholic Church.

oppenheimer1

UglyBolloxFace wrote: »

Why do you recognise Catholicism but not Jedi? Why do you see Catholicism as a real religion but basically dismiss Jedi? Who are you to laugh at someone for identifying as Jedi?

Is it because of the power and wealth that the Catholic Church have?

Fundamentally what I'm asking is - who gave Catholicism the right to be a religion but not extend the same right to Jedi?

Catholicism and Jedi are very similar - they are both wholly and completely based on unrealistic fantasy.

Its taking the piss because by and large people who put it down are not actually Jedi are they?

People who write that do so to be funny, and stick it to the "Man". Lies corrupt the statistics which are vital to the running of the State. Can you trust a form which has a declaration of truth when an article has knowingly and willingly been filled out incorrectly?

UglyBolloxFace

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

You do not have to pay church tax in Germany if you do not want to. If you are not registered as belonging to a church in state records, the same percentage is still taken and given to the State instead afaik. It may even be a higher rate.

There is no evasion.

You are completely wrong there. Completely wrong..I can further tell by your use of "afaik". Clutching at straws.

Fact: If a person puts down that they are a member of say, the Luther Church, 9% is taken and passed onto that church. If a person, who, like me, has been baptised but puts down "keine Religion" ("no religion") then they are technically, under German Federal Law, engaged in tax evasion and are thus breaking the law.

This conversation is getting slightly off-topic.

UglyBolloxFace

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Its taking the piss because by and large people who put it down are not actually Jedi are they?

People who write that do so to be funny, and stick it to the "Man". Lies corrupt the statistics which are vital to the running of the State. Can you trust a form which has a declaration of truth when an article has knowingly and willingly been filled out incorrectly?

I am glad you have said this, because I can finally say this - by and large, those who put down Catholic are not Catholic either are they? No, they are not. The only reason they put it down is because they've been doing it for years and it just seems like the done thing to do.

It's a dodgy practice and it needs to be stopped.

oppenheimer1

UglyBolloxFace wrote: »

You are completely wrong there. Completely wrong..I can further tell by your use of "afaik". Clutching at straws.

Fact: If a person puts down that they are a member of say, the Luther Church, 9% is taken and passed onto that church. If a person, who, like me, has been baptised but puts down "keine Religion" ("no religion") then they are technically, under German Federal Law, engaged in tax evasion and are thus breaking the law.

This conversation is getting slightly off-topic.

Having looked it up, I can see I was incorrect. Opting to pay (and it is opt-in) often works out as being more tax efficient due to the charity tax relief it opens up.

Church tax is not a true tax per-se, it is monies collected by the state on behalf of churches. The churches pay for this service.

partyatmygaff

UglyBolloxFace wrote: »

You are completely wrong there. Completely wrong..I can further tell by your use of "afaik". Clutching at straws.

Fact: If a person puts down that they are a member of say, the Luther Church, 9% is taken and passed onto that church. If a person, who, like me, has been baptised but puts down "keine Religion" ("no religion") then they are technically, under German Federal Law, engaged in tax evasion and are thus breaking the law.

This conversation is getting slightly off-topic.

If you were actually ever charged with Tax Evasion i'm fairly sure the case would fail if the government failed to prove that you were an active member of the church in question. Your name being on the baptismal records could have been a mistake of some sort for all they know. It would not be unreasonable to suggest that someone who does not go to church or engage in any religious activities is no longer an active member of the Church in question.

TheChizler

UglyBolloxFace wrote: »

This conversation is getting slightly off-topic.

I would argue that we're completely on topic as we're talking about official recognition of a contrived implication of membership.

oppenheimer1

UglyBolloxFace wrote: »

I am glad you have said this, because I can finally say this - by and large, those who put down Catholic are not Catholic either are they? No, they are not. The only reason they put it down is because they've been doing it for years and it just seems like the done thing to do.

It's a dodgy practice and it needs to be stopped.

I agree. If people who put down catholic and are not practising then they have filled out the form incorrectly. It does need to be stopped, and then we might get some true stats on catholics in Ireland.

That said the numbers of practicing catholics can be observed from the numbers attending churches. This then gives us numbers for practising and non practising.

PogMoThoin

I'm glad I'm a Pastafarian, blessed be his noodly goodness, ramen

Tayla

afrodub wrote: »

I really see this a non-issue you don`t go to Mass or attend Church fullstop, so you simply disassociate/ divorce yourself from the RC faith, and that`s the end surely isn`t it.

No, it's not the end of it, he wants to leave, I want to leave, loads of people want to leave. It is definitely not a non issue.
Maybe someone wants to leave because they think it's a disgusting cult?
Or they don't believe in God?
Or maybe they just don't like the priests shoes? It doesn't matter, we should be allowed to leave.

What about someone who was abused as a child by a priest What if they want to leave and they're not allowed, do you think that that is a non issue?

mikemac1 wrote: »

Is there no way to get yourself excommunicated if you cannot leave voluntarily?

Women can get excommunicated by trying to be ordained :rolleyes:

Although i'm pretty sure excommunicated Catholics are still counted as Catholics!

MagicSean wrote: »

It annoys me because it is pointless whinging. Is someone asks if you are a Catholic you say no. On the census you dont put Catholic. You don't donate to the church. You don't practice the religion. You can cry and cry about them having your name on a list of members but in the end it won't change anything because even if this list is destroyed there will always be a record of your baptism into the church.

Maybe you should apply that way of thinking to your comments in the legal discussions forum on people writing Jedi as a religion.

There's no point in you whinging about people claiming that their religion is Jedi!

Irish Steve

mikemac1 wrote: »

Is there no way to get yourself excommunicated if you cannot leave voluntarily?

I wonder if you'd be out on your ear if you sat at the back of the church, and then called out in a Ghostly Voice on the third or fourth repetition of the decade of the Rosary

I heard you the first time

Move on, nothing to be seen here

Celly Smunt

I've always said it,things would be a lot better now if the protestants won.

Hank_Jones

I find it fairly petty of them.

It's almost as if they are trying to consolidate what meagre power they have left by shackling people.

Wondering how much this is about money, that with more people as "part" of the church, they can ask for more government funding or some nonsense.

They probably get feck all from the government, but anyway..

1huge1

Recently emailed my local diocese about leaving the church officially.

Got this reply

Dear Mr. Mitchell,

The procedure regarding formally defecting from the faith is a simple one. Write to the Diocesan Secretary of the diocese of baptism with your relevant details: Name, Address, Date of Birth, Parents’ Names; Parish of Baptism. The Diocesan Secretary would then reply and would process your request. The outcome, if you wished him to proceed, would entail the secretary contacting the Parish Priest of the parish of your baptism and ask him to include an annotation regarding your defection in the baptismal records.

Yours sincerely,

Rev. Nicholas J. Irwin,
Diocesan Secretary.

Lanaier

Forgive me for not reading the whole thread, my view may have already been stated.


People suggest denouncing your faith or baptism, for me that just gives it power, gives it meaning.
Why would I go through some ritual of "denouncing" something that is essentially meaningless to me?

I would simply be giving credence to the idea that baptism has any kind of power, instead of just ignoring it and forgetting about it.

Finally, the idea of guilt by association and comparing to the Nazi party makes no sense.
If you are a member of the Nazi party you are a member to everyone, not so with the RCC, it's only they who deny the truth that you are not one of them.

The rest of the world isn't associating you with the child abuse.

The point is that by having this argument you only give them power, make them matter.
Just ignore them, let it die out quietly and peacefully.

EDIT:
I'm talking specifically on their "claim" on us here.
The influence they have in schools, the abuse etc are other issues - not to be ignored of course.

CliffHuxtabel

Its a violation of my human rights having to look at another stupid thread about the Catholic Church or religion

Overheal

CliffHuxtabel wrote: »

Its a violation of my human rights having to look at another stupid thread about the Catholic Church or religion

actually if anything,

Article 19.

• Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

starbelgrade

Lanaier wrote: »

People suggest denouncing your faith or baptism, for me that just gives it power, gives it meaning.
Why would I go through some ritual of "denouncing" something that is essentially meaningless to me?

I would simply be giving credence to the idea that baptism has any kind of power, instead of just ignoring it and forgetting about it.

The point is that by having this argument you only give them power, make them matter.
Just ignore them, let it die out quietly and peacefully.

If it is not an issue to you, then it is easy enough to ignore it. However, to some people it is & they should be allowed the freedom to leave the church should they so wish.

By ignoring a problem, you don't make it go away & any effort to address this issue doesn't give the church additional power or credence - in fact it is a concerted effort to diminish the control it has over the citizens of the state.

If the church is to die out, it is a grave mistake to believe that it will do so peacefully & quietly. For generations, it has fought tooth and nail in this country to fight any moves to separate the church from the state & to secularise our society. The church thrives on authority & always has done. If the move to "opt out" was not perceived as a threat to this authority, then there would be no issue & they would not have moved to block it by altering their canon laws.

This issue is an issue of freedom and as a concept, freedom is one of the most important things there is in life. Not being allowed to remove oneself from the church may only be in reality a type of freedom that exists only in the perception or notion of freedom, but by no means does that make it any less important than freedom of the physical kind.

MagicSean

Tayla wrote: »

No, it's not the end of it, he wants to leave, I want to leave, loads of people want to leave. It is definitely not a non issue.
Maybe someone wants to leave because they think it's a disgusting cult?
Or they don't believe in God?
Or maybe they just don't like the priests shoes? It doesn't matter, we should be allowed to leave.

What about someone who was abused as a child by a priest What if they want to leave and they're not allowed, do you think that that is a non issue?





Women can get excommunicated by trying to be ordained :rolleyes:

Although i'm pretty sure excommunicated Catholics are still counted as Catholics!



Maybe you should apply that way of thinking to your comments in the legal discussions forum on people writing Jedi as a religion.

There's no point in you whinging about people claiming that their religion is Jedi!

Yes there is. The census provides a break down of the population. Some moron putting Jedi as their religion interferes with the results of the census. People are sometimes too stupid to see what effects this has.

Paparazzo

mikemac1 wrote: »

Is there no way to get yourself excommunicated if you cannot leave voluntarily?

You have to kick the bishop in the arse

partyatmygaff

starbelgrade wrote: »

If the church is to die out, it is a grave mistake to believe that it will do so peacefully & quietly. For generations, it has fought tooth and nail in this country to fight any moves to separate the church from the state & to secularise our society. The church thrives on authority & always has done. If the move to "opt out" was not perceived as a threat to this authority, then there would be no issue & they would not have moved to block it by altering their canon laws.

How exactly does someone's name being present on a baptismal register give the RCC "authority" over them? It sounds too much like hyperbolic populist nonsense.

As for the Church fighting tooth and nail to fight any moves to "secularise our society" I would personally commend them rather than condemn them, as would many others (And I'm not even Catholic nor agree with many of the RCC's decisions). As for the Church being separate from the state, I don't really think that's an issue. The current government don't seem to get on with the RCC.

This issue is an issue of freedom and as a concept, freedom is one of the most important things there is in life. Not being allowed to remove oneself from the church may only be in reality a type of freedom that exists only in the perception or notion of freedom, but by no means does that make it any less important than freedom of the physical kind.

If you never knew your name was on a piece of paper in an office somewhere, would you still call yourself unfree? No offense but get a grip. To start waffling on about this being a fight for freedom when there are millions of far worse injustices going on right around you is ridiculous. A person in debt to a bank paying back money for a house worth 1/4 of their mortgage for the next 30 years of their life is unfree. A person falsely imprisoned for a crime they did not commit is not free. A person living in a police state like North Korea suffering God-knows-what injustices is not free. A person who was sold in to slavery in a third world country is not free.

A person whose name just so happens to be on a baptismal register somewhere but feels that this is somehow an affront to their freedom is nothing but someone needing a good dose of perspective.

MagicSean

UglyBolloxFace wrote: »

You are completely wrong there. Completely wrong..I can further tell by your use of "afaik". Clutching at straws.

Fact: If a person puts down that they are a member of say, the Luther Church, 9% is taken and passed onto that church. If a person, who, like me, has been baptised but puts down "keine Religion" ("no religion") then they are technically, under German Federal Law, engaged in tax evasion and are thus breaking the law.

This conversation is getting slightly off-topic.

Actually I would say this is the topic. If being on the list in the Vatican has a financial consequence then there is merit in wanting to be removed from it.

Rabidlamb

Is there any loopholes here to be exploited.
Could I ordain the missus as a priest or something ?.
Think I read once that kiddy fiddling is grounds for excommunication, ironic.

Nothingbetter2d

UglyBolloxFace wrote: »

Like a lot of people in our little country, I was baptised as a child. And for the communion and confirmation - I only did this for the money.

Looking back on it, they are the three biggest mistakes of my life. I no longer want to be a part of this disgusting organisation, and as such I want to leave.

Countmeout.ie, a website dedicated to helping people leave the church, was a great thing for people like me. But no, I am unable to leave because the church changed the 'Canon Law' which governs this stuff (because people were leaving in their droves), and this led to the countmeout website becoming defunct, in a sense. So technically, in their eyes, I am a catholic forever.

Freedom of Religion is a a fundamental human right. But how am I supposed to exercise this right if I am being forced to remain a member of the catholic church against my will? What right do the church have to do this to me and countless others?

Would I have a case in the EU Court? - i.e. the catholic church forcing me to remain a member of their sect and therefore infringing on my human right of freedom of religion? If so, how would I go about it?

I know I probably won't get the serious answers here in AH, but I think there will be some people out there in the same position as me, and I'd like to hear from them suggestions etc.

i hearby baptise you a free man... go forth and live life to its fullest

Paparazzo

partyatmygaff wrote: »

How exactly does someone's name being present on a baptismal register give the RCC "authority" over them? It sounds too much like hyperbolic populist nonsense.

As for the Church fighting tooth and nail to fight any moves to "secularise our society" I would personally commend them rather than condemn them, as would many others (And I'm not even Catholic nor agree with many of the RCC's decisions). As for the Church being separate from the state, I don't really think that's an issue. The current government don't seem to get on with the RCC.


If you never knew your name was on a piece of paper in an office somewhere, would you still call yourself unfree? No offense but get a grip. To start waffling on about this being a fight for freedom when there are millions of far worse injustices going on right around you is ridiculous. A person in debt to a bank paying back money for a house worth 1/4 of their mortgage for the next 30 years of their life is unfree. A person falsely imprisoned for a crime they did not commit is not free. A person living in a police state like North Korea suffering God-knows-what injustices is not free. A person who was sold in to slavery in a third world country is not free.

A person whose name just so happens to be on a baptismal register somewhere but feels that this is somehow an affront to their freedom is nothing but someone needing a good dose of perspective.

If it's as meaningless as you say, why don't the church just remove names? I think it's more the principle of it. The rule changes in the church so you can't take your name off is trolling athiests imho.

Nothingbetter2d

Paparazzo wrote: »

If it's as meaningless as you say, why don't the church just remove names? I think it's more the principle of it. The rule changes in the church so you can't take your name off is trolling athiests imho.

ive found many a website where taking your email address off their spam list is equally as difficult.