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

Paparazzo

Nothingbetter2d wrote: »

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

And isn't it annoying? Now, imagine it was a child pórn website.

ItsNoAlias

The facebook analogy does not really count as when yo are not forced to sign upto them, if you are basptised as a child you have no choice and therefore should be allowed the option to leave, once you become of legal age to do so. Terms and conditions and all that.

starbelgrade

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.

The fact that you do not place any value on freedom as concept and are only concerned with freedom in it's physical forms is all very well if that is what you are happy with, but everyone should have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion as well as their physical freedom.

You can try & write that off as "hyperbolic populist nonsense", but that is really no more than a dismissal, which is an argument put in it's laziest and most ineffective form.

conorhal

UglyBolloxFace wrote: »

Ah there appear to be a problem already - just called a friend who studies law and has a bit of experience with the EU court, and he advised me that before you can take anything to the EU court, all avenues have to be exhausted domestically first.

So I'm going to give the Courts a call tomorrow.

I've been checking the UN website and there appears to be another problem (see picture below)

http://i.imgur.com/PJ7jo.png

The Vatican is not a party to the Convention, and as you will see in the image "...it may be declared inadmissable".

Still gonna write to them though.

I can't help but feel that this kind of narcissistic, obsessive focus by people on the kind of minutiae and irrelevancies that make not a jot of difference to their everyday lives as they choose to live them is why Ireland is the shoite state it is today.
How about getting exercised about something that might actually matter? If you put half as much effort in on behalf of autistic children denied ABA learning or perhaps challenge the states right to impose the crushing debt of irresponsible builders on the general citizenry you might actually acheive something more worthwhile then a smug sense of self-satisfaction?
I give up on this country, I really do.....

MagicSean

starbelgrade wrote: »

The fact that you do not place any value on freedom as concept and are only concerned with freedom in it's physical forms is all very well if that is what you are happy with, but everyone should have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion as well as their physical freedom.

You can try & write that off as "hyperbolic populist nonsense", but that is really no more than a dismissal, which is an argument put in it's laziest and most ineffective form.

None of those freedoms are affected by your name being on a list in the Vatican.

starbelgrade

conorhal wrote: »

I can't help but feel that this kind of narcissistic, obsessive focus by people on the kind of minutiae and irrelevancies that make not a jot of difference to their everyday lives as they choose to live them is why Ireland is the shoite state it is today.
How about getting exercised about something that might actually matter? If you put half as much effort in on behalf of autistic children denied ABA learning or perhaps challenge the states right to impose the crushing debt of irresponsible builders on the general citizenry you might actually acheive something more worthwhile then a smug sense of self-satisfaction?
I give up on this country, I really do.....

If you believe that the will to challenge a fundamental breach of human rights is a narcissistic, smug viewpoint to have, then it really says a lot more about you than it does about the OP.

conorhal

starbelgrade wrote: »

If you believe that a fundamental breach of human rights is a narcissistic, smug viewpoint to have, then it really says a lot more about you than it does about the OP.

If you believe that somebody writing down your name down in a book or irrelevent register with your parents permission is a fundamental breach of human rights, it goes to show how divorced from reality your idea of human rights has become.

Come to think of it, your username now appears quoted in a post that you no doubt vehemently disagree with. Perhaps you should hysterically petition the ECHR to force boards.ie to remove it?
Perhaps you no longer get on with your family, can you petition the ECHR to force them to remove your picture from any family albums?

All I see here, and I say this as a person that hasn't gone to Church since I was a teenager, is a lot of people with a lot of growing up to do. I'm sure that the ECHR has more pressing matters to attend to then the hysterical outrage of internet boardsies.

MagicSean

Has anyone established is there an actual list or just a record of baptisms and last rights?

Lawrence1895

I think, I grew up in a dreamland, when it comes to religion, churches and their influence. In Germany, you have the right to leave your church with 14 years of age...which I did.

But still, as long as people give their silent consent to whatever the dominant religion in their country is, nothing will change

partyatmygaff

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.

The Catholic church has over a billion members. If they had to keep updating people's status at their every change of opinion they'd need an army of people to take care of all the administrative work. There's also the fact that they do not "Rebaptise" people who change their minds after deciding to leave. The most practical solution and most congruent with doctrine would be to consider those who no longer consider themselves to be Catholic to "have strayed from the path but may return".

ItsNoAlias wrote: »

The facebook analogy does not really count as when yo are not forced to sign upto them, if you are basptised as a child you have no choice and therefore should be allowed the option to leave, once you become of legal age to do so. Terms and conditions and all that.

Funnily enough, it does count. Have you never heard of parents making Facebook pages for their sometimes even yet-to-be born children? I have.

starbelgrade wrote: »

The fact that you do not place any value on freedom as concept and are only concerned with freedom in it's physical forms is all very well if that is what you are happy with, but everyone should have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion as well as their physical freedom.

You are free to think, free to have a conscience and free to practice any religion you please. A piece of paper with your name on it does not make you any less free.

You can try & write that off as "hyperbolic populist nonsense", but that is really no more than a dismissal, which is an argument put in it's laziest and most ineffective form.

It's not an argument. All it ever was was a dismissal. I find it almost offensive to consider something this trivial as an affront against your freedom of religion. It is nothing of the sort. A real affront to freedom of thought and religion would be constant governmental persecution and threats of death and violence of the type you may find in Eastern countries whether that be the Middle East or the Far East. They are breaches of human rights. This trivial matter isn't.

dillo2k10

partyatmygaff wrote: »

It's no different to Facebook or even our very own boards.ie

You can never delete your account and completely disassociate yourself. All you can do is ask the administration to close or deactivate your account and just distance yourself from the organisation in question. If it was revealed that Facebook revenue was being used to prop up terrorist groups or something of that nature and you wanted to completely disassociate yourself from Facebook you simply wouldn't be able to.

In any case, if someone really wanted to leave the Catholic church I think conversion to another religion denomination/religion is sufficient to no longer be considered a member.

But once you delete/close your facebook or boards accounts they no longer consider you a member, even if they do still keep some data.

If 150 million people closed their facebook accounts tomorrow then it would be reported that facebook has 650 million users instead of 800million. Where as when you leave the church and you say you arent a member they turn around and say but you are.

starbelgrade

conorhal wrote: »

If you believe that somebody writing down your name down in a book or irrelevent register with your parents permission is a fundamental breach of human rights, it goes to show how divorced from reality your idea of human rights has become.

Apostasy is a formal is the formal disafilliation from or renunciation of a religion by a person, which is recognised as a right under the following international human rights laws:

- Universal Declaration on Human Rights, 1948
- International Convention on Civil & Political Rights, 1966

And also under these laws :

- European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, 1950
- American Convention on Human Rights, 1978

If the concept of apostasy was so divorced from the reality of the idea of human rights, then no doubt it would not protected as a fundamental right by laws.

You also say that the European Court of Human Rights would have more important things to do than deal with the hysterics of people who believe that the right to apostasy should be upheld.

If you believe this to be true, then you really have as little understanding of what the ECHR was set up to do as you do of the concept of human rights and the laws regarding them.

At present, there is a case in the ECHR on this very issue as Turkey have been brought before them for not recognising apostasy as a fundamental human right. Granted, they are guilty of punishing apostates, but the same principal still applies.

starbelgrade

partyatmygaff wrote: »

You are free to think, free to have a conscience and free to practice any religion you please. A piece of paper with your name on it does not make you any less free.

They are breaches of human rights. This trivial matter isn't.

I refer you to my post above.

MagicSean

dillo2k10 wrote: »

But once you delete/close your facebook or boards accounts they no longer consider you a member, even if they do still keep some data.

If 150 million people closed their facebook accounts tomorrow then it would be reported that facebook has 650 million users instead of 800million. Where as when you leave the church and you say you arent a member they turn around and say but you are.

Do they? Since I decided not to be catholic I've never had anyone try tell me I was still a member.

dillo2k10

MagicSean wrote: »

Do they? Since I decided not to be catholic I've never had anyone try tell me I was still a member.

They don't come knocking at you door to remind you, but when there telling the world how great they are because of the amount of followers they are counting you in and if someone wants proof of the amount of followers they would be given a book with you in it.

MagicSean

dillo2k10 wrote: »

They don't come knocking at you door to remind you, but when there telling the world how great they are because of the amount of followers they are counting you in and if someone wants proof of the amount of followers they would be given a book with you in it.

All they have is a record of my baptism. Doesn't bother me. It's a historical event. If someone believes that to be a member list then more fool them. It doesn't affect me. When my brother stopped being catholic he practiced Buddhism. He wasn't prevented from doing that in any way.

conorhal

starbelgrade wrote: »

I refer you to my post above.

And as partyatmygaff pointed out, you haven't been denied that right, whose forcing any kind of religous observance on you? Nobody. Nobody's denying you the right to call yourself what ever you choose to, in fact you can register your chosen set of beliefs in the only place that really matters as to who gets counted as what, in the census.
I could call you a few choice words all over the internet, but if my opinion matters not a jot then what does it really matter in the end? So here it goes (deep breath) Starbelgrade, You great big giant CATHOLIC YOU!!!!! Ultimately uglybollixface's demand is little more relevent then suggesting I delete that last remark.

GrizzlyMan

noxqs wrote: »

Break into church, put this on the speaker system just as the sermon starts:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0PakoE1eBps

Excommunication, win?

Amazing band even better live

starbelgrade

conorhal wrote: »

And as partyatmygaff pointed out, you haven't been denied that right, whose forcing any kind of religous observance on you? Nobody. Nobody's denying you the right to call yourself what ever you choose to, in fact you can register your chosen set of beliefs in the only place that really matters as to who gets counted as what, in the census.
I could call you a few choice words all over the internet, but if my opinion matters not a jot then what does it really matter in the end? So here it goes (deep breath) Starbelgrade, You great big giant CATHOLIC YOU!!!!!

I'm not a catholic as I was never baptised.

However, for those people who were baptised and wish to formally renounce their religion, the fact that the church are effectively blocking them from doing so, is a denial of their rights under international human rights law.

It may not matter to you or to many others, but that's really not the issue at all.

Paparazzo

partyatmygaff wrote: »

The Catholic church has over a billion members. If they had to keep updating people's status at their every change of opinion they'd need an army of people to take care of all the administrative work. There's also the fact that they do not "Rebaptise" people who change their minds after deciding to leave. The most practical solution and most congruent with doctrine would be to consider those who no longer consider themselves to be Catholic to "have strayed from the path but may return".
.

No they don't. Just a letter to your priest and he takes your name off the register, the way it was before they changed canon law

Solair

I think the fact that you can no longer leave the Catholic Church using their own internal rules, does make them rather more cult-like. It's completely ridiculous and probably should be illegal in actual real law. I thought we had data protection law that ensured this kind of thing was not possible?? They're a private organisation in the same way that Tesco is!

Never forget, that despite the Catholic Church's use of the term 'law' in reference to its internal rules, that Canon Law has no more legal standing than the rules of any club or society. They're not 'laws', they're just internal rules for members. The only place they could be considered laws is if you were in the Vatican as it's a theocratic state.

The most important thing is that when it comes to the census that if you are not Catholic (or not any other religion for that matter) that you tick the correct box. The census is the *only* accurate measure of membership of any particular faith group. I find the fact that the data is collected at all a bit odd, but even so, it is used to figure out things like the provision of services as our education system is still stuck in the dark ages.

I filled in the appropriate forms a few years ago and left the Catholic Church. It was rather painless and simple and they were very polite about it. I just got a friendly letter from the Archbishop's office and another friendly hand-written letter from the parish priest in the church I was baptised in. He just said he respected my decision and that he wished me the best of luck with my future.

I don't know the guy at all, so it's possible that that made it a bit easier. It might be more awkward in remote rural areas or places where the local priest might be someone you know quite well / bump into all the time. Or, perhaps not.

Quite honestly, I think the only approach to this is stick to your guns, leave and make that declaration on the census!

I know a few people who do not go to mass ever and will quite openly say they don't even believe in God, yet they will still baptise their kids, do the communion, confirmation etc etc and consider themselves 'culturally catholic'.

Culturally, you're Irish from whatever county/town etc ... I think *some* Irish people really have to grow up a bit. We have an ancient and very rich culture that goes back long before Christianity we really need to stop linking everything to Catholicism which is only a relatively recent arrival in comparison to many aspects of culture on this island.

I also think that the Catholic and Church of Ireland churches in particular are stuck in the middle of what should be actual community services in many areas. In most instances, they are projects that are either state-funded, or funded by contributions of locals and fulfil a practical community purpose. Things like the local schools, the local community halls, etc etc should be *local* town/suburb facilities, not owned by a religious organisation.

I think we need to reinvigorate local communities through things like actual functioning town councils, community organisations etc etc. There was far too much of this controlled by religious organisations in the past.

Nothingbetter2d

Im of the opinion the entire Roman catholic church as an organisation should be banned. Child Pornography is banned because it dangerous to children. A church that actively protects it's own pedophiles is a danger to children and thus should also be banned.

partyatmygaff

starbelgrade wrote: »

I'm not a catholic as I was never baptised.

However, for those people who were baptised and wish to formally renounce their religion, the fact that the church are effectively blocking them from doing so, is a denial of their rights under international human rights law.

It may not matter to you or to many others, but that's really not the issue at all.

"Formally renounce" your religion... If it really mattered to you, go stand in O'Connell Street and get a microphone and say "I formally renounce my religion.". Removing yourself from a probably non-existant "List of members" doesn't mean anything.

Paparazzo wrote: »

No they don't. Just a letter to your priest and he takes your name off the register, the way it was before they changed canon law

What register? I may be wrong but is it not simply just a baptismal register? It wouldn't make any sense to remove your name from a register of baptisms. For one, according to the RCC there is no such thing as "reversing" baptism. Secondly, if you were baptised, that's it. You were baptised and that's a historical fact and your presence on a baptismal register is perfectly valid regardless of your current opinions.

starbelgrade

partyatmygaff wrote: »

"Formally renounce" your religion... If it really mattered to you, go stand in O'Connell Street and get a microphone and say "I formally renounce my religion.". Removing yourself from a probably non-existant "List of members" doesn't mean anything.

What register? I may be wrong but is it not simply just a baptismal register? It wouldn't make any sense to remove your name from a register of baptisms. For one, according to the RCC there is no such thing as "reversing" baptism. Secondly, if you were baptised, that's it. You were baptised and that's a historical fact and your presence on a baptismal register is perfectly valid regardless of your current opinions.

You are missing the point entirely. Whether or not a baptismal record is kept is irrelevant and the suggestion that shouting out an announcement in O'Connell Street is enough is quite frankly an absurd suggestion, though I'm sure you already know that.

The simple fact is that in April last, the Catholic Church modified the Code of Canon Law to remove all references to the act of formal defection which effectively blocks all attempts at people to officially leave their religion.

In doing so, they are contravening all the human rights laws that have been in place in the western world since the 1940s.

This - very simply put - is an affront to the freedom of humans and their rights to choose not to be considered part of a religion if they so wish.

I fail to understand how you cannot grasp the concept that the act of the Church in April, was an attempt to reduce basic human liberties and as such is something that should be stood up to & challenged.

You may not feel that it is an important issue, but that does not mean that it isn't one and the fact that you continue to challenge people who place a higher value on intellectual freedom than you do, has a lot more to say about you than them.

Tayla

MagicSean wrote: »

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.

Why are they morons, just because you say so? I'd rather claim that i'm a Jedi Knight rather than being associated with a church which shields paedophiles.

Tell me one effect that people writing Jedi has on the census and how it negatively interferes with the result?

Seachmall

Tayla wrote: »

Tell me one effect that people writing Jedi has on the census and how it negatively interferes with the result?

If the Dark Side believe we're forming an army of Jedi, as suggested by census numbers, they'll preemptively attack us destroying the world.

MagicSean

Tayla wrote: »

Why are they morons, just because you say so? I'd rather claim that i'm a Jedi Knight rather than being associated with a church which shields paedophiles.

Why would you feel the need to write either.

Tayla wrote: »

Tell me one effect that people writing Jedi has on the census and how it negatively interferes with the result?

It gives an incorrect count of the number of people without a religion.

Seachmall

MagicSean wrote: »

Why would you feel the need to write either.

Why do people spoil votes?

MagicSean

Seachmall wrote: »

Why do people spoil votes?

They think it is recorded in some way. Whereas in reality it's just put in with those who are too stupid to fill out the polling card correctly.

Fremen

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.

I don't think the state knew about the abuse and deliberately covered it up though. If it ever turns out that this is the case, believe me: Heads. Will. Fúcking. Roll.

You can get rid of a government for doing something like that, but the RCC is fundamentally un-democratic.