Mark your diaries! Pope Frank coming to Ireland - August 2018

recedite

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

forgiveness does not come so easy and to show that we stand by those who suffered.

It does to RCC, sure they officially dispense it.
Report to your nearest confession box for daring to question this.

An_Toirpin

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

An_Toirpin wrote: »

It is beyond doubt that the Pope will acknowledge Irish clerical abuse. All the signals are there and it will one of the many apologies that have been made. I dont  know if he will visit Tuam, I hope he doesnt though, as it is a scandal concocted out of nothing by bigots. Read more about Tuam before throwing it around like it means something.

All the signals are where?  How do you know what the pope will say.

Catherine Corless is a bigot is she? :pac: Perhaps you need to educate yourself on Tuam.  The dislike of the Catholic Church for a lot of people has nothing to do with bigotry, the Catholic Church are victims of nothing more than the criminal acts of their own organisation.

I didn't say she was. The Tuam thing is so disingenuous. No one bats an eye lid that babies remains are burned to heat hospitals in the UK in recent years, here what is accused to have happened at Tuam 70 years is unescapable like it was a genocide in out midst. There is no evidence of any law being broken at Tuam. All record keeping was in proper order and there is no evidence of murder. There is good evidence that the graves were marked at ground level (until the council removed it) and they probably were respectfully buried too in a crypt and not a functioning sewer but that remains very unclear. The only real concern is if there was wilful medical negligence. There may have been but it is not necessarily the case and given the time passed it is so incredibly overblown.

Hannibal_Smith

An_Toirpin wrote: »

I didn't say she was. The Tuam thing is so disingenuous. No one bats an eye lid that babies remains are burned to heat hospitals in the UK in recent years, here what is accused to have happened at Tuam 70 years is unescapable like it was a genocide in out midst. There is no evidence of any law being broken at Tuam. All record keeping was in proper order and there is no evidence of murder. There is good evidence that the graves were marked at ground level (until the council removed it) and they probably were respectfully buried too in a crypt and not a functioning sewer but that remains very unclear. The only real concern is if there was wilful medical negligence. There may have been but it is not necessarily the case and given the time passed it is so incredibly overblown.

You said Tuam is:-

is a scandal concocted out of nothing by bigots

As Catherine Corless is the person who fought to bring Tuam to light, is she not the person you are claiming concocted it? Therefore is she amongst the bigots you refer to? In fact her initial work was largely ignored initially.

I don't know why you're linking an article about something that happened in the UK? What has that got to do with the Pope coming to Ireland?

I never said anyone murdered anyone in Tuam. The issue with Tuam is with children being dumped in unmarked graves in a space that was used as a septic tank. I personally wouldn't define this as burying the children 'respectfully', but that's your own business really.

Tuam is not the main issue here. We can pick a number of different towns and villages that were decimated by what the Catholic Church did for the Pope to visit, if you'd prefer?

An_Toirpin

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

An_Toirpin wrote: »

I didn't say she was. The Tuam thing is so disingenuous. No one bats an eye lid that babies remains are burned to heat hospitals in the UK in recent years, here what is accused to have happened at Tuam 70 years is unescapable like it was a genocide in out midst. There is no evidence of any law being broken at Tuam. All record keeping was in proper order and there is no evidence of murder. There is good evidence that the graves were marked at ground level (until the council removed it) and they probably were respectfully buried too in a crypt and not a functioning sewer but that remains very unclear. The only real concern is if there was wilful medical negligence. There may have been but it is not necessarily the case and given the time passed it is so incredibly overblown.

You said Tuam is:-

is a scandal concocted out of nothing by bigots

As Catherine Corless is the person who fought to bring Tuam to light, is she not the person you are claiming concocted it?  Therefore is she amongst the bigots you refer to?  In fact her initial work was largely ignored initially.

I don't know why you're linking an article about something that happened in the UK?  What has that got to do with the Pope coming to Ireland?

I never said anyone murdered anyone in Tuam.  The issue with Tuam is with children being dumped in unmarked graves in a space that was used as a septic tank.  I personally wouldn't define this as burying the children 'respectfully', but that's your own business really.

Tuam is not the main issue here.  We can pick a number of different towns and villages that were decimated by what the Catholic Church did for the Pope to visit, if you'd prefer?

Corless said the graves were marked. Her language was actually far more moderate than some of the unhinged stuff that has been said. I have sen claims of murder in many places infact.A lot of it is total faux outrage. It is a real shame as it deflects from actual abuse that happened.
What do you mean towns and villages that were decimated by what the Catholic Church did?

Odhinn

An_Toirpin wrote: »

It is beyond doubt that the Pope will acknowledge Irish clerical abuse. All the signals are there and it will one of the many apologies that have been made. I dont know if he will visit Tuam, I hope he doesnt though, as it is a scandal concocted out of nothing by bigots. Read more about Tuam before throwing it around like it means something.

I have to presume this is taking the piss.

An_Toirpin

Odhinn wrote: »

An_Toirpin wrote: »

It is beyond doubt that the Pope will acknowledge Irish clerical abuse. All the signals are there and it will one of the many apologies that have been made. I dont  know if he will visit Tuam, I hope he doesnt though, as it is a scandal concocted out of nothing by bigots. Read more about Tuam before throwing it around like it means something.

I have to presume this is taking the piss.

Do you really think the mass graves that you would find on the grounds of any older hospital or prison is any better?

Hannibal_Smith

An_Toirpin wrote: »

Corless said the graves were marked. Her language was actually far more moderate than some of the unhinged stuff that has been said. I have sen claims of murder in many places infact.A lot of it is total faux outrage. It is a real shame as it deflects from actual abuse that happened.
What do you mean towns and villages that were decimated by what the Catholic Church did?

You are twisting yourself round in circles. In fact the only faux outrage is coming from you. If Tuam is so irrelevant, why are you going to such great lengths to discuss it? It was one word in my post and that some how makes me similar to Trump?

I never mentioned murder, never made an accusation of it. I think the crimes that have been committed by members of the church are disgusting enough as they are without any false accusations needed. You can throw as many smoke screens as you like, but the rape and abuse that went on was scandalous. As I've said (I think a few times in this thread now), it is not a mystery why so many people have turned their back on the church, and that is the church's own doing. I find it strange that you would find that thinking similar to Trump?

An_Toirpin

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

An_Toirpin wrote: »

Corless said the graves were marked. Her language was actually far more moderate than some of the unhinged stuff that has been said. I have sen claims of murder in many places infact.A lot of it is total faux outrage. It is a real shame as it deflects from actual abuse that happened.
What do you mean towns and villages that were decimated by what the Catholic Church did?

You are twisting yourself round in circles.  In fact the only faux outrage is coming from you.  If Tuam is so irrelevant, why are you going to such great lengths to discuss it?  It was one word in my post and that some how makes me similar to Trump?

I never mentioned murder, never made an accusation of it.  I think the crimes that have been committed by members of the church are disgusting enough as they are without any false accusations needed.  You can throw as many smoke screens as you like, but the rape and abuse that went on was scandalous.  As I've said (I think a few times in this thread now), it is not a mystery why so many people have turned their back on the church, and that is the church's own doing.  I find it strange that you would find that thinking similar to Trump?

I felt the need to mention Tuam as it is been so heavily mentioned and that includes this thread. I agree there were terrible crimes committed by clerics and they should be centre stage, not Tuam.
I mentioned Trump as the way the church is described as some kind of foreign distant corporation-like entity is very misleading and it resembles the sort of paranoid Trump rhetoric about the mythical deep state. It is much easier to describe the situation in this way than to accept the uncomfortable truth that church abuse and cover-up was entirely done by Irish people in a broad array of institutions who we all have connections too.

Hannibal_Smith

An_Toirpin wrote: »

I felt the need to mention Tuam as it is been so heavily mentioned and that includes this thread. I agree there were terrible crimes committed by clerics and they should be centre stage, not Tuam.
I mentioned Trump as the way the church is described as some kind of foreign distant corporation-like entity is very misleading and it resembles the sort of paranoid Trump rhetoric about the mythical deep state. It is much easier to describe the situation in this way than to accept the uncomfortable truth that church abuse and cover-up was entirely done by Irish people in a broad array of institutions who we all have connections too.

What else is religion, if it is not an organization? It is a group of people of similar intent grouping together, with one common goal, to meditate or pray or whatever. It is arrogant, in my opinion, to believe any religion should be valued by everyone. To me, it is a club of people with a common interest, is it not?

I am not sure how you can say the bit in bold, when earlier in your post you admit that there were 'terrible crimes committed by clerics and they should be centre stage'. I never made Tuam centre stage btw, that was yourself. Those 'terrible crimes', committed by priests, who were held in such high regard in Irish society and supposed to be a beacon of honesty and goodness, is the reason why I would rather the pope wasn't coming.

Zubeneschamali

Odhinn wrote: »

I have to presume this is taking the piss.

I'm quite happy to see defenders of the Church say in public that Tuam was grand.


It's a reminder that things have not changed in some poeple's heads.

Hotblack Desiato

The church's worst enemies are its own defenders...

Mark Hamill

An_Toirpin wrote: »

I have sen claims of murder in many places infact.A lot of it is total faux outrage. It is a real shame as it deflects from actual abuse that happened.

Murder is what happened, in quite a lot of the cases.
From the article reference by Cabaal in the Tuam thread we find that out of the 796 recorded deaths in Tuam, that 221 were recorded as either "debility" (193), "congenital idiot" (14) or starvation (14). How does a cared for baby die of starvation? Or from "debility" or from being a "congenital idiot", whatever that means? They don't. They are let die, they were starved to death, or killed through inattention.
That is straight up murder. And why? Well, we know that all of these homes were selling babies to "good catholic" families abroad, what do you think they do to the babies they can't sell? The sickly or disabled ones (read: costly to care for)?

Then you have all of the death certificates that were issued "some time" after the actual deaths of the child, by a doctor who was told the cause because he never saw or treated the child (Of course, the Home collected capitation for the dead child up to the point the certificate was actually issued). In fact, there is no evidence that the doctor was present at any death at all. Sure, how could he be? The 50% death rate in the home was perfectly normal according to him (a point he used to assure the homes Board when they complained about the cost of keeping the kids alive until 15). A rational person might question why the death rate was upwards of 4 or 5 times the national average.

Tuam was a for-profit venture that had no problem with hundreds of babies dying if it meant more profit. You might argue about some of the cases, you might argue the semantics of whether allowing a baby to die for money is even killing. You won't get far. Causing a death for financial gain is murder.

Mark Hamill

An_Toirpin wrote: »

Do you really think the mass graves that you would find on the grounds of any older hospital or prison is any better?

Ah yes, a mass grave with potentially up to* 796 babies and conjectured whataboutery is what we get in return.


*I wouldn't be surprised if the actual number in the grave is less, they had to hide the exported adoptions somehow.

recedite

Mark Hamill wrote: »

Murder is what happened, in quite a lot of the cases.
From the article reference by Cabaal in the Tuam thread we find that out of the 796 recorded deaths in Tuam, that 221 were recorded as either "debility" (193), "congenital idiot" (14) or starvation (14). How does a cared for baby die of starvation? Or from "debility" or from being a "congenital idiot", whatever that means? They don't. They are let die, they were starved to death, or killed through inattention.
That is straight up murder. And why? Well, we know that all of these homes were selling babies to "good catholic" families abroad, what do you think they do to the babies they can't sell? The sickly or disabled ones (read: costly to care for)?

Then you have all of the death certificates that were issued "some time" after the actual deaths of the child, by a doctor who was told the cause because he never saw or treated the child (Of course, the Home collected capitation for the dead child up to the point the certificate was actually issued). In fact, there is no evidence that the doctor was present at any death at all. Sure, how could he be? The 50% death rate in the home was perfectly normal according to him (a point he used to assure the homes Board when they complained about the cost of keeping the kids alive until 15). A rational person might question why the death rate was upwards of 4 or 50 times the national average.

Tuam was a for-profit venture that had no problem with hundreds of babies dying if it meant more profit. You might argue about some of the cases, you might argue the semantics of whether allowing a baby to die for money is even killing. You won't get far. Causing a death for financial gain is murder.

These are valid points, and should be researched further (for posterity and history).
But... murder is not the appropriate term here, and more than it is for a modern abortion. Also the fact that all these deaths were well documented is at odds with the general (ill informed) perception that the nuns were trying to hide those deaths.
Also the septic tank thing is a bit of a red herring, in that it seems very unlikely that the place used to inter the human remains was in use as a septic tank at the time.
Whereas the aborted human remains going into a modern UK hospital CHP unit (combined heat and power) is something that does not seem to bother a lot of those who complain bitterly about those nuns in the past.


IMO some things never change. Society will always value some individuals more than others, although the criteria will change down through the ages.
And when you are dead, it doesn't matter a whole lot where your remains end up.

Mark Hamill

recedite wrote: »

These are valid points, and should be researched further (for posterity and history).

They should investigated and prosecuted to the full ability of the law.

recedite wrote: »

But... murder is not the appropriate term here, and more than it is for a modern abortion.

You lost the referendum, get over it.

recedite wrote: »

Also the fact that all these deaths were well documented is at odds with the general (ill informed) perception that the nuns were trying to hide those deaths.

Read Cabaals link. The deaths were all recorded after the fact. The doctor signing off did not treat a single child and was not present at a single time of death. They told the doctor the cause, he did not observe or determine it. Real easy way to hide murders, no? Nice way to hide babies you've sold too.

recedite wrote: »

Whereas the aborted human remains going into a modern UK hospital CHP unit (combined heat and power) is something that does not seem to bother a lot of those who complain bitterly about those nuns in the past.

Whataboutery.
Also, you lost the referendum, get over it.
Also, the use of biological waste matter after the abortion of what many see as decidedly not a human, is obviously not going to be viewed in the same way as how born children were allowed die and unceremoniously treated afterwards (by those who supposedly proclaim great importance to how the dead should be treated).

For someone who supposedly cares so much about abortion, why does the abortion of nearly 800 born lives not bother you?

Hannibal_Smith

recedite wrote: »

Also the septic tank thing is a bit of a red herring, in that it seems very unlikely that the place used to inter the human remains was in use as a septic tank at the time.

It was never claimed to be in use at the time. From my recollection all the news reports called it a disused septic tank

Does that make it more palatable to some?

Odhinn

An_Toirpin wrote: »

Do you really think the mass graves that you would find on the grounds of any older hospital or prison is any better?

....well they'd be graves, which is one or three steps up from where they were placed in Tuam. That's before we get into the horrifically high death rate, due to indifference, ignorance and malpractice by both the order and the accompanying state employed doctor.

Odhinn

recedite wrote: »

These are valid points, and should be researched further (for posterity and history).
But... murder is not the appropriate term here, and more than it is for a modern abortion. Also the fact that all these deaths were well documented is at odds with the general (ill informed) perception that the nuns were trying to hide those deaths.
Also the septic tank thing is a bit of a red herring, in that it seems very unlikely that the place used to inter the human remains was in use as a septic tank at the time.
Whereas the aborted human remains going into a modern UK hospital CHP unit (combined heat and power) is something that does not seem to bother a lot of those who complain bitterly about those nuns in the past.


IMO some things never change. Society will always value some individuals more than others, although the criteria will change down through the ages.
And when you are dead, it doesn't matter a whole lot where your remains end up.

I heartily apologise. I had forgotten the high status disused septic tanks enjoy as burial places.

An_Toirpin

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

An_Toirpin wrote: »

I felt the need to mention Tuam as it is been so heavily mentioned and that includes this thread. I agree there were terrible crimes committed by clerics and they should be centre stage, not Tuam.
I mentioned Trump as the way the church is described as some kind of foreign distant corporation-like entity is very misleading and it resembles the sort of paranoid Trump rhetoric about the mythical deep state. It is much easier to describe the situation in this way than to accept the uncomfortable truth that church abuse and cover-up was entirely done by Irish people in a broad array of institutions who we all have connections too.

What else is religion, if it is not an organization?  It is a group of people of similar intent grouping together, with one common goal, to meditate or pray or whatever.  It is arrogant, in my opinion, to believe any religion should be valued by everyone.  To me, it is a club of people with a common interest, is it not?

I am not sure how you can say the bit in bold, when earlier in your post you admit that there were 'terrible crimes committed by clerics and they should be centre stage'.  I never made Tuam centre stage btw, that was yourself.  Those 'terrible crimes', committed by priests, who were held in such high regard in Irish society and supposed to be a beacon of honesty and goodness, is the reason why I would rather the pope wasn't coming.

Terrible things happened. That doesnt m ean everything that happened was terrible. It is so factual wrong to liken Tuam to say abuse by Brendan Symth or Letterfrack.

An_Toirpin

Mark Hamill wrote: »

recedite wrote: »

These are valid points, and should be researched further (for posterity and history).

They should investigated and prosecuted to the full ability of the law.

recedite wrote: »

But... murder is not the appropriate term here, and more than it is for a modern abortion.

You lost the referendum, get over it.

recedite wrote: »

Also the fact that all these deaths were well documented is at odds with the general (ill informed) perception that the nuns were trying to hide those deaths.

Read Cabaals link. The deaths were all recorded after the fact. The doctor signing off did not treat a single child and was not present at a single time of death. They told the doctor the cause, he did not observe or determine it. Real easy way to hide murders, no? Nice way to hide babies you've sold too.

recedite wrote: »

Whereas the aborted human remains going into a modern UK hospital CHP unit (combined heat and power) is something that does not seem to bother a lot of those who complain bitterly about those nuns in the past.

Whataboutery.
Also, you lost the referendum, get over it.
Also, the use of biological waste matter after the abortion of what many see as decidedly not a human, is obviously not going to be viewed in the same way as how born children were allowed die and unceremoniously treated afterwards (by those who supposedly proclaim great importance to how the dead should be treated).

For someone who supposedly cares so much about abortion, why does the abortion of nearly 800 born lives not bother you?

The lack of moral consistency displayed here is staggering. So I should more concerned by the unintended deaths of hundrds unwanted babies in the 1940s than the intended deaths of thousands unwantd babies in 2018. Right.

An_Toirpin

Mark Hamill wrote: »

recedite wrote: »

These are valid points, and should be researched further (for posterity and history).

They should investigated and prosecuted to the full ability of the law.

recedite wrote: »

But... murder is not the appropriate term here, and more than it is for a modern abortion.

You lost the referendum, get over it.

recedite wrote: »

Also the fact that all these deaths were well documented is at odds with the general (ill informed) perception that the nuns were trying to hide those deaths.

Read Cabaals link. The deaths were all recorded after the fact. The doctor signing off did not treat a single child and was not present at a single time of death. They told the doctor the cause, he did not observe or determine it. Real easy way to hide murders, no? Nice way to hide babies you've sold too.

recedite wrote: »

Whereas the aborted human remains going into a modern UK hospital CHP unit (combined heat and power) is something that does not seem to bother a lot of those who complain bitterly about those nuns in the past.

Whataboutery.
Also, you lost the referendum, get over it.
Also, the use of biological waste matter after the abortion of what many see as decidedly not a human, is obviously not going to be viewed in the same way as how born children were allowed die and unceremoniously treated afterwards (by those who supposedly proclaim great importance to how the dead should be treated).

For someone who supposedly cares so much about abortion, why does the abortion of nearly 800 born lives not bother you?

The lack of moral consistency displayed here is staggering. So I should more concerned by the unintended deaths of hundrds unwanted babies in the 1940s than the intended deaths of thousands unwantd babies in 2018. Right.

An_Toirpin

Mark Hamill wrote: »

An_Toirpin wrote: »

I have sen claims of murder in many places infact.A lot of it is total faux outrage. It is a real shame as it deflects from actual abuse that happened.

Murder is what happened, in quite a lot of the cases.
From the article reference by Cabaal in the Tuam thread we find that out of the 796 recorded deaths in Tuam, that 221 were recorded as either "debility" (193), "congenital idiot" (14) or starvation (14). How does a cared for baby die of starvation? Or from "debility" or from being a "congenital idiot", whatever that means? They don't. They are let die, they were starved to death, or killed through inattention.
That is straight up murder. And why? Well, we know that all of these homes were selling babies to "good catholic" families abroad, what do you think they do to the babies they can't sell? The sickly or disabled ones (read: costly to care for)?

Then you have all of the death certificates that were issued "some time" after the actual deaths of the child, by a doctor who was told the cause because he never saw or treated the child (Of course, the Home collected capitation for the dead child up to the point the certificate was actually issued). In fact, there is no evidence that the doctor was present at any death at all. Sure, how could he be? The 50% death rate in the home was perfectly normal according to him (a point he used to assure the homes Board when they complained about the cost of keeping the kids alive until 15). A rational person might question why the death rate was upwards of 4 or 50 times the national average.

Tuam was a for-profit venture that had no problem with hundreds of babies dying if it meant more profit. You might argue about some of the cases, you might argue the semantics of whether allowing a baby to die for money is even killing. You won't get far. Causing a death for financial gain is murder.

To be frank, inferring murder is really faulty reasoning. From your comment I can tell you dont have a medical background. There are many ways which a baby can die from starvation while still being being fed, and the risk of this before modern medicine. Such causes could be bowel obstruction, celiac diease, cystic fibrosis, childhood cancers, heart defects from birth. These all occurr all the time and only in recent decades are treatable. Like wise with illnesses described as debility. The reality is a large amount of those causes are probably incorrect and it is mostly acute infectious diseases. For most of the duration of the Tuam facility celiac diease was not uet discovered. the death rate varied considerable but anyup to 50 % was common before modern medicine. That figure is deeply upsetting reading to a modern auidence but it is reality so inferring unhygenic conditions and substandard medical care is reasonable but murder is absurd.
The article you linked mixes facts with wild allegations with no evidence like 

Fraud was the norm rather than the exception.

Mark Hamill wrote: »

An_Toirpin wrote: »

I have sen claims of murder in many places infact.A lot of it is total faux outrage. It is a real shame as it deflects from actual abuse that happened.

Murder is what happened, in quite a lot of the cases.
From the article reference by Cabaal in the Tuam thread we find that out of the 796 recorded deaths in Tuam, that 221 were recorded as either "debility" (193), "congenital idiot" (14) or starvation (14). How does a cared for baby die of starvation? Or from "debility" or from being a "congenital idiot", whatever that means? They don't. They are let die, they were starved to death, or killed through inattention.
That is straight up murder. And why? Well, we know that all of these homes were selling babies to "good catholic" families abroad, what do you think they do to the babies they can't sell? The sickly or disabled ones (read: costly to care for)?

Then you have all of the death certificates that were issued "some time" after the actual deaths of the child, by a doctor who was told the cause because he never saw or treated the child (Of course, the Home collected capitation for the dead child up to the point the certificate was actually issued). In fact, there is no evidence that the doctor was present at any death at all. Sure, how could he be? The 50% death rate in the home was perfectly normal according to him (a point he used to assure the homes Board when they complained about the cost of keeping the kids alive until 15). A rational person might question why the death rate was upwards of 4 or 50 times the national average.

Tuam was a for-profit venture that had no problem with hundreds of babies dying if it meant more profit. You might argue about some of the cases, you might argue the semantics of whether allowing a baby to die for money is even killing. You won't get far. Causing a death for financial gain is murder.

To be frank, inferring murder is really faulty reasoning. From your comment I can tell you dont have a medical background. There are many ways which a baby can die from starvation while still being being fed, and the risk of this before modern medicine. Such causes could be bowel obstruction, celiac diease, cystic fibrosis, childhood cancers, heart defects from birth. These all occurr all the time and only in recent decades are treatable. Like wise with illnesses described as debility. The reality is a large amount of those causes are probably incorrect and it is mostly acute infectious diseases. For most of the duration of the Tuam facility celiac diease was not yet discovered. the death rate varied considerable and often was at more regular levels but anything up to 50 % was common in institutions before modern medicine. That figure is deeply upsetting reading to a modern auidence but it is reality so inferring unhygenic conditions and substandard medical care is reasonable but murder is absurd.

The article you linked mixes facts with wild allegations with no evidence like 

Fraud was the norm rather than the exception.

Odhinn

An_Toirpin wrote: »

To be frank, inferring murder is really faulty reasoning. From your comment I can tell you dont have a medical background. There are many ways which a baby can die from starvation while still being being, and the risk of this before modern medicine. Such causes could be bowel obstruction, celiac diease, cystic fibrosis, childhood cancers, heart defects from birth. These all occurr all the time and only in recent decades are treatable. For most of the duration of the Tuam facility celiac diease was not uet discovered. the death rate varied considerable but anyup to 50 % was common before modern medicine. That figure is deeply upsetting reading to a modern auidence but it is reality so inferring unhygenic conditions and substandard medical care is reasonable but murder is absurd.
The article you linked mixes facts with wild allegations with no evidence like

The death rate was nowhere near 50% in the rest of the state during that period.

splinter65

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

My hope that everyone who attends will have a safe and happy event? You can't rob me or them of that but let's be realistic here. If 1% of attendees have a medical issue, that's 6000 people. All EDs in the Dublin region combined can't cope with that. There will be an over-representation of pensioners among those attending, you can't deny that. They will have to walk several kilometres from where their bus is parked to the event, sit there for hours, then walk several kilometres back. I hope (for their sake) that religious zeal does not override the actual ability of senior citizens to overcome these physical challenges.

The levels of self delusion in this post are almost off the scale. It’s hard to know where to begin. You do know that the organizers of this event have organized similar events previously and I don’t believe very many people died?!?
Actually what I think you should do hotblack, considering your rather touching concern for event goers, is volunteer your services as a steward?

splinter65

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Most of 'em already have bus passes...

You keep telling yourself that.

Hannibal_Smith

An_Toirpin wrote: »

Terrible things happened. That doesnt m ean everything that happened was terrible. It is so factual wrong to liken Tuam to say abuse by Brendan Symth or Letterfrack.

I didn't liken Tuam to anything...as far as I recall? Things can be terrible in their own independent right. They don't stop being terrible because something else is worse.

smacl

An_Toirpin wrote: »

The reality is a large amount of those causes are probably incorrect and it is mostly acute infectious diseases. For most of the duration of the Tuam facility celiac diease was not uet discovered.

Do you have any references for the above? Specifically the assertion that Tuam had coeliac disease above the national average or this had ever even been measured? Similarly, for bowel obstruction, cystic fibrosis, childhood cancers, heart defects, etc... to be a significant factor, they would have to be more prevalent than national averages at that time. Uncontrolled spread of infectious diseases on the other hand would very much be associated with poor hygiene and poor medical practice. Without plausible references, you're assertions seem not so much 'reality' as rather fanciful imagination from bias.

recedite

Mark Hamill wrote: »

read Cabaals link. The deaths were all recorded after the fact. The doctor signing off did not treat a single child and was not present at a single time of death. They told the doctor the cause, he did not observe or determine it. Real easy way to hide murders, no? Nice way to hide babies you've sold too.

I'd be more concerned if the deaths were recorded "before the fact ";)

Seriously there is absolutely nothing wrong with a doctor issuing a death cert for somebody who is already dead.
When you call it murder or selling babies, without even a jot of evidence to back up these allegations, you display ignorance and you defame others who are no longer around to defend themselves.
Unfortunately, defamation is commonplace on this forum.

Mark Hamill wrote: »

Whataboutery.
Also, you lost the referendum, get over it.
Also, the use of biological waste matter after the abortion of what many see as decidedly not a human, is obviously not going to be viewed in the same way as how born children were allowed die and unceremoniously treated afterwards (by those who supposedly proclaim great importance to how the dead should be treated).

"Biological waste matter" by your rules, but unborn human beings according to other peoples rules.


Also according to RCC rules, AFAIK, there was a thing that unbaptised infants would not be buried inside a normal consecrated graveyard, hence the preponderance of "raheen" infant cemeteries around the countryside.
And burial in an underground tomb or crypt was considered posh at the time ( a method often used by the landed gentry).
In other countries (Rome) there are extensive catacombs which were used for burials by early Christians. All things considered, if the remains were interred respectfully in an underground tomb that may or may not have been part of an earlier and disused sewer network, I'd consider that a reasonable and practical solution under the circumstances.

An_Toirpin

Odhinn wrote: »

An_Toirpin wrote: »

To be frank, inferring murder is really faulty reasoning. From your comment I can tell you dont have a medical background. There are many ways which a baby can die from starvation while still being being, and the risk of this before modern medicine. Such causes could be bowel obstruction, celiac diease, cystic fibrosis, childhood cancers, heart defects from birth. These all occurr all the time and only in recent decades are treatable. For most of the duration of the Tuam facility celiac diease was not uet discovered. the death rate varied considerable but anyup to 50 % was common before modern medicine. That figure is deeply upsetting reading to a modern auidence but it is reality so inferring unhygenic conditions and substandard medical care is reasonable but murder is absurd.
The article you linked mixes facts with wild allegations with no evidence like

The death rate was nowhere near 50% in the rest of the state during that period.

The 50 % figure is stat cherry picking. I understand the average at Tuam 31.6% and other homes had far lower rates around 15%. In Dublin inner city you had periods exceeding 15%. Don't get me wrong, even one child dying due to overcrowding is tragic and if I was alive at the time I would do my utmost to reduce it but a sense of proportionality is totally lost. I hope you spend as much time worrying about present day cases of medical neglience. No one would bat an eye lid about Tuam if it not seen as a Catholic issue. The proof of this is the total radio silence on the awful abuses that went on psychiatric hospitals until very recently or the workhouse predecessors of the mother and baby homes. Criticism of Catholicism in Ireland centres on sex. Thus human reproduction and Tuam is just the lastest fruit of this national neurosis.

An_Toirpin

smacl wrote: »

An_Toirpin wrote: »

The reality is a large amount of those causes are probably incorrect and it is mostly acute infectious diseases. For most of the duration of the Tuam facility celiac diease was not uet discovered.

Do you have any references for the above?  Specifically the assertion that Tuam had coeliac disease above the national average or this had ever even been measured?  Similarly, for bowel obstruction, cystic fibrosis, childhood cancers, heart defects, etc... to be a significant factor, they would have to be more prevalent than national averages at that time.  Uncontrolled spread of infectious diseases on the other hand would very much be associated with poor hygiene and poor medical practice.  Without plausible references, you're assertions seem not so much 'reality' as rather fanciful imagination from bias.

There is just so many reasons why something like that can happen. Quoting a medic friend below:

Anything causing lack of appetite which for babies, could be anything like chronic pain, or increased in use of energy. congenital (cerebral palsy, cystic fibrosis, Hirschsprung disease, congenital heart diseases), infectious (E coli, salmonella etc etc).

Yes by modern standards terrible hygene and potentially poor by those of a good hoispital in that era.