Fall of the Catholic Church

American here. Parochial school, Catholic girls' high school. In fact, this June is my 50th(!) reunion, and some of us will be attending a brunch and then graduation for the current class of our high school at the Shine of the Immaculate Conception in Washington DC. The elephant in the room is that some of us no longer consider ourselves Catholic. Yeah, I'll attend. But I married a Lutheran and we very happily belong to a Lutheran congregation. One of my best friends from high school will be there and is on the board of her Episcopal church. Another who can't attend because she'll be on a cruise considers herself unaffiliated but posts "namaste" on her FB page a lot. And here in the US, many Catholics show up to mass but are divorced and remarried or contracepting etc. etc.

My wedding was a humanist ceremony 5 years ago, think it was 20/25 mins tops withol our own choice of all readings and music.

The church weddings I've been to in recent years have absolutely dragged on, possibly because the priest is delighted to have an audience to preach to. The music is dire, and I can nearly recite the corinthians by heart as it that same boring reading shows up all the time.

My brother told me he was at a catholic wedding ceremony recently and there were 2 songs to be played while communion was dished out. He said those who took communion were done halfway through the first song so everyone had to sit there twiddling thumbs until the music ended and it felt pretty awkward.

You’ve answered your own question, as I certainly wasn’t offering an opinion on anyone else’s behalf, but rather precisely as you suggested, I was offering my own interpretation of your opinion as an answer to your question. If I’d realised at the time that you were trying to be a smartarse, I wouldn’t have bothered.

Rather than go through each of your beliefs point by point, I’ll simply remind you that your opinions which are based upon your beliefs, preceded the question where you asked how was any of the opinions which you had expressed, dogmatic. Your opinions amount to nothing more than fatalistic argument. They’re not nearly so convincing as you need them to be, never mind that you are of the belief that unless they be imposed upon children, children will inevitably be damaged and unequipped for later life. I say you should be perfectly free to do that for your own children in your own schools, or in schools which espouse your world view.

Your opinions obviously aren’t going to fly and don’t apply to Catholic Education in Catholic schools, and that’s why I suggested that if you were to try and do an end run around the Constitution, it’s been tried already by TDs, and by the NCCA -

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/education/churchs-backlash-blocks-change-in-religion-classes-35249798.html

We’re having the same conversation, it’s just that I’m explaining why, while I don’t care much for your beliefs one way or the other, the fact is that they are never going to be part of any curriculum in Catholic schools, whatever about your beliefs being part of the curriculum in other types of schools, where parents or guardians are still free to withdraw their children from the lesson so that their children are not exposed to your opinions.

The top ranking secondary school in Ireland for the last six years in a row is an all girls Catholic school, with 95% of it’s graduates going on to University -

For six years straight, 2014–2019, The Sunday Times Best Schools Guide ranked Laurel Hill Coláiste FCJ as the top secondary school in Ireland with 95.2% of its students going on to university.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laurel_Hill_Coláiste

Mary Immaculate College, a Roman Catholic Institution with a 95% student retention rate, academically affiliated with the University of Limerick is only a stones throw away from the secondary school -

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Immaculate_College

It’s unlikely that any Irish University will ever appear in the top World rankings, but that has everything to do with the assessment criteria -

Critics argue that rankings can divert universities' attention away from teaching and social responsibility towards the type of scientific research valued by indicators used for ranking exercises. There have also been concerns that by applying a limited set of criteria to world universities, and given the strong desire to feature in the top 200 universities, rankings actually encourage the homogenization of higher education institutions, making them less responsive and less relevant to their immediate contexts. The fact that rankings are also said to favour the advantage enjoyed by the 200 best-ranked institutions has important implications for equity.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/College_and_university_rankings

“Discrimination against girls” is a bit vague tbh, I’ve heard plenty of stories alright from women who attended school in the 80’s and 90’s. I’d say it depends upon who you ask, experiences vary, but Irish schools haven’t been dumbed down to this level at least where girls would experience this sort of discrimination -

https://amp.lbc.co.uk/news/girl-18-driven-out-of-school-for-questioning-transgender-ideology/

If the goal of Irish units is "teaching and social responsibilities" then they should state that up front along with "you'll otherwise get a mediocre education if you attend here." Frankly, saying a uni/college focuses on teaching is well known in the US as a way to excuse poor educational experience. And, again, Irish unis might fare better and their students have better life results if less time were spent prior to Uni on RCC fairy tales. If you dumb down the students the Uni has to dumb down its teaching.

In the US, public schools don't teach religion. Catholic schools are supported by the government only in the sense that they are tax-exempt organizations. Parents pay tuition, the schools or diocese pay the teachers. Students who attend pubic schools can go to religious instruction and preparation for sacraments at their parishes which is usually after school or on Saturday mornings.

I realize that this approach would be a wholesale change of the structure of education in Ireland, but it seems a more rational approach to me.

You're still not telling what my beliefs are. I've simply stated facts.

1. Homosexuality does exist, that is not a belief it is a fact.
2. Ignoring homosexuality in sex education is incorrect as homosexuality exists. This is a fact.
3. Not teaching homosexual children about their sexuality is damaging as it leaves them uneducated about their lives. This is a fact.
4. Not teaching heterosexual children about homosexual people they might know or be related to is damaging as it as it leaves them uneducated about their lives. This is a fact.

Please point out which of the above four items are not facts and specifically how they are actually personal beliefs of mine, should be easy I've broken it down very clearly.

Then after we can cover why you think you should answer for the other poster when I specifically asked them what they meant. I'm curious as to how you can be sure enough to answer for them.

Ranking schools based on numbers going to university is fairly pointless. It measures lots of other things, economic factors, cultural factors, way beyond academic factors. Is university really the best fit for 95% of students?

And don’t believe everything you read on LBC.

Brilliant. Answer for someone else, get it completely wrong, insist black is white, refuse to say way, tell me I'm not engaging honestly.

That's is an amazing stance to take with a straight face, I'll give you that.

I haven’t gotten it completely wrong at all. You appeared to be struggling to understand the very basic idea that people exist who are of the opinion that introducing sex and sexuality to children in schools is simply inappropriate. It was nothing to do with any distinction between teaching children about heterosexuality or homosexuality or anything else. I understand that it isn’t an easy concept to grasp from your position where you’re of the opinion that it is imperative that children understand sex and sexuality from your point of view.

I made an honest attempt to explain why your beliefs were dogmatic, and the reason I referred to them as beliefs is because that’s exactly what they are - YOU believe certain things as though they are inevitable, and on that basis you refer to them as facts. Two or more people being of the same opinion as you are, does not make a belief a fact. Were that argument to hold any water, well what say you if 2 billion people are of the same opinions as each other? I didn’t think it would be fair to you to put you on the spot like that, as you seemed genuinely confused enough already.

I didn’t take the stance you’re claiming I did, I was referring specifically to your stance, and if I were to pick one to argue with, it is your claim that without an education in accordance with your opinions in regards to sex and sexuality, children would inevitably be damaged and would be unequipped for later life. There is simply no way whatsoever that you can make that claim as though it were an incontrovertible fact. It is not a fact.

For one thing, you appear to be overlooking one of the more obvious career choices, though it’s understandable given your stance that children who are not educated in accordance with your opinions, that they will inevitably be damaged and unequipped for later life; it wouldn’t have occurred to you -

https://www.thejournal.ie/maynooth-atmosphere-grindr-poisonous-2911475-Aug2016/

Contrary to your belief, it appears they are well equipped for later life with a higher proportion among the clergy than among the general population, with estimates putting the figures as high as 50% in the US alone -

Studies find it difficult to quantify specific percentages of Roman Catholic priests who have a homosexual orientation (either openly gay or closeted) in the United States. Nevertheless, several studies suggest that the incidence of homosexuality in the Roman Catholic priesthood is much higher than in the general population as a whole. While a Los Angeles Times survey of US priests find that 15% say they are completely or mostly homosexual, estimates of homosexual priests run as high as 50%.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_clergy_in_the_Catholic_Church

Understandably, like most people in polite society, priests too, tend to prefer to be discreet about their sex lives. It’s generally regarded as inappropriate behaviour to be so open about it, and by the time teenagers become adults, they generally understand that nobody wants to hear about their sex life.

No, they're oppressive third world shitholes that just happen to have a lot of money.

I really couldn't give two fúcks what muslims think, if someone is prepared to live by a religion even more ridiculous and rigid than Christianity that's entirely their problem.

Well I was raised a catholic and don't believe in any level in heaven or hell or any of the rest of it, and I'm far from alone.

The deathbed conversion myths are just that, myths the promoters of religion desperately cling on to because it gives them hope that they haven't invested a significant portion of their life in complete and utter bullshit.

Honest question, given all you know about how it has evolved and the utter lack of evidence, do you believe it all? Even half of it? Or do you take it with a pinch of salt but it helps you validate this crazy world and the unknown after death?