The abuse of children by the Catholic church

[jake]

Endemic.

This along with forgiveness from mosques about abuse of children is it time we banned any involvement of religious cults with children ?

 

Yea I've just watched Spotlight .

[jake]

Funny how it's only brown skin that draws anger and not children skin from the the usual posters.

It's not about race.

And you do have to wonder how it's always the elite who are most involved.

Or does that make me a tinfoil nut.

 

 

 

[Sharpie]

In my experience pedophiles come from all classes, colors, races, religions, of course some gain more availability because of their care, custody or control of the victims. It is a despicable practise whomever the perpetrator, and can illicit anger and or violence in persons discovering the act, or finding a victim. The lifetime reaction and physchological damage to a young victim can be extreme, and in some cases has  caused this victim themselves to also in adult life become a predator. I would think it may be a stretch to suggest that the elite are more directed to this action than any other class.

I am not sure I understand your point about brown skin, I think though  in the type of society you and I have been raised in the color of a victim or a perpetrators skin would have no affect on our immediate response to the action if witnessed in progress. I can assure you from personal experience, the anger is instant as is prohibitive response.

[ri Alban]

Better add the BBC, WM, and the Entertainment Industry to the list.

[Boris]

6 hours ago, jake said:

Funny how it's only brown skin that draws anger and not children skin from the the usual posters.

It's not about race.

And you do have to wonder how it's always the elite who are most involved.

Or does that make me a tinfoil nut.

 

 

 

 

I don't think anyone has said it's about race, have they?

 

I'm surprised Yaxley-Lennon's cohorts haven't been all over this, given they are the defenders of the people and good yeoman stock etc etc.

 

Point regards organised religion and link to abuse of kids is fair though.  Was just reading the other day about the now defunct Jesus Army.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48447066

 

Vile persons, taking advantage of those less fortunate, offering love and peace, but administering violence and abuse.

 

What is as equally savage is the inability of organisations to take responsibility for the actions of those working in their name.

[Justin Z]

 

 

7 hours ago, jake said:

Funny how it's only brown skin that draws anger and not children skin from the Yaxley-Lennon brigade.

They make it about race.

 

Fixed that, jake, but good on you for noticing the disconnect regardless.

 

As for the elite, while they might do it too, it's a universal problem. It's just that they have the means to . . . make an industry of it, as revolting as that is.

And some of the world's most elite are tightly wound up with organised religion . . . so you get what you get.

[Ray Gin]

See thousands of bones have been uncovered at the King of the Paedos' home (the Vatican) during the search for a missing teenager?

Squeaky bum time for the Catholic Church.

 

[Homme]

5 hours ago, ri Alban said:

Better add the BBC, WM, and the Entertainment Industry to the list.

 

and Celtic FC.

[Homme]

2 hours ago, Boris said:

 

I don't think anyone has said it's about race, have they?

 

I'm surprised Yaxley-Lennon's cohorts haven't been all over this, given they are the defenders of the people and good yeoman stock etc etc.

 

Point regards organised religion and link to abuse of kids is fair though.  Was just reading the other day about the now defunct Jesus Army.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48447066

 

Vile persons, taking advantage of those less fortunate, offering love and peace, but administering violence and abuse.

 

What is as equally savage is the inability of organisations to take responsibility for the actions of those working in their name.

 

He posted a topic in the middle of the night and when there were no replies within the hour (when most are sleeping) the race issue got mentioned as a dig at certain members on here.

[Justin Z]

7 minutes ago, Homme said:

 

He posted a topic in the middle of the night and when there were no replies within the hour (when most are sleeping) the race issue got mentioned as a dig at certain members on here.

 

Indeed. How five foot four total bore gets away with his posting style, who knows.

[i8hibsh]

Yup, I am all for child abuse as long as it is from white skinned people.

 

[SE16 3LN]

11 hours ago, ri Alban said:

Better add the BBC, WM, and the Entertainment Industry to the list.

Is that you Carl?

[Mikey1874]

A lack of understanding of the human sex drive, failure to protect the most vulnerable around ideas of who is deserving/ undeserving and deference to certain groups is a toxic combination. 

[jake]

On 22/07/2019 at 10:48, Justin Z said:

 

Indeed. How five foot four total bore gets away with his posting style, who knows.

Quality .

I'm 5 11 though but your post is correct.

 

I will be looking .

🙂

[Sharpie]

14 minutes ago, jake said:

Quality .

I'm 5 11 though but your post is correct.

 

I will be looking .

🙂

Jake I try to avoid giving my height in disputes after a guy told me he didn't think they could build shite that high

[Stephen Muddie]

The Catholic church is a disgusting and immoral institution.

Jake is right - very few will call them out. The reason is not as simple as most catholics (that we know of) being white though, IMO.

In my view, it's more to do with what's politically correct/socially acceptable. You don't need to be a Stephen Yaxley fan to notice that it's fine to call out Islam but not so acceptable to criticise catholicism. Then again, rightfully calling out the CC is still more acceptable than calling out crazed religio-fascist, apartheid regimes in the middle east, never mind what they do to children.

[Jambo, Goodbye]

It's not child abuse,  it's child rape. It may be less comfortable for some to say,  but it's the truth. The word 'abuse' lessens the seriousness of the past behaviours imo. 

Edited July 28, 2019 by Jambo, Goodbye

[peter_hmfc]

There's no American money or Israeli agenda to push and monetise so Yaxley-Lennon and co. won't care at all about it.

 

Sweep it under the carpet for all they care.

[Justin Z]

12 hours ago, jake said:

Quality .

I'm 5 11 though but your post is correct.

 

I will be looking .

🙂

 

And I'm 6'6". Four just rhymed the best.

[Justin Z]

6 hours ago, Stephen Muddie said:

 You don't need to be a Stephen Yaxley fan to notice that it's fine to call out Islam but not so acceptable to criticise catholicism.

 

Which is a shame because it's so easily dunked on. Great example, starring Stephen Fry, Christopher Hitchens and Ann Widdecomb (self-own expert):

 

    

[Stephen Muddie]

15 hours ago, Justin Z said:

 

Which is a shame because it's so easily dunked on. Great example, starring Stephen Fry, Christopher Hitchens and Ann Widdecomb (self-own expert):

 

    

Might watch the 41 mins of it at some point cheers. What's the crux in relation to your post in the meantime please?

[Justin Z]

10 hours ago, Stephen Muddie said:

Might watch the 41 mins of it at some point cheers. What's the crux in relation to your post in the meantime please?

 

It's been quite a while since I watched it myself, but as I recall . . .

 

- The motion to debate was "The Catholic Church is a force for good in the world".

- They take a vote amongst the audience before the debate and you can choose either Yes, No, or Undecided. That tally, plus a vote afterward, are revealed at the end.

- A Catholic bishop from Nigeria is the first to speak, and his arguments make little sense.

- Ann Widdecombe then speaks and you want to cut your own ears off to end the misery.

- Stephen Fry comes up and focuses in part on figuring out his own feelings when he was younger, since the Church made him feel inadequate and lesser because he is gay.

- Christopher Hitchens does the Hitch thing and tears the Church apart, focusing on Africa and how much damage it's done there, pedophile priests, corruption, etc.

- The bishop still doesn't say anything that makes sense in reply and can't refute Hitch on Africa.

- Widdecombe screeches some more and doesn't address any of the negatives brought up, including claiming the Crusades were the last time the Church was bad, plus a lot of whataboutery (it wasn't just the Catholic Church doing x and y bad stuff).

- Fry counters everything either of the two of them tried to claim.

- Hitch does too.

 

Finally, the vote tallies are revealed; I looked them up again. Before the debate the stats were

 

For: 678 (32%)

Against: 1102 (52%)

Undecided: 346 (16%)

 

An advantage for Against so to speak, but the result depends on the vote changing. After:

 

For: 268 (12%, -20%)

Against: 1876 (86%, +34%)

Undecided: 34 (2%, -14%)

 

You don't normally see swings like this in an IQ² debate; the Fors and Againsts usually stay relatively level and the winner is based on the undecideds. This was an absolute bloodbath

 

Edited July 29, 2019 by Justin Z

[Mysterion]

On 22/07/2019 at 02:52, bobsharp said:

In my experience pedophiles come from all classes, colors, races, religions, of course some gain more availability because of their care, custody or control of the victims. It is a despicable practise whomever the perpetrator, and can illicit anger and or violence in persons discovering the act, or finding a victim. The lifetime reaction and physchological damage to a young victim can be extreme, and in some cases has  caused this victim themselves to also in adult life become a predator. I would think it may be a stretch to suggest that the elite are more directed to this action than any other class.

I am not sure I understand your point about brown skin, I think though  in the type of society you and I have been raised in the color of a victim or a perpetrators skin would have no affect on our immediate response to the action if witnessed in progress. I can assure you from personal experience, the anger is instant as is prohibitive response.

 

Good post.

 

I read posts and people talk about the "Catholic Church" with no recognition that the majority of the local parishes haven't had any involvement with child abuse. They also don't recognise that followers and Clergy are absolutely disgusted by historic abuse.

 

There's almost an implication that child abuse takes place in every church and every community and that's clearly not the case. All organisations (regardless of religion) in the Uk are to have implemented child protection schemes/vetting since the late 90s. I'm aware that this was happening in local churches in Edinburgh.

 

The church needs to work hard to address historic child abuse, it's critics need to evolve their argument though as just saying "Catholic Church" is ignorant of the majority of decent people/clergy who belong to that sect of Christianity. 

 

 

[Governor Tarkin]

On 28/07/2019 at 00:05, Stephen Muddie said:

You don't need to be a Stephen Yaxley fan to notice that it's fine to call out Islam but not so acceptable to criticise catholicism.

 

We need more criticism of Catholicism imo.

[John Findlay]

Child abuse/rape by anyone is heinous, vile, disgusting and should not be accepted in any society anywhere in the world. Sadly there are evil twisted people in this world who perpetrate these crimes but even sadder are those who will hide shield and cover up for these people and it is this, that is to the shame of the Catholic Church and other non Catholic organisations that they covered it up for years and despite their saying so to the contrary are still trying to do so to this day.

[Maple Leaf]

Getting your morals from religion  (and that's not just the RC church) is like getting health advice from tobacco companies.

[Stephen Muddie]

4 hours ago, Justin Z said:

 

It's been quite a while since I watched it myself, but as I recall . . .

 

- The motion to debate was "The Catholic Church is a force for good in the world".

- They take a vote amongst the audience before the debate and you can choose either Yes, No, or Undecided. That tally, plus a vote afterward, are revealed at the end.

- A Catholic bishop from Nigeria is the first to speak, and his arguments make little sense.

- Ann Widdecombe then speaks and you want to cut your own ears off to end the misery.

- Stephen Fry comes up and focuses in part on figuring out his own feelings when he was younger, since the Church made him feel inadequate and lesser because he is gay.

- Christopher Hitchens does the Hitch thing and tears the Church apart, focusing on Africa and how much damage it's done there, pedophile priests, corruption, etc.

- The bishop still doesn't say anything that makes sense in reply and can't refute Hitch on Africa.

- Widdecombe screeches some more and doesn't address any of the negatives brought up, including claiming the Crusades were the last time the Church was bad, plus a lot of whataboutery (it wasn't just the Catholic Church doing x and y bad stuff).

- Fry counters everything either of the two of them tried to claim.

- Hitch does too.

 

Finally, the vote tallies are revealed; I looked them up again. Before the debate the stats were

 

For: 678 (32%)

Against: 1102 (52%)

Undecided: 346 (16%)

 

An advantage for Against so to speak, but the result depends on the vote changing. After:

 

For: 268 (12%, -20%)

Against: 1876 (86%, +34%)

Undecided: 34 (2%, -14%)

 

You don't normally see swings like this in an IQ² debate; the Fors and Againsts usually stay relatively level and the winner is based on the undecideds. This was an absolute bloodbath

 

Wow thanks for explaining bud. 86% lol.

 

Didn't know dear Ann W was a cafflick, but it kind of explains a lot ha

[John Findlay]

33 minutes ago, Maple Leaf said:

Getting your morals from religion  (and that's not just the RC church) is like getting health advice from tobacco companies.

Maple Leaf.  Not quite. Most laws of western nations take their foundation from the Ten Commandments.

[Maple Leaf]

49 minutes ago, John Findlay said:

Maple Leaf.  Not quite. Most laws of western nations take their foundation from the Ten Commandments.

 

Perhaps, John.  And nowhere in the Ten Commandments is child abuse forbidden, although four of the ten describe the proper way to worship God.

[Ray Gin]

On 28/07/2019 at 07:35, Justin Z said:

 

Which is a shame because it's so easily dunked on. Great example, starring Stephen Fry, Christopher Hitchens and Ann Widdecomb (self-own expert):

 

    

 

Great stuff from Hitchens and Fry there.  

[Justin Z]

1 hour ago, John Findlay said:

Maple Leaf.  Not quite. Most laws of western nations take their foundation from the Ten Commandments.

 

Erm, really? Which ones did you have in mind? Not worshipping any other gods before Yahweh? Not seething a kid in its mother's milk? Not taking Yahweh's name in vain? Honoring your father and mother? Not making idols?

 

Meanwhile adultery, lying (under most circumstances), and coveting are all perfectly legal. I don't know a single legal system in the world where either murder or theft are legal, so there's nothing earth-shattering about their inclusion in the law in western countries.

 

Running out of ideas here.

[Jaap's Sigh]

On 28/07/2019 at 09:35, Justin Z said:

 

Which is a shame because it's so easily dunked on. Great example, starring Stephen Fry, Christopher Hitchens and Ann Widdecomb (self-own expert):

 

    

Really enjoyed watching that. Thanks for posting. 

[coatbridgejambo]

Good watch👍

[John Findlay]

3 hours ago, Justin Z said:

 

Erm, really? Which ones did you have in mind? Not worshipping any other gods before Yahweh? Not seething a kid in its mother's milk? Not taking Yahweh's name in vain? Honoring your father and mother? Not making idols?

 

Meanwhile adultery, lying (under most circumstances), and coveting are all perfectly legal. I don't know a single legal system in the world where either murder or theft are legal, so there's nothing earth-shattering about their inclusion in the law in western countries.

 

Running out of ideas here.

Can people be divorced on the grounds of adultery?

Is there a crime called Perjury?

You've mentioned murder and theft.

[John Findlay]

4 hours ago, Maple Leaf said:

 

Perhaps, John.  And nowhere in the Ten Commandments is child abuse forbidden, although four of the ten describe the proper way to worship God.

Maple Leaf you are correct. New laws are added to statutes on a daily basis nowadays. So yes things evolve  and will continue to do so.

[Justin Z]

7 minutes ago, John Findlay said:

Can people be divorced on the grounds of adultery?

Is there a crime called Perjury?

You've mentioned murder and theft.

 

The Code of Hammurabi, which predates the Pentateuch (probably by a millennium), has prohibitions against all of these things. Are "western" nations' legal systems based on it because of some things in common?

 

Murder and theft are illegal under every criminal system I'm aware of, "western" and otherwise. Perjury also. In Arizona, adultery is not grounds for divorce, because divorce is handled on a no-fault basis. This is true of many states and some countries--various "western" legal systems deal with divorce in various ways. As do many non-"western" ones, some of which do allow adultery as grounds for a divorce. They would have no reason to have any of their laws based on anything in the Old Testament, and yet coincidentally they have some of the same rules.

 

You've ignored all the examples in the Ten Commandments I brought up that are nowhere to be found in any "western" legal system. Why?

 

The Ten Commandments (whichever set of them we mean) offer absolutely nothing vital or different than any other legal code in existence at the time of their writing. No "western", or any other legal system is "based on them" because of a few superficial, coincidental prohibitions in common.

[John Findlay]

2 minutes ago, Justin Z said:

 

The Code of Hammurabi, which predates the Pentateuch (probably by a millennium), has prohibitions against all of these things. Are "western" nations' legal systems based on it because of some things in common?

 

Murder and theft are illegal under every criminal system I'm aware of, "western" and otherwise. Perjury also. In Arizona, adultery is not grounds for divorce, because divorce is handled on a no-fault basis. This is true of many states and some countries--various "western" legal systems deal with divorce in various ways. As do many non-"western" ones, some of which do allow adultery as grounds for a divorce. They would have no reason to have any of their laws based on anything in the Old Testament, and yet coincidentally they have some of the same rules.

 

You've ignored all the examples in the Ten Commandments I brought up that are nowhere to be found in any "western" legal system. Why?

 

The Ten Commandments (whichever set of them we mean) offer absolutely nothing vital or different than any other legal code in existence at the time of their writing. No "western", or any other legal system is "based on them" because of a few superficial, coincidental prohibitions in common.

We will just have to agree to disagree. As for the American legal system individual state or federal. I wouldn't go near it. He/she with the most money can be found not guilty of anything and have been.

[Justin Z]

4 minutes ago, John Findlay said:

We will just have to agree to disagree. As for the American legal system individual state or federal. I wouldn't go near it. He/she with the most money can be found not guilty of anything and have been.

 

And yet there exist Americans who 100% sincerely believe the Bible is the foundation of the Constitution, and the Ten Commandments, the basis for American law.

 

Neither of those is true, either, but we can agree to disagree on that too if you want.

[John Findlay]

1 minute ago, Justin Z said:

 

And yet there exist Americans who 100% sincerely believe the Bible is the foundation of the Constitution, and the Ten Commandments, the basis for American law.

 

Neither of those is true, either, but we can agree to disagree on that too if you want.

Ok

[The White Cockade]

Of course Christianity was a major factor in the foundation of the Constitition and Legal framework of most Western countries 

They were all Christian countries governed by God fearing Christians