Cardinal O'Brien - Disgrace

[Toggie88]

They might be cheap shots, but it would take 2 minutes of googling to prove that they are all undisputed facts.

 

If the catholic church wants to be in charge of "moral guidance" it really has to get it's house in order first.

 

Surely it's not hard to realise why people find it objectionable that we are being told what to do by an organisation with THAT sort of track record.

 

I don't want this thread to turn into a similar one on the previous board about peadophillia.

 

I'll leave you with this fact though,

 

*I've deleted it, as it would just this thread into a debate about peadophillia and it shouldn't be about that.

[Toggie88]

Not half as cheap as bullying key decision makers of our country to protect draconian non factual beliefs which effect those who are not connected with the said religion.

 

Yawn.

 

So freedom of speech is okay...as long as it's not a religous point of view.

[monkfish1979]

They might be cheap shots, but it would take 2 minutes of googling to prove that they are all undisputed facts.

 

If the catholic church wants to be in charge of "moral guidance" it really has to get it's house in order first.

 

Surely it's not hard to realise why people find it objectionable that we are being told what to do by an organisation with THAT sort of track record.

 

TBH, I object to any religious organisation having any sort of bearing on anything I ever do. The idea of a church having any influence in these matters is, IMO, ludicrous. They can tell their "subscribers" what to do, but I'm sure for the majority, they can just GTF.

[Boris]

Yawn.

 

So freedom of speech is okay...as long as it's not a religous point of view.

 

No Toggie, yawn, that isn't what is being said.

 

People are entitled to say things based on religion if they want, but to force people through religiously motivated guilt to do what you want them to do is not exactly freedom, is it?

 

This is what the Cardinal is trying to do.

[BigC]

I don't want this thread to turn into a similar one on the previous board about peadophillia.

 

I'll leave you with this fact though,

 

on average, less priests have been convicted of sexual assualt related crimes than the mainstream public.

 

What do you want? A lollipop?

 

That's like saying "I'm a moral compass because I've only stolen around ?2000 in my lifetime, whereas the average person steals over ?3000"

 

In making that point you have pretty much confirmed mine.

 

Priests are no different to anyone else. They is just people.

 

Their opinion should count no more than yours or mine. The problem I have is that Cardinal Frankenstein is trying to speak as the moral authority for the public, by taking advantage of the fact that his followers falsely evelvate priests to a higher status because they are supposedly "men of god".

 

But there are some of us who feel that believing in a stupid 2000 year old fairy tale, is one qualification that should ensure you are never given the power to influence important decisions, especially decisions which are complicated scientifically as well as morally, because Cardinal Frankie has demonstrated with his staements that he either doesn't have the intelectual capacity to understand, or the motivation to study the scientific implications of what he is talking about.

[monkfish1979]

No Toggie, yawn, that isn't what is being said.

 

People are entitled to say things based on religion if they want, but to force people through religiously motivated guilt to do what you want them to do is not exactly freedom, is it?

 

This is what the Cardinal is trying to do.

 

I'm all for free speech, but a religious figurehead like O'Brien making these statements is verging on irresponsible. Like it or not, many people that seriously follow religion will take his words as absolute truth. How many mothers will deny treatment to children that are too young to have a say in their religious views because of what pompous trumpets like this guy spew to the press?

[Toggie88]

No Toggie, yawn, that isn't what is being said.

 

People are entitled to say things based on religion if they want, but to force people through religiously motivated guilt to do what you want them to do is not exactly freedom, is it?

 

This is what the Cardinal is trying to do.

 

I don't see where the force is coming from.

 

If I was told to vote a certain way on an issue, and I disagreed what I was being told from whatever religion. I'd ask myself why I was a member of that church.

 

It's still up to the MPs. The choose to be members of whatever church. They choose their beliefs.

[monkfish1979]

I don't want this thread to turn into a similar one on the previous board about peadophillia.

 

I'll leave you with this fact though,

 

on average, less priests have been convicted of sexual assualt related crimes than the mainstream public.

 

That might be a fairer statement if the ratio of priests to public was around 1:1.....

[Toggie88]

What do you want? A lollipop?

 

That's like saying "I'm a moral compass because I've only stolen around ?2000 in my lifetime, whereas the average person steals over ?3000"

 

In making that point you have pretty much confirmed mine.

 

Priests are no different to anyone else. They is just people.

 

Their opinion should count no more than yours or mine. The problem I have is that Cardinal Frankenstein is trying to speak as the moral authority for the public, by taking advantage of the fact that his followers falsely evelvate priests to a higher status because they are supposedly "men of god".

 

But there are some of us who feel that believing in a stupid 2000 year old fairy tale, is one qualification that should ensure you are never given the power to influence important decisions, especially decisions which are complicated scientifically as well as morally, because Cardinal Frankie has demonstrated with his staements that he either doesn't have the intelectual capacity to understand, or the motivation to study the scientific implications of what he is talking about.

 

Again, in your opinion.

 

 

The fact is still a minority of folk will pay attention to these comments. And this minority will probably have had the same beliefs as those telling them.

[BigC]

Again, in your opinion.

 

 

It is not my opinion that the Cardinal doesn't know what he is talking about when it comes to the science.

 

It is a fact.

 

He has made assertions in the public domain that are blatantly and proveably false, and have since been disputed by many scientific experts.

 

That makes it a fact, because it's an assertion that I can prove.

 

If he's not ignorant then he's a liar which is even worse.

[systemx]

I,m not sure the last time His Holiness was in Bute House but I have it on good authority that as he leaves Brian Soutar is being shown in!!!!!!

[Toggie88]

I,m not sure the last time His Holiness was in Bute House but I have it on good authority that as he leaves Brian Soutar is being shown in!!!!!!

 

From?

 

Are you just paddling in ****e?

[Boris]

I,m not sure the last time His Holiness was in Bute House but I have it on good authority that as he leaves Brian Soutar is being shown in!!!!!!

 

Eek...sounds like the God Squad have an "in" to Executive!

 

How democratic!

[mac]

See, stem cell research is to help combat generative disease, so I'm all for it - if it was to help implant gills and a trunk on humans, I'd be against it.

[systemx]

Paddling away like a pig in it chum.Enjoy watchin you bite every time .You come across like a young pioneer from the communist era or Hitler youth who has to defend the party and the leadership no matter what.Boris will know the proper description.Apparatchik?Don,t worry tho there are people like you in every political party.(ass lickers)

[Boaby Ewing]

See, stem cell research is to help combat generative disease, so I'm all for it - if it was to help implant gills and a trunk on humans, I'd be against it.

 

 

Some people just can't see the bigger picture.

 

"**** you Spielberg, where's your ET now!"

 

[I P Knightley]

Yes they were. If it was simply a party political system the ballot papers would simply read:

Labour [ ]

Conservative [ ]

SNP [ ]

etc...

 

When a MP is elected, they have been elected as an individual. It does come down to their party ultimately however as this is the way in which politics has evolved nationally.

 

I think this is similiar to abortion. It will come down to personal opinion...not party position.

 

Hence my "allegedly". Surely that's why we have a party system?

 

I'm sure that there are at least as many folk who vote for the party without having a scooby about the candidate as there are folk voting for the candidate regardless of political affiliation.

 

I, for one, would never vote for certain parties, even if the candidate was the most charismatic person around. In fact, I could tell you which parties I have voted for but I couldn't name a single candidate who got my X.

 

On the other hand, I'm fairly certain that Sebastian Coe would have struggled to become an MP had he not been an record-breaking Olympic superstar. But that has to be in the minority?

[I P Knightley]

If you take your view, nothing is a free ballot then.

 

Every time a vote is taken people are influenced by others. That may be pressure groups, constituents, religous leaders, scientists, doctors et al.

 

It's still ultimately down to whoever is voting, which they vote.

 

This is a very valid point.

 

Why jump on it when it's the Catholic Church voicing their opinion when there are smoking lobbies, car lobbies, nuclear lobbies, financial institutions, arms firms and oil companies all telling MPs, Cabinet Members and Prime Ministers what they should do?

 

At least we know that MPs are unlikely to retire in to half-million pound jobs with the RC Church.

[K1874M]

Yawn.

 

So freedom of speech is okay...as long as it's not a religous point of view.

 

As long as you arent stopping people congregating to celebrate their faith in a place where they are one then yes.... for once in my life I feel for those sorry politicians who have been placed in a position where they have to put there personal faith in the line for some mad cap preacher

[Boris]

This is a very valid point.

 

Why jump on it when it's the Catholic Church voicing their opinion when there are smoking lobbies, car lobbies, nuclear lobbies, financial institutions, arms firms and oil companies all telling MPs, Cabinet Members and Prime Ministers what they should do?

 

At least we know that MPs are unlikely to retire in to half-million pound jobs with the RC Church.

 

These other lobbies are not using the same sort of guilt trip on MP's as religions do though.

[Toggie88]

These other lobbies are not using the same sort of guilt trip on MP's as religions do though.

 

They do.

 

Enviromental campaigners go on about how you are destroying the planet.

Doctors about how you are affecting someones health.

....

 

It's the way most campaign groups operate.

 

Why jump down the kneck of the Catholic Church? If they said, vote this way and you'll go to hell. Then the majority wouldn't care, they don't believe the hell. Those who do, probably had the same views as the church in the first place.

[Boris]

They do.

 

Enviromental campaigners go on about how you are destroying the planet.

Doctors about how you are affecting someones health.

....

 

It's the way most campaign groups operate.

 

Why jump down the kneck of the Catholic Church? If they said, vote this way and you'll go to hell. Then the majority wouldn't care, they don't believe the hell. Those who do, probably had the same views as the church in the first place.

 

Except in the examples you use the individual has evidence from other sources to corroborate (or not) their view. If they are religious they can hardly hum and haw at God's word, can they?

 

But given their positions in cabinet they also have to accept they must back the Govt or resign. Cabinet responsibility and all that.

 

If they simply resigned then there would be no problem - except they want their cake and to eat it too.

 

Your final point is perhaps the best reason to NOT have any religionists in positions of power at all!

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

They do.

 

Enviromental campaigners go on about how you are destroying the planet.

Doctors about how you are affecting someones health.

....

 

It's the way most campaign groups operate.

 

Why jump down the kneck of the Catholic Church? If they said, vote this way and you'll go to hell. Then the majority wouldn't care, they don't believe the hell. Those who do, probably had the same views as the church in the first place.

 

The last time I can remember this much furore (ie a national media campaign) over an individual vote was to do with legislation relating to gay adoption. No prizes for guessing who was leading the opposition, and no prizes for guessing how public the argument became. Once again, the debate was distorted into a discussion about religious morality rather than the main issue of social benefit which is exactly what is happening here.

[K1874M]

They do.

 

Enviromental campaigners go on about how you are destroying the planet.

Doctors about how you are affecting someones health.

....

 

It's the way most campaign groups operate.

 

Why jump down the kneck of the Catholic Church? If they said, vote this way and you'll go to hell. Then the majority wouldn't care, they don't believe the hell. Those who do, probably had the same views as the church in the first place.

 

Toggie I'd like to say I dont think your views are wrong there your views... but can I ask you what makes you decide on what your views are?

[Toggie88]

Toggie I'd like to say I dont think your views are wrong there your views... but can I ask you what makes you decide on what your views are?

 

Certainly.

 

I like to look at both sides of the argument, then make a decision. I'm quite happy to take on board comments from others, though.

[K1874M]

Certainly.

 

I like to look at both sides of the argument, then make a decision. I'm quite happy to take on board comments from others, though.

 

He he good answer... ever thought about being a politician??

[Acey]

You stopped your highlighting a paragraph early in my opinion. The bit I've highlighted below was the most ill informed part of the article.

 

Again, just another example of blatant "lying for Jesus".

 

You'll have to take my word for it, but the only reason I didn't highlight that was because I couldn't be *rsed looking up something to back up my discrediting of it.

 

I was tired.

[BigC]

You'll have to take my word for it, but the only reason I didn't highlight that was because I couldn't be *rsed looking up something to back up my discrediting of it.

 

I was tired.

 

Thanks for that... Now I have to do it.....

 

It didn't take me long actually.....

 

All you need to do is type "stem cells" into wikipedia:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stem_cell

 

Medical researchers believe that stem cell therapy has the potential to dramatically change the treatment of human disease. A number of adult stem cell therapies already exist, particularly bone marrow transplants that are used to treat leukemia.[25] In the future, medical researchers anticipate being able to use technologies derived from stem cell research to treat a wider variety of diseases including cancer, Parkinson's disease, spinal cord injuries, and muscle damage, amongst a number of other impairments and conditions.[26][27}

 

References:

 

25. Gahrton G, Bj?rkstrand B (2000). "Progress in haematopoietic stem cell transplantation for multiple myeloma". J Intern Med 248 (3): 185-201. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2796.2000.00706.x. PMID 10971785.

26 Lindvall O (2003). "Stem cells for cell therapy in Parkinson's disease". Pharmacol Res 47 (4): 279-87. doi:10.1016/S1043-6618(03)00037-9. PMID 12644384.

27. Goldman S, Windrem M (2006). "Cell replacement therapy in neurological disease". Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 361 (1473): 1463-75. doi:10.1098/rstb.2006.1886. PMID 16939969.

[Acey]

...I was really tired.

 

[Toggie88]

He he good answer... ever thought about being a politician??

 

 

**** that.