 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Clerical Abuse of Children
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: akenaton Date: 23 Jul 17 - 01:16 PM It seems to me that the "legal age of consent" does not come into this equation, as even the seventeen year old victims were sexually assaulter.....I don't think consent was given in any of the cases. Jim, This thread deals with "Catholic abuse of children"......over 80% of sexual abuse of young people in the Catholic Church is perpetrated against boys...by adult males many of whom admit to previous homosexual contact. The statistics are glaringly obvious....The Church itself is only guilty of some isolated cover ups and a stupid celibacy rule. The criminals as always are the perpetrators, who in this case are mainly homosexual. Now don't come back until you find some alternative cause of this very unusual type of abuse and why it is perpetrated by people with previous homosexual contact. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Iains Date: 23 Jul 17 - 06:56 AM Well jimmy and chunderboy you both seem determined to wreck this thread(as usual) So let us look at some recent posting to see what fine fellows you are: Shaw a recent post,"Posting about food is deliberate and intentional thread drift, designed to irritate but not to goad into emotional responses, therefore it is not trolling" (I suspect many would dispute that statement) Jimmy a recent post. "Now fuck off and provide some evidence" Shaw a recent post."Leave the Chardonnay for the kids and the Essex girls. About your level, actually. Someone's got to drink it I suppose. Oaky whites? I puke in your general direction." Shaw."You're a waste of space. And unfunny to boot."(definitely hit a nerve there!) Shaw your patronising, schoolmaster, know it all approach simply makes you look even sillier than you are. Now I suggest you both troll off and let the serious discussion continue. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Steve Shaw Date: 23 Jul 17 - 06:47 AM The guilt thing was very real at the schools I attended. The overall general drift was that we are all miserable wretches who need saving, but, at least, we were Catholics and had a game chance as long as we stuck to the rules. Naturally, anything at all to do with sex pitched you into severe danger of mortal sin. I can't think that I was especially unusual in living in a permanent state of guilty unease in consequence. The double whammy was that you then had to confess all your impure thoughts/impure acts to a celibate man behind a screen, who would occasionally entertain himself by requiring you to elaborate on the lascivious details of your transgressions. Even then I found the notion that you could rid yourself of several weeks of accumulated guilt by muttering three Hail Marys to be ludicrous. I kid you not - we were once told that the very best time to be run over by a bus was as you left the church just after confession. However, the silliness of it all is relatively benign compared with what happens in other religions. It doesn't make it right but it wasn't too hard to escape and, in spite of what Joe may think, I came out relatively undamaged and can laugh about it. But that isn't the same as sexual or physical abuse... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Steve Shaw Date: 23 Jul 17 - 05:55 AM There was not "legislation with minutae [sic] attached." The legislation was changed significantly in 2000 to protect children between 16 and 18 from sexual activity with people in positions of trust. That is hardly "minutiae." You said that the only exception had been for male homosexual activity. I'm glad that my post prompted you to correct yourself in the end, even with your customary bad grace. Perhaps you could refrain from making authoritative statements that are uninformed in future. We waste a lot of energy here checking the accuracy of what people say when they could have afforded us the good manners to check it for themselves first. Your current outbursts on three separate threads are boorish in the extreme and are uncalled for. It's about time you reined yourself in. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 23 Jul 17 - 05:01 AM "I had no intention of poisoning this thread. If Shaw wished to draw attention to further qualifiers concerning the age of consent" It was your boorish bad manners I was referring to Iains - not your opinion I doubt if you are qualified to judge the reasons for another poster expressing an opinion - try to pretend the rest of us know as much as you for five minutes Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Iains Date: 23 Jul 17 - 03:53 AM Jim. I had no intention of poisoning this thread. If Shaw wished to draw attention to further qualifiers concerning the age of consent, he had his chance but wished to merely make the point that I had not done my research. All legislation has minutae attached. The general premise about the age of consent being 16 was correct. It would be hoped that someone who claims to have been a teacher would be aware of the age of consent being lifted to 18 when one of those involved is in a position of authority over a minor. This qualifier is not in the mainstream and would not be known without a specific search. Shaw could have added this to the debate instead he chose to write"Iains is wrong, Jeri. There are important exceptions here. He hasn't done his homework. Nothing new. ". Now Jim is that a useful contribution or merely provoking? Amplification of this important legislation is welcomed, point scoring is not. His behaviour here towards my posting is typical on all threads that I participate in. The old adage "It is better to give than to receive" did not have shaw's puerile behaviour in mind. His sole purpose is to bully, goad,and divert threads. If you wish I can supply numerous examples from both him and his puny acolytes. Now let us return to this very important topic |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 23 Jul 17 - 03:15 AM "well little sniper shaw hows about you enlighten us all or are you simply popping up to troll as you normally do when you have zilch to contribute." So far this tragic and potentially contentious discussion has been conducted with the minimum of personal abuse and a fair degree of dignity and gravity- Is it too much to expect that the victims of these events are treated with enough respect to not get this thread closed? "If these priests had been heterosexual and were assaulting young girls you would be screaming for their blood."" I don't "scream for blood" nor do I rant The same thing I asked of Iains goes for you Personal abuse aside, unlike you, I don't discriminate between heterosexual and homosexual crimes or Catholic or Muslin or Traveller or Irish crimes - a crime is a crime, whoever commits it. Nor do I try to make any of these anything other than the criminal acts they are. The Clerical abuse outrages have two distinct aspects. I've never believed the "few bad apples" theory" - far too many incidents and far too long a history. The celibate nature of clerical life may have something to do with it, but this abuse has gone hand in hand with centuries of power and influence wielded with draconian savagery - its weaponry ranges from divine blackmail to simple brute force and has been established by a Church that has been given access to children's minds from the moment they begin to think - I'm delighted somebody brought up "guilt" The Irish church (I grew up with the phrase "Holy Ireland" ringing in my ears) is on the skids - congregations have dwindled, the numbers of masses have been reduced and in some towns, no longer take place, and there is a recruitment crisis in the priesthood. And still the Vatican will not open its files to victims, Religious bodies will not pay legally demanded compensation and the victims of the savage MAGDALENE LAUNDRIES are still being described as "whores" and "the sweepings of the street". These crimes have never really been generated by sex - it has always been about the wielding of power in order to establish superiority and control over subjects. That power is coming to an end Education here is now a pitched battle, with the church fighting desperately to maintain its 90% plus stranglehold on education Yesterday it was announced that an inquiry is to be held into the use of nuns in the medical system (possibly something to do with a recently failed attempt to put Ireland's largest maternity hospital under the control of a religious body that believes pregnancy termination to be a 'mortal sin') - not to mention the deaths of women who have been forbidden treatment because "Ireland is a Catholic Country" (to quote a Galway Hospital medical attendant) I find it beyond belief that a notorious homophobe should attempt to turn this into another campaign against homosexuality (sorry - I lie, given past behaviour, I would have been surprised if it hadn't become an issue). Enough is enough Ake - homosexuality has been recognised as the nature=al state of being that it is - please try to keep up with what has been happening in the outside world for well over half a century. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: DMcG Date: 23 Jul 17 - 02:41 AM I never got the guilt thing in my upbringing, or in my 16 years of Catholic education. Still, I don't deny that it exists That is my experience as well. I imagine my primary school of the very late 50's and early 60's was as orthodox as any - we always had the Angelus for example, had long rosary sessions and we all learned sections of the 'penny catechism' by heart - but we never got those "you are all sinners bound for hell!" diatribes: in fact we associated them with somewhat mad varieties of the more extreme Protestants. As for matters of sex: it simply didn't arise. Perhaps because Vatican II had happened before I reached senior school, but I recall no discussion of any sort of sexual matters outside biology lessons. What did arise was a much more generalised discussion about treating everyone with respect, with no distinction by gender. You can, perhaps, put this down to the teachers and school being repressed about sex, but for my part I didn't. Rather, I treated it as an important aspect of life, but one amongst many. One little scene to ponder, when I was at University and around 20. I was in the foyer area outside computer room with Sarah who was going to a party in that evening. She asked for help putting a necklace on and while I was doing so remarked I was the only male friend she had she would trust to do that. Maybe that marks me as an odd-ball, or repressed, or some such, but to me it was more an indictment of all the other men she knew, that 'a little grope' was somehow acceptable. Given the choice of the repressed or the gropers, I know which camp I would rather fit into. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 22 Jul 17 - 07:29 PM I never got the guilt thing in my upbringing, or in my 16 years of Catholic education. Still, I don't deny that it exists - and it's a phenomenon that warrants study. Seems to me that it exists primarily in ultra-conservative institutions and families. I think it goes hand-in-hand with the severity and harsh discipline that is found in some religious schools. It seemed to me that it was common in the West of Ireland, but not around Dublin. It's a prevalent attitude in many dioceses in the United States, but not in most. Some of it seems to depend on the tone the local bishop sets; but some dioceses have a tradition of severity and the people want a severe bishop. In every Catholic parish I've belonged to, there seem to be a few sad-looking women who appear to be very pious; and they seem to keep having babies. I rarely see them with husbands. If the husband is there, he seems aloof, and uninvolved in caring for the children. Lately, the conservative women in our parish have begun wearing headcoverings, usually lace mantillas. I'm not sure what that's about. Most of these women, while conservative, are not the somber sort. But there's one young women who concerns me. She spends 15 minutes or more after Sunday Mass, kneeling on the concrete floor in the aisle - and she seems to be crying. So, I wonder what the deal is with her. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: SussexCarole Date: 22 Jul 17 - 07:25 PM Thanks Shakey |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Shakey Date: 22 Jul 17 - 07:00 PM SussexCarole, if there was an up-vote button I would click it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Steve Shaw Date: 22 Jul 17 - 06:45 PM No sniping, no trolling. You simply hadn't checked your facts. You said the only exception was for homosexual males, etc. etc. It wasn't the only exception at all and I'm glad to see that you corrected yourself in your subsequent post, which came after mine. Since 2000, it has been illegal for people in a position of trust to engage in sexual activity with children under 18. That is a very important exception that covers people working in a number of professions dealing with children. You got that wrong then you called me a troll then you corrected yourself. Weird. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: SussexCarole Date: 22 Jul 17 - 06:30 PM No one seems to have mentioned the mental abuse of children by the Catholic 'authorities'. Guilt, sin and more guilt - that's what we were made to feel about ourselves at our Catholic Primary school. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Iains Date: 22 Jul 17 - 06:18 PM well little sniper shaw hows about you enlighten us all or are you simply popping up to troll as you normally do when you have zilch to contribute. You are saying wikipedia is wrong. Possibly it is. It would not be the first time. Perhaps if you know so much you would care to tell us the specifics of its error. he age of consent (the legal age to have sex) in the UK is 16 years old. The laws are there to protect children. They are not there to prosecute under-16s who have mutually consenting sexual activity but will be used if there is abuse or exploitation involved. To help protect younger children the law says anyone under the age of 13 can never legally give consent. This means that anyone engaging in sexual activity with a child who is 12 or younger will be subject to penalties set out under the Sexual Offences Act 2003. The law also gives extra protection to young people who are 16 to 17 years old. It is illegal to: take, show or distribute indecent photographs pay for or arrange sexual services for a person in a position of trust (for example, teachers, care workers) to engage in sexual activity with anyone under the age of 18. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Steve Shaw Date: 22 Jul 17 - 05:54 PM Iains is wrong, Jeri. There are important exceptions here. He hasn't done his homework. Nothing new. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jeri Date: 22 Jul 17 - 05:49 PM It isn't here. It varies by state. Of course, I haven't had a job where I had to know for some years. Age of Consent, by state |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Iains Date: 22 Jul 17 - 05:17 PM Joe. The age of consent in the UK is 16years and has been for some time. The only exception until recently was for homosexual males where the age was 18 until recently. Now it is also 16. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent_reform_in_the_United_Kingdom |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: akenaton Date: 22 Jul 17 - 04:54 PM Jim, I am "attacking" the sexual assault of mainly youths by adult men who happen to be priests. If these priests had been heterosexual and were assaulting young girls you would be screaming for their blood. You are a clumsy and ignorant debater, stick to ranting. You should find the words Racist, Fascist, homophobe if used often enough, will keep your head above water. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 22 Jul 17 - 02:20 PM Ake, the National Catholic Reporter has had hundreds of articles on the subject of the abuse of children by clergy in the Catholic Church, all available at that link. Here (click) is a link to the most recent of many articles on the Regensburger Domspatzen. I believe that in a boys' choir, the boys are usually soprano, which means that they are reasonably young. But it really doesn't matter, does it? When an over-21 adult has sex with an under-18 child, it's a crime in most civilized parts of the world. You can access many, if not all, of the National Catholic Reporter articles on abuse under "Accountability" on their Website. The National Catholic Reporter is very critical of how the Catholic Church has mishandled the sexual abuse crisis all these year - and their position more-or-less matches mine. Here (click) is a sex-offender priest's story. It's very unsettling. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 22 Jul 17 - 01:38 PM Am I the only one who finds it incredibly distasteful that someone should use the sexual abuse of children as a soapbox to attack a state of sexuality that is now fully legal and is is recognised as being as natural as being left-handed? Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 22 Jul 17 - 01:00 PM So - if something is written badly, the information it carries is of no value?? Homosexuality has never at any time been linked to clerical abuse - that is part of your archaic hatred of homosexuals Give us a break Ake - can't we be allowed to discuss this topic seriously without your using it as a hate-soapbox? Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: akenaton Date: 22 Jul 17 - 12:40 PM Thanks Joe, I followed one of your links National Catholic Advisor. I found an article concerning the issue being dealt with on this thread. I am amazed that you can recommend this publication. It was a large article of many pages, but I read it through, they started by citing the abuse of a child...a little girl, by a member of the priesthood, from there they rambled on about how terrible paedophilia was. Not once in the article was the main issue addressed.....that this is not about paedophilia, but the sexual abuse of teenagers and young men by homosexual priests. Never mentioned in the who article? These people are IMO not in the business of "advising", but rather in "concealing"......they must know the statistics from the previous priest abuse scandals.....that over 80% of the victims are male between 12 and 17......That over 80% of male abusers of young boys had already had homosexual experience. Maybe I was unlucky in the article I picked, but I would appreciate your views on the piece, just follow your link. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Raggytash Date: 22 Jul 17 - 12:24 PM Today a news article on the BBC implicates Buddists as not following a true path. Could someone do the honours and provide a link please. It's a pain in the proverbially trying to do so on a an android. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 21 Jul 17 - 08:30 PM Ake, the Catholic League is one of a number of right-wing Catholic organizations that act like they're official representatives of the Catholic Church. The group was founded in 1973 by Jesuit priest and Merquette professor Virgil Blum, and kept a fairly low profile in its early years. A new president, Bill Donohoe, took office in 1993 and has maintained a much more aggressive stance. It often seems like the League is a one-man operation, but it is supported by the extreme right-wing bishops of the U.S. Its office is on the same floor as the offices of the Archdioces of New York, but it has no official connection to the Archdiocese or to the Catholic Church. And it really pisses me off when news agencies go to Donohoe and ask him to speak on behalf of the Catholic Church. This happens quite often. Why can't they go to a bishop, or to the National Council of Catholic Bishops? Early in the history of the Internet, the right-wingers grabbed up all the Catholic-sounding URLS and built websites on some of them. The most popular is Catholic Answers https://www.catholic.com/, which has a "team of apologists standing by to answer your questions. Then there's the Eternal Word Television Network, EWTN, which has cable TV stations all over the U.S. and a network of radio stations. All of these right-wing organizations speak as though they are official representatives of the Catholic Church. This has been a bit uneasy in recent years, because they aren't sure they like Pope Francis. The right-wingers control very few Catholic universities in the U.S. Most of the universities are older institutions run by religious orders that don't agree with the neoconservatives. Many of these religious orders have their own publications and other media. These religious orders make it clear that they speak for themselves, not for the Catholic Church. My favorite in America Communications, run by the New York Province of the Jesuits. I liked above to the National Catholic Reporter, which takes pride in being a "liberal rag." It is fiercely independent. Another independent Catholic publication is Commonweal Magazine. So, generally the way it is in the American Catholic Church, is that the liberals speak for themselves, and the conservatives claim to speak the absolute truth for the entire Catholic Church. After all, they really believe that only they have the truth. So, be careful of the Catholic League. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 21 Jul 17 - 07:15 PM Would recommend both of these highly There is a steady trickle of such films now; the most impressive being 'Mea Maxima Culpa' I can remember the time when such films would be met by massive protests and censorship Hopefully they will continue to treat the subject seriously rather than capitalise by sensationalising it Galvin's 'Raggy Boy' trilogy (thanks Joe) is worth reading as a piece of literature Among the first albums of traditional songs was his double album set, songs of Irish Rebellion - still have them. His published collection of songs published by the Workers Music Association remains a classic Sorry for the thread drift - thought I'd try on my other hat Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 21 Jul 17 - 04:57 PM The Industrial Schools movie that Jim refers to is Song for a Raggy Boy. It's an excellent film. I can't remember who recommended it to me, but I suspect that it was either Jim or Martin Ryan. Iains posted a link to a very interesting piece about Father Flanagan (of Boys' Town) and his condemnation of the Industrial Schools. Please, take a look at it. Now, there's an interesting bit of church political intrigue in the Domspatzen matter. Gerhard Ludwig Müller was Bishop of Regensburg 2002-2012. Here's what the Wikipedia article on Müller says:
In 2012, Benedict XVI appointed Müller Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) [once known as the Holy Office, or the Holy Inquisition]. Müller's 5-year term was up in 2017, and Pope Francis did not renew his contract - i.e., Müller was sacked. And Müller did not take his removal gracefully. He complained about the short notice of the non-renewal, and chose to retire rather than accepting a new assighment. It will be interesting to see whether Müller will be another troublemaking "Cardinal without portfolio" like the renegade Cardinal Burke. Both Burke and Müller come from the old school, which believes in the "discipline" that appears to have been the rule at the Regensburger Domspatzen, along with a belief in obedience to top-down management. Trouble is, Burke and Müller don't like the guy at the top, and seem to be almost in open rebellion against Francis. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: robomatic Date: 21 Jul 17 - 04:34 PM Two great films of the recent past which involve some of these matters are "Philomena" and "Spotlight". Deserved award winners. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 21 Jul 17 - 03:40 PM Sorry Iains Still don't get your point The Church and the State were hand in hand in this affair, and to an extent, still are. Accusations of abuse were treated with contempt and disbelief by the Authorities and the church hierarchy, even though many of both were well aware of what was happening Even parents didn't accept what was happening to the kids, so powerful was the influence of the Church Up to the present day, the State has undertaken to bear the financial burden of the abuses being exposed - some of the religioius bodies have refused to pay anything, even the wealthy ones, and taxpayers money is being used to fill the gap Films like The Magdelene Girls, and the one on the Industrial schools based on Patrick Galvin's trilogy did more to expose the facts than did the establishment A similar job was done in Canada with 'The Boys of St Vincents" DeValera's dream of Ireland couldn't cope with all this - brave investigative journalists did what the State should have been doing I honestly can't think of one prominent clerical whistleblower - though there must have been some. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Iains Date: 21 Jul 17 - 03:24 PM Jim. The point I was making was twofold: Father Flanagan who founded boys town came back to Ireland and severely criticised the abuse of children in institutions he visited. The Irish government villified him. This was in the 1940's. Claims of abuse are not new-gathering a believing audience is. https://www.irishcentral.com/roots/history/only-father-flanagan-of-boys-town-shouted-stop-to-child-abuse-in-ireland My second point is that the boystown Fr Flanagan founded was itself the subject of investigation under the Franklin affair. Many claims were made concerning abuse but subsequent court action found them to be baseless.Not everyone accepts this verdict. It may be pure coincidence but I find it hard to accept that whenever politicians are the subject of claims of abuse the subsequent enquiries seem to have all vestiges of credibility destroyed, long long before a case can be prepared. Are the allegations baseless? or creatively destroyed? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: David Carter (UK) Date: 21 Jul 17 - 02:43 PM Please, do not think that this problem is confined to the Roman Catholic denomination. If its ie more common there, that is probably due to the (semi-) enforced celibacy of the priesthood. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Kenny B (inactive) Date: 21 Jul 17 - 12:02 PM Ake All stats are accurate but unless you understand why they were quoted, how and why they were obtained and how they fit into the broader picture they are worse than useless. To put the Catholic League into context they appear to be the equivalent of the "Wee Frees" I am translating Joe's definition into language you may understand. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 21 Jul 17 - 11:31 AM " they seem to promote the ideals of the Catholic Church, regarding homosexuality, family, abortion etc." It seems to have escaped your notice that the views expressed by the old guard of the Church are as extremist as they come Some have still to leave behind the opinion that sex is a necessary evil and the church constantly attempts to infuence the various referaenda on pregnancy termination. Ireland is on the point of taking its first giant step into the middle of the twentieth century compared to Britain - we await with bated breath to se whether it will make it A few years ago a couple of 'Magdalene Nuns' were interviewed over their roles in the Madelene Laundries They said their work was "guided by god" and described their victims as "fallen women" and "the sweepings of the street" Dickens would have been proud of such phrases had propriety allowed him to use them Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: akenaton Date: 21 Jul 17 - 11:24 AM "Keith, we are trying to rescue the Labour thread from your insane and obsessive grip. If that means discussing the heights of mountains, or Dave, well so be it. Your input is highly repressive, and responding to it is worse than pointless." I'm sure a simple apology to Keith concerning your tactics on the thread would have been accepted and would have saved the thread from becoming meaningless? Or perhaps that was your intention when all chance of escape with any sort of credibility was gone. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: akenaton Date: 21 Jul 17 - 11:17 AM Sorry Joe I was unaware of that, but I suppose the stats will be accurate, as they are repeated on several media outlets. In what way are they extremist? they seem to promote the ideals of the Catholic Church, regarding homosexuality, family, abortion etc. Would a socially conservative organisation not be nearer the mark? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 21 Jul 17 - 10:43 AM Ake, the Catholic League is an extremist group, not an official Catholic representative. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 21 Jul 17 - 10:22 AM Whoops Preamature ejaculation - must stop doing that Pronouncements such as that one leaves the distinct impression of something being covered up. "I think Jim, you'd rightly object to a thread with the title "Muslim Abuse of children" I certainly would if it was an attempt to implicate the religion as a whole I have always made it quite clear that I believe this involves the church hierarchy, not Catholics as a whole Maybe the title should read The Catholic Church's abuse of children, jus as the Muslim cases should read the abuse of young women by a handful of Muslim criminals. Unfortunately, the latter is not possible because of the Islamophobic nature of Western society Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 21 Jul 17 - 10:15 AM "Thus far the politicians have not had too many stones upturned. No doubt their day will come." I'm not sure what your link was about Iains, the power of the church was such that many people knew about it and did nothing while many who claimed it was going on were ignored or vilified Particularly horrific was the case of the priest who committed more rapes of children than any other, Brendan Smythe, it's difficult to find out exactly how many rapes he committed, but it's recond to go into the hundreds. Each time his behaviour was discovered he was moved on to continue raping children - this included Wisconsin When the children protested he called them sinners for defying 'God's will' and when the parents confronted his cardinal they were given a religious lecture and told they would never win if they took on the church. "Jim.....I'm afraid the stats say something different." And I'm afraid that the last people I would go for information is a body who has never come to terms with sexuality, has struggled with the idea of sexuality since Jesus and Mary Magdalene were mates, is dominated by elderly single men who see fit to pronounce on matters such as contraception and pregnancy termination and who prohibit half the population on this planet from taking Holy Orders because of their gender. Homosexuality is as familiar as walking on the Moon to these people This affair is still in its early days and the powers that be have not begun to quantify the incidents, let alone find the causes - that takes specialist skills by qualified people |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Nigel Parsons Date: 21 Jul 17 - 09:40 AM Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: McGrath of Harlow - PM Date: 21 Jul 17 - 08:32 AM I think Jim, you'd rightly object to a thread with the title "Muslim Abuse of children". Unfortunately the original title is open to being misread. While the Roman Catholic church (and many of the public) seem to believe that the word 'catholic' relates exclusively to that church, its meaning is actually much wider. Much as 'Conservatives', and 'conservatives' have different meanings. Putting the term at the start of a sentence (or heading) will force it to start with an upper case letter whether that is the intended use or not. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: bobad Date: 21 Jul 17 - 09:33 AM Keith, we are trying to rescue the Labour thread from your insane and obsessive grip. By putting it into the insane and obsessive grip of your cabal of bullies. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Steve Shaw Date: 21 Jul 17 - 09:20 AM Keith, we are trying to rescue the Labour thread from your insane and obsessive grip. If that means discussing the heights of mountains, or Dave, well so be it. Your input is highly repressive, and responding to it is worse than pointless. Joe, one problem in this sexy-obsessive world of ours is the language we use. Priests are "celibate." We have "gay weddings" and "same-sex marriage." You'd think that the average priest went around all day expending his energy resisting sexy urges instead of getting on with his priestly duties. You'd think that gay people shunned the mundane vicissitudes of everyday life so that they can spend all their time "being gay." One clown here insists on referring to "homosexual marriage." Defining a long-term relationship via a reference to sexual proclivities in that way only is a gross misrepresentation. Well I've been happily married for forty years and, while you don't get to hear about my sex life, I can tell you without fear or favour that I haven't quite got sex on the brain all day (I used to, but I had it lowered). There are lots of lovely young women on holiday here at the moment and I confess to being one of those blokes who has enough of an "aesthetic" streak in him to have a very subliminal sexy thought at frequent intervals (though not quite every six seconds). But as I go about whatever it is I go about every day, it's on the back burner. So I agree with you. We can have great, well-balanced lives without sex being upfront all the time. That's just annoying. I like the openness of modern life but there can be casualties. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Senoufou Date: 21 Jul 17 - 08:38 AM "...Give it a frickin' rest. Who the hell do you think you are?..." Greg, I have never, either in my life or on here, ever ever spoken to anyone in such a fashion. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 21 Jul 17 - 08:32 AM I think Jim, you'd rightly object to a thread with the title "Muslim Abuse of children". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Greg F. Date: 21 Jul 17 - 08:30 AM how dare you address me like that???? Well, Sen, back up and re-read a few of your posts and then ask yourself the same qiestion. GTF |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: akenaton Date: 21 Jul 17 - 08:28 AM Jim.....I'm afraid the stats say something different. Catholic League view |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Iains Date: 21 Jul 17 - 06:47 AM Jim. https://www.irishcentral.com/news/boys-town-founder-fr-flanagan-warned-irish-church-about-abuse-46390952-237644371 Thus far the politicians have not had too many stones upturned. No doubt their day will come. Were Elm House and Haut de la Garenne discredited enquiries, squashed, or still to tell their story? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 21 Jul 17 - 06:28 AM "Is Greg too nasty to be a part of this community." Isn't it about time your started sorting out your own behaviour rather than concentrating on that of others Keith? Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 21 Jul 17 - 06:25 AM Clerical abuse was first documented by a clerical scribe writing The Annals around the time The Book of Kells was being put together - there is little doubt that is has been a part of enclosed religious life since time immemorial What we are seeing is a gradually more enlightened time coming to terms with sexuality and wronging old bad habits - certain sections of the religious population seem to be having trouble with that As Iains rightly points out, this type of abuse is not confined to the Church - it happens wherever unrestricted power is wielded over the weak and vulnerable - nor is the abuse confined to sexual behaviour It most certainly is not confined to the Catholic Church the **** has yet to hit the fan over similar abuses in other religions. Those Christians who have targeted Muslims over their attitudes to sex need to set about building themselves a fall-out shelter It has nothing whatever to do with homosexuality - homosexuals are no more prone to rape and paedophilia than are hetros In my opinion homophobia is a sickness - not homosexuality Clerical - or any serial abuse within institutions is about power and distorted sexuality due to enforced celibacy - it is also down to availability of victims I'd love to be a fly on the wall when Ake goes into Wandsworth Nick or The Scrubs and calls the inmates a bunch of 'disease ridden poofdahs' - you could sell tickets for those particular cage fights The main criminals in the case of Catholic clerical abuse are those who covered up and facilitated the rapes of children - the church leaders from the bishops to the Vatican The latter still refuses access to documented evidence that would give closer to the victims and the surviving families of those whose lives were scarred and ruined even to the point of suicide In Ireland, details are now emerging of the possibility of manslaughter by clerical institutions - secret mass graves and covered up deaths of maltreated children under institutional care The most positive The past and current revelations are a speck compared to the diarrhea storm that is quite likely to hit the fan Probaly the most positive thing to come out of all this is that, at long last, the grip of the church on the minds of the people appears to be weakening - some way to go but early days yet Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 21 Jul 17 - 06:07 AM Is Greg too nasty to be a part of this community. Have not enough decent, moderate people like Sen been driven away from the forum? He usually does not even express views on the topic under discussion. (A bunch of his friends are dominating the Labour thread while refusing to enter debate on it right now.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Iains Date: 21 Jul 17 - 05:42 AM Sadly child abuse is not restricted to the Catholic church. Many religions and organisations are equally guilty. http://childfriendlyfaith.org/information-about-abuse-neglect-by-religion/ Having had 7 years of a Jesuit education, I can say that I had absolutely no suspicion of anything untoward happening to any of the pupils during my time there, other than having a blackboard duster hurled across the room or getting beaten by whalebone encased in leather. Then it was the norm. There was not the slightest hint of any sexual predation although it is clear that it happened elsewhere. If anything can be worse than a deviant priesthood it must be forces representing the UN that are guilty of child abuse. This is an organisation with a specific mission to protect the rights of children. http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/united-nations-soldiers-paedophilia-un-child-rape-ngo-staff-a7648791.html |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Senoufou Date: 21 Jul 17 - 04:10 AM No akenaton, you've got me wrong. I may have disagreed in the past with some of your opinions and standpoints, but you have never been aggressively rude or insulting to me. One can differ without being nasty, and you have always been civil. I admire Joe for continuing to post in depth about the thread title. He obviously knows much about the Catholic religion and this particular case, and his information is interesting and informative. He also hasn't 'bitten'anybody. I cannot understand why anyone would want to insult or mock him. "...who do you think you are?..." Well I know exactly who I am and what I stand for. Do you? |