Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial

Subject: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Jack Campin
Date: 11 May 18 - 06:11 AM

I didn't want to start a new thread for this, but after finding four successive threads where it would have been appropriate had all been closed, I gave up.

This is a bizarre link. Apart from "evil shits have to stick together" I can't see any obvious logic.

Trump's EPA chief and Cardinal Pell

(If there IS still an open thread this can be moved to, please do so. Proliferating new threads all the time is ridiculous).

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 11 May 18 - 06:37 AM

Should have posted this interesting topic down on the ground floor
Jack
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Jack Campin
Date: 11 May 18 - 06:55 AM

I'm using a phone, where I can't see all the relevant bits of the Mudcat user interface at the same time. I'm sure someone will move it (or better, reopen an appropriate thread and move it there).

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 May 18 - 06:57 AM

Climate denial hasn't actually been defined as heretical by Pope Francis, but pretty near.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: GUEST
Date: 11 May 18 - 09:44 AM

Kevin .... isn't "the sun shine on the righteous" the apt phrase

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: GUEST,Observer
Date: 11 May 18 - 09:56 AM

An observation and a question:

As there seems to be no connection in any way to music (the observation). What on earth is this thread doing above the line? (the question).

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 11 May 18 - 11:54 AM

And just to simplify understanding of what is being discussed, I think the term generally used is "Climate Change Denial" (or even man-made climate change denial).
I don't think anyone is really denying the concept of 'climate'.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Iains
Date: 11 May 18 - 12:05 PM

The climate has always been changing.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: mg
Date: 11 May 18 - 12:11 PM

Pell is one of the two creepiest prelates in the church. The other lives in new york. It is not news that pell was accused of abuse. This was known for a long time. He also was abusive to survivors. Pope can not claim ignorance because i personally wrote him and said wtf when he brought creep to vatican. Australianns were quite outraged.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Joe Offer
Date: 11 May 18 - 01:03 PM

Pell is apparently a pretty smart guy, and I think he did a decent job fixing Vatican finances. Time and the courts will tell about the child abuse allegations. I expect he will be found guilty.
The Trump Administration doesn't get along with Pope Francis. Did you notice that? So, Trump's gang does its best to sidle up to Catholic leaders who are Thorns in the Side of Frankie da Pope. Joe

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: keberoxu
Date: 11 May 18 - 01:09 PM

E pur si muove?

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Joe Offer
Date: 11 May 18 - 01:17 PM

Yes, I'm sure you can find some Catholics who will deny climate change, some who don't know or care, and some who will agree with the Pope that it is a serious problem.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: PHJim
Date: 11 May 18 - 03:42 PM

You will also find some who feel that the twin towers and the moon landing and school shootings were all faked. Also the Earth is flat, vaccines cause autism and Elvis is still alive and living in Tweed, Ontario.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Joe Offer
Date: 11 May 18 - 03:50 PM

Informed Catholics knows that Elvis is in Memphis...

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 May 18 - 04:07 PM

Unless you believe the guy works down the chip shop.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 11 May 18 - 07:34 PM

Is it just an Urban/rural legend that creationists have objected to tour guides telling their customers how old The Grand Canyon is reckoned to be because it contradicts the Bible?
Seems an appropriate place to clear up something that has bugged me fur a long time
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Rapparee
Date: 11 May 18 - 08:51 PM

It's an urban (rather, rural) legend. I've been there several times and the official (and licensed) NPS tour guides say nothing of the sort. I can't speak for those who come with tour groups; they can say pretty much anything they want, I guess.

I'm waiting for the Pope, Big Frankie in Rome, to come out and say ex cathedra that we have to care for the poor and each other, that we have to care for the environment, and that Matthew 18:6 is in force. If you then don't do those things you're a heretic and as such cast out of the Church, both Roman and Eastern Rites. Paul Ryan is a Catholic. So Nancy Pelosi and Susan Collins. There's a list of the Senators here and the Representatives here.

As for the dinner -- BFD. The powerful know the powerful, always have and always will.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Joe Offer
Date: 12 May 18 - 01:30 AM

Hi, Jim - I'm sure some tour guides have been challenged by New Earth Creationists about the age of things. The National Park Service and the Smithsonian seem to work hard to present only information that is scientifically accurate. There was a squabble a few years ago about a creationist book that was for sale in a Grand Canyon bookstore, and I don't know how that came out. It was only one book among hundreds the park stores sell, so I didn't think it was worth the big stink some people made of it.

One Mudcatter took me to a park near her home in Texas to show me the dinosaur footprints there. I was amazed to see a creationist center just outside the park - obviously meant to contradict whatever false teachings may go on in the dinosaur park.

But actually, even in the Bible Belt, there's far less anti-evolution propaganda than one might expect. I think most Americans accept standard scientific concepts. It's only a few that are science-deniers.

---

Rap, I really don't think you will hear Frankie da Pope speak ex cathedra (claiming infallibility) on anything. I don't think he buys that infallibility stuff. I think it's only twice that the Doctrine of Infallibility has been invoked since it was promulgated in the 1870s.

But Pope Francis wrote the encyclical Laudato Si, "On Care for our Common Home" in 2015, and that's a very official teaching. That encyclical gives strong support to measures to control the effects of climate change. It's good science.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 12 May 18 - 03:31 AM

Thanks for that Joe and Rap
Jim

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Jack Campin
Date: 12 May 18 - 04:56 AM

Joe is onto something. The US has a long track record of promoting dissension and civil war in nations that stand in the way of its hegemony (hence the destruction of Libya and Iraq, the civil war in Syria, promotion of dissent in Iran and backing Falun Gong in China). They would not stop at doing the same to the Catholic Church if it looked like it was bad for the oil business.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 May 18 - 05:03 AM

"But actually, even in the Bible Belt, there's far less anti-evolution propaganda than one might expect. I think most Americans accept standard scientific concepts. It's only a few that are science-deniers."

From livescience.com. Jan 21 2017:

"The U.S. has a science problem. Around half of the country's citizens reject the facts of evolution; fewer than a third agree there is a scientific consensus on human-caused climate change, and the number who accept the importance of vaccines is ticking downward."

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 May 18 - 05:09 AM

"...clear up something that has bugged me fur..."

I can recommend a good flea spray which will clear yer bugged fur, Jim...

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Rapparee
Date: 12 May 18 - 09:45 AM

US belief in evolution? Well....76% do, in one way or another. As for climate change....

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Joe Offer
Date: 12 May 18 - 10:50 AM

76 percent is a far more credible number, I think. I suppose Steve's number does not allow for divine involvement of any sort.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 May 18 - 11:31 AM

The essence of evolution is that there can be no underlying guiding force, God or not. If you believe that God had a hand in creating humans, or that evolution is "driven by God," then you don't "believe" in the same process of evolution that has been painstakingly teased out by science over two hundred years. It's something else altogether that you believe in. You simply can't start adding fanciful bits on to the science just to reconcile it with your religious beliefs. That's the whole problem with Rap's "one way or another."

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Joe Offer
Date: 12 May 18 - 11:44 AM

That's what I mean about "born-again atheists," Steve. They take the same rigid, narrow view taken by the religious fundamentalists - that there can be one and only one answer to things. They also share a belief that proven facts are the only knowledge that is important. For most people, such narrow "accuracy" is neither necessary nor helpful. In fact, it's downright boring and often distracting from the main point.

It's clear from everyday conversation that most Americans believe in evolution, and note that I use the word "believe" - they find it credible, but can't be bothered with the details or the process of proof.

For the most part, it really doesn't matter whether there's a God involved or not. If God is what rings your chimes, then go ahead and believe in God and that won't hurt anybody. If God ISN'T what rings your chimes, then that's OK, too.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Raggytash
Date: 12 May 18 - 12:21 PM

" If God is what rings your chimes, then go ahead and believe in God and that won't hurt anybody"

If only that were true Joe, if only that were true.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 May 18 - 01:07 PM

I don't "share beliefs" because my science is never, ever, predicated on belief, and I am not taking a narrow view about the answer to "things" because I'm not concerning myself at all with answers to things. I AM concerning myself with the fact that there are people of faith who think they can reconcile their faith with science by distorting the science. It's taken science two hundred years to arrive at, agonise over, finesse and refine evolutionary theory, so much so that it's one of the crowning glories of human scientific endeavour. So you attempt to harmonise it with your faith by suggesting (without a shred of evidence to support you) that God runs evolution or has inputs, such as "creating" human beings? Can't you see how silly and facile that is? It's not me taking a narrow view, Joe, it's you narrowing down and degrading the work of thousands of evolutionary biologists who, with respect, know a lot more about the science than you do... When I say that the essence of evolution is that there can be no conscious directional driving force or "intelligence" of any kind behind it, I'm not shutting you out. I'm just doing the science.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 12 May 18 - 01:59 PM

That's how you see things Steve. You have to accept that lots of people, including scientists with Nobel prizes, with a fair understanding of evolutionary theory, and who'd also see it as "one of the crowning achievements of human scientific achievement", find no difficulty in reconciling that with religious perspectives.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 May 18 - 02:12 PM

In many, or most, cases, they may not be deliberately reconciling it, or even trying to reconcile it at all. You're assuming that they all take philosophical thought on the matter, which, actually, they may not bother with. Or they may be compartmentalising the two. I don't have an issue with that, though it gets me scratching my head. We do, though, all have space in our brains for a dash of irrationality, which differentiates us from Mr Spock and gives free rein to imagination and creativity. Religion is the ultimate irrationality, though there are other examples almost as egregious, support for Man U being a case in point.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 12 May 18 - 02:19 PM

You don't have an issue with other people seeing things differently from you, and nor do I. And Mr Spock was of course much more prone to irrationality than he made out, you'll recall from Star Trek.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 May 18 - 02:33 PM

Wasn't that because he had a dash of non-Vulcan blood in his veins?

There's no point trying to share this planet with seven billion other flawed humans if you can't accept that we all have different perspectives on things. And it would be arrogant in the extreme to assume that, somehow, your perspective is superior to theirs. There is a point, which I think can be objectively pointed to, when a perspective, applied by force to other people, becomes malevolent. I regard telling children that there is a supernatural deity in whom they must believe under pain of punishment is a blatant overstepping of that mark. Religions, look to yourselves.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 12 May 18 - 02:47 PM

It's a long time ago now, but I can't remember being taught that unbelief was a sin. If you did get taught that, you didn't ought to have been.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Rapparee
Date: 12 May 18 - 10:05 PM

Here's a decent summary of the position of the RC Church regarding evolution.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: robomatic
Date: 12 May 18 - 10:41 PM

Science IS predicated on belief: The belief in science.

As for Darwin, there is a belief that God gave us Darwin to 'splain His Works.

As for songs there's this:

Origin of Species

"I'll just lie back in the shade while everyone gets laid-
Now that's what I call Intelligent Design!"

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Joe Offer
Date: 13 May 18 - 12:51 AM

Steve, you're a scientist. You feel driven to work out all those theorems and stuff, and that's a good thing. When I studied science (in a Catholic seminary), I worked enough with the Scientific Method that I came to accept that modern scientific study is credible. So, although I did not choose science as a career, I almost always accept (believe) the findings of reputable scientists.
Now, yes I find something divine, something wonderful, in the beauty of the world. Is that unacceptable for you as a scientist?
What bothers me so much about born-again Christians, is that they think that faith is accepting a specific laundry list of beliefs, and despise those who don't buy their list. There are now ultra-conservative Catholics who have the same narrow view. And I suggest that some atheists have a similarly narrow view. I prefer to hold lightly to a variety of perspectives, all of which have value.

Joe

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Thompson
Date: 13 May 18 - 05:08 AM

Surely the definition of "a cold day in Hell"!

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 May 18 - 05:21 AM

"Now, yes I find something divine, something wonderful, in the beauty of the world. Is that unacceptable for you as a scientist?"

Arse about face I'm afraid, Joe. Science, unendingly, keeps us looking towards better explanations. That search is what fully opens you to seeing the true beauty and "divine" nature of what is really real. Belief in a creator gives you an "explanation" that can't itself be explained, ever (you made it that way, quite deliberately). You've got your answer and you can stop looking. My dad stands outside his house, waving his arms in the air, seeing the trees swaying and feeling the warm sun and breeze on his face and says, what more evidence than THIS do you need for God! My dad's stopped looking, stopped asking. He's found an answer, the wrong answer. Not the wrong answer for him, but still, objectively, the wrong answer. As he's 95 I cut him some slack these days. If there really is a God it's a good bet that he expects us to use all the resources of imagination and intellect he gave us to the full. He'd be grievously insulted to think that huge sections of humanity are too easily satisfied with "answers" that aren't answers at all.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 13 May 18 - 06:18 AM

That is why catholicism is bollocks and Church of England is the most normal!

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 May 18 - 06:48 AM

Commercial break time already !!
Jim Vaarrill

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Joe Offer
Date: 13 May 18 - 12:54 PM

And to counter Steve, I would suggest that what his dad and I see is the same thing he sees, but we perceive a divine essence within that causes us to ponder in awe. I don't know that it matters whether that essence is reality or perception, and I don't know why Steve feels it is so important to deny that perception.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 May 18 - 04:17 PM

Pondering in awe is a wonderful thing. I've been doing it up on the cliffs near Bude all afternoon, in the warm sunshine and gin-clear air that enabled us to see thirty miles along one of the most beautiful coastlines in the world, from Widemouth Bay down to Stepper Point and beyond. The tips of low, lazy waves were spiced by the breeze into sparkling white frothy crests. Early butterflies and bumble bees jousted with each other and the thrift and scurvy grass made a great foil for the fresh green of the turf and the vivid lemon of the kidney vetch. The cool sea breeze on our faces was a tease next to the hot May sunshine. But the pondering sets me looking for the magic of reality, not settling for a super-easy "answer" about some supernatural bloke up there who runs the show. He doesn't. Your mission is to use your brain to find out what's really true. Anything less and you're not using that brain properly. Your God would be very cross with you for that. And if you could just liberate your mind you'd look back on all the dismal aspects of your previous God-infested musings and see that you were wasting your time. It's as strong as that.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 13 May 18 - 08:52 PM

"Some supernatural bloke up there who runs the show"

Well, there are some people of whom it’s true to say that's how they see things. But I don't think you'd find many round here. As St Paul put it "When I was a child, I used to talk like a child, and see things as a child does, and think like a child; but now that I have become an adult, I have finished with all childish ways."

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Joe Offer
Date: 14 May 18 - 12:50 AM

I was a Theology major in college in a Catholic seminary, and I've taught religion classes to adults and children for over 50 years. I don't know how many times I've told classes, "God doesn't write the script." What happens in our lives, is a natural, logical consequence of our own actions and of what happens around us.

I see something wonderful, something divine, in what happens around me. I find value in tying myself to the wisdom, tradition, ideals, and community of my own religious tradition, and of the many religious traditions that exist in the world. I also do my best to consider things from an atheist viewpoint - and to respect all of these traditions and learn from them. I have found it worthwhile to spend my entire life considering things from a variety of perspectives. Even though I may question some aspects of some perspectives, I can still find wisdom in them and learn from them.

Steve, your perspective is too narrow, and you have an annoying habit of redefining God in terms that reasonable believers just can't buy into. Think whatever you want to think, but try to learn how to respect and understand those who see things from a different perspective.

I'm not looking to convert anyone - I'm just asking for tolerance instead of ridicule.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 May 18 - 03:29 AM

NEW PROBLEM FOR CHURCH IN IRELAND
Jim Caarroll

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 May 18 - 05:04 AM

Belief in a supernatural being/force/spirit running through all things is a notion that thoroughly deserves ridicule. Doesn't necessarily mean that all holders of such notions deserve ridicule: it depends on how they were conditioned to adopt that blind alley of non-thinking. But intelligent people who persist in pushing those ideas definitely do deserve ridicule, even at times condemnation. And Joe, the narrowness in thinking comes from a persistent, nagging, clinging notion that what you see all around
you simply can't be all there is, that divine add-ons can't be done without. Yes they can and unless you can completely liberate your intellect from that strangling restraint and come into the sunlit uplands you won't ever know just how narrow religious thinking is. The truly divine can come only from your own study, your own questioning, your own freed sense of wonder.

St Paul was abjectly wrong. He forgot to make the crucial distinction between childish and childlike. As Wordsworth said, the child is father of the man (much of his finest poetry wrestled with the theme of the lost innocence, clarity of mind and unending curiosity of children as one moved into adulthood. He wanted it all back for himself but even he couldn't reconjure it). Children question everything and have unbounded enthusiasm for everything (except sprouts). We do our damnedest in our education system to damp that down, unfortunately. And St Paul held the most childish notion of all that humanity has ever dreamed up: he believed in God. Ironic, eh?

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Iains
Date: 14 May 18 - 05:20 AM

To be so sure that the stance you advocate is the only correct one and all others are totally wrong smacks of arrogance, and is not supported by the scientific method.
The earth is flat
man will never fly
rocks cannot fall from the sky
merely three betrayals by the scientific method, overturned by later research.
The way science evolves makes all definitive statements plausible, until overturned.
I would suggest that also applies to deities.As yet no proof exits to support or deny the belief. Tomorrow that could well change.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 May 18 - 05:41 AM

Well my "stance" on deities is absolutely consistent with "the scientific method" in that the construction has been placed beyond its scrutiny by adherents. The proposition can never be subjected to science, and that's precisely the way they want it, and that isn't going to change tomorrow or any other day. Don't blame me.

I've never said that there's no God, by the way, Iains.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 14 May 18 - 08:26 AM

To say that you see belief in God is ridiculous does actually imply saying that there is no God,

Incidentally the suggestion that is "what you see all around" is all that there is appears not to be held these days by many scientists, in these days when they talk cheerfully about dark energy and dark matter, and multiple universes and suchlike.

What scientific reason do you have for caring about this stuff anyway, Steve?

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Jack Campin
Date: 14 May 18 - 08:30 AM

This abstract fluff about the truth or otherwise of religion completely misses the point.

The Catholic Church is not a monolith and its internal divisions matter a great deal. Right now we have a situation where the Pope is trying to take the institution into a more liberal/left direction against a great deal of resistance from entrenched reactionaries backed by the fascist regime in Washington. It is just fucking nuts to attack an organization that might actually do something to stop Trump because of wibbling pickiness about their epistemology.

Nor is the Catholic church the only one. On the one occasion when I met Noam Chomsky he made an interesting point (probably repeating something he'd already said in print, he won't have wasted an insight on some random stranger): the place you expect to see grassroots progressive initiatives in the US is within churches. This being because (a) nearly everybody in the US belongs to one since the country has an unparalleled proportion of religious believers, and (b) they provide a unique space for people to meet and organize. Not all churches provide such an environment - a mega-church seating thousands where all the doctrine comes out of a PA certainly won't - but the "Christian Left" is a significant phenomenon over there.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Joe Offer
Date: 14 May 18 - 11:39 AM

Exactly, Jack. We of the Religious Left (not only Christians) in the United States usually find atheists to be natural allies, and we have found ways to work together quite happily. Our natural enemies are the Religious Right, who self-righteously use their religion to support racism and nationalism and other forms of oppression.

Those on the right in the U.S. spend a lot effort and money "proving" that their religion is the right one. Back when God created the World Wide Web, the Catholic right-wingers bought up all the domain names that sounded Catholic, and they use those Websites to prove how right they are. Catholic.com is a Website called "Catholic Answers," and they have "apologists standing by 24 hours a day to answer your questions about the Catholic Faith." The answers they give are sometimes pretty weird. They claim to be representing the "true religion," but their religion is far different from what I learned in a Catholic seminary.

We on the religious left don't want to be bothered to prove or defend our faith. We see faith as a way of life, not a checklist of beliefs to be defended. We generally enjoy our religious practices, but don't see them as something to fight about. We're more interested in fighting for justice for the poor and the immigrants and others who suffer injustice.

So, we're bewildered by European atheists who find it so important to prove that our religious faith is wrong. We're in an age where fascism is gaining strength at an alarming rate, all over the world. Isn't it more important to join together in mutual respect and deal with the threat of fascism?

-Joe-

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 May 18 - 11:45 AM

With you on that Joe.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 May 18 - 11:57 AM

"Isn't it more important to join together in mutual respect and deal with the threat of fascism?"
The church has trditionally supported the right - Franco - Pinochet - some of the worst of the worst
They ar built in parts of establishment contol
As far as I'm concerned, it's not religion that's the problem, it's how it is used to keep the imbalance in society
The Catholic church remains in the top league in that particular game
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 May 18 - 12:00 PM

One "christian" that springs to mind not a million miles fro here is at present appeasing the slaughter of demonstrators who are protesting to get their homes back
Kind of confirms that such self-acclaimed Christians are best left to their own devices
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Joe Offer
Date: 14 May 18 - 12:13 PM

Jim Carroll says: "The church has trditionally supported the right - Franco - Pinochet - some of the worst of the worst"

I think, Jim, that you will find church people on both sides of every struggle, throughout history. Your mistake is to consider churches monolithic. That never has been the case. It is true, however, that those in the Ruling Class tend to side with those in the Ruling Class (including the Ruling Class in churches). I tend to believe in the importance and power and intelligence of those who are not part of the Ruling Class.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Jack Campin
Date: 14 May 18 - 12:18 PM

The church has trditionally supported the right

Archbishop Romero was also part of Catholic tradition. As were the people who made Reagan unwelcome when he visited Ireland - they'd been to Latin America working for the church and had seen first-hand what his foreign policy really meant.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 May 18 - 12:31 PM

"Archbishop Romero was also part of Catholic tradition. "
Anmd was quite possibly taken out by the Bishops - he was certainly given a rough time by them
"I think, Jim, that you will find church people on both sides of every struggle"
I'm talking about the bit of the church that makes the policy Joe
I have no doubt that there are clergy who follow Christian teachings
Quite honestly - I've had my fill with how they have been behaving over the last few weeks over the refereendum (not the position thay take -their bahaviour) - beyond belief
If they don't guarantee themselves a place in Hell they certainly are heading for obscurity in Ireland at present
Jim Caarroll

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 May 18 - 01:05 PM

"Our natural enemies are the Religious Right, who self-righteously use their religion to support racism and nationalism and other forms of oppression."

They're not your enemies. You have just fast-track sainted two of them, John-Paul II and Mother Teresa, quite likely the two worst of the last hundred years if you count people of influence. They're doing all the work for your Church while those of you who purport to be on the left provide the acceptable surface conscience gloss for the public consumption of the rest of us. You change nothing, really, do you? Just look at the Church's teachings on sex and contraception. Same old - outmoded, outdated, out of touch and thoroughly immoral. The only difference is that some of you are learning that breaking the rules won't actually pitch you into hell, you hope.


Belief in a supernatural deity is utterly ridiculous, Kevin. So is supporting Arsenal or Man U, of course. But, on any objective level, it is ridiculous. It just isn't very diplomatic of me to say so, that's all. I don't feel an especial need to be diplomatic about a phenomenon that is potentially so harmful.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Joe Offer
Date: 14 May 18 - 01:40 PM

Well, Steve, you and Jim are just as convinced of your righteousness, as are the born-again Christians. There are two vastly different approaches to religion, as different as night and day. You acknowledge the existence of only one of them, and condemn ALL who practice religion because the sins of the right. That, my friends, is bigotry, plain and simple.

I didn't "fast-track" John Paul II. I despised him.

As for Mother Teresa, I didn't care whether she became a saint or not, but I don't believe the demonizing propaganda of your friend Hitchens, who made a career out of demonizing Mother Teresa.

As for Catholic teaching on sex and contraception, I simply ignore the parts I don't accept. Millions of Catholics do the same.

You say I've changed nothing. Over the last ten years, I've been a leader and spokesman in an interfaith group that has built a homeless shelter and continues to operate it, and changed the philosophy of criminal justice and incarceration in our county, which used to pride itself in "using a stick instead of a carrot." Now we're working to mitigate the effects of the Trump war against immigrants.

All you see as important, is the power and ideology of the elite. Argue and condemn all you like, but your animosity is part of the problem. Ordinary people can make a big difference if they work together and don't get tied up in ideological squabbles. Ideological correctness is immaterial. What matters, is working with others and respecting them, to accomplish what needs to be done in this world.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: keberoxu
Date: 14 May 18 - 02:05 PM

"Your God would be very cross with you for that."

That one sticks in my craw,
so I'm spitting it out, sorry.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Kenny B (inactive)
Date: 14 May 18 - 02:22 PM

For folks who don't know what a humanist is
"UK Humanist" definition a of a humanist:-
"Bringing non-religious people together to develop their own views and an understanding of the world around them

Humanists are people who shape their own lives in the here and now, because we believe it's the only life we have. We make sense of the world through logic, reason, and evidence, and always seek to treat those around us with warmth, understanding, and respect."

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Joe Offer
Date: 14 May 18 - 02:25 PM

And that, Kenny B, I can applaud. Humanism should be a wonderful thing, not a rabid campaign to bring down anyone with religious beliefs.
-Joe-

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 May 18 - 02:38 PM

I'm not convinced of any righteousness. Like you, I don't know whether there's a God or not. How is that "convinced" of anything?

You are involved in good works and I've always acknowledged that religion can yield such things and bemoaned the fact that we atheists are a disorganised, ragbag bunch who can't really do anything much in our collective name. However, you haven't changed the rules, the rules that are still used to repress millions of people, women especially, in the developing world. Which is what I meant, and I think you knew that.

The late Christopher Hitchens did not make a career out of demonising Mother Teresa. She was a very small part of the grist to his mill - and he told the truth about her. No demonising. Whether or not you care to check it out is, of course, up to you.

My personal heritage is Roman Catholic and a good deal of it travels with me still. The only people I ever condemn are those who use religion to manipulate and control people. Because I include the proselytisation of children in faith schools under that, you don't like it. I can't help that. It's my honest view of religious miseducation in schools.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Iains
Date: 14 May 18 - 02:44 PM

Bur, but, but if the Jesuits do not get them by 7 what happens then?????

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 14 May 18 - 03:19 PM

Well, the term "humanist" is used to refer to Christian humanists, and other religions.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Iains
Date: 14 May 18 - 03:38 PM

Of course Ignatious of Loyola said give me a child unti 7.......

So much for my 7 years of Jesuit education, though in my defense, for me it did not start until age 11.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 May 18 - 04:05 PM

I experienced a staunchly uncompromising Catholic education for thirteen years, the last seven at the hands of the Salesian Fathers and Brothers. I can honestly say that it did me no lasting harm, though the guilt I suffered from even thinking lusty thoughts about girls was tiresome. I saw no sexual abuse, and any physical abuse was sparing and of its time. There were good teachers and bad teachers, just like everywhere else. Like everywhere else, most of the teachers had the interests and wellbeing of the kids at heart. I taught in a Catholic school until I was 30 and in the early days I even taught religious education. I love the cultural heritage of Christian and Muslim religions that I see all over Europe, the architecture and the art, and a large proportion of the classical music I own and I listen to is religious.

So if you think there's going to be a barb, you're right. What I need like a hole in the head is some fellow going all defensive on me telling me that I take a narrow view and that I deal in certainties. That's just arse about face. OK, Joe?

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 14 May 18 - 04:58 PM

You rightly, I imagine, assume that Joe believes in turning the other cheek. I trust that bit of the conditioning may have remained with you, Steve.

I'm still waiting for you to suggest some scientific basis for caring out all this stuff.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 May 18 - 05:24 PM

You appear to be asking a silly question, strangely for you. I have strong opinions about a number of issues and when this one comes up I like to articulate in typed words where I am with it. That's all. There is almost certainly no God, a very easy point to support (quite likely you wouldn't want me to revisit that, but I will if you want), and I find it rather disappointing when those of the opposing viewpoint can respond only with defensiveness. Disappointing, but not surprising. The bottom line for me is, believe what you want, but keep it to yourself, otherwise I'm here, waiting with the challenge...

What's so wrong with that, Kevin?

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: keberoxu
Date: 14 May 18 - 05:39 PM

"...going all defensive on me,
telling me that I take a narrow view
and that I deal in certainties."

No, I wouldn't say it that way.

I would say that your stance is all about debate,
in which a good offense is the best defense.
Hence the negativity, cynicism, and abruptness in your choice of words.

The awareness of that which is greater than any one of us individuals,
is not something to be rammed into a pigeonhole,
and if that pigeonhole is institutionalized religion, you oppose it. Fine.

In conversation, alas, it is convenient to default to debate.
Many times I myself have been guilty of doing so,
and I regret this now, for the most part.
Sure, there are some occasions when only a debating stance is understood,
and so one defends oneself.

In my own history of speaking with others,
there are many, too many, who will not risk speaking with me again,
because of how I hurt them with my choice of words
and with my defensive attitude.
I regret the loss.
I speak here of those, like me, who are vulnerable under all those defenses.
More to the point,
I speak of those times when the injury I dealt the other person
was not at all personal,
it was in fact indifferent to that person, to the point of disregard.

Disregard and indifference, in the interest of responding to a challenge,
are as inhibiting to an opening of one's most vulnerable side
as is open hostility.

There are none so blind as those who will not see,
and I was blind for a long time.
I will regret it for the rest of my life.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 May 18 - 06:03 PM

"Hence the negativity, cynicism, and abruptness in your choice of words."

Rubbish. My words give you an objective challenge, and if you choose to get defensive (which you've just done), that's your problem.

Have a bit of context, keberoxou. You take offence at a few words I type here in cyberspace on 14 May 2018. You think I'm threatening your belief system (I'm not, not in the slightest, but I can't help it if you see it that way: all I ask is that you keep it to yourself). Well the thing is that I've been belaboured by Catholicism for all of my 67 years on this planet. I appear to have survived that quite well and come through the other end. But if you feel that I'm insulting you for five minutes on this website, think of the insults I've endured for sixty-seven years. The lies, the anti-education, the controlling, the threats of hellfire, the judgementalism, the fear of apostasy....your fit of pique is as nothing, n'est-ce pas?

Life is such a challenge...

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 May 18 - 06:05 PM

Apologies for the misspelling.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: keberoxu
Date: 14 May 18 - 06:38 PM

There speaks the voice of impatience.

Impatience is not amongst the deadly sins, nor need it be,
not like greed, anger, envy, sloth, and so on.
Impatient speakers can wreak havoc without committing the least of sins.

You have your context, you impatient whippersnapper,
and my context is out where you can read it,
in the final four paragraphs of my previous post.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 May 18 - 06:47 PM

You are incredibly judgemental and incredibly wrong. Whatever else my faults, impatience is not one of them. I'm throwing you challenges from a very calm and measured position, but you're responding defensively. I can't understand why you feel so insecure about your faith. You should be shrugging off people like me with ease. But you can't. Odd.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: keberoxu
Date: 14 May 18 - 06:50 PM

. . . none so blind . . .

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 May 18 - 07:09 PM

Nighty night! :-)

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Donuel
Date: 14 May 18 - 07:30 PM

I fully believe Joe Offer sincerely tried to make a difference.
I'm sure you guys see that too.
What more do you want,
a pound of flesh?

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: keberoxu
Date: 14 May 18 - 07:54 PM

Agreed, Donuel, however I suspect that some of us see it
and some of us see I don't know what else.

Defensiveness is a most remarkable presentation,
and I say that speaking from both sides --
I have been blindly defensive myself, and will be, I fear, again.
It's hard to let that down once it becomes second nature.

And I agree with what you, Donuel, and Joe, and Jack Campin were saying
about progressives within certain denominations.
Seems like there ought to be a way of considering that history
without anybody bringing on the heavy artillery.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 May 18 - 07:59 PM

Putting points to you honestly and directly is hardly "heavy artillery," and the fact that you see it that way is testament to your own defensiveness. Even Joe knows what a fluffy bunny I really am, though it'll be two or three threads down the line before he'll ever admit it again...

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 14 May 18 - 08:12 PM

"Believe what you like, but keep it to yourself". But you don't keep it to yourself, do you,, Steve. The very word you use for responses to what you write, "defensiveness" implies an attacker.

My point in asking you to give a scientific basis for your concern was that such things as concerns do not fit too readily into the world view you present. They are oriented to a future that isn't as yet there.

I don't in fact feel comfortable with that adage, "believe what you will, but keep it. To yourself". My preference would be, "Be open about what you believe, but without feeling any need to seek to impose those beliefs on others."

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 May 18 - 05:07 AM

"Believe what you like, but keep it to yourself". But you don't keep it to yourself, do you,, Steve. The very word you use for responses to what you write, "defensiveness" implies an attacker.

No it doesn't. Defensiveness in this topic implies confected righteous indignation, intended to attack criticism and blame the critic in place of honestly taking on their arguments.

What beliefs am I "not keeping to myself," Kevin? Now in this thread we've already had the routinely trotted-out insult that "I believe in science." I note that you didn't pick up on that canard. Concepts elicited by science are not "beliefs" as they are founded on evidence and reason. As I've made it clear that I don't know whether there's a God or not (oh for such honesty from believers!), I'm simply giving my opinions. I'd suggest that those opinions are based on reason, if not evidence (as there isn't any, but concepts that break every law of nature can be dealt with by reason alone). As for being free and open about religious belief, I challenge you to tell me how you can do that without giving succour to those of potentially like mind, your kids for example, helping to cement their own copycat beliefs in the face of a world full of doubt. In other words, proselytising. If as an adult I declared freely and openly that I believed in fairies at the bottom of my garden, I'd be ridiculed. I'd be best keeping that belief to myself, though if I did advertise it to the world at least I wouldn't doing anyone else any harm, and there's the rub.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Jack Campin
Date: 15 May 18 - 09:06 AM

Some of the people Jim doesn't believe exist.

Red Letter Christians

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 15 May 18 - 09:41 AM

If you believe something that is a belief. That's how the English language works. Nothing to do with how well founded that belief maybe. The one word fits all sizes.

You sincerely believe, I am sure, that the responses you evoke are assumed, and that those responding in a way you describe as defensive do not actually experience what you write as attacking. I believe that is a mistaken belief on your part.

There is no difficulty in any of us being open about our beliefs without trying to impose them on others. Try it.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 May 18 - 10:25 AM

They are my opinions, not my beliefs. Beliefs are held without reason or evidence, usually with a degree of unshiftable conviction or certainty. I'll justify my opinions to you any time you like. When I do, you may think I'm wrong, and I may be wrong, but that means there were flaws in my reasoning or gaps in the evidence that I underestimated. But beliefs, never. In this context the word has a specific meaning. You believe in God despite the fact that there's no evidence and that you've abandoned reason. It's no different to believing in Santa or the tooth fairy or your guardian angel. Objectively, it's just as childish. I have no beliefs that I can try to impose or not impose, but I do have opinions that I put forward for anyone to consider if they want to. I respect opinions opposing mine, as long as they're measured and free from hidden motives. Can't say much fairer than that.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 May 18 - 11:31 AM

I believe that evolution explains the diversity and origins of species.
Don't you Steve?
Beliefs are held without reason or evidence, usually with a degree of unshiftable conviction or certainty.

Not true. There is much evidence for evolution, and I find it convincing but I do not feel and unshiftable conviction.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: bobad
Date: 15 May 18 - 11:59 AM

I fully believe Joe Offer sincerely tried to make a difference.
I'm sure you guys see that too.
What more do you want,
a pound of flesh?

Hear, hear! Donuel.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 May 18 - 12:28 PM

I don't need to "believe" things that have mountains of evidence to support them. I hold the view that it is overwhelmingly likely (not certain), on grounds of evidence and reason, that the theory of evolution explains all the beauty, diversity and complexity of life on Earth. You believe in God. That's a notion that has no evidence to support it (a matter discussed here ad nauseam and which I will not revisit) and which can't be arrived at via the use of reason. In this context, and in the context of science, that's how I'm using the term "belief." You hold your belief with such unshakeable conviction and certainty, despite the absence of evidence, that you see no harm in obliging small children to be made to believe it too. After all, that's how you came to believe it too, in all probability. That's highly irrational. And not very nice.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Donuel
Date: 15 May 18 - 01:00 PM

Have you ever heard someone in the House of Commons being argumentative for the sake of argument and lose their thread of thought to the point they can not even agree with actual supporters.

There is truth, strategy and honor in being able to recant.
Some of you won't acknowledge a reasonable point for fear it would diminish your ego.

In America we say people who can't be honest with themselves as "he couldn't say shit if he had a mouthful".

A little flexibility won't make you younger but it could make you wiser, and help you avoid being a shithead.

Admittedly arguing is fun but the only people keeping score are in your imagination. If you want it to count, run for office.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Joe Offer
Date: 15 May 18 - 01:12 PM

Steve Shaw says: As I've made it clear that I don't know whether there's a God or not (oh for such honesty from believers!), I'm simply giving my opinions.

Up above, Joe Offer says: "And to counter Steve, I would suggest that what his dad and I see is the same thing he [Steve] sees, but we perceive a divine essence within that causes us to ponder in awe. I don't know that it matters whether that essence is reality or perception, and I don't know why Steve feels it is so important to deny that perception."

But Steve attempts to redefine what Joe has consistently said about God, and make Joe's perception of God into something else: So you attempt to harmonise it with your faith by suggesting (without a shred of evidence to support you) that God runs evolution or has inputs, such as "creating" human beings? Can't you see how silly and facile that is? It's not me taking a narrow view, Joe, it's you narrowing down and degrading the work of thousands of evolutionary biologists who, with respect, know a lot more about the science than you do... When I say that the essence of evolution is that there can be no conscious directional driving force or "intelligence" of any kind behind it, I'm not shutting you out. I'm just doing the science.

I don't have a simplistic view of God as some guy who goes around throwing the switches so all the trains run on time. I believe that everything that surrounds me follows the laws of science and logic exactly. But within all that surrounds me and all that is within me, I perceive something infinite that is worthy of awe and wonder - and that is what I perceive as God. The doctrines and rituals and myth help people to celebrate and recognize that essence that is worthy of awe and wonder, but those are things that I don't hold tightly to. I also recognize that the general concept of God is an anthropomorphism, but humans tend to think anthropomorpically - and maybe that's ok.

For me, while the laws of science and logic are true, they fail to explore the depth of meaning of that which surrounds us. For that, I have to go into the realm of poetry and myth and ritual and perhaps mysticism or nirvana.

Literalists cannot deal with poetry and myth and mysticism, so they find them untrue or worthless and find ritual to be empty. Steve seems to be more-or-less a literalist. Fundamentalist Christians and generally literalists, too. Steve's intelligence and education will not allow him to accept a literalist God, so he rightly rejects that God - and I applaud him for that.

Note again what I said: "[I] perceive a divine essence within that causes [me] to ponder in awe. I don't know that it matters whether that essence is reality or perception." But whether it is reality or perception, exploring that essence has been of great and deep value to me all my life.

Steve can use his Scientific Method to analyze love, too - and his analysis would be correct. To really appreciate love, one has to go into the realm of poetry and beyond. Same with death, or life. These things are mysteries that we can never fully define or explain - but nonetheless they are worthy of lifelong exploration, using the Scientific Method to its fullest extent, but also going deeper and farther than the Scientific Method will allow.

And that exploration will not produce absolute answers - it will produce only perceptions, but those perceptions are of infinite value.

-Joe Offer-

P.S. And yeah, I do acknowledge Steve to be a fluffy bunny (his words). Maybe that's why I enjoy debating with him.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 15 May 18 - 06:59 PM


I don't need to "believe" things that have mountains of evidence to support them

No, you don't "need" to believe - it’s just that you do believe those things, and those mountains of evidence are the basis for that belief.

We clearly disagree in what we understand the word belief to mean, Steve. My understanding is that it merely means that we see something being true. That is irrespective of whether we have extremely strong evidence for its truth, or indeed its truth is beyond reasonable doubt, or whether we have the flimsiest evidence, or whether indeed it is totally delusional. In all cases it is a belief, because we believe it. The one word covers all of them.

I'm not trying to compel anyone to believe anything, Steve. I think you are. The thing is, it can't really be done.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 May 18 - 07:14 PM

"I'm not trying to compel anyone to believe anything, Steve. I think you are. The thing is, it can't really be done."

And what precisely am I trying to "compel" anyone to believe? If I've said it once I've said it a hundred times: I don't care what people choose to believe. The problem with you believers is that you find it very, very hard to reconcile religious belief with science, therefore you try to marry the two by pretending that science is a belief system. Well it isn't. In fact, it's the very opposite. There is no room for belief in the scientific method. None whatever.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 15 May 18 - 08:41 PM

If you don’t care what people believe why do you keep posting about it?

As I said, we have very different understandings of what the word "believe" means. I think it covers a much wider range than you do. Both absolute and provisional beliefs, objective and subjective beliefs, false beliefs, and true beliefs.

I'm confused by "there is no room for belief in the scientific method". Do you mean there can be no room for a conviction of certainty, and therefore that everything is in principle provisional? On the basis that the scientific method is traditionally founded on a permanent readiness to doubt - you come up with a hypothesis, and set about trying to disprove it.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Joe Offer
Date: 16 May 18 - 02:33 AM

Steve Shaw says: If I've said it once I've said it a hundred times: I don't care what people choose to believe.

And often, he adds: unless they teach it to their kids.


I'm puzzled about Steve's objecting to people "believing" science. No, you can't go on "belief" when doing scientific research. But research by competent scientists is credible, which is another word for believable, and most people other than mindless ideologues do trust (and believe) in the work of credible scientists - without need to do the research for themselves.

In a court of law, jury members believe (or do not believe) a witness to be credible/believable.

We can't do all the research on everything ourselves. We have to trust/believe somebody, or we'd never make any progress in this world. I do hope, however, that we base our belief on credible evidence.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 May 18 - 04:45 AM

Steve,
The problem with you believers is that you find it very, very hard to reconcile religious belief with science,

Who told you that? It is not my experience at all.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 May 18 - 05:14 AM

That's the point, Joe (even though we don't agree on the point). What you believe (using tbe word in its sense of carrying a conviction that can't be shaken by lack of evidence or by contrary evidence) shouldn't impinge on anyone else. No-one should ever tell a child that there's a God. Children should be encouraged to be curious, to be critical, to question everything and be shown how to find evidence to find out what's really true. No child brought up that way would ever end up believing in God. So religions can't allow that to happen. That's sad and that's what I've got against religion. I'm keeping all the art, the music and the wonderful basilicas, by the way. They're mine as much as yours.

Most believers don't have to spend their energy trying to reconcile science with religion. For most people the two can run on parallel lines. After all, everyday science is a practical matter, even for researchers. The philosophy can wait 'til later. We're all allowed our own particular daily doses of irrationality, as I've said many times. We're not Vulcans. The problem comes when religion, realising that you can't actually deny science, tries to bend it a little in order to fit the belief system. Hence we get ridiculous attempts, for example, to invent a divine force that "kick-starts" evolution or which guides the process unseen or which has some hand in "creating" things. Science can sail by unconcerned by that, but the ensuing pseudo-science fed to the gullible is damaging.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 May 18 - 05:39 AM

Dealing with what you believe or take on trust when it comes to science, it isn't the same thing as religious belief. Consciously or unconsciously, you will be be weighing up your source, you'll be considering the reputation of the scientist or journal, asking yourself if there's an axe being ground or whether there's a bit of self-publicising going on. That's where the trust comes in. You will have used reason to assess your source of information. If you truly used reason to assess the existence or not of God, you'd dismiss the concept immediately.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Jack Campin
Date: 16 May 18 - 06:38 AM

This generic waffling about religion is just tedious self-indulgent crap. Who the hell do you expect will be interested in reading it?

Meanwhile, if somebody can tell me how there came to be a fraction of the Catholic church that promotes climate change denial, and where it's currently going, I'd like to know. It's a political force that has slipped under the radar of every news outlet I follow.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 May 18 - 08:55 AM

If you truly used reason to assess the existence or not of God, you'd dismiss the concept immediately.

Not true.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 May 18 - 09:36 AM

Everything posted here is tedious, self-indulgent crap, Jack. Unless you don't think it is. Do what I do: neither read nor post to 97.268% of threads.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Joe Offer
Date: 16 May 18 - 12:19 PM

Jack Campin says: Meanwhile, if somebody can tell me how there came to be a fraction of the Catholic church that promotes climate change denial, and where it's currently going, I'd like to know. It's a political force that has slipped under the radar of every news outlet I follow.

I'm sure we have some climate change deniers in the Catholic Church, Jack, but I don't think they're a significant force. What alarms me, is all the nice one-issue Catholics who cast their votes strictly on the candidate's position on the issue of abortion. Of course, there are one-issue pro-abortion people in the US, too. Both sides can see no importance in any issue other than abortion. It IS a significant issue, but certainly homelessness and mass incarceration and immigration are far more important and far more liable to change in the current age.

Since Roe v. Wade legalized abortion in the U.S. in 1973, not one U.S. President of either party has done anything that would affect the legality of abortion. Therefore, abortion should be a non-issue in national politics in the U.S. But far too many people cast their votes on this one non-issue.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Joe Offer
Date: 16 May 18 - 01:00 PM

Interestingly, the anti-abortion movement in the U.S. Catholic Church is a lay movement. Priests don't usually get involved.

Priests don't usually talk about sex, either - but conservative lay Catholics have latched onto John Paul II's unrealistic "theology of the body" as a way to teach their kids not to do anything to embarrass the family.

Benedict and Francis have said very realistic things about sex, but the conservatives don't listen to them. They hear only John Paul II - and I have no respect at all for JPII.

Steve, I think only conservative Christians find a need to "reconcile religion with science." The rest of us see no conflict between faith and science. YOUR concept of God won't allow you to see that, and it's an interesting phenomenon. You have a fundamentalist concept of God, and you rightly reject that concept. But you cannot seem to understand that many people of faith have an understanding (or perception) of God that is radically different from your concept.

You and I see the same thing, or experience the same thing. I perceive the essence of that as divine, and you don't. That's fine with me, as long as you don't deny my perception or prevent me from expressing my perception - including expressing this to my children. My perception is no threat to your having a different perception. Both are OK.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 May 18 - 01:02 PM

Apart from the point that calling anyone at all "pro-abortion" is unfair, your overall point is skewed. I agree that there are many people in our democracies who are stupid enough to vote on a single issue (many brexit voters in this country voted solely on the basis of keeping foreigners out, for example, ignorant of the fact that their decision was going to wreck this country). But voting for a party that may be more liberal about abortion, because you support a woman's right to choose, could also mean that you are voting for a more liberal-minded party in general, a party that is more likely to resist pressure groups coming from business or religion and which may have a more humanitarian and egalitarian slant on things. If I were involved in an election in which abortion was a party issue, I can safely predict that I'd be voting for the party with the more liberal take on the issue. But it would be a cast-iron bet that that party's policies would chime with my general views far more closely than those of the other lot.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 May 18 - 01:08 PM

Expressing it to your children isn't the same as telling your children that there is a God and obliging them to sit in classrooms under crucifixes. You may be doing the right thing, but that wrong thing is still widespread the world over, and Christianity isn't even its worst manifestation. The bottom line is that either you catch children early and firmly or you watch your religion die. No getting away from it.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 May 18 - 02:08 PM

You seem to assume that having a Catholic education ensures that the children are going to grow up with a particular religious orientation. It doesn’t, as you know very well from your own experience.

Most adults I know who are practising Catholics are likely to have dropped away at some stage in their adolescent and adult lives. Many of them never return to the Church, some do.

You say that "Children should be encouraged to be curious, to be critical, to question everything and be shown how to find evidence to find out what's really true. No child brought up that way would ever end up believing in God. " I'd challenge whether that is in fact true. When people get into religion for the first time as adults, my impression is that they are more likely to end up in some fundamentalist outfits, rather than in mainstream religion. That can have some undesirable results.

Many people who are obliged learn a musical instrument in childhood, or learn a language similarly are likely to abandon it as they grow into adulthood. However if at a later stage they want to get back into it, they start with an advantage. I see that kind of thing as extending freedom rather than reducing it.
..........
As for climate change denial, no doubt you get some Catholics who buy into it. The very word Catholics does rather imply we've got all sorts. But they are very much at odds with the consensus, backed up by the consistent voice of Pope Francis. I suspect there's maybe more of that in the States, consistent with the evident fact that there are an awful lot of climate change deniers in society over there.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Jack Campin
Date: 16 May 18 - 04:01 PM

You don't get to such a senior rank in an organization as Pell has done without having a lot of supporters. And if anything, climate change denial is even more vicious in Australia than it is in the US.

It would be interesting see what sort of religious garb they dress it up in.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 May 18 - 05:52 PM

"You seem to assume that having a Catholic education ensures that the children are going to grow up with a particular religious orientation. It doesn’t, as you know very well from your own experience."

So this is supposed to be some kind of justification for telling children lies? Phew, Kevin...are you sure...?

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 May 18 - 06:44 PM

A lie is when you say something you believe to be a lie. That's not what happens in school, at least it never should. I suspect it may sometimes happen in history lessons.

I get the impression that your primary objection to exposing children to religion is that it restricts their future freedom and potentially damages them.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 May 18 - 07:09 PM

I'm an escaped Catholic, non-bitter, unharmed, Kevin. Catholicism is relatively benign when it comes to breaking free. Your granny and grandad might not like it and your mum and dad will never let it drop (believe me). But no-one is going to honour-kill you and there are plenty of people in society who are on your side, and ostracism won't really bother you much. I'm describing life in a liberal western country though, aren't I. Most Catholics live in far more straitened and illiberal circumstances, and so do billions of Muslims, for example.

If you tell an untruth to children, it doesn't matter whether you know you're telling a lie or not. Actually you really should know in any case, shouldn't you. The effect is the same and you shouldn't be using your ignorance as an excuse. It really doesn't take much by way of intellectual self-examination to realise that telling children that there is a God is a lie. I'm sorry that I can't get past this rather basic notion, and I'm a bit surprised that you don't appear to be able to see it.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 May 18 - 07:21 PM

I know you can't get past your position that any belief in God is a lie. But not everyone shares your belief, and you see that as delusional.

( And I'm using "belief" in the wider sense which I explained. That may be pedantic on my part. But using perphrasis to express it in different ways, as I have in some posts, just gets too complicated and artificial.)

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 May 18 - 08:03 PM

"I know you can't get past your position that any belief in God is a lie."

That is not my position at all. I don't know whether there's a God or not. The belief in God, subscribed to by billions, is not my concern. What is my concern is the passing on of that notion to children.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: keberoxu
Date: 18 May 18 - 02:57 PM

I don't know who AFP is but they have just
reported on a Vatican announcement.

"Every bishop in Chile"

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: mg
Date: 18 May 18 - 03:46 PM

every bishop in chile signed mass resignation letter. pope should sign one too because he was part of this mess and abused the victims. He has admitted this. he is good in some arenas but he is beyond horrible in the abuse situation. not just failure to do much of anything...but obstructing people who are trying to fix things. Not listening to people who were essentially rioting in a church in Chile. Not listening in Australia..Guam is a mess... Supposedly he publicly kissed the bishop who people are so upset about..Barros. Is there anyone in the church who has the strength to take this on as next pope? There must be one somewhere but it escapes me...What would Pope White Light have done? Died trying at the very least..oops, he did.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 May 18 - 07:34 PM

It's a pity this has to be about religion rather than the way it has been abused and manipulated by the people who invented it
Strip away the bogeymen, sky fairies and men in frocks and you have a half decent philosophy regarding how we should react to one another as human beings
If those claiming to be Christians lived up to their claim, this planet would be an infinitely more friendly and interesting place to inhabit.
Unfortunately.....

I concur totally with Tom Munnelly's description of one of Ireland's great traditional singers, Tom Lenihan - a man we recorded annually from 1974, when we first met him, to his death in January, 1990.
"Tom was a deeply religious Roman Catholic who practiced his faith without ostentation or cant. In all the years of working with him I never heard him say an unkind word about anybody. In making such a declaration I am aware that such claims can often be mere well-meaning clichés, but I wish to emphasise that I record it here as an objective statement of fact.
This lack of complication in Tom’s faith was not an indication of simplicity of mind. The simplicity Tom acquired over the years was that of wisdom and the ability to discard the peripheral while retaining core values. This was illustrated for me one day when I called to keep a recording appointment I had made with him the week before. In the meantime I had discovered that a pilgrimage to the Marian shrine at Knock for the over-sixties had been arranged on the same day. Knowing of Tom’s devoutness, I more than half expected him to be gone when I called up to Knockbrack. Sure enough, there was nobody about the house when I arrived. I was walking back to my car when I was hailed from a nearby field. Tom was in there thinning cabbages. I said: ‘I heard about the pilgrimage and I thought you’d be gone with them.’
‘Why would I travel a hundred miles? If I want God, isn’t He here with me in the garden?’
I couldn’t argue with that."

Me neither
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 18 May 18 - 08:02 PM

Bloody cracking story there, Jim. I got a bit poorly last week and I'd let my grass grow out of the chimbley pots. Spent all day today getting it back down (I've got half an acre to mow and my garden won't admit ride-ons) and even then I had to cut a whole season's growth down under my apple trees. I finished at ten to eight this evening, utterly shagged out. Spotted a shaft of warm evening sunlight on me patio, so poured meself a glass of Colombard and sat in the last bit of sun for fifteen minutes on me tod. Every bird for miles was singing its heart out and I just shut me eyes for a few minutes...

There was no God though. Everything I saw and heard in that fifteen minutes was sublimely ordinary and explicable. No need for Godly add-ons. Why can't we all just accept that the most beautiful thing about everything is just how ordinary it is?

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 May 18 - 04:28 AM

" (I've got half an acre to mow and my garden won't admit ride-ons) "
That's the problem with these gods who gave us all these beautiful things - they never offer to roll their sleeves up to help out
We (accidentally) have an acre of bad soil, rushes and now ****** moss which we refuse let become an unsightly mess
We are a mile from the Atlantic so the salty air restricts us in what we grow, we live on a coastal plain so we have to drive 20 miles to Ennis to find out what time of year it is (no real trees), and the fact that we live over the far fringes of The Burren means that the few trees we have managed to coax into taking root in the foot or so of soil before we hit limestone look as if they's just staggered back pissed from one or the local sessions - I have to prop up two conifers some time as soon as I can rely on the weather not to wash them own again.
"All god's gifts around us" is a breach of the trades desription act around here
On the other hand, I understand from what somebody said last night, that shortly I will be able so sit in the garden and watch and listen to the skylark rise and fall in the next field, we are starting to be woken up early in the morning by the ***** cuckoos, the swallows are back with a vengeance with their aerobatic displays and the sheltered spot outside our back door is crawling with robins, finches, tits, stone-chats (now and then) and collard doves (and unfortunately the occasional sparrow hawk) all clambering to be fed
Tonight we'll settle down to Casualty to the sounds of the Herons clacking their way home over the road
My heart was nearly broken a few months ago when a lady living in the town next to our paper shop asked me not to feed the two beautiful white Peace Doves because they shit all over her doorstep - she asked me did want them, but we couldn't work out a way to get them home !
You win some - you lose some
Wouldn't have it any other way
Jim

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 May 18 - 05:44 AM

"That's the problem with these gods who gave us all these beautiful things - they never offer to roll their sleeves up to help out"

Heheh, that's the line of the week is that. Must remember to use it next time I'm having a God-related ding-dong with Joe... :-)

Jim, the Burren is one of the most exciting botanical locations in these islands. That thin soil on limestone, coupled with mild Atlantic winters, is the key. Maybe not the greatest for your garden, though...

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 May 18 - 07:09 AM

"Maybe not the greatest for your garden, though..."
Surprisingly, though, it produces the most desirable cattle in the country
I attended a lecture at our local history group and amused the audience my mispronouncing the title and told them I thought it was about dancing - the title was "boolying in the Burren" - see if you can find it on Wiki
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Donuel
Date: 20 May 18 - 07:41 PM

One way to take the rape factor out of the hands of priests is to let them marry.

Another is to use AI and robotics to take the rape factor away from people is to build and maintain sexual predator robots who will rape children automatically instead of religious people and policies ;^/

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: mg
Date: 20 May 18 - 09:00 PM

I can not believe what I am reading here. Do you mean this? If you do moderators need to be involved.

---

Yes, it was a weird comment, mg. We usually don't moderate for content. Our job is just to keep the peace.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Iains
Date: 21 May 18 - 04:20 AM

" "boolying in the Burren" A form of transhumance formerly practised in many countries. It would normally refer to moving stock to higher pastures in the summer e.g.alpine pastures. These pastures would have dwellings associated with them known as a hafod in Wales, a Shieling in Scotland. In Ireland transhumance pastures were known as Booley, Boley, Bouley, Buaile and Boola. These names survive in many place names such as Buaile h'Anraoi in Kilcommon parish, Erris, North Mayo, where the landscape still clearly shows the layout of the rundale system of agriculture. The livestock, usually cattle, was moved from a permanent lowland village to summer pastures in the mountains. The appearance of "Summerhill" (Irish: Cnoc an tSamhraidh) in many placenames also bears witness to the practice. Mentioned in the Brehon Laws, booleying would have dated back to the Early Medieval period or even earlier. The practice was widespread in the west of Ireland up until the time of the Second World War.
The Burren was the reverse process, where cattle were wintered on the Burren. In most places even a traditional sward would be heavily poached by cattle outwintering. The far better drainage of the limestone Burren would be far more resistant to poaching and this enabled outwintering to occur.


https://roaringwaterjournal.com/tag/booleying/

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: keberoxu
Date: 21 May 18 - 12:44 PM

Shades of the Swiss alps, Iains.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 May 18 - 01:03 PM

You got it Iains
The Burren was one of the sites of a national campaign against the division of land in the latter half of the 19th century
In the 1880s The British Government instructed the breakup of the private estates belonging to absentee English landlords, but, true to form, they allocated them to wealthy farmers rather than those in need
A national campaign of cattle rustling was embarked on by local small-farmers who would drive the cattle through the towns, shouting and blowing horns - they would then be driven onto large open spaces like The Burren, leaving the owner to find and reclaim them
The campaign was officially called off in 1911, but persisted in Clare, Tipperary and parts of Galway up to Independence, and in North and East Clare, beyond that
This campaign produced a number of songs
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Donuel
Date: 21 May 18 - 01:41 PM

Climate deniers never die
They just watch the oceans rise

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 May 18 - 08:15 AM

Another jobby just hit the fan
A care home run by Nuns in Northern Ireland has been found to have arranged illegal and forced adoptions
Northern Ireland has yet to enquire on clerical sexual abuse - this should do the trick
Jim Caaarroll

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Donuel
Date: 22 May 18 - 09:50 AM

AI robots to assume the crimes by priests while clergy go to prison, in order to maintain the legacy of child rape, is a different take on a cynical joke by Jeff Jeffries. Weird but cutting humor imo


The absurd can often highlight what people numbly come to accept as a new normal and see with new eyes. As a cartoon in the New Yorker Magazine may do.


Joe should know and does know why I sometimes use the absurd.


I assume most but not all people can tell the difference between an editorial cartoon and an expose'.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Raggytash
Date: 22 May 18 - 10:07 AM

There have numerous occasion when posters have claimed that the various churches have done much to curtail clerical abuse. Some would argue they have never done enough, the article attached links to one such.

Wilson

He will be sentenced next month.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Joe Offer
Date: 22 May 18 - 12:04 PM

Some Catholic bishops did a good job of dealing with the child abuse scandal from the very beginning. Many were mediocre at the beginning but adopted good measures as pressure against them got strong. And a few were downright criminal in their conduct and deserve to be in prison.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Joe Offer
Date: 22 May 18 - 12:12 PM

Some want to blame Rome for the entire scandal, but I don't think they understand the structure of the Catholic Church, which is a loose federation of autonomous dioceses.
The U.S. government is not responsible for most crime within its borders. That is the function of the states. The organization of the Catholic Church is similar. Ratzinger had to move mountains to get any central control of the situation, and that control is still limited.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Raggytash
Date: 22 May 18 - 12:27 PM

"The U.S. government is not responsible for most crime within its borders."

I would hope it's not responsible for any crime.

Sorry Joe, couldn't resist!

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Joe Offer
Date: 22 May 18 - 01:16 PM

(moderate grin)
Yeah, but do you understand what I mean?

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 May 18 - 02:54 PM

You still appear not to have grasped how high up the tree this goes Joe
If the revelations of a cover up by the Vatican shown in the documentary 'Mea Maxima Culpa' didn't ring alarm bells, the Pope abusing the Barros whistle blowers should have
This is no longer a case of a "few bad apples" or a diocesan matter - the rot now goes from top to bottom
No matter how the Referendum goes on Friday, thanks to the scurrilous way the Bishops have sided with the very worst of the "No" campaigners will have left bitterly divided congregations
I have no time for the church, but I did not want to see this happen
Stupid - stupid - stupid !
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Joe Offer
Date: 22 May 18 - 03:34 PM

No question that it goes "high up the tree," Jim. I have studied this scandal for over 30 years, and I have been highly critical of those who were guilty. But part of understanding, is understanding the organizational structure. Put the blame where blame is due. One huge factor in all this was John Paul II. Naming him a saint was a travesty.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: mg
Date: 22 May 18 - 04:14 PM

I think there are some things to evil to joke about period. And the time is already here that people are doing evil things with AI and robots etc. I also think on public websites there are lines that should not be crossed and this did.

The rot in the church is not only at the trunk and the tops..it is in the roots themselves. We need to go back to the original, hopefully cleaner version. This happened with the Essenes I believe, and the churches founded in England and France by Joseph of Arimathea and Mary Magdalene. Anything from Constantine on is suspect and incorporated all sorts of Roman practices, assumptions etc. Of course, we killed the healthier aspects of Catholicism by killing Cathars, forcing the English church to adopt Roman ways and supervision etc. Big nasty mess.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Donuel
Date: 22 May 18 - 04:37 PM

A go along to get along decision can be made by members of any organization. This eventually becomes what we call culture, no matter how despicable it may become. You know, like Congress.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 May 18 - 07:12 AM

Whatever the Referendum result this week, the chuch will be considerably weaker thanks to the scurrilous behaviour of the Bishops in co-operating with the "No" fundamentalists - their behaviour has also divided Ireland   
When/if the dust dies down on this one (if it does - the fundamentalists are threatening to challenge the referendum result in court if it doesn't go their way) the church has another fight on its hands regarding its demanding baptismal Certificates before enrolling pupils in the 90 plus percent of schools under their control

Just read that Adelaide's Bishop Wilson is facing a jail sentence for covering up sex abuse (he told the victims to say 10 Hail Marys and forget it happened)
This really is an indication of the urgent need of a tree surgeon
Jim Caarroll

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 May 18 - 08:56 AM

Another Northern Irish clergyman has been accused of Clerical abuse
This really isn't going to go away until the Vatican deals with it openly
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Raggytash
Date: 23 May 18 - 09:19 AM

I'm not 100% sure of this Jim, but I would suggest his words may be in contravention of the "Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006"

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Raggytash
Date: 23 May 18 - 09:30 AM

Sorry, my last post was to the wrong thread !!

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Jack Campin
Date: 23 May 18 - 09:54 AM

Child sexual abuse may be a serious matter but it is NOWHERE NEAR in the same league of threats facing humanity and the planet as climate change.

I've just spent a bit of time googling for the Catholic response to climate change - and overwhelmingly the institution has been on the same side as the scientific consensus. Nor is it all talk. This is a very significant move:

https://www.greengrants.org/2017/10/26/church/

I have close to zero interest in rants from all-mouth-and-no-trousers keyboard warriors with a thing about clerical perversions. But if somebody like Pell is trying to make Trump effectively Pope with dogma written by Breitbart, that MATTERS.

Subject: RE: Catholic sexual abuse & climate denial
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 May 18 - 01:48 PM

"NOWHERE NEAR in the same league of threats facing humanity and the planet as climate change."
Can't disagree with that but have you ever thought that the nasty things happening to our planet might be God taking it out on the baddie who misbehave in the way the priests did?
Food for thought !!!
Jim Carroll