[Closed] Catholic church and child abuse.

Mr Woppit, stop being such a cock please. Your hectoring stance does no-one any favours.

The usual word is "strident". I'm just typing words. Would you prefer it if I plastered little smiley faces over everything or obscured the text with "please don't be offended but" or "I'm only saying this" or other such fluffy reassurances?

Look - 😆 😆 😆 8) 😀

Try to imagine that I'm speaking in a polite, sotto voce tone with a friendly smile on my face.

O.K now?

Mr Woppit - I'm not 'indoctrinated', thanks all the same. You know nothing about my life, let alone the lives of my parents. My dad is dead now, but I'm sure he'd be pissing himself laughing about all your talk of 'brainwashing', especially as you're so insistent on quoting Richard Dawkins at every opportunity. Now, I cant carry on voicing my disgust at Ratzinger and his pals, can I? And I'm not about to recant my faith based purely on your repetitive arguments, am I? So where do we go from here?

Dear dear me. Some fine closed-mindedness on this thread.. Mr Woppit I am looking at you!

You seem to think that the search for answers in life is simply about what created the world or what happens when we die. An embarassing and intellectually feeble position for a thinking adult I would say, something I would expect from an emerging adolescent.

The reason I say that it because the existence or otherwise of God is largely academic, since it's unprovable either way. Religion is *really* about a doctrine and morals, and a code by which to live one's life. Now most people need this; you either get it from a religion or from the generally accepted ideals of your society. In your case those are basically the same as religious ideas anyway for historical reasons. The only difference is the idea of critical scientific thought, but that in many ways only tries to answer the most basic questions.

Other people are just as intelligent as you but they see the world differently. Maybe isntead of ranting at them to change their minds, you might actually take the time to learn about their point of view. And you have to be open minded about it...

Or, to put it another way, your juvenile rantings give atheists a bad name, so take it easy!

Would you prefer it if I plastered little smiley faces over everything or obscured the text with "please don't be offended but" or "I'm only saying this" or other such fluffy reassurances?

Hehehe.. human communication is a very subtle thing, I guess taht's something else you need to learn about 🙂

I have quoted Richard Dawkins once.

You may express your disgust at Ratzinger and his gang of abusers as much as you like - you don't need my permission.

Please deal with my proposal - Religion propagates itself by the indoctrination of children, placed there by the parents.

On your more specific point - if this general point does not apply to you - perhaps you would like to tell me how you bacame a cultist?

Smiley face, moderate voice, friendly smile, etc etc etc.

[i]I'm not about to recant my faith based purely on your repetitive arguments, am I? So where do we go from here? [/i]

I think he ties you to a tree, and shoots you repeatedly with a crossbow while you look towards heaven with a beatific expression playing across your faintly effeminate countenance and little rivulets of blood trickle over your well-toned torso. 😉

[img] [/img]

I was brought up (or brainwashed) a Catholic. Then once I was old enough to think for myself, I kinda made up m mind that there "might" be a god (all this brainwashing takes a while to unindoctrinate) and then after another few years decided it was all bollocks and that I was then an atheist.

However, the likes of Mr. Woppit, who, despite being told he is sounding like the the most enormous cock (you have to imagine me saying that...how do you put it...how do you justify sounding like a cock...oh yes, there it is...strident!!...yes, stridently) on the thread today, is convincing me that maybe Catholicism might be a good idea after all...

STFU dude...you're giving atheists a bad name.

whoppity why the pleasure in being so offensive it does just make you look like a c0ck even to those of us who are aetheists want to put some distance between your view and our own.

Religion proagates itself by the brainwashing and indoctrination of children, placed there by the parents.

I suspect further discussion of this with you would be like discussing matters of faith with a devout person. Utterly pointless you are both beyond persuassion and at times you also appear incapable of rational discourse due to your hatred. Shame that no point holding on to hate according ot the Buddha 😉

I've been a member of this forum for about three years now. Today is the first time I've ever mentioned the fact that I'm a catholic, and I only did so in order to say that (a) I disagree with the churches apparent lack of concern regarding the actions of some of its priests, and (b) that not all catholics blindly accept it's doctrine. To say I wish I'd have kept my mouth shut would be an understatement.
BigDummy - if you replace the phrase 'well-toned' with the phrase 'well-rounded', you'd be much nearer the mark!

"Every Catholic is responsible."
How does that make any sense? I've already stated my position on this, and I will not accept that simply by being a member of the catholic church I am in some way condoning the acts and omissions of other members. By that argument, would you also state that all muslims are responsible for 911, etc? This is a long standing problem that has long been ignored /condoned by the vatican, which desperately needs addressing, now.

I think the problem a lot of non-Catholics have is that the Roman Catholic Church has such a rigid heirachy, with the infallible Pope at the head. I find it a bit odd that a Catholic can be excommunicated or put under interdict for supporting a woman's right to abortion, or engaging in pre-marital sex, but not for repeatedly and systematically covering up paedophile priests.

I think that's why people brand the Catholic Church as a whole, because the top layers are rotten. The question is, if you're on the bottom level of the heirachy and you question the moral authority of the Church leaders, are you still really a Catholic?

It's a shame - when I was little, I used to be taken to Catholic Church by my best friend's family when I stayed over for the weekend. I wasn't a Catholic, so I found it a bit overwhelming - why are they wearing those outfits? Why are half of the hymns and readings in Latin? Oooh, and what's with all the sparkly gold stuff? But everyone was incredibly welcoming, but not in a JOIN US sort of way. And my friend's parents remain to this day some of the most awesome people I know - whether that's because of their religion or despite of it, I don't know.

It must be incredibly difficult for Catholics to try and reconcile their faith and their dedication to their church with the shadier aspects of the organisation. I guess they can't win - if they do question it, they get people like me saying, "But doesn't that make you a rubbish Catholic if you don't have blind faith in the Pope?", and if they don't then they get labelled mindless indoctrinated drones. And sometimes both! 😛

Possibly the only solution is for Catholics to go on strike/wee in the Pope's shoes/own the Church's leaders with some bombers.

[i]To say I wish I'd have kept my mouth shut would be an understatement. [/i]

If I may say so, your decency and patience on this thread is remarkable.

You seem to think that the search for answers in life is simply about what created the world or what happens when we die.

That is your perception and of course, you're welcome to it. I'm not searching for answers however, merely asking for a response to a proposal.

what happens when we die

We die.

The reason I say that it because the existence or otherwise of God is largely academic

No, it's simply a matter of evidence. There being none, however, puts the weight of responsibility on the shoulders of those who propose god's existence. I am quite happy to stop being an atheist and accept that a god exists. All anyone has to do is demonstrate it.

Religion is *really* about a doctrine and morals, and a code by which to live one's life.

Not so. Religion is founded on a belief in a god. Or gods. Without this, it wouldn't be a religion.

Maybe isntead of ranting at them to change their minds, you might actually take the time to learn about their point of view.

I fail to see how anything I have written is a "rant". I think this is a projection on your part. I am actually trying to learn the point of view. I have done nothing but ask for it for some time now, but all I get back are either confused critiques like yours, or expressions of hurt feelings and accusations of bullying.

Shall I repeat the proposition again, and would you and other religious apologists care to actually deal with it in a meaningful exchange? At all?

 

Religion proagates itself by the brainwashing and indoctrination of children, placed there by the parents.

ah another of your open and genuine questions again again it reads like you would listen to the answer it really does.

It is not a question, it's a proposition.

Which nobody has yet dealt with - I am incapable of "listening" to something that has not been "said"!

Would it be any easier for you if I preceded it with "Do you think that..."?

I think he ties you to a tree, and shoots you repeatedly with a crossbow while you look towards heaven with a beatific expression playing across your faintly effeminate countenance and little rivulets of blood trickle over your well-toned torso.

That made me chuckle. Brilliant. 😆

On your more specific point - if this general point does not apply to you - perhaps you would like to tell me how you bacame a cultist?

Smiley face, moderate voice, friendly smile, etc etc etc.

You know Mr Woppit, you really are an objectionable tw*t, but as youre so insistent, here goes. My Dad came over from Ireland when he was in his twenties - he never spoke about it, but I got the impression it had something to do with the troubles. He had been raised a catholic, but was non-practising and was often (especially when he was pissed) quite outspoken in his condemnation of organised religion. He then met and married my Mam, who was a devout and practising catholic. Cue a lifetime of 'interesting' debate. None of my siblings were brought up as catholics, it was something we never really gave much time to, to be honest. When I was born, I was premature, weighed two pounds and wasnt expected to survive, which allowed my mam the excuse to have me baptised as a catholic - you can imagine how delighted my dad was! This may not fit in with your theory of brainwashing and indoctrination, for which I can only apologise. I keep my beliefs very much to myself, I dont follow doctrine blindly, and I dont judge others according to my own faith. You can call your own way of thinking whatever you want to call it, but you should perhaps try exercising a little less eagerness in condemning others. 😉 (that smiley was supposed to be ironic)

Religion propagates itself by the indoctrination of children, placed there by the parents.

To an extent I suppose it does, although it isn't a simple "yes" or "no" question. I'm sure many relegious folk have been converted later in life. My parents weren't Christians until their mid-thirties, so they can't have been indoctrinated. I was a Christian until my late teens (10+ years ago now I hasten to add!), I think some may say I was indoctrinated, but I reckon that word is a bit loaded. Although I can't remember being given a choice of relegions (or atheisim for that matter) so maybe...

What is certain is that in the case of my parents and me the above asertion is incorrect. Interesting debate argument though!

barnsleymitch - Member

On your more specific point - if this general point does not apply to you - perhaps you would like to tell me how you bacame a cultist?

Smiley face, moderate voice, friendly smile, etc etc etc.

You know Mr Woppit, you really are an objectionable tw*t, but as youre so insistent, here goes. My Dad came over from Ireland when he was in his twenties - he never spoke about it, but I got the impression it had something to do with the troubles. He had been raised a catholic, but was non-practising and was often (especially when he was pissed) quite outspoken in his condemnation of organised religion. He then met and married my Mam, who was a devout and practising catholic. Cue a lifetime of 'interesting' debate. None of my siblings were brought up as catholics, it was something we never really gave much time to, to be honest. When I was born, I was premature, weighed two pounds and wasnt expected to survive, which allowed my mam the excuse to have me baptised as a catholic - you can imagine how delighted my dad was! This may not fit in with your theory of brainwashing and indoctrination, for which I can only apologise. I keep my beliefs very much to myself, I dont follow doctrine blindly, and I dont judge others according to my own faith.

Interesting. So, if you don't mind me asking (see what I did there?) if your own induction into cultism wasn't from the result of parental subduction, why did you become a catholic in particular and a christian in general?

Lynch mob mentality at its best. You can always rely on STW for the righteous few to shoot down anyone who dares voice an opinion slightly awry from their own!

It's O.K., I can take it. I'm a big boy... 😉

Catholicism wasnt something I chose, as my last post clearly stated. My christianity, faith, whatever you want to call it, is my own business, which appears to be of more interest to you than it does to myself - why is that, exactly?
I believe there are other aspects of my life (twenty odd years as a psychiatric nurse, the adoption of two brilliant kids from a less than ideal background, an extensive period of work in orphanages in Romania, for example) that are far more interesting and worthy of discussion. Religion - why is that more important?

I wouldn't worry Barnsleymitch. You're onto a loser here I reckon.

Go to say Woppit, you're vitriol does you no favours. Do you have similar issues with Germans and Japanese of a similar age? Or those raised behind the Iron Curtain?

You preach (and that is the correct word) intolerance of those who you accuse of intolerance.

barnsleymitch - Member

Catholicism wasnt something I chose, as my last post clearly stated. My christianity, faith, whatever you want to call it, is my own business, which appears to be of more interest to you than it does to myself - why is that, exactly?
I believe there are other aspects of my life (twenty odd years as a psychiatric nurse, the adoption of two brilliant kids from a less than ideal background, an extensive period of work in orphanages in Romania, for example) that are far more interesting and worthy of discussion. Religion - why is that more important?

If you don't want to talk about it that's fine. There's no rule that says you have to.

As a psychiatric nurse however, what do you make of my general point regarding the indoctrination of children? Bearing in mind that you don't have to join in that discussion if you don't want to, although I'd be interested to hear why you would not want to put me in MY place with a convincing argument, given the opportunity...

I thank Jesus for bank holidays.

Why is contraception evil BTW. Where in the Bible does it say this?

Probably because he knows he doesn't have to reason with someone who is unable to take on board a viewpoint different to his?! I'm sure that would put me off wanting to argue. Seems pointless does it not?!

"As a psychiatric nurse however, what do you make of my general point regarding the indoctrination of children? Bearing in mind that you don't have to join in that discussion if you don't want to, although I'd be interested to hear why you would not want to put me in MY place with a convincing argument, given the opportunity..."
Because, as you've already inferred with that last statement, there cannot be a 'convincing argument' based purely on faith, as well you know. You've already placed yourself in the position of my intellectual superior, so please, be happy with that, and leave me the **** alone.

vinnyeh - Member

Go to say Woppit, you're vitriol does you no favours. Do you have similar issues with Germans and Japanese of a similar age? Or those raised behind the Iron Curtain?

You preach (and that is the correct word) intolerance of those who you accuse of intolerance.

Not at all. I have never preached intolerance of religion. Quote me, I dare you. I do however, uphold my right to argue against it. I am perfectly happy to support the right of anyone to believe in whatever they want. I don't see however, why a conversation about religion shouldn't be as robust as a conversation about anything else. You don't find such a touchy level of sensitivity being demanded in conversations about football, or the weather, or favourite pop groups for instance. I can't see why religion has to be put in a special category, frankly.

And hora - stop bloody trolling, you whey faced poltroon.

vinnyeh - Member
Go to say Woppit, you're vitriol does you no favours. Do you have similar issues with Germans and Japanese of a similar age? Or those raised behind the Iron Curtain?

You preach (and that is the correct word) intolerance of those who you accuse of intolerance.

Another straw man - you can't choose your nationality.

You've already placed yourself in the position of my intellectual superior, so please, be happy with that

Well, if I had and am, I might be if I was in an ego-polishing mood. However I think it would be more accurate to say that I placed my argument in a superior position to yours - assuming that it was following the usual reason/faith arc, as you seem to imply:

Because, as you've already inferred with that last statement, there cannot be a 'convincing argument' based purely on faith

IRMC.

PS:

leave me the **** alone

By all means.

For being born into a Western Catholic Family I pretty much seem to be responsible for every evil in the world. Oh well Im not going to worry about it too much.

Is this a new form of the Nuremburg Defence..... I was only follwing Gods order as given on Earth by his appointed representative Der Pope?

You've totally missed my point here one of the key words was "Western" which am I meant to be fixing first the horrors of colonialism ? The situation on the Middle East ? The problems with the catholic church ?

Get real man, the simple fact is that the all western nations* are morally bankrupt organsiations, and to choose to continue to passively support their unbelievable evils is to actively engage in the commission of those self same evils. Or do you think millions of Europeans/Americans turning their back on their nation publically stating their reasons would have no impact on the way the franchise is run ?

Or would they just go to war with who ever they fancied because there was oil there ? Which is what they did despite all the protests.

* or put in which ever organisation/nation you fancy because none is perfect.

Nick the child molesting clergy and get them on the sex offenders register.

Should keep them from abusing any more vunerable kids that are dragged along to a place of worship

Unfortunately like all paedophiles they are very devious and no doubt use fear to keep their victims from reporting them

Tijuana Taxi - Member

Nick the child molesting clergy and get them on the sex offenders register.

Should keep them from abusing any more vunerable kids that are dragged along to a place of worship

Staring with Ratzinger the second he steps off the plane in September.

* or put in which ever organisation/nation you fancy because none is perfect.

But no sovereign nation claims to be infallible.

I have never preached intolerance of religion. Quote me, I dare you.

"The indoctrination of children into religious dogma, is a form of child abuse" - Richard Dawkins.
Religion is filth.
I find your equating of a free and balanced upbringing where children are allowed to see all sides of the argument and are allowed to make up their own minds, with the sort of disgusting brainwashing that happens in religious cults like yours, to be an exact product of the indoctrination that I am talking about.

If you accept the Dawkins quote, then unless you're advocating child abuse, it follows that you're being intolerant.

FWIW, Catholicism is one of the most passive Christian faiths- it seems to demand little of it's followers, and makes little impact on their lives, in comparison to say, one of the Pentacostal churches. Certainly, followers seem less excited by it than your average football fan does about their team.
Brainwashing is a term more applicable to some of the more extreme, fundamentalist offshoots.

*I was raised a Catholic, dabbled with 'born again Christianity as a pubescent teenager, then came out the other side as a staunch atheist. There are fairly reasonable arguments for the existence of God, the historical existence of Jesus, and the veracity of the Bible as a historical document, but any stance beyond neutral will always require a leap of faith. 8)

whether that's because of their religion or despite of it

It's not because of religion. Nice people are nice, bad people are bad, it's got nothing (in my experience) to do with what religion they are 🙂

As for Mr Woppit - your tone has been very confrontational. You are rubbishing other people's very personal beliefs (and pressing your own) quite agressively. This really is't on, from a social point of view. The Christians on this thread have behaved far more decently than you.

From a philosophical one though, your position seems no different to me to that of the catholics. So you are no different to a Christian Evangelist in many ways. After all, you can no more prove that there is no supreme being watching all this with a big smirk on his face than Christans can prove there is one with an expression of divine love. We might all be lab rats in a cage on drugs, for all we know.

When my daughter asks me if God exists, I won't say "No". I'll say "well it's hard to say, some folk believe so and some don't". Then when she goes on to ask more questions I'll answer them honestly and she can make her own mind up.

What would you say to your kids Wopster?

When my daughter asks me if God exists, I won't say "No". I'll say "well it's hard to say, some folk believe so and some don't". Then when she goes on to ask more questions I'll answer them honestly and she can make her own mind up.

Quite right too!

Brainwashing is a term more applicable to some of the more extreme, fundamentalist offshoots.

Interesting view. The inquisition. The murder of african followers by denying them contraception to prevent aids. The support of the execrable "Mother" Theresa. The support of Hitler. Anti-semitism. and so on and so on... Ending up with the protection, through a worldwide network, of paedophile child torturers. This is not extreme?

it seems to demand little of it's followers, and makes little impact on their lives

It demands that they belive that a ridiculous and stupid numbskull in a silly hat is the earthly representative of the will of an allegedly all powerful "god".

Who would not wish for it's followers to be free of that particular psychological choking entramellment?

There are fairly reasonable arguments for the existence of God,

Name one.

he historical existence of Jesus

Disputed. No evidence.

the veracity of the Bible as a historical document

A huge misrepresentation. You will few other documents of such internal innacuracies, impossibilities and self-contradictions. One example:

If "jesus" was alone in the garden of gethsemane during his conversation with his "god", who was able to report it?

There are many others, geographical, historical and just plain impossible.

the sort of disgusting brainwashing that happens in religious cults like yours, to be an exact product of the indoctrination that I am talking about.

Any type of upbringing is brainwashing. Surely you could argue any ideas you put in the mind of a child could be viewed as evil ?

Personally I could see labeling a child as an english child would evil, both the first and second world wars were partially caused by nationalism and this was encouraged in the 19th century during the raising of children. It is still something which is encouraged to a more or lesser extent in most countries in the world.

If you raised a child with out any influence you would nt be raising them at all.

The inquisition. The murder of african followers by denying them contraception to prevent aids. The support of the execrable "Mother" Theresa. The support of Hitler. Anti-semitism. and so on and so on... Ending up with the protection, through a worldwide network, of paedophile child torturers. This is not extreme?

It's not because of religion. Nice people are nice, bad people are bad, it's got nothing (in my experience) to do with what religion they are

9/11. Good people will usually do good things. Bad people will usually do bad things, but for good people to do bad things, that takes religion.

As for Mr Woppit - your tone has been very confrontational.

Value judgement based, as far as I can tell, on projection.

You are rubbishing other people's very personal beliefs (and pressing your own) quite agressively.

I disagree, I feel "assertive" would be more accurate. As to rubbishing - if you mean treating them as rubbish then yes, but so what? Would you complain if I was discussing the merits of various football teams? Of course not. Why should religion demand special consideration?

The Christians on this thread have behaved far more decently than you.

On the contrary, they are generally obfuscatory, snide, resentful, misrepresentative and sneeringly rude. But that really doesn't bother me.

After all, you can no more prove that there is no supreme being watching all this with a big smirk on his face than Christans can prove there is one with an expression of divine love

The burden of proof rests with the proposer, not the opposer. I am constantly surprised at how this needs to be reiterated, it's simple enough to understand. I can certainly say that there remains not the slightest bit of evidence that such a thing as a god exists - fact. Otherwise, why would the argument always end up with the religious saying "Oh well, it needs a leap of faith"? Absence of evidence is evidence of absence. If I were to say that an invisible giant green snail lives on the roof of the National Gallery, would it be reasonable to suggest that someone who disagrees (for obvious reasons) should "prove" that it does not? Of course not.

What would you say to your kids Wopster?

If I had any - having explained a selection of the supposed natures of some of these gods - that many people propose the existence of a god, or gods. That there is no agreement between different groups of proposers as to what form or forms this "god" or these "gods" take, but when the universe is examined, no evidence can be found to support the assertions of these widely different and contradictory groups of believers in these non-evidential things.

If you raised a child with out any influence you would nt be raising them at all.

I refer you to my previous response.

Yes this is an extreme version of what the Church stands for and is as accurate a decription of them as Genesis is of how the world was created.

Not so. The catholic church has been documented as being responsible, through it's "theology", for all the events that I describe.

The book of genesis is a myth tale written by ignorant Bronze-age sheepherders.

No thanks i dont want to discuss facts with you like those you oppose you do not appear to need these to hold your view as infallible

I haven't the slightest idea what this is supposed to mean.

The Pope is never going to say; "Sorry, it was all our collective fault" for one very simple and very Secular reason...If he does, it opens up a whole bunch of lawsuits aimed at the Vatican, and there goes the Church, and all it's money...