"Violence was their creed"

Fine ... as you say, 'the Crimes are Equal'.
though each to be judged 'individually' . But's to separate by preference is worrying, looks like a case of pot calling the kettle black... to me.

 

How can you be so certain?

Besides, I have said before I have known religion to bring a lot of strengh and comfort to a lot of people.

Thats fair enough in my book.......It doesn't float my boat.....but horses for courses.

 

I am certain that anyone who needs to fall back on a non existant god is weak of mind and unable to cope with the rigours of life using their own brain.

 

Another low-wattage entry. You can't see that it is morally much worse for the religious to commit these crimes.

Meanwhile, DavidF's mind is so "open" that everything seems to have fallen out of it.

 

I quite agree, religious people committing these crimes are more reprehensible as they should be examples of right conduct and moral rectitude. The recent revelations of alleged abuse of drug addicts in Serbia by priests is yet another example.

There are, however, millions of other religious people who would never in a million years consider committing such abuse. Let's put the blame squarely where it belongs - on the perpetrators of these acts and those who shield them.

 

They are presumably too busy oppressing women, opposing scientists, twisting education, persecuting homosexuals, murdering adulterers, mutilating and terrorising children, etc etc, to have enough energy left over to run a children's home?

Or maybe they are the mostly harmless unthinking donkeys who never bother to question the absurdities put forward by religion.

 

That is just what I expected from such an intolerant person as yourself.

 

The irony is presumably unintentional. I am the most tolerant person you could meet. Religions are intolerant, by their very nature. They prohibit this, that, and, especially, the other.

Why should we continue to tolerate these silly, baseless ideas, especially when they cause so much harm?

 

That seems to be contradictory.

By "the other" are you referring to matters of sexuality?
If so, I do not see it as intolerant to prohibit adultery, for example. That would appear to be proscribed in most societies. Sex is not prohibited, by the way, merely restricted to within marriage between man and woman.
Of course I can only speak of Christianity. 'Religion' is a very wide term which encompasses very different creeds and practices, as you are well aware.

These discussions, however, are always a downward spiral and inevitably end up with insults to believers. Why do you never seem to post comments on other matters? Or any positive posts (on any subject)? If I have missed them, I apologize and would appreciate being referred to them.

 

than the aforementioned doctors, teachers, prison officers and residential school employees, are you Potty

 

Well, it isn't. I am not in favour of banning religions, just educating the unfortunates who have so far failed to escape their childhood brainwashing.

Yep. Religions are obsessed with sex. Whether it be childhood sexual mutilation (including male circumcision), homosexuality, sex before marriage, you name it.

I read in the Herald today that the church of Scotland are currently tying themselves in knots over the non-issue of the appointment of a homosexual minister, or bishop, or something of that nature. The "modernisers" are pointing out that the "kirk" has been "wrong" in the past over such issues as slavery. What nonsense it all is! They can suddenly change their weak minds about slavery, and now homosexuality, purely because they sense that the moral zeitgeist has moved on in the past couple of hundred years, and now their very silly, but previously firmly-held beliefs, look very silly indeed.

Believers deserve to have their beliefs challenged. It might make them think, although apparently not in some cases.

 

No. Those people do not set themselves up as moral arbiters, who get their rules directly from the all-powerful creator of everything. These god-given rules are, of course, elastic, and the more outlandish ones are carefully airbrushed away whenever they become politically embarrassing.

I pointed out this difference in a previous post.

 

Missed this gem the first time. So, er, let me get this right.... in your belief system, god creates homosexuals, but then prohibits them from enjoying sex with one another? That's a good one!

 

an exact same Crime that was committed by a doctor a priest a teacher a prison officer and residential school employee was equal in the eyes of the law.
You then seperate the equal with your taunted imagination allowing nothingness the control to build a picture that you have freely given your hand by manipulation of your judgement to bless , you then see what you are shown, and believe it to be true, though your instinct tells you that there is something amis but as you cannot truly take control of yourself.. so you look to question, gravitate toward those you sense have fallen for the same trick, not knowing that you are fading amongst another level of the same game, when in.. you then try to open a dialogue in order to destroy the control/level in order to escape back to what you imagine is yourself, *this you repeat*, time and time again, and regardless of how high or low the power runs your shared self will only take so much before it takes over, you or those you imagine are absolute in open conciousness may just as well be dreaming an equal illusion.

 

These discussions, however, are always a downward spiral and inevitably end up with insults to believers

If I was you I'd just keep well out of it.

 

But you never do quite manage to keep out of it yourself, do you?

spica, your post is yet another impenetrable word salad. I'm sure you are attempting to make a point, but it's been lost in non-translation.

 

spica, I see from other posts that you can write perfectly intelligible posts, when sober. How about trying again?

One huge difference between doctors, teachers, prison officers and residential school employees, and the catholic church is that the church is an international organisation, with a HQ in Rome, and a prominent and politically-influential head - the pope. The doctors, teachers, prison officers and residential school employees don't have a comparable structure.

I'm disappointed Czechchris has wimped out of the discussion.

 

of the aforementioned... a crime committed by one is no worse than a crime committed by another..i doubt very much that any victim of x violation would have a personal preference as of the professional attachment (s) of the abuser...and neither would the court.
The Catholic Church, an international organization, ok, with over a Billion followers, that would include the likes of doctors, teachers, prison officers and residential school employees, of course, the doctors, teachers, prison officers and residential school employees could also be part of the one in six people that are atheist..and so on, and all is well as long a their actions/intentions stay 'good'. So why when 'bad' would the 'moral arbiters' crime's be seen as any worse than the 78% that believe in god, or 15% that believe in a universal spirit or 6% that don't believe in either the 0.5% other or 1% with no opinion, because the said arbiter is placed and seen as holding a position of trust ? because they hold influential position ? it seems that the general consensus would agree with that conclusion, and i say they are wrong to believe so, as doing so would place them beyond sin, held as perfect, as clean as the driven snow etc, why ? because they passed an exam, because they spoke the words wanted, because they wear the collar of righteousness..of piety, but couldn't these lordly qualities have the ability to fall into the wrong hands, couldn't they be twisted into and deformed by a cheating mind, in my opinion..of course they could, and do, and have been, but until that moment arises, and we would hope never, we have to take the good word for what it is, we do that with each other, every day, as each of us of beautiful way hopes never to cross into the abyss or see another fall from grace, to believe it 'couldn't' or shouldn't happen to those that pertain to the highest of values is childishly naive, i only wish the world of man had such a short history of the unclean, that then opposite 'would be shocking'

 

It's far, far more serious than that. This is systematic, institutionalised abuse occurring over many years, with the full knowledge of the church hierarchy - who did nothing except try to cover it up. When they realised the game was up, "the Christian Brothers successfully sued the commission in 2004 to keep the identities of all of its members, dead or alive, unnamed in the report."

If you don't think that's scandalous, what is?

 

Yes, scandalous... sickening, deeply saddening, depraved and seedy etc etc . But with a move to Hierarchy and as with any of the all powerful throne sitter's of the many levels, when the roots or branches of their organization/system are under attack they close ranks in order to protect their interests, it's a rough business..i know, that competes for position and most certainly wont be closed to infection from those with bad intention. There'll only be one rotten apple with plenty of worms trying to drown out the voices of the many who are calm, that din would perhaps like to convince us into frenzy and fear, but we've come a long way amongst the distraction and devastations by living our individual way's in the most of a second, and long may that good and greater portion continue.