The UN Tells Vatican to change doctrine

[R_Bert]

Not surprising they finally got around to meddling.

 

http://www.breitbart.com/system/wire/ap_8422f77ce20a4d99b8d52f19fcf7653b

[Jonnin]

lol who meddles?  The vatican has been meddling in global politics since rome fell.  

 

The 'church's '  stance on covering up and defending child molesters is unacceptable.  I do not care about any of the rest of it, but that is evil.

[E4 No More]

lol who meddles?  The vatican has been meddling in global politics since rome fell.  

 

The 'church's '  stance on covering up and defending child molesters is unacceptable.  I do not care about any of the rest of it, but that is evil.

Ding, ding, ding!

 

EDIT: Perhaps those jurisdictions should charge the pope and others with conspiracy on all of those crimes?

Edited February 5, 2014 by SWJewellTN

[R_Bert]

So the UN is therefore justified in demanding the church change its stance on abortion?

[E4 No More]

So the UN is therefore justified in demanding the church change its stance on abortion?

It carries as much weight as the Catholic Church's do.

[Jonnin]

So the UN is therefore justified in demanding the church change its stance on abortion?

 

Nope.  The two are totally unrelated. 

The UN is correct on the molestation.  

The UN overstepped on abortion --- their rant is effectively telling a religious entity what to think/say.  

[RobertNashville]

The UN, most especially when it comes to "human rights" has zero credibility or moral authority to be telling anyone anything.

Edited February 5, 2014 by RobertNashville

[R_Bert]

The UN, most especially when it comes to "human rights" has zero credibility or moral authority to be telling anyone anything.

here is one example - Congo  http://abcnews.go.com/2020/UnitedNations/story?id=489306&page=1http://abcnews.go.com/2020/UnitedNations/story?id=489306&page=1

[R_Bert]

Difference is the UN is firing people that are caught doing it, while the Vatican seals all the records and in some cases where more people know about just move them to new areas. No agency, governing body, force or anything else that has 1000s of members/employees has a clean record on..well just about any issue. The difference is most do something about the few that bring a bad name to them but the Vatican isn't one of them. They actively try to hide it and let those bad seeds stay.

 

not really - http://www.dw.de/pope-benedict-removed-400-priests-accused-of-abuse/a-17371452

[Mark A]

Difference is the UN is firing people that are caught doing it, while the Vatican seals all the records and in some cases where more people know about just move them to new areas. No agency, governing body, force or anything else that has 1000s of members/employees has a clean record on..well just about any issue. The difference is most do something about the few that bring a bad name to them but the Vatican isn't one of them. They actively try to hide it and let those bad seeds stay.

Not even close to the truth.

Just to be clear, I'm not Catholic. I just freakin hate the UN.

If the UN wants anything from the Vatican they should shut up and take notes. The Vatican has been guiding world policies for centuries. It hasn't always been good leadership but they are the gold standard for working behind the scenes...

Mark

[partypilot1]

Oh okay, one did. Benedict (the last one) fired a bunch. That makes up for the 250+ popes before him and the one currently under the hat, the 3000+ civil cases against them just in the US (many with multiple victims), and all the hiding of it they have done. You know the moving the priests to other countries to evade LE AND keeping them in positions where they have contact with children. You guys are right, no one should say anything. My bad...

You are way off, it is your bad. There has been cases handled very poorly, but not all. Futhermore, one should not consider every case as a guilty charge, as we all know when there is easy payouts to be had there are plenty of free loaders who jump on the wagon. The media love to push bad press about the Church, regardless of the accuracy. Looks like you do too.

[TMF]

Sounds like someone is butthurt about their religion. Pun intended.

You're being a dick.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[RobertNashville]

Pun intended? But yeah I am, because someone wants to get personal and say I like pushing bad press about the church "regardless of the accuracy", they are basically calling me a liar. I don't take kindly to that, do you?

Your accuracy is questionable but I don't see that as the point.

 

Just a couple of posts ago you accused a poster of being "butthurt about their religion"' as if you have some special insight into the person or even know if the person is a member of the Catholic church (or any church for that matter); at best that seem presumptuous to me.

 

If you think the Catholic church has handled the issue of priests abusing children poorly I won't argue that but it seems to me that you've got some kind of significant personal beef with the Catholic church that is really the issue for you and are just using this thread as an excuse to unload on them.

 

The Catholic church is far from perfect (as is every organization, religious or otherwise) but the corrupt, worthless organization known as the UN telling anybody how they should do anything is insane.

[partypilot1]

Pun intended? But yeah I am, because someone wants to get personal and say I like pushing bad press about the church "regardless of the accuracy", they are basically calling me a liar. I don't take kindly to that, do you?

I only know what you have posted here on this thread and by that, I gathered you are much worse than a liar. It will take quite a few posts to change my, and other peoples, mind about you in the positive. It takes a certain type of person to use blanket statements that would most likely offend any proper Christian person and certainly every Catholic. I will be watching you.

[Metalhead]

Ahhh, religion threads.

[RobertNashville]

What have I posted that is inaccurate? Yes the last pope fired 400 people, wow, my statement still stands that they don't fire them on the average. As for the accuracy of my numbers, look them up. 3000+ cases against the church for sexual misconduct and 10s of thousands of priest in the church...which of those is inaccurate?
Yes, I did. And would again. I don't take kindly to someone calling me a liar with my reporting of things "regardless of the accuracy". Again I point back to what is inaccurate? Yes, presumptuous but it was intended to a retort to an insult.
I have a beef with all organized religion. That is why I am non-denominational. I have something against the Catholic church in particular because of their supporting pedos. Yes this opened the door to rip on them a little, exactly why it is an open forum...to get more than one sided statements.
As for the UN, couldn't care less if it was the UN, the US, the UK, Germany, China, AU, EU etc etc etc As you said, no one/gov is perfect. My original point stands, someone/anyone needed to say something.

IC - you just want a forum to use so that you can flame the church. :rolleyes:
 
I guess you really are just being a dick. :ignore:

Edited February 6, 2014 by RobertNashville

[RobertNashville]

Not for flaming them, for saying what is on my mind about them. IE a forum for discussion. But if that makes me a dick I guess that makes everyone that says anything bad about anything or anyone a dick too? Like when you called the UN out on their "credibility and moral authority" in your first post on this topic? Ok, dick. Now about my accuracy?

Also, I wonder why so many people on here want to make it personal when they can't make an intelligent argument and someone else does? How about we keep it on topic and if you think someone's numbers or "facts" are inaccurate then call out/disprove the facts instead of making a personal attack. Name calling, be it dick, liar or anything, is the last resort of the small minded and desperate.

So you want to rag on the church but you think the UN has credibility when it comes to morals and ethics?  :wacko:

[RobertNashville]

...

:drama:   I find it amusing that you would use such a morally bankrupt organization like the UN as a jumping off point to rag on the church (and on a gun forum no less) - it seems to show that you to have a significant need to denigrate the church; one might even say an intense need to do so.

 

I suspect that most everyone here, Catholics included, find the acts of the Catholic church, with respect to how they've handled priests who have molested boys, to be reprehensible yet, other than you, no ones else sees the need to bash the church just because there is an opportunity to do so.

 

If you hate organized religion in general and/or the Catholic church in particular I'm sure that there are any number of places where you could go to vent. :shrug:

Edited February 7, 2014 by RobertNashville

[TrickyNicky]

You're a dick, he's a dick, I'm a dick, whatever.

The matter of pedophilia is a social problem, not a religious one. It exists in some shape or form in every religion, because like in this forum, your going to get a lot of really great people, and your gonna get some real dicks in there too.

[KKing]

Lawd help us all, even the pedophiles....and Keal G Seo. Edited February 7, 2014 by KKing

[TMF]

The argument isn't who's problem it is. The argument is that someone called out the church for their practices in handling it. I voiced my opinion: Someone should call them out for the pedophilia but I agree they overstepped on the abortion and contraception part. Then I start getting bashed for mentioning it even though that is the MAIN topic of the article from the OP. As for where it exists, it exists anywhere a lot of adults have a position of power over children and even more so when they have it over their parents. As I stated no large governing body etc has a clean record on anything. Just that the difference being most don't actively try to cover it up or save the offenders when caught.

You're not getting bashed for mentioning the abuse of young boys, you're getting bashed for how you're doing it. Whether or not you choose to be religious, you have to respect that other people are. Some of them are Catholics. Being Catholic doesnt mean you automatically condone abuse of children. That broad brush you're painting with suggests that. Chill out and try to be more respectful towards the beliefs of others.

I don't think you'll find anyone here that would defend how The Vatican handled the incidents of abuse by priests. Yet no one here would be labeled such a dick like you for voicing that. So perhaps instead of trying to play the martyr for having an differing opinion, you should look at what you're saying and how other people may take that. Let us start by being empathetic and contemplating what a Catholic would think about you calling the whole of the Catholic Church "pedophiles". You don't see why that may be offensive to some? If you don't you're being disingenuous.

Also, how strongly do you feel about Shia Islam? Not so long ago the Ayatollah issued his fatwa concerning acceptable, non-penetrative sex with prepubescent girls. Guess what, he said it was okay.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[tnguy]

You're a dick, he's a dick, I'm a dick, whatever.

The matter of pedophilia is a social problem, not a religious one. It exists in some shape or form in every religion, because like in this forum, your going to get a lot of really great people, and your gonna get some real dicks in there too.

 

Ugh. I'l regret this. I will say that the Catholic priesthood, with its prohibition on normal human relations, is definitely likely to draw those of a troubled sexuality. Not all will be abusers, some will simply be abused, others might simply find their sexuality not accepted in their society (homosexuality for example) but it will also draw those fleeing other demons. Time for that to end. It was only really brought in so the church could inherit from heirless estates.

Edited February 7, 2014 by tnguy

[TMF]

Really? This coming from the gay and immigrant bashing community? I'm sorry I thought the whole deal here was only lefties preach tolerance? Oh I guess that is just the hypocrites talking huh? [Redacted: The reason I had you blocked was the "bloody" something or another you had called me, making personal attacks again, when we had different views on LEOs] Where was your tolerance?
As for being Catholic and that meaning you automatically abuse children, please point out where I said anything like that. I have stated several times that not all of them are doing it...do I need to break it down re-quote myself again? (Do any of you read more than one comment before jumping to the attack?) The only broad brush I am painting with is against the practices of "The Church" and their actions on how they handle pedophiles.

So in other words you think we shouldn't say anything about the pedophiles and the Church protecting them EVEN WHEN the linked article in the OP is about that very topic? Again we are back to what I said in the first paragraph. Tolerance. How about you be tolerant of my views against the church? Yes it is offensive but that isn't what I have said at any point in this conversation! WTF! Why can you people not get this? I am not painting anyone other than the people who do it and cover it ("The Church" and their practices being the latter) as bad. But you people take too much offense when it something you care for or are all about on the line. Sounds like a bunch of whiny hypocrites to me.

As for Islam, couldn't care less about it as a religion. Again, as I already stated I don't care for organized religion which is why I am non-denominational, but then you guys don't read jack before you jump into a conversation. If what you say is true the f*** them too, even more so since they would be publicly condoning it. But what does this have to do with the OP?

Here are your comments regarding the church:
 

PS- Stereotypes are there for a reason...

Someone needed to...bunch o pedos.

You don't see why someone might find that offensive and a broad stroke of the brush?

And who said we shouldn't acknowledge abuse? Not I or anyone else in this thread. Hell, I'd be willing to bet most here, to include myself, would agree with most of what you think in regard to how The Vatican handled things. The difference is we can acknowledge that without abusing another person's religion.

And when did I become a gay or immigrant basher? You quoted me and made that your first line in your response. Clearly you don't know my stance on gay marriage or immigration to think I would "bash" either group just for the sake of it. And before you say that wasn't directed at me, why would you even put it in your quote in response to what I said.

And for the record, I referred to you as a blood belching vagina because of your attitude, not your opinion. You can have the exact opposite opinion as me and it's cool. I married a liberal Yankee. Differences of opinion don't bother me as much as someone who chooses to present their side in an intentionally abusive way. So, in reference to what you're speaking of, you're doing it again and getting the same response. You likely think I'm way of base, and that's okay. It would be beneficial for you to listen and absorb it though. Maybe then people won't think you're such a dick when you talk. You may have the last word, Sir.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Edited February 7, 2014 by TMF

[QuietDan]

If you want to be equal opportunity for butt-hurtedness, talk about school personnel from guidance counselors, to principals to university professors;  "Christian" ministers of all denominations; and muslims from mullahs to the rank and file, where homosexual conduct between the old and the young males is a social construct. 

 

Also, please try to remember when talking about international governing bodies, that the Catholic Church is well over 2,000 years old, through thick and thin, good and bad, and that without the Catholic Church after Rome, there would be no Western Civilization and we'd all be living in grass huts OR stone forts and we'd all be hacking and stabbing each other to death with swords and spears. Those of us that didn't die before 30 from slavery overwork, battlefield slaughter or hideous pandemic diseases. 

Edited February 8, 2014 by QuietDan

[tnguy]

Pfft. The Catholic church is largely responsible for the malaise that persisted through the middle ages and played a large part in the death of many around that time (and others). I have nothing against those that practice the faith but the church itself has largely been a force against (objective) good.