[Peter Zack]

Richard Dawkins calls for arrest of Pope Benedict XVI -Times Online

Dawkin's is an interesting guy and who knows if he'll pull this off. But there's no doubt for me that it's time to reverse the priests can't marry thing and get back to some reality.

Nowhere in the bible does it say a priest can't be married. For example St. Peter was married. There's several passages about how one can't serve 2 masters etc. but a pedophile hiding his crimes isn't preoccupied? I'd rather the priest be a little diverted by his wife wanting him home in time for supper.

In fact married priests were common in the RCC and a few times it was put to a vote to enforce celibacy. At first that was only the night before celebrating the Eucharist. Then as mass became almost a daily event in the 4th century, priests were still married but celibate. Not until the mid 11th century did celibacy become Canon law. All this is well recorded historical information.

So now it's time for the RCC to reverse this thousand year old mistake and modernise the church if it ever hopes to survive. It won't solve everything but should go a long way to weed out the bad apples. They also have to turn over all the criminals hidden in secret places and let the authorities punish them to the fullest extent of the law.

It's interesting that an atheist might just give them the knock in the head that they need.

[Nesster]

Heaven forbid! Don't you know the next thing will be gay marriage in the RCC

[Ratmagiclady]

I think it's more a matter of irony that it takes an atheist to lay out what's actually happening, has been happening, everyone knew,and knelt to anyway...


Whatever you may say about the man's motives, (He's none too kind to *anyone* 'of faith' quite often, as much as he's a bogeyman of Christian literalists seeking power, he often does think *his* job in the world right now is the only one ever for everyone, and where have we heard that before... )

But... he does lay the case *out* while everyone that can do something about the system 'negotiates' and blames the victims.

They are *not.* As amply demonstrated here, gonna listen to the likes of me or anyone they hurt. Being hurt is considered to disqualify one from reporting at all.


I know well how messy they make it inside. Excusing, obfuscating, displacing every damn thing that happens for centuries and playing the 'real victim' at anyone who says, "Hey, Emperor dude!"...and also by getting the flock saying, "Well, if you don't want to take *this,* you 'sinner,' imagine what the Prods'll do to you!"

How these people *do* this stuff is by making every single instance and every single victim feel they're the only ones in the world it's happening to and therefore must be 'your own fault...'

But there's a system.


Meanwhile, it's all out there. Hitchens is only saying it. Clearly.

Bravo.


And, listen.

[clmonk]

Who is Hitchens?

[Ratmagiclady]

Who is Hitchens?

My mistake. Hitchens, Dawkins, I usually hear about them second-hand as 'vocal atheists not to be listened to by some, except as 'devils.'


Dawkins. There's been a series of articles just laying out what the Church has been covering up and how. All very observable-fact-based.

[Rupert]

What about the idea of millions of Catholics just keeping their wallets closed? Is that so hard? I always just assumed they don't really mind the pedo's, you never see any large protests by Catholics, and the cash keeps coming in......if they are happy with their own children being abused, why not just make it the "Will of God" like they have with everything else they want to be "Holy"?
Regards!

[Ratmagiclady]

What about the idea of millions of Catholics just keeping their wallets closed? Is that so hard? I always just assumed they don't really mind the pedo's, you never see any large protests by Catholics, and the cash keeps coming in......if they are happy with their own children being abused, why not just make it the "Will of God" like they have with everything else they want to be "Holy"?
Regards!

Cause the Church historically has simply 'blamed homosexuality' and said, 'No one should speak of this in polite company.' Said, 'It's the victims making it up, the liars... Said everything *you* say, Rupert.

You refuse to admit that anything with a cross or a Bible on it could be so.. wonder what 'evil' could possibly lead people to... Treat children exactly as you treat *me* now.

Yeah, I'm a big girl now. More or less.

When I was a smaller one, I saw it in their eyes... They knew.

They always knew. They were afraid.

Just like you speak.

Same Godsforsaken words, actually. By the Mothers, they thought it was even *protecting* me till they were like, in later years after messed-up shit about it, 'Did you getting raped make you queer? We thought so!"


I was like, "Actually, when you froze and thought that was happening, I was just running my mouth about theology. "

But, ...of all days, I remember the day well. Saw it in their eyes. Whole 'flock.' Knowing what they were complicit in, but which none of the *kids* were allowed to *say*... They *thought* that was what had been happening ..to me... Right while they sat and watched, ...and, thinking, believing so, *froze.*

Saw it all in their eyes. All I knew at the time was, "They were convinced something terrible was happening and dared not move."


I found out their perspective, later.

It's not to say moves weren't put on me, but I wasn't as I was 'supposed' to be, anyway. Wasn't about shame or inhibition or elaborate theology or even thinking what was supposed to be 'on offer' wasn't somehow art of the whole whatever-church-thing-is supposed to be... It just didn't make sense. I was no more emotionally-mature than anyone at that age, but there's been all this stuff going on, and it didn't *make sense.* So I asked.

A lot.

Me and my big mouth, right?

No answers, though. Just..Facing what was supposed to be a community and realizing they were *terrified* of something and for whatever reason *would not get up.* Instead, looked at me funny. I didn't understand fully till later, but I remember.


I came to know that funny look and the words that go with it, Rupert.

Quite well.

You 'wonder' why people hand over their lives and even, their minds and souls, (and holy money) blame the queers, claim 'Obedience to Infallibility,' while you cry out for the same Gods-damnable things to be applied to me and all 'like me' right *here.*

There is a shame of cowardice about all this, Rupert. *That,* I can forgive. If it stops. Justifying it, no. I cannot accept that.

For what my strivings as one human being may be worth to you.


Which I know are not much.

But maybe... You're better than this.


I can't make you be so. Or answer your demands so.

But I can still talk as long as it takes.


And as for that daughter you simultaneously accuse me of not 'really' having any right to have stayed with and of abandoning? When the chips were down, well, let's say I was no sheep. Yaknow. Any metaphorical actions may not necessarily have been strictly legal, if you know what I mean.

---

Last edited by Ratmagiclady; 04-12-2010 at 02:36 PM.

[Rupert]

Ratlady you are a sick and tormented soul, you certainly have my sympathy, I don't think I have seen any mind more twisted and perverted that yours on this or any other Forum.

I see you are back on that "daughter" story you tried to sell us, you know, the daughter you never had that was taken from you by those mean Fundies that didn't actually take the daughter you didn't actually have becasuse you actually abandoned her.......
Ratlady, you should let that story die, it does nothing to enhance your mental reputation, I guarantee. It was a dishonest attempt to gain sympathy for the lifestyle of your choice at the expense of the truth.
While I am weary of pointing out your never ending attacks on religion and Christians in particular, I will continue to do so as long as you remain clinically insane, which appears to also be never ending.
Beast Regards!

[Ratmagiclady]

Ratlady you are a sick and tormented soul, you certainly have my sympathy, I don't think I have seen any mind more twisted and perverted that yours on this or any other Forum.

Interesting.


What the F do you want, stigmata?

*YOU* asked:

you never see any large protests by Catholics, and the cash keeps coming in..

Why?

*This* is *why,* genius!

Right here. Coming out your very own mouth.

*spit.*

[Rupert]

Interesting.


What the F do you want, stigmata?

*YOU* asked:



Why?

*This* is *why,* genius!

Right here. Coming out your very own mouth.

*spit.*

Just more proof of what I just wrote. I didn't make the case half as well as you just did.
Beast Regards!

[Parallax]

I can't wait to see how the Catholic Church is going to spin this:

Connecticut bishops fight sex abuse bill - CNN.com

They are opposing a Connecticut bill that would remove the Statute of Limitations on child sexual abuse cases. I'm really eager to see how they justify opposing a bill that would put more child molesters in jail.

[gokenin]

What about the idea of millions of Catholics just keeping their wallets closed? Is that so hard? I always just assumed they don't really mind the pedo's, you never see any large protests by Catholics, and the cash keeps coming in......if they are happy with their own children being abused, why not just make it the "Will of God" like they have with everything else they want to be "Holy"?
Regards!

actually here in Boston members of the Archdioses actually did hold back money a few years ago when we were in the middle of the crisis up here. the result was the closing of churches and the selling of property to cover expenses and the money given to the victims. the result is lots of people are now angry that their churches were closed over others but hey after a few years things will settle down and return to normal.

---------- Post added 04-12-2010 at 05:42 PM ----------

I can't wait to see how the Catholic Church is going to spin this:

Connecticut bishops fight sex abuse bill - CNN.com

They are opposing a Connecticut bill that would remove the Statute of Limitations on child sexual abuse cases. I'm really eager to see how they justify opposing a bill that would put more child molesters in jail.

I don't want to sound like I don't believe the victims but I have to admit I do have difficulty finding some accusations 100% trustworthy when they are coming out from "recovered" memories of something that happened 20,30,40 years ago. Human memory is that not infallible to take it as 100% accurate memories over that kind of time so I do think there needs to be some kind of term limit in order to file charges.

[Ratmagiclady]

I hope you'll understand, Parallax, if I've ever 'sinned' by being *pissed off about this shite?*


Few but an Irish Pagan can possibly appreciate just how much that *@&&@ Church structure has been *ballast* against still worse in the real lives of so many people, but especially with the election of Ratzy, in part *by* the same SOB who, well, Boston..

Well, they gave up that role *anyway,* but I'm well aware who catches the backwash when that thing rolls and capsizes.

Can't say it's a day I'd weep to see, ust personaly, but part of this is how they getcha. 'Hey, smart kids! Contest the Church and the maniacal Prods will get Cromwell on ya!.'

And they do play their part here, too.

What the people in the robes forgot is that there really is a point past which the flock says 'F it!"

Meanwhile, too much ballast on deck. Strike up the band....

[Rupert]

actually here in Boston members of the Archdioses actually did hold back money a few years ago when we were in the middle of the crisis up here. the result was the closing of churches and the selling of property to cover expenses and the money given to the victims. the result is lots of people are now angry that their churches were closed over others but hey after a few years things will settle down and return to normal.

What I find hard to believe is a scenario where it was proven and well known that Mc Donalds molests children at their "Fine Food" establishments worldwide, covers it up when possible and continues with the same pattern resisting all attempts for real change....and families would still patronize them enough to keep the doors open? Ratlady seems to infer (it is difficult to be sure what she is saying) that the victims guilt does not allow change.....what about the adults, the parents, those that give financial support? What is stopping them from cutting off all funding until real and verifiable change occurs? Something is not right here...I am not Catholic, so I can only speculate, but I can still see that there is some sort of "Catholic Problem" beyond my comprehension. Any suggestions?
Regards!

[Ratmagiclady]

actually here in Boston members of the Archdioses actually did hold back money a few years ago when we were in the middle of the crisis up here. the result was the closing of churches and the selling of property to cover expenses and the money given to the victims.

Or, rather, properties in Allston-Brighton which'd been vacant and had for sale signs on them since the early Nineties got blamed on abuse victims for speaking up....

the result is lots of people are now angry that their churches were closed over others but hey after a few years things will settle down and return to normal.

That's the guiding star, right, 'Normal?'
Blame the victims when no one goes to those churches anymore.


But a few old folks who may or may not get a hand getting there from 'evil' infidels like myself, of course.

I don't want to sound like I don't believe the victims

You achieve this, regardless.

but I have to admit I do have difficulty finding some accusations 100% trustworthy

Interesting standard, there.

when they are coming out from "recovered" memories of something that happened 20,30,40 years ago.

This is not alien abductions under hypnosis, though, this is just... How people justify having been in denial so long. These things are coroborated by the very documents that the Vatican still considers a media 'conspiracy' while saying anyone queer is 'objectively-disordered,' thus, not in any curia a 'real witness,' and continuing to reinforce the same things that brought it about by 'purging homosexuals' even if a third of the victims are female....

Human memory is that not infallible to take it as 100% accurate memories over that kind of time so I do think there needs to be some kind of term limit in order to file charges.

Infallibility is not a criterion when they *fricking write it down,* dude.

And if you don't mind my speaking Bostonian, I'm *shitserious* when I say the first thing they did when the 'scandal' came out, after 'Blaming homosexuality' was say that properties they'd been trying to sell for years 'had to be sold cause someone spoke up,those 'evil victims.' .'



It finally comes out and you say, "If this was going on all along, why didn't you say something before?"


I say, *I did.* I was a *child,* you stupid *@&@&&#&^#.

K?