It's far from negligable as I now run the risk of a criminal charge for blasphemy. That was only introduced because of Church influence. So it's all well and good people suggesting googling new faiths or tolerating atheism, but you don't run the risk of a personal prosecution for drawing attention to hypocrasy and immorality in those official views. Thanks. For. That. We'll hide those that abused children and while we're at it, we'll make it nice and illegal for you to comment on the full nature and extent of our actions and immorality. Negligable influence indeed.
The problem is we shouldn't need a thumbs up from the Church for homosexuality, it shouldn't be down to them as to whether or not all people have an equal footing and an equal access to services. Whether they approve or disapprove should be of no relevance.
And I'm not even going to comment on the abortion issue, the standard card thown out whenever these discussions get under way. Abortion is an moral issue that is independent of faith.
If in public the pope is going to state that women priests are as grevious a sin as hiding child abusers, then that's going to get comments. Such a statement is wholly alien and abhorent to me and many others, it was stated publically, it's going to be reacted to. It doesn't matter who makes such a ridiculous statement, if they make it in public, people will comment. And if people are going to defend that statement in public, then people are going to comment.
I think that the influence that the Church has over peoples lives today is grossly overstated, negligible even.
Many laws are antiquated and I can't remember anyone being arrested for blasphemy in my lifetime even though it can be heard of day of the week, so the influence you speak of here is hardly worth mentioning at all.
The 'we' you refer to when speaking of hiding rapists does not encapsulate the CC so to continually infer that the CC as a complete entity facilitated such crimes is again misleading and incorrect.
You don't need a thumbs up for homesexuality or anything else, make your own decisions, they have their guidelines you have yours, ignore them if you wish.
With regard to the comments, did he say that one sin was akin to the other? no he did not, but don't let that stop the bandwagon which is just about freedom of speech of course and has nothing to do with CC bashing whatsoever.
A crime against the sacrament is just that, a crime against what they believe was the way This post will be deleted if not edited immediately meant for his word to be carried out. A crime against morals is a crime against the teachings and what is considered right in society. I can see an obvious difference in what he said.
The feigned indignation of some committed atheists is interesting. Why do these people get vexed at utterings from the Catholic Church.
Cameroon is only around 40% Christian and of those a little over 50% are Catholic (25% of total population). The problem of men with HIV/AIDS having sex with young (virgin) girls is based on tribal beliefs. Such beliefs are held by around 40% of the population.Do you think the influence of the church is negligible in Africa?, for example in Cameroon or Nigeria?? Another pearl of wisdom delivered by benedict last year here when speaking about the spread of AIDS "You can't resolve it with the distribution of condoms," "On the contrary, it increases the problem.". Yes he was speaking in a country where in some parts 1 in 5 have AIDS, yes he was speaking in a country where girls as young as 12 are forced into marriage with elderly men who have AIDS. His answer? practice abstinence........ yep that same 12 year old girl is to ask her new 'husband' not to have sex with her in case he infects her! Maybe she should do some 'googling' herself and see what her options are!
There is no link between child rape (of either sex) and homosexuality.if they are so much against homosexuality how come they protected homosexual child rapists!
It is silly to blame the spread of AIDS in Africa on the Catholic Church. Do you really think that Africans don't use condoms because the Pope says don't? The Pope is also down on adultery and sex before marriage but that doesn't seem to have an influence, so why would the Church's position on condoms make any difference . . come onDo you think the influence of the church is negligible in Africa?
Do you really think that Africans don't use condoms because the Pope says don't?
IMHO the Irish Constitution is a fine document, albeit one with room for improvement. The Church has a large membership in Ireland and as such may lobby like any other interest group. It seems to me that the Church punches well below its weight. Do you genuinely believe that the Church exerts any real negative influence on you personally?But then it would be fine if the consitution wasn't heavily influenced to begin with by the Catholic Faith. So on that basis it does affect my life and it does affect the lives of everyone. And they fight to retain those principles, so again that is the Church actively involved in influencing a state and state policy.
No one will ever be convicted of blasphemy. I was under the impression that the Church was opposed to the introduction of such law.It's far from negligable as I now run the risk of a criminal charge for blasphemy. That was only introduced because of Church influence. So it's all well and good people suggesting googling new faiths or tolerating atheism, but you don't run the risk of a personal prosecution for drawing attention to hypocrasy and immorality in those official views. Thanks. For. That. We'll hide those that abused children and while we're at it, we'll make it nice and illegal for you to comment on the full nature and extent of our actions and immorality. Negligable influence indeed.
We don't. The Church's approval or otherwise is, and should be, of no relevance to non-Catholics.The problem is we shouldn't need a thumbs up from the Church for homosexuality, it shouldn't be down to them as to whether or not all people have an equal footing and an equal access to services. Whether they approve or disapprove should be of no relevance.
Great, we agree on somethingAbortion is an moral issue that is independent of faith.
There is only one Church that preaches the Trinity and it gives overall authority to a God. That affects me. It affects the laws made and interpretation of those laws. When the Dail resits and they're all refreshed from 3 months off, they'll start with a prayer and guidance on their decisions.In the Name of the Most Holy Trinity, from Whom is all authority and to Whom, as our final end, all actions both of men and States must be referred, We, the people of Éire, Humbly acknowledging all our obligations to our Divine Lord, This post will be deleted if not edited immediately Christ, Who sustained our fathers through centuries of trial, Gratefully remembering their heroic and unremitting struggle to regain the rightful independence of our Nation,
Paedophilia has very little to do with homosexuality.if they are so much against homosexuality how come they protected homosexual child rapists!
Except among priests ......... the overwhelming number of sexually abused were male. No?Paedophilia has very little to do with homosexuality.
Come again?It usually isn't onerous to distil the considered opinion in a given discussion.
As an atheist, I'm neither committed nor indignant, nor even surprised at Lombardi's pronouncement, which is perfectly accurate and entirely consistent with Church dogma. But I would venture exactly the opposite of what you say here.I think that the influence that the Church has over peoples lives today is grossly overstated, negligible even.
[...] No doubt the CC is antiquated and not exactly a slick PR machine but I don't see it as sinister or evil.
Except among priests ......... the overwhelming number of sexually abused were male. No?
But does it actually effect you in any tangible way?The Constitution is a fine document. But it's is covered with Catholic references. . . as such it still affects me personally.
Hardly.There is only one Church that preaches the Trinity and it gives overall authority to a God. That affects me. It affects the laws made and interpretation of those laws.
Silly legislation introduced unnecessarily by an overzealous Minister to cater for an oxbow lake of a Constitutional provision.You say the CC punches well below its weight. Again, the blasphemy laws. You claim no one will be prosecuted, so why introduce them? Why does religion get special protection over and above anyone else in what people can and can't say? To me getting special protection in legislation in 2009 shows a bit more influence.
Fair enough. I'm just saying that said influence is IMO markedly and deliberately overstated.I'm just saying the actual influence is much greater than perhaps we should be comfortable with.
Without wishing to indulge in semantics ............. homosexuality defines itself as an emotional/sexual attachment to persons of the same sex. If a paedophile priest indulges in sexual behaviour with an underage male ......... then, that to me is the act of a homosexual paedophile. Likewise you have heterosexual paedophiles. And you have female practioners of both genres.So? Child abuse has nothing to do with your sexuality.
No idea. Did I write that. Low blood sugar maybe.Come again?
Yes, consistent and unsurprising.As an atheist, I'm neither committed nor indignant, nor even surprised at Lombardi's pronouncement, which is perfectly accurate and entirely consistent with Church dogma.
Maybe it's a matter of opinion, or maybe I'm just oblivious to their sinister ways and their hidden hand.But I would venture exactly the opposite of what you say here.
Again, maybe you're right that that terrible deal is down to a pervasive influence or perhaps it's just another example of a hapless Government decision; others that spring to mind are a blanket guarantee for the banks, M50 toll bridge mess, electronic voting, tax incentives for building in the middle of nowhere and for building too many hotels, Willie swapped helicopters worth many millions for some magic beans . . there is an endless list of bad decisions which have cost or exposed the taxpayer.To go back to 2003, by what 'grossly overstated, negligible' influence would you say that Michael Woods was empowered to broker a compensation deal for victims of clerical abuse which, for €128m, granted total indemnity for all time to the religious institutions responsible for covering up and perpetuating the abuse?
But does it actually effect you in any tangible way?
Without wishing to indulge in semantics ............. homosexuality defines itself as an emotional/sexual attachment to persons of the same sex. If a paedophile priest indulges in sexual behaviour with an underage male ......... then, that to me is the act of a homosexual paedophile. Likewise you have heterosexual paedophiles. And you have female practioners of both genres.
i understand the point you make about the church having a certin influance over th state....how much influance is a matter of opinion, but you have understand that this is a catholic country, the vasy of majority of people on this island are roman chatolic,so therefore the chatolic church are always going to have som influance over the state...thats just the way the world works! i doubt it would be any different in say a muslim country ect, the only way things might change is if every chatolic in ireland decided to 'jump ship' and join some new religion..dont think thats going to happen any time soon! but lets just say it did happen....how long do you think it take before this new shiny happy religion also has some influance over the state?Hmmm, not entirely sure whether googling religion is how you go about things. Most of us were baptised as children and had to do the confirmation and communion too. So it appears to be an "opt out" system at some stage when you're older.
But then when the Catholic Church still has an influence on State Policy, education and health in this country over and above any other religion, it gives me the right to comment on their policies. Especially when they are contray to equality legislation and especially when they afford greater protection to the institution over and above any other employer. (You can google equality if you want).
The church cannot have it both ways, it cannot tell me to keep my nose out because I'm an atheist when it continues to stick its nose into my affairs through influencing state policy based on its own agenda.
Do we really want people who think that having female priests is the same offence as hiding child abusers (you can google the Ferns Report or The Ryan Commission if you wish) having any say whatsoever in how this country should be or in the education of our children or in the "morals and ethics" committees of hospitals?
It's just not that easy to say to atheists or other religions to keep their noses out when this church continues to have an influence on me and my family.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?