Due to the universal nature of this latest RCC scandal,

[MineralMan]

I have posted my response in GD, rather than in the Religion Group:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100211003961

[thbobby]

1. Religion is the root of so much evil

The crusades. The 80-year war after the Protestant Revolution. Historic pogroms of Jewish People. Muslim Fundamentalism.

How many combatants and innocent victims have been slaughtered over the belief that my god is better than your god?

Slavery justified by religion. Calvinism justifies the lust of wealth. The sexual abuses at RCC you mention. Priests blessing soldiers before they go to slaughter and be slaughtered. Crap, the list of evil and misery perpetrated by religion and god is seemingly endless.

I do not believe in god because it just seems like unsubstantiated bullshit to me. The fantasy of those afraid to die or those not willing to take responsibility for the evil they have done.

[guillaumeb]

2. Universal is the wrong word. eom

[MineralMan]

3. Oh, thanks for the language lesson.

[guillaumeb]

4. You are welcome. eom

[marylandblue]

5. Maybe catholic would be a better word. eom

[guillaumeb]

7. Or "world wide"? eom

[marylandblue]

8. World wide is fine with me.

Shocking and unprecedented could be added too. I am not aware of any other institution that carried such a reprehensible criminal conspiracy over such a long period of time. Are you?

[guillaumeb]

9. Shocking? Yes.

But the US military has always had issues with extreme violence and brutality as well.

[marylandblue]

10. Raping thousands of children entrusted to them by their parents?

Over a 70 year period with the full knowledge of the highest levels of the highest level of leadership? When did the military do that?

And soldiers are SUPPOSED to be extremely violent. It's in the job description and no secret. When did the church openly approve raping children?

[guillaumeb]

11. The function of the US military

does not include rape and torture, nor does it include war crimes. But what individuals in an institution do often differs from the stated goals of an institution.

[marylandblue]

12. This wasn't just a few individuals it was the entire priesthood.

Last edited Sun Aug 19, 2018, 10:31 PM - Edit history (1)

They all knew or should have known what was happening. But they raped CHIlLDREN passing them from one to another for years, generation after generation. How many CHILDREN did the military rape, with the full knowledge of senior officers? Don't evade this question.

[Major Nikon]

15. At this point the RCC apologists' arguments just keep getting more bizarre

Makes you wonder why they even continue.

[guillaumeb]

16. It was not "the entire priesthood". eom

[marylandblue]

25. The all knew or should have known. eom

[Major Nikon]

26. Notice how the question was evaded

As fully predicted.

[marylandblue]

27. I noticed.

[Major Nikon]

28. How many of them spoke up at the time?

That's the part that really speaks volumes.

It's not hard to figure out why. When South American nuns started talking to the press about child raping priests, pope Frank dismissed it as "gossip" and even called them terrorists. Their code of silence goes all the way up.

[guillaumeb]

29. Not provable, or reasonable. eom

[marylandblue]

30. How many times can a man turn his head, and pretend he just doesn't see

Last edited Tue Aug 21, 2018, 09:41 PM - Edit history (1)

The answer is blowin' in the wind.

[guillaumeb]

31. I am a Dylan fan. eom

[marylandblue]

32. You should pay attention to the lyrics then.

I mean really pay attention, not be one of those who pretends not to see.

[MineralMan]

33. Blinders are not a good look on you.

[guillaumeb]

34. Remove the beam from your own eye......

You will, of course, make the connection.

[MineralMan]

35. Nope. My vision, including peripheral vision,

Is excellent. Bye, now.

[guillaumeb]

36. There are none so blind.........eom

[MineralMan]

37. Why even bother...

Cliches and platitudes? If you have nothing of substance to say in a reply, why bother?

[guillaumeb]

38. The same might be said of the original post.

[marylandblue]

39. Not really. It's a satirical post on current news.

You just post empty and generic one sentence rejoinders. I fully expect you to post an empty one sentence rejoinder to this post. Snooooze.

[Major Nikon]

14. ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism

[guillaumeb]

17. Ignoringthepointism.

[Major Nikon]

18. My reply directly addresses your "point"

But thanks for the fully predictable canned reply, and good luck in your future endeavors as a RCC child rape apologist. Looks like you're going to need it.

[guillaumeb]

19. Your weak attempt at framing is ridiculous.

As is your avoidance of what you cannot address.

[Major Nikon]

20. Kinda rich coming from the guy who makes up his own group rules

...in a pathetic attempt at framing organized religion criticism as intolerance.

Throwing in another one of your infamous canned responses was a nice touch, BTW.

If you want to be an RCC child rape apologist, be my guest. Just don't get all butthurt when you're called out for it.

[guillaumeb]

21. Keep pushing your slanderous narrative.

Given that I have said nothing like what you claim, it certainly sounds like you are personally attacking and defaming me.

[Major Nikon]

22. Kinda rich coming from the guy who stalks members of this group

Slander doesn't mean what you think it means, BTW.

[guillaumeb]

23. Perhaps you should look up the word stalk.

Good bye.

[Major Nikon]

24. You stole my line!

[marylandblue]

40. It would be better for you to be silent on this issue

You have trouble understanding the damage that can be caused by institutional religion, even when it is this egregious. Better to stay silent than to say anything that minimizes the gravity of this, or could be construed by anyone as such.

[guillaumeb]

43. So I should ignore a slanderous misrepresentation of what I said?

I disagree.

[Mariana]

44. Thank you, Gil, for reminding us who the true victims are. nt.

[guillaumeb]

45. And that excuses personal attacks based on slander at DU?

I await your explanation of that one.

[marylandblue]

47. I believe slander is against the TOS, so make a complaint to the moderators

[guillaumeb]

49. No.

I prefer to let it stand.

[marylandblue]

54. Why?

[guillaumeb]

55. So that people can read it and form their own opinion about the poster. eom

[Mariana]

48. I wasn't excusing anything. I merely expressed gratitude. nt.

[marylandblue]

46. No, I mean you shouldn't touch this issue with a ten foot pole

No defense of the church is possible. Even the Pope is blaming the institutional hierarchy itself, not a few rogue individuals. Emotions run high on this, and rightfully so. If you are not criticizing the church as a whole, then you don't understand what happened and open yourself up for criticism.

But as Mariana said, you are not the victim here. So just remain silent and talk about some other nice religion for a while.

[guillaumeb]

50. I made no defense. None.

Nor will I. But when slander and misrepresentation are a tactic, no one should wonder at the absence of dialogue or the comments about a negative atmosphere.


And I will not remain silent in the face of such slander. No one should remain silent. Instead, more should join me in noting the slander. Unless the same group dynamic that exists in the RCC also exists among some few here.

[marylandblue]

51. Yes, you should ignore the slander and join the chorus, just this once.

[guillaumeb]

52. Which normalizes slander as a tactic.

Sorry, you are giving bad advice. We cannot become what we condemn in others.

[marylandblue]

53. As I said, if it violates the TOS, take it to the appropriate forum

Otherwise, whatever you call it, it's fair game.

[Permanut]

6. The word "universal" is exactly correct..

According to Merriam Webster.



[link:https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/catholic|

[MineralMan]

13. Yes. Lower case "catholic" was what I had in mind.

Of course, I didn't expect anyone else to catch that. Most of my plays on word definitions never get noticed.

[Pope George Ringo II]

41. It's always a source of dismay for me

To see how many people have had their moral compasses so utterly destroyed by religion that they can't even identify the problem correctly. It's not, as they insist, that this church hired some pedophiles, much like the post office, or General Motors, or any other large business has done over time. But they willfully refuse to acknowledge the simple existence of the problem of their church covering up these crimes across continents and generations. It's a huge moral blind spot which their church created for its own benefit.

I guess the old saying is true: If you're not part of the solution, you're probably part of a church.

[MineralMan]

42. Yes, exactly. The individual priests who sexually abused children should

be prosecuted for their crimes. Those who shifted them around, covered up the crimes, or kept them secret should also be prosecuted as accessories to the criminal acts. All of them, right up to the top of the hierarchy.

The abuse has long been known. The cover-up has gone on just as long. It must end. If the organization will not do it, then it should be bankrupted with fines, punitive judgments, and compensation to victims and then put out of business.

If there actually were a benevolent deity, that entity would have shut this criminal enterprise down centuries ago.