Spanish bishop makes inflammatory comments about women who've aborted <title-edited>

thebullkf · 11-01-2012 4:42pm

Penn wrote: »

You raise some fair points. But while it doesn't say 'rape', what would you take from this part of the sentence:

Absolute licence.... to abuse her body.... without restrictions....

hi penn, see above. i'm actually amazed everyone sees it this way- goes to show what a misleading title can influence.

thebullkf · 11-01-2012 4:45pm

Dades wrote: »

This must be what interpreting the bible must be like...

It doesn't specifically mention rape, but it's heavy enough to suggest it, or at least be condemned for it's fire and brimstone.

i wouldn't know Dades- either all religon is right or its all wrong.

as a famous man once said:
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.

11-01-2012 4:45pm

thebullkf wrote: »

the bit in bold in my intewpretation means the actual abortion itself is the licence given to abuse their body.

How are you coming to that conclusion? "That gives men the absolute licence, without limits, to abuse the body of the woman/women".

thebullkf wrote: »

reasonable hysterical you mean.

why didn't the OP use the word he actually said?.... artistic licence and all that jazz.

disgusting really.

You think the thread title would be less inflammatory if it read "Spanish bishop says it's okay to abuse the body of women who've had abortions"?

MagicMarker · 11-01-2012 4:45pm

thebullkf, what does ''without limits'' mean to you?

Delirium · 11-01-2012 4:46pm

thebullkf wrote: »

so he doesn't mention rape, but you state it as fact that he does

"That gives men the absolute licence, without limits, to abuse the body of the woman/women" for me would include rape since the term "without limits" was used.

thebullkf · 11-01-2012 4:49pm

ye're misssing the point, he doesn't say because she had an abortion that gives men the right..... the abortion itself is the right shes given to man /whoever to abuse her body.

Monumental difference.

thebullkf · 11-01-2012 4:50pm

eh why did ye delete your posts...?

11-01-2012 4:54pm

thebullkf wrote: »

ye're misssing the point, he doesn't say because she had an abortion that gives men the right..... the abortion itself is the right shes given to man /whoever to abuse her body.

Monumental difference.

But you've just totally changed the text. "Eso" means "that", not "she". The act of abortion in the previous sentence is referred to by "Eso". "That [act] gives men the licence....", not "she gives men the licence..."

Penn · 11-01-2012 4:55pm

thebullkf wrote: »

ye're misssing the point, he doesn't say because she had an abortion that gives men the right..... the abortion itself is the right shes given to man /whoever to abuse her body.

Monumental difference.

But that isn't what he says. Unless something got lost in translation, he's using past tense to refer to the abortion.

'a woman who has an abortion gives a man absolute licence to abuse her body without restrictions because she has committed a sin as if she had a right to do so' reads to me that she gives a man absolute licence to abuse her body because she has already had an abortion.

I would say it's possible you're right, but it doesn't seem that way to me.

thebullkf · 11-01-2012 4:58pm

the irony ...:rolleyes:

talking about changing text, tenses.. when the word Rape was used in the title.

my reading of what he meant is obviously different from yours.

lets leave it at that shall we:)

Ellis Dee · 11-01-2012 5:00pm

Tea_Bag wrote: »

can't wait for the Vatican to defend this one.

Don't worry! You won't have to wait long.:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

The Vatican only takes its time when it comes to protecting kids.

thebullkf · 11-01-2012 5:01pm

Penn wrote: »

But that isn't what he says. Unless something got lost in translation, he's using past tense to refer to the abortion.

'a woman who has an abortion gives a man absolute licence to abuse her body without restrictions because she has committed a sin as if she had a right to do so' reads to me that she gives a man absolute licence to abuse her body because she has already had an abortion.

I would say it's possible you're right, but it doesn't seem that way to me.

hhmmmm...... my reading is completely different tbh.

good point though. (still think its wrong though!)

11-01-2012 5:02pm

thebullkf wrote: »

the irony ...:rolleyes:

talking about changing text, tenses.. when the word Rape was used in the title.

I didn't set the thread title.

And interpreting "abuse of a woman's body without limits" as rape is a lot different to changing "that" (referring to an act) to "she", especially when it means the difference between a consensual act and an act of abuse.

Ellis Dee · 11-01-2012 5:08pm

koth wrote: »

"That gives men the absolute licence, without limits, to abuse the body of the woman/women" for me would include rape since the term "without limits" was used.

I agree. As I have already written on another thread about this matter, "absolute licence, without limits, to abuse the body of the woman" covers a fair bit of ground.:rolleyes:

Not everyone who still listens to members of the hierarchy of the kiddy-fiddler church and lives according to the guidelines of that organisation is necessarily endowed with a Jesuitical mastery of the finer nuances of semantics and sophistry and it can not be ruled out that he would interpret the Archbishop's words as giving him the right to slip her the sausage whether she wants it or not.:):)

Carlos Orange · 11-01-2012 5:12pm

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

Can we have a little competition? Whoever guesses their response wins!

I'm going to guess they'll go with the 'completely ignore' option.

Well it is from 2 years ago so I imagine they won't even notice it enough to have to ignore it.

BrensBenz · 11-01-2012 5:15pm

Hold on, lads – the clue is in the title, i.e. “bishop”, i.e. a man in fancy dress, mangling the words and intent of JC.
Other that the meeja, who scour the world looking for cr@p like this, who the Hell actually cares anymore what some bishop says? Do you really think that hoards of men are going to justify brutality of any sort based on the ramblings of some airhead bishop, who has probably lost whatever marbles he ever had during his decades of isolation from the real world? Do you really think that, by quoting his outrageous rant, any court is going to dismiss an accused? So, relax! It might sell a few papers but it definitely shows the meeja in a clearer light, and our unerring insistence on falling for their manipulations.

Penn · 11-01-2012 5:23pm

thebullkf wrote: »

hhmmmm...... my reading is completely different tbh.

good point though. (still think its wrong though!)

For me, one of the key words in the sentence is "man". Gives "a man" absolute licence... etc. If he said person, or doctor, or something else, I could read it as being the abortion doctor. But specifically "man", used in conjunction with abusing her body... I don't know.

But like you said, peoples readings of it are different.

Doctor Jimbob · 11-01-2012 5:49pm

psinno wrote: »

Well it is from 2 years ago so I imagine they won't even notice it enough to have to ignore it.

So....they ignored it?

Dades · 11-01-2012 5:50pm

BrensBenz wrote: »

Hold on, lads – the clue is in the title, i.e. “bishop”, i.e. a man in fancy dress, mangling the words and intent of JC.

I'm inclined to agree. If you have enough bishops ruling their own particular roosts, there's always going to be one nutty one somewhere giving a juicy soundbyte for a slow news day.

However the interesting bit is always what the Vatican say (or don't say) in response.

robindch · 11-01-2012 6:43pm

koth wrote: »

Are the RCC having some sort of "say the most offensive sh*t possible" competition this year??

Possible, but unlikely since the article above was posted on 2012-01-04, but the sermon is dated ~two years ago, on 2009-12-20.

While the first bit of that second para seems clear(ish), the bish does go on to say that the only cure is the chrisitan form of forgiveness and that seems to be at odds with the license to abuse that he's apparently just granted. If the translations are accurate.

My spanish is pretty crap at the best of times, but I've just asked a friend of mine who lives a few miles south of Granada to clarify -- let's see!

robindch · 11-01-2012 7:21pm

^^^ Ouch.

I can't post all of my friend's reply, since I can't easily establish the marital status of the bishop's parents at the time of the bishop's birth.

However, I think I'm ok to say that the bish is not very popular in the region and is the subject of an ongoing investigation into claims of (non-sexual) harassment of one of his former employees, claims for which some believe he may end up in jail.

The relevant quote from my mate's reply is:

a local native speaker wrote:

"that gives males absolute, unlimited license to abuse the woman's body..." it sounds a bit biblical, but that is what the f*t b******d said [... ] the bit where it says "sin límites" is particularly scary.

So yes, the worst-possible meaning of the translation is accurate.

Nice one, bish.

fisgon · 12-01-2012 12:44am

Hubo
en la Edad Media -en esa preciosa Edad Media que nadie se atreve a
recordar porque tampoco es políticamente correcto- una orden militar
cristiana.......

The above is another quote from this troglodyte. I read Spanish and had a look at the whole text. There is nothing surprising in it, it's the usual medieval bullsh1t, the usual misogynist nonsense about the glory of the church etc...

The above quote is literally..."There was in the Middle ages - this beautiful Middle ages which noone dares to remember because it's not politically correct - a military christian order..."
The man is looking back to the Middle Ages with nostalgia as a glorious time. This is his mindset, not untypical in the Spanish church. There is lots of other blathering nonsense in it, but nothing we haven't heard before.

The quote in the OP does not, to me, refer to rape specifically, and doesn't necessarily advocate it. It seems to me to be saying that a woman has given up her right to bodily integrity by having an abortion. Still sick and evil and woman-hating, but not quite an invitation to rape. Anyway, I repeat, the man is clearly a troglodyte.

guerito · 12-01-2012 2:09am

fisgon wrote: »

The quote in the OP does not, to me, refer to rape specifically, and doesn't necessarily advocate it. It seems to me to be saying that a woman has given up her right to bodily integrity by having an abortion. Still sick and evil and woman-hating, but not quite an invitation to rape. Anyway, I repeat, the man is clearly a troglodyte.

"Eso le da a los varones la licencia absoluta, sin límites, de abusar del cuerpo de la mujer"

The Spanish version translates as saying that allowing abortion itself gives this "right" to abuse a woman. But the word "varones" means "males" as opposed to "men" or "people", and it implies rape. If he had said "eso le da al hombre la licencia absoluta..." that would say the same thing, but would imply something else completely ("this would give man the absolute right...").

He knew exactly what he was saying. It's just inflammatory bulls*t from an opportunistic clergyman looking to take advantage of the new conservative government's stated opposition to abortion.

[-0-] · 12-01-2012 6:41am

So if a woman who was raped has an abortion she should be raped again? Great logic there Bishop Old Testament.

We have an old man who has no experience with relationships, sex, marriage, children, spouting ridiculous rhetoric. Why is this news worthy? People like him should be ignored. I would pay more attention to the drunk whine-o (get it?) on the street than this out of touch old fart who is just a hater in a cape.

I wish there was a hell for this bastard to suffer in.

fisgon · 12-01-2012 10:07am

"la cruz estorba, los cristianos y la Iglesia
estorban a los que tienen la pretensión del poder absoluto"

In one sense I find this guy's sermon jaw-dropping in its revisionism and nonsense and delusion, in another, what do we expect? He is a cleric in the catholic church, they really believe their own bullsh1t.
The above made me laugh. ...."The cross obstructs, christians and the church obstruct those who aspire to absolute power"

This coming from a church which backed, one hundred per cent, Franco's fascist totalitarian state from the 30s to 1975, a state that took for itself 'absolute power', a state that employed slave labour to construct its monuments to itself, that did all the usual imprisoning and banning that a dictatorship does, all with the connivance of this church.
It's clear that this guy is a pathetic, self-serving, deluded extremist.
I still think, though, that the title of the thread is a little sensationalist.

Tonyandthewhale · 12-01-2012 5:57pm

Can we change the thread title so since we've established that the bishop didn't actually use the word 'rape?'

For instance we could change it to say something like 'Spanish bishop says it's okay for men to disregard the humanity of women who've had abortions and violate their bodies without limits through abuse, sexual or otherwise.'

Dades · 12-01-2012 6:12pm

I've gone for something shorter.

sensibleken · 12-01-2012 6:14pm

Denegrates? It sounds like he called them poopie heads.

Dades · 12-01-2012 6:17pm

Sure, the gravity may not be conveyed by the thread title - but that's what the thread content is for.

People can make their own minds up what he meant, as clearly there's differences in opinion, all of which are put forward in the thread.

Mark Hamill · 12-01-2012 7:32pm

A question for those who think the guy wasn't talking about rape when he said a woman who has an abortion "gives males absolute, unlimited license to abuse the woman's body...". What exactly do you think he was talking about?

Spanish bishop makes inflammatory comments about women who've aborted <title-edited>

Comments