[ISAW]

Originally Posted by recedite

Can you clarify for us which types of slavery are just and which are unjust

I already have;
And i already made my points about inconsistency of science and how Christianity is rooted in the sale greek reason as science.

If you think I havent post it in the christianity forum.
Ill waste no mer tile with threaths and bullies here.

And robin as you are foind of telling m what you already posted ill await your "6.5% of abusers are priests" evidence there.

[robindch]

Originally Posted by ISAW

And robin as you are foind of telling m what you already posted ill await your "6.5% of abusers are priests" evidence there.

For the umpteenth time, I didn't say that 6.5% of abuses are priests. I did repeat the claim from the Irish Catholic that 4% of those convicted for abuse in Ireland are priests (thanks to oldrnwisr for locating a link to that story). I also mentioned that ~6.5% of priests have either been convicted of abuse or had credible allegations of abuse levelled against them, with figures which back this up from Cloyne and Dublin, figures which have been broadly accepted and admitted by the Vatican. I have no interest in continuing a discussion in which your only apparent purpose is to disagree with everybody, regardless of whether or not it's reasonable to do so.

Originally Posted by ISAW

Ill waste no mer tile with threaths and bullies here.

I'm sorry you feel this way, but if you followed some of the points that were suggested to you privately and publicly, you might find A+A a lot more welcoming.

Best of luck and thanks for contributing.

[GarIT]

I never got a reply to my post #72 regarding what gives ISAW the power to decide to is Catholic and who is not. It would be good if he could reply to that.

[Steef]

Originally Posted by jank

OK, so there is a constant theme on this board that religion rightly or wrongly is precieved as the great inhibitor to human progression. There may or may not be a case to argue in that favour however, it is not as straight forward as that.

Modern western culture and indeed modern eastern culture (think China) is being more and more driven in a secular fashion where some are even suggesting that organised and the controlling religion we have know throughout history is dead.

However, what comes next? How will society organise itself? Will it lead to an explosion of discovery, peace and universal human enlightenment or would a world without religion descend into an age without morals, chaos and general malaise where humans still fumbling around in the dark.

Discuss!

I may be discredited for this but Southparks episode(s) on atheism summed it up nicely. Bottom line people will always have disagreement and abolishing religion wont magical lead to "an explosion of discovery, peace and universal human enlightenment" nor will the lack of religion cause "an age without morals, chaos and general malaise where humans still fumbling around in the dark". The world would change with out religion I just believe that it would not change that much.

[ISAW]

Originally Posted by robindch

For the umpteenth time, I didn't say that 6.5% of abuses are priests. I did repeat the claim from the Irish Catholic that 4% of those convicted for abuse in Ireland are priests (thanks to oldrnwisr for locating a link to that story).

Im fairly sure that like the fake 6.5% you are misreporting this!
4% of child sex abusers are not priests!
4% of those convicted arent priests!

I also mentioned that ~6.5% of priests have either been convicted of abuse or had credible allegations of abuse levelled against them, with figures which back this up from Cloyne and Dublin,

No you didnt!
what figures show 6.5% of priests in cloyne or dublin are pedophiles?
and the original claim was dublin but Im happy to look at any evidence.

figures which have been broadly accepted and admitted by the Vatican.

You are misreporting this I believe.
wher did the vatican accpet that 6.5% or 4% of child sex abusers are priests or that 4% of those convicted were priests?

I have no interest in continuing a discussion in which your only apparent purpose is to disagree with everybody, regardless of whether or not it's reasonable to do so.I'm sorry you feel this way, but if you followed some of the points that were suggested to you privately and publicly, you might find A+A a lot more welcoming.

It is very simple.
You made a 6.5% claim you couldnt back up.
You told me it was in this thread.
It wasnt.
You then made a 4% claim but you didnt wadmit the 6.5%one was wrong.
You were asked for evidence for the 4% claim.
You didnt provide it.
All you did was restate the claim.

the 4% figure is usually related to the percentage of victims not the percentage of abusers!
You made the claim and you coldnt back it up and no ammount of restating a false claiml will prov it.

all you simply have to do is produce the Vatican/ dublin diocese report saying that either 6.5% or 4% of abusers are priests.

So,
where is it?????

No amount of "we dont like your tone" comments will make you false claims true.

All you simply have to do is produce the evidence. Not hearsay claims about evidence . Just the actual evidence.

so wher is the evidence you keep saying the Bishops or Vatican have?

[Doc_Savage]

Isaw, If this is the way that you try to have a debate in real life then i have to say i'd be tempted to headbutt you at a live debate...

Your posts can be absolutely infuriating to read, and i hope that you come across a lot better in real life than you do from behind a keyboard!

Sorry i'm not contributing to the thread but i don't think that Isaw is either?

[Dades]

My point here applies to this thread, too.

[ISAW]

Originally Posted by GarIT

I never got a reply to my post #72 regarding what gives ISAW the power to decide to is Catholic and who is not. It would be good if he could reply to that.

sorry i cant reply to that here. Im happy to reply in the Christianity forum.

[RichieC]

Originally Posted by ISAW

sorry i cant reply to that here. Im happy to reply in the Christianity forum.

Yea were any back talking gets you a red card from PDN. do not follow him in there, it's a trap.

[Dades]

Originally Posted by RichieC

Yea were any back talking gets you a red card from PDN. do not follow him in there, it's a trap.

Talking about moderation in *other* forums gets you a card in here so leave it at that.