Brady keeps excommunication threat hanging over abortion TDs

Daveaherne

So cardinal sean brady says he would like to excommunicate TD,s who support abortion, because its evil. This coming from the man who coved up child rape.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/cardinal-keeps-excommunication-threat-hanging-over-abortion-tds-29242992.html

So if excommunication is possible how would one go about getting one. Would love to see his face when so many would not be pushed if they were excommunicated.

Sarky

The organisers hoped for 10,000 people. They got about 4,000. One of Ireland's 'holiest' places, too, you'd imagine they came from all over the country. And it was less than half of what they'd hoped.

That's a wonderful pair of numbers, don't you think? They're falling flat on their collective arse and dying out. Slowly but surely, piece by whiny, self-righteous piece.

robindch

Daveaherne wrote: »

So cardinal sean brady says he would like to excommunicate TD,s who support abortion, because its evil. This coming from the man who coved up child rape.

It's a wonder he's not calling for those who protected child rapists to be excommunicated.

Oh, hang on, I've just thought of a reason...

Turtwig

Sarky wrote: »

The organisers hoped for 10,000 people. They got about 4,000. One of Ireland's 'holiest' places, too, you'd imagine they came from all over the country. And it was less than half of what they'd hoped.

That's a wonderful pair of numbers, don't you think? They're falling flat on their collective arse and dying out. Slowly but surely, piece by whiny, self-righteous piece.

According to RTE's reporter it was 5,500 according to Knock's event management. So, yeah, still a far cry short of the 10,000, but just in case we get accusations of inaccuracies.

vitani

Yet when someone tries to leave the Catholic Church themself, they're not allowed.

If I write to Brady expressing support for abortion, do you think he'd kick me out??

Turtwig

Has the Irish Catholic Church ever excommunicated any convicted Criminals ever for serial murders?

Obliq

Jernal wrote: »

Has the Irish Catholic Church ever excommunicated any convicted Criminals ever for serial murders?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_excommunicated_by_the_Roman_Catholic_Church

"All the Catholics and legislators who promoted the abortion law in Uruguay." - There's a precident, anyway.

Meant to add, not that I can see! (about the serial murderers)

redfacedbear

Jernal wrote: »

Has the Irish Catholic Church ever excommunicated any convicted Criminals ever for serial murders?

I'm fairly sure that those fighting on the Anti-treaty side in the Civil War were excommunicated.......


I seem to have equated Dev with a criminal serial killer - whoops :pac:

Tombo2001

Maybe if he makes all the TDs swear an oath of secrecy........

freyners

TBH I hope he does, and then when the public show their indifference to the subject maybe they will finally stop paying attention to the largest hypocrite in Ireland and the church he represents

Obliq

Obliq wrote: »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_excommunicated_by_the_Roman_Catholic_Church

"All the Catholics and legislators who promoted the abortion law in Uruguay." - There's a precident, anyway.

Meant to add, not that I can see! (about the serial murderers)

While it's not relevant to politicians, another case from that list really jumped out at me:

"The Archbishop of Olinda and Recife in Brazil, Jose Cardoso Sobrinho, announced the automatic excommunication of the mother and doctors of a nine-year-old girl who had an abortion after being raped and impregnated by her stepfather."

I have no words.

michael999999

So he wants to protect children before they are born?

But once there born he will protect the priests that raped and molested them!

Interesting.

smellslikeshoes

This guy is an absolute Godsend (:pac:) to pro choice, every time he opens his mouth he seems to make himself, his organization and pro lifers more irrelevant.

MrPudding

Flying Fox wrote: »

While it's not relevant to politicians, another case from that list really jumped out at me:

"The Archbishop of Olinda and Recife in Brazil, Jose Cardoso Sobrinho, announced the automatic excommunication of the mother and doctors of a nine-year-old girl who had an abortion after being raped and impregnated by her stepfather."

I have no words.

Quite an old one that. If I remember correctly the 9 hear old was actually pregnant with twins. Obviously the church took no action against the stepfather / rapist.

MrP

eviltwin

Sarky wrote: »

The organisers hoped for 10,000 people. They got about 4,000. One of Ireland's 'holiest' places, too, you'd imagine they came from all over the country. And it was less than half of what they'd hoped.

That's a wonderful pair of numbers, don't you think? They're falling flat on their collective arse and dying out. Slowly but surely, piece by whiny, self-righteous piece.

What's even better is the Catholic rags had full page ads out advertising it for ages even offering transport options for anyone who wasn't in a position to make it there themselves. Even when they went out of their way to help people go they still only got that kind of turnout.

KyussBishop

Perhaps we could 'excommunicate' i.e. remove citizenship, from the protectors of child-abusers within the Catholic church in Ireland?

Really, I would love to see an irreparable and permanent falling-out between our government/politicians, and the Catholic church, such that our standard response to any attempts at interference in the running of our country is a collective "fúck off".

fisgon

This makes it more and more clear that the Church's hysterical opposition to this bill is part of a power play. The lives of foetuses are secondary to the church trying to flex its muscles and get the country to obey it on something, anything, after having been ignored on every major issue in the last thirty years.

They are so used to being on the losing side on homosexuality, divorce, contraception, sex before marriage, that they have gotten desperate now and just need a win on abortion, and are resorting to any means possible.

It kind of goes hand in hand with my theory that the religious aren't really that bothered about embryos and foetuses. The real fact is that abortion is an issue that they feel they can assert some kind of moral superiority over their opponents. It plays into one of the basic desires of the religious, namely to feel themselves better people than unbelievers, to be able to look down on those outside their viewpoint.

The abortion position of the church and Iona et al is about power. We are better than you, is their belief, and you need to do as we say. Finally they have found an issue that they might have some support on. They are just desperate to be obeyed, and the abortion debate is simply a tool to impose their will on the rest of us.

riffmongous

cardinal brady wrote:

"We're trying to persuade them not to introduce it. In addition to doing good, we also have to oppose evil and to oppose a law that would take away fundamental rights from people. It should be opposed."

That must be a new rule then :rolleyes:

But when it comes down to it, it's up to the people to support their TDs publicly in-case the church does try to pull any sort of stunt. It's easy to scoff at a 50% turn out, but I'd guess politically anyone would be happier with the support of 5000 old aged people who will almost certainly vote than 10000 younger people who might not be so bothered later.

genericguy

michael999999 wrote: »

So he wants to protect children before they are born?

But once there born he will protect the priests that raped and molested them!

Interesting.

He's clearly just trying to ensure the maximum availability of victims. How anyone can listen to this prick defeats me.

the_syco

michael999999 wrote: »

So he wants to protect children before they are born?

But once there born he will protect the priests that raped and molested them!

I'm so stealing that quote!

Obliq

Fr. Tony Flannery - an interestingly astute and inclusive article. http://www.thejournal.ie/readme/column-tony-flannery-catholic-church-abortion-897260-May2013/ - as seen on "Doctors for Choice" facebook.

"Finally, I would say to them that it is not appropriate to attack the bill in such a forthright fashion without stating clearly their alternative position, taking into account the actual situation that the legislators face.

In this debate, it is essential to remember that the teaching of the Catholic Church on abortion still holds. It calls on us to respect the life of the unborn child. However, many people in this country no longer follow the teaching of the Catholic Church and it is the task of our politicians to legislate for all citizens."

Lapin

Its interesting to see how an organisation that places so much value on the virtues of forgiveness and freewill is quick to resort to a form of emotional blackmail by threatening its members with expulsion for following their conscsience.

Gbear

Obliq wrote: »

Fr. Tony Flannery - an interestingly astute and inclusive article. http://www.thejournal.ie/readme/column-tony-flannery-catholic-church-abortion-897260-May2013/ - as seen on "Doctors for Choice" facebook.

"Finally, I would say to them that it is not appropriate to attack the bill in such a forthright fashion without stating clearly their alternative position, taking into account the actual situation that the legislators face.

In this debate, it is essential to remember that the teaching of the Catholic Church on abortion still holds. It calls on us to respect the life of the unborn child. However, many people in this country no longer follow the teaching of the Catholic Church and it is the task of our politicians to legislate for all citizens."

Well.. he's doing religion wrong but he's certainly doing humanity right.

Flier

Gbear wrote: »

Well.. he's doing religion wrong but he's certainly doing humanity right.

That figures - the church have been trying to shut him up for years. I'd say he's close to getting defrocked (or whatever the term is). Seems to happen to anyone who's even vaguely in touch with the modern world and their flock.

Go Fr. Tony!!

krudler

So the church can kick people out for not following their teachings yet if you disagree with them you can't willing leave? pffft

Sarky

krudler wrote: »

So the church can kick people out for not following their teachings yet if you disagree with them you can't willing leave? pffft

They've never cared if you believe, only that you obey.

Turtwig

krudler wrote: »

So the church can kick people out for not following their teachings yet if you disagree with them you can't willing leave? pffft

Trying to seek logic in the Church's actions is like trying the see logic behind an LSD hallucination. It probably exists but the mental gymnastics required will likely destroy your brain first.

krudler

Jernal wrote: »

Trying to seek logic in the Church's actions is like trying the see logic behind an LSD hallucination. It probably exists but the mental gymnastics required will likely destroy your brain first.

They've moved the goalposts so much at this point it's just laughable, straw clutching and threatening people with excommunication? sounds pretty desperate.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

smellslikeshoes wrote: »

This guy is an absolute Godsend (:pac:) to pro choice, every time he opens his mouth he seems to make himself, his organization and pro lifers more irrelevant.

He does, but perhaps we also need to remember that the proposed legislation is deeply inadequate. It probably ticks all the boxes needed to be able to say "there, we legislated for the X Case". But it's still short of a practical solution, even if we want to have a quite limited abortion regime.

I basically agree with you. The upshot from all this might be the sight of Irish politicians, for the first time, dismissing Church edicts as irrelevant. However, give that the political class sees abortion as a no-win issue, they'll welcome the possibility of getting this inadequate legislation through while basking in the glow that comes from being able to say "did you see how we told the Bishop to feck off".

I hate to make it a conspiracy theory, but that outcome would actually suit both Church and politicians.

Galvasean

Flier wrote: »

That figures - the church have been trying to shut him up for years. I'd say he's close to getting defrocked (or whatever the term is). Seems to happen to anyone who's even vaguely in touch with the modern world and their flock.

Go Fr. Tony!!

Turtwig

That looks like a Minecraft reference. I don't get Minecraft.:(

Edit : Nevermind google be mi savior!

Obliq

Jernal wrote: »

That looks like a Minecraft reference. I don't get Minecraft.:(

Edit : Nevermind google be mi savior!

Was about to be helpful and say that's a creeper. It blows you up (according to youngest). Sigh, google beat me to it

muppeteer

Anybody see Enda fob off the Cardinals threat by saying "My book is the constitution, and the constitution is determined by the people."

Nice secular feck off for the Cardinals:), even if its from a FG that won't touch actual abortion rights with a barge pole. Oh well, small steps.

Video here: http://www.independent.ie/videos/irish-news/enda-kenny-responds-to-cardinals-abortion-comments-29243569.html

joseph brand

muppeteer wrote: »

Anybody see Enda fob off the Cardinals threat by saying "My book is the constitution, and the constitution is determined by the people."

Nice secular feck off for the Cardinals:), even if its from a FG that won't touch actual abortion rights with a barge pole. Oh well, small steps.

Video here: http://www.independent.ie/videos/irish-news/enda-kenny-responds-to-cardinals-abortion-comments-29243569.html

Enda made the Front Page of reddit

Sarky

Jesus, he actually looked quite statesmanlike in that clip. No humming and hawwing, no silly mistakes or shifty eyes. It actually looked like he had a backbone when it came to being ordered about by a priest.

Shame he's scared of upsetting the apple cart by doing anything other than the bare minimum, but at least it looked like he was determined to do that bare minimum in spite of any opposition.

joseph brand

I think this image deserves to posted.

(Don't let us down Enda)

Turtwig

GODDAMMIT! !
There I was with that cruel sadistic smile on my face ready to ban you for breaking the thread and frick you anyway you fixed the image size. Now who am I going to ban?

joseph brand

Jernal wrote: »

GODDAMMIT! !
There I was with that cruel sadistic smile on my face ready to ban you for breaking the thread and frick you anyway you fixed the image size. Now who am I going to ban?

Sorry to be so anal, but large images just annoy me.

kylith

Good to see him with a bit of backbone. Strange how some people will only stand up when they're backed into a corner; he should have been telling the religious lobbyists this from the get-go.

robindch

joseph brand wrote: »

I think this image deserves to posted.

It could have been phrased slightly better, but only just. The thought's what matters.

I wonder what their Lordships will do next?

UDP

Its great that the iona institute and the catholic church are picking this fight since they cannot win (not sure how they do not know this). They should have been delighted with how restrictive the actual law is that will be voted on. All this shows is that they don't give a f'uck what the people of this country want and I hope that is visible to many. I hope they up their fight further to make sure everyone sees.

Viper_JB

Ah well, hopefully this will aid detaching the state from the church. It does seem like they're determined to do as much damage as possible to freedom of choice and womens rights, although with how the current legislation is being proposed I'd feel the same about the politicians.

I would love to see what would happen if they do excommunicate half of the dail though, has the potential to be very entertaining and will almost definitely blow up in the church's face.
It feels somewhat similar although not as serious as the conditional aid being provided in 3rd world countries (provided no birth control is being used), like a 1st world implementation.

Penn

Serious question though I may be embarrassing myself by asking it:

Can action be taken against the church for essentially threatening politicians regarding a matter involving the Constitution? Surely there's something unlawful about an organisation attempting to influence politician's votes like this?

I worry that some politicians would be religious enough to change their vote under threat of excommunication. Now obviously, I seriously doubt the Government would take any action against them if such action did exist, but I'd be interested to know if this would fall under any bribery or threat laws regarding influencing the votes of a politician.

UDP

Penn wrote: »

Can action be taken against the church for essentially threatening politicians regarding a matter involving the Constitution? Surely there's something unlawful about an organisation attempting to influence politician's votes like this?

They are no different to any other lobby group so they are allowed to threaten. Maybe the new Regulation of Lobbying Bill 2013 might make a difference as it brings in regulation of lobby groups and will require registration of communications from lobby groups.

Viper_JB

Penn wrote: »

I worry that some politicians would be religious enough to change their vote under threat of excommunication. Now obviously, I seriously doubt the Government would take any action against them if such action did exist, but I'd be interested to know if this would fall under any bribery or threat laws regarding influencing the votes of a politician.

I dunno, I would say that any politician that would let that threat change their vote should be removed from their position as a representative of the people.

Bannasidhe

Is it wrong of me that I really, really, really hope Brady does excommunicate them?

The **** storm will be deliciously compulsive viewing.

Penn

Viper_JB wrote: »

I dunno, I would say that any politician that would let that threat change their vote should be removed from their position as a representative of the people.

Well, as much as I agree, no politician would acknowledge that it changed their vote. They'd likely say they had a change of heart themselves after considering the facts. But even if they're not overly religious, I could see some TDs worrying about how it would affect them in the eyes of some voters.

Galvasean

Penn wrote: »

Well, as much as I agree, no politician would acknowledge that it changed their vote. They'd likely say they had a change of heart themselves after considering the facts. But even if they're not overly religious, I could see some TDs worrying about how it would affect them in the eyes of some voters.

I can't help but feel that any politician who is fearful of losing these votes is overlooking the sea of evidence that shows that such views are a minority in this country.

the culture of deference

Penn wrote: »

I worry that some politicians would be religious enough to change their vote under threat of excommunication. Now obviously, I seriously doubt the Government would take any action against them if such action did exist, but I'd be interested to know if this would fall under any bribery or threat laws regarding influencing the votes of a politician.

Should religious beliefs be tolerated in our politicans.

I would want a system of elected government led by people who can actually think for themselves, and not depend on prayer and fictional fantasy, and aren't afraid of actually taking on a corrupt organisation like the rcc head on.

Viper_JB

the culture of deference wrote: »

Should religious beliefs be tolerated in our politicans.

I would want a system of elected government led by people who can actually think for themselves, and not depend on prayer and fictional fantasy, and aren't afraid of actually taking on a corrupt organisation like the rcc head on.

Belief's are fine, and I don't think it would be right to encourage anyone away from those beliefs as long as they're not hurting/destroying anyones lives. As far as I'm concerned a politician should be a walking representative of their electorate and their electorate's feelings and will, doesn't seem to happen though, most of them seem all too happy to get on in front of a reporter and tell them what they personally think is right or wrong, it's like they've missed the whole point.

magicbastarder

Penn wrote: »

Surely there's something unlawful about an organisation attempting to influence politician's votes like this?