796 children buried in Septic Tank in Galway - ### Mod Warning in 1st Post

Nodin

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

But they were representatives of the RCC!

...in fact they were bloody typical of the RCC.

Czarcasm

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

But they were representatives of the RCC!

I meant the RCC as a whole Kiwi. Not all Roman Catholics are solely intent on promoting hate and division between people.

That's how the people who committed these atrocities and ran these laundries were able to thrive in society - by promoting hatred and divisions among people.

That's why I asked the question earlier that some people just didn't get - because they are so blinded by their own hatred of any ideology that doesn't jig with their perceived self-superior intellect and morality.

Spring Onion

The Roman catholic organisation has angered me several times in the past but I have to say this story has me absolutely livid. It has shocked me to the core. And the anger has not abated in over a week. I have even emailed 3 local TDs and 2 Ministers which is something I have never done before. I am going to email Sean Brady next even though I believe that man should be in prison and not leader of the Irish section of the Roman organisation.

Dan_Solo

Czarcasm wrote: »

That's why I asked the question earlier that some people just didn't get - because they are so blinded by their own hatred of any ideology that doesn't jig with their perceived self-superior intellect and morality.

Another utter crock.
I dig loads of ideology. I just don't see how not raping children and not starving babies makes me only have a perceived moral superiority TBH.
You think the difference between the average Joe Bloggs and a pedophile baby killer is a matter of perception? WTF.

Nodin

Czarcasm wrote: »

I meant the RCC as a whole Kiwi. Not all Roman Catholics are solely intent on promoting hate and division between people.

That's how the people who committed these atrocities and ran these laundries were able to thrive in society - by promoting hatred and divisions among people..................

...but earlier it didn't matter about the church because people would find some way to feel superior anyway, sez you. Not the most consistent narrative.

rotun

Is there anything stopping a solicitor taking a class action on behalf of these victims to the European court of human rights?

SpaceTime

Czarcasm wrote: »

The people who committed these atrocities are anecdotal and aren't representative of the RCC.

I'm sorry to be picking you up on this but I can't really let that statement stand unchallenged.

The people who committed these acts were absolutely representative of the Catholic Church. While it's unfortunate that they did what they did, they very much did it as fully consecrated religious members of the Catholic Church and with huge authority gained from the fact that they were representing the church, which at the time was an immensely powerful organisation in Ireland.

You may feel that they don't represent the Catholic Church as you see it or would like to see it, but sadly, they did represent a particularly unpleasant aspect of the church.

I'd suggest that rather than trying to argue that they're not church representatives that perhaps you focus your energy on changing the Catholic Church from within ?

Before an organisation can develop, heal or change it needs to recognise and confront its own past.

One of the primary reasons the Catholic Church is losing touch with real people is because it's still in denial about what went on. No organisation can just continue to go around pretending that these things were someone else's fault or that they didn't happen. It's a cowardly stance and it really does the church no good whatsoever.

-- edit --
I'd just add there : I'm not saying that in any way in defence of the Church and I'm very definitely an atheist. However, I just think that if someone's going to be a Catholic, they'd really want to start demanding serious change. The church isn't likely go away but if enough of its members demand change, maybe it might at least become a more pleasant and accountable organisation!

I mean, there are lots of very nice catholics out there, they just need to start making sure the church actually reflects that. Hiding from its past won't fix anything.

Resonator75

rotun wrote: »

Is there anything stopping a solicitor taking a class action on behalf of these victims to the European court of human rights?

If someone did that they would deserve some form of "Hero of Ireland "Medal

Dan_Solo

rotun wrote: »

Is there anything stopping a solicitor taking a class action on behalf of these victims to the European court of human rights?

Not sure what the statute of limitations is on infanticide. Probably impossible as these crimes predate the EU itself.

Kiwi in IE

Czarcasm wrote: »

I meant the RCC as a whole Kiwi. Not all Roman Catholics are solely intent on promoting hate and division between people.

That's how the people who committed these atrocities and ran these laundries were able to thrive in society - by promoting hatred and divisions among people.

That's why I asked the question earlier that some people just didn't get - because they are so blinded by their own hatred of any ideology that doesn't jig with their perceived self-superior intellect and morality.

When I refer to the 'RCC' I am not even talking about about ordinary Catholic people. From what I can see ordinary Catholic people and the distructive, dispicble, evil heirachy and upper echelons of that church are worlds apart.

I cannot understand why on earth ordinary people follow such an horrendous institution without being able to see the wood from the trees, but I get that indoctrination from birth is extremely powerful.

Czarcasm

Nodin wrote: »

...in fact they were bloody typical of the RCC.

Does examining the evidence and statistics count for nothing when it comes to making ignorant amd biased generalizations about ideologies you don't agree with?

Your ill informed statement just shows you are as incapable of rational thought as anyone, and incapable of critical thinking when you rush to judgement. You're basically no better than the people you're insulting, for exactly the same reasons.

Spring Onion

Czarcasm wrote: »

just like the people who committed these atrocities are anecdotal and aren't representative of the RCC.

That's a pathetic statement. You are not blinkered, you're blindfolded.

Annasopra

rotun wrote: »

Is there anything stopping a solicitor taking a class action on behalf of these victims to the European court of human rights?

I don't think an action could be taken on behalf of dead people

Nodin

Czarcasm wrote: »

Does examining the evidence and statistics count for nothing when it comes to making ignorant amd biased generalizations about ideologies you don't agree with?
..............

You mean the statistics with regard to the death rate of illegitimate children?

The statistics relating to the other Mother & Child Homes?

The Ryan report?

The Murphy report?

SpaceTime

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

I don't think an action could be taken on behalf of dead people

I don't think their being dead would preclude action from being taken. It's certainly an avenue that should be explored.

Bear in mind that a lot of European Human Rights laws actually stem from the Council of Europe rather than the EU. This is a separate body that was created in the aftermath of World War II and Ireland has been a member since 1949 and is a signatory to all the various statues and treaties.

We signed the European Convention on Human Rights on 4 November 1950.

rotun

Resonator75 wrote: »

"Hero of Ireland "Medal

That particular stock has lowered in value these past years

Czarcasm

Nodin wrote: »

You mean the statistics with regard to the death rate of illegitimate children?

The statistics relating to the other Mother & Child Homes?

The Ryan report?

The Murphy report?

Yes Nodin, ALL the statistics. What you're effectively saying is the equivalent of saying that Muslims who commit atrocities are representative of Islam as a whole, and we both know that's not true.

Dan_Solo

Czarcasm wrote: »

You're basically no better than the people you're insulting, for exactly the same reasons.

He's no better than pedophiles and baby killers?
You care to rephrase that for sanity's sake buddy?

shruikan2553

Czarcasm wrote: »

Yes Nodin, ALL the statistics. What you're effectively saying is the equivalent of saying that Muslims who commit atrocities are representative of Islam as a whole, and we both know that's not true.

Theres a difference between someone who is a muslim/catholic committing a crime and a priest/nun/bishop/whatever the muslim version of priest is committing a crime. I buy microsoft products but me doing anything is not representative of the company. Bill Gates or some sort of manager in the company is. Members of these religions are just buying a product, the clergy are representatives of the religions.

Dan_Solo

Czarcasm wrote: »

Yes Nodin, ALL the statistics. What you're effectively saying is the equivalent of saying that Muslims who commit atrocities are representative of Islam as a whole, and we both know that's not true.

No, it'd be the equivalent of saying the leader and higher council of the Muslim faith sanction atrocities and order cover ups, transfers of clerics and non-cooperation with authorities.
Which we both know isn't true.
For the Muslim religion.

mcmoustache

SpaceTime wrote: »

Before an organisation can develop, heal or change it needs to recognise and confront its own past.

I think you've touched on something there.

Every organisation has its bad apples. That's a fact of life.

What distinguishes a malevolent organisation from a benevolent one is how they deal with those bad apples.

An organisation that was a force for good would ensure that bad apples were condemned and that their victims would be compensated, apologise and ensure it never happened again.

A bad organisation would instead try to conceal its misdeeds, withhold evidence, swear victims to secrecy, move bad apples to other locations, blame the times, blame the state, play the victim, lawyer up and hire PR firms.

If the shoe fits...

Frank Grimes

Czarcasm wrote: »

Yes Nodin, ALL the statistics. What you're effectively saying is the equivalent of saying that Muslims who commit atrocities are representative of Islam as a whole, and we both know that's not true.

The Catholic Church is a hierarchical organisation, an organisation that had an extremely large influence on the functioning of the Irish state for decades - that analogy really is not appropriate in this context.

Adamantium

I love how the media and the clergy tries to aim for balance and are constantly trying to place this in a bigger and BIGGER context until we zoom out of the milky way galaxy until its all rendered innate/natural and surmise that "**** happens"....moving on.. with a sigh.....

SpaceTime

shruikan2553 wrote: »

Theres a difference between someone who is a muslim/catholic committing a crime and a priest/nun/bishop/whatever the muslim version of priest is committing a crime. I buy microsoft products but me doing anything is not representative of the company. Bill Gates or some sort of manager in the company is. Members of these religions are just buying a product, the clergy are representatives of the religions.

It's not quite that simple a comparison.

A church doesn't sell a product or service. It's a community of people. While I would agree with you that the Catholic Church as it is structured at present does not really allow those people to have an awful lot of say in how it runs its affairs, they are still members of a community rather than purchasers of a product.

As members of a community, they could decide to lobby, to pressure, to withdraw their support etc to force change. However, that's not what they did and it's still not really being done today to any great extent from what I am observing anyway.

Also, unlike a company selling a product or service, a religion is actually a set of philosophies and rules by which its adherents live their lives (well they may not take them all on board, but in theory that's what they do). If you buy Microsoft Windows, you're just buying an operating system for your computer. That's all it is. You don't subscribe to some set of philosophies and rules that form a way of life nor do you in any way represent the company or anything like that. Your relationship is just buying a product/service.

So, really you can't quite compare the situations.

I do think though that Irish Catholics in the past were definitely cowed by the Church more than they were members of it though. It was a very top-down authoritarian type of an organisation which ruled its flock by fear in those days.

rotun

Adamantium wrote: »

I love how the media and the clergy tries to aim for balance and are constantly trying to place this in a bigger and BIGGER context until we zoom out of the milky way galaxy until its all rendered innate/natural and surmise that "**** happens"....moving on.. with a sigh.....

To keep it in context, buy 800 daisy dolls, put them in a see thru shipping container and put that in front of dail eireann.

mcmoustache

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

I cannot understand why on earth ordinary people follow such an horrendous institution without being able to see the wood from the trees, but I get that indoctrination from birth is extremely powerful.

It's like being the supporter of a football club. Listen to two supporters of different football clubs debate a controversial refereeing decision when their respective teams are playing and you'll know what I mean.

AndonHandon

Post-birth abortions for some, miniature American flags for others!

Overheal

Czarcasm wrote: »

Were more people in the RCC starving children to death and dumping them in sewers than those that didn't? Of course they weren't. Has the RCC a long history of atrocities and crimes against humanity? Yes it does. Every organization will inevitably have a minority of members who will corrupt it to further their own agenda.

First off, how do you possibly know without supporting evidence whether or not the RCC was any more or less guilty of using mass graves?

Secondly, we're not talking about just any organization - even though the argument presented here is fallible anyway, but let's leave that to ridicule by others. The RCC is more than a club or society, it's not the NRA or NAMBLA, it's an organization which assumes God-Appointed Moral Authority. They had their fingers in every corner of society, public and private, and still have a considerable presence today. Put best in this quote here, which hits the nail on the head: http://www.broadsheet.ie/2014/06/05/what-they-cant-get-away-with/

“It’s extraordinary to hear a bishop ask people why people are singling out the church, in the context of asking questions about the cover-up of child abuse. When you look at who the moral arbiters are in society, who are, what is the organisation that we have allowed in Irish society and that have been to the fore in telling us what is right, what is wrong, what is morality, what is sin, what is virtue. And then, we discover, through a series of of reports that they have behaved with the greatest hypocrisy, according to their own rules and then bishops complain, and wonder why they’re being singled out and why it is we are asking these questions about them. It displays, what it displays I think, is an amazing detachment from real life. I mean these people are obviously so disconnected, they’re so, they live in such a rarefied atmosphere, they haven’t the slightest comprehension as to why it is people get exercised over this issue. And I mean I was very struck by the statement when the row broke in Ferns over Bishop Brennan, who indeed was there but who didn’t really say very much, looking for contributions to compensate people, looking for contributions from parishioners. There had been a redefinition almost of what it was that they were involved in, in terms of a cover-up, no mention of a cover-up, no mention of negligence, it was ‘mismanagement and/or lack of resolve’ and the ‘and/or’ really got me and ‘a lack of understanding’. So this is now being minimised, the actual culpability. I was interested to hear Bishop McAreavey, he expressed it as ‘massively misguided’ and ‘massively wrong’ which is a bit of an advance on ‘and/or lack of resolve’.”

So frankly, for an organization which wishes to claim itself as THE STANDARD of Moral Authority - Cosmic, Divine, Holy Authority - well they will be held to it if nothing else. In which case it doesn't matter if it's 0.1% or 0.0001% of the Church perpetuating it, there ought to be no tolerance provided for this level of atrocity.

Resonator75

rotun wrote: »

That particular stock has lowered in value these past years

Damn it to hell. Your right. Possibly a badge made of compressed child bones would be more appropriate for the establishment.

I was in the Killing fields once and thought to myself how lucky I was to be from a civilized country where stuff like this never happened.

I curse my naivety.

SpaceTime

mcmoustache wrote: »

I think you've touched on something there.

Every organisation has its bad apples. That's a fact of life.

What distinguishes a malevolent organisation from a benevolent one is how they deal with those bad apples.

An organisation that was a force for good would ensure that bad apples were condemned and that their victims would be compensated, apologise and ensure it never happened again.

A bad organisation would instead try to conceal its misdeeds, withhold evidence, swear victims to secrecy, move bad apples to other locations, blame the times, blame the state, play the victim, lawyer up and hire PR firms.

If the shoe fits...

That's the very problem though. Its default position is to immediately protect the organisation and the hierarchy and go on a damage control exercise and lots of people seem to jump onto forums like this or go on TV and radio trying to defend indefensible positions to protect it.

They're looking like any big corporate body that has done something nasty and is now desperately trying to cover it up.

Nothing good ever comes of that ...