"Significant" numbers of babies remains actually found

The Rape of Lucretia

ChikiChiki wrote: »

It starts with bad governance. FF & FG have been useless since the foundation of the state.

Meaning, since for a hundred years between them they represented the vaste majority of Irish people, the Irish people have been useless since the foundation of the state at governing themselves. Useless, maybe goes little far, but very poor at it, I would agree with you. Social solutions such as the one being discuszed here that abhors us today, being a good example. It took theE Irish people a long long time to maturs after they lost the support of the British. Echoes from the past like it embarrass many to loom back and see you badly they handled self governance.

jameorahiely

volchitsa wrote: »

"Society" didn't all send their daughters there, afaiaa nobody in my family was ever sent to one of those places. And yes, some had children "out of wedlock".

And of those who did, do you really think they knew the babies were going to be ill treated and dumped in illegal graves when dead? Or do you think that by signing them over to the nuns they had no right to expect them to be kindly treated? I wouldn't agree with that at all.

What did they think happened the babies? To pretend they thought it was some sort of Narnia is very niaeve. Girls would have stories about their experiences inside the homes. Not only that but doctors, teachers and other professionals knew it aswell. Nobody chose to listen and hear what was happening. It was quietly accepted by society at the time.


Maybe you need to widen your sample size. Just because nobody in your family went to a home, doesn't mean that society didn't turn a blind eye to what was happening. By that logic, nobody in your family went in to a home, maybe the homes didn't exist :rolleyes:

volchitsa wrote: »

This is actually quite funny now. Talk about off topic. But do keep going - by continuing to make that link you are helping the pro choice cause enormously.

Babies in unconsecrated graves is aborhant, babies in buckets is funny. What a wierd logic!!
If the "pro-choice" support those actions, they are on par with the nuns and the society that let this kind of thing happen. Brainwashing is a hell of a thing.

volchitsa

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

It isnt really a case of fault or blame, rather of thats just the way it was. And thank God it is better now. A country as a while took a certain course as a country, and no individual or institution was out of step with what the country set as an appropriate standard and policy.
It isnt 'everyone is to blame', it 'no one is to blame'.

I thought the church was supposed to have some sort of eternal truth about good and bad?

Has that all gone by the wayside now, they're no better than the very worst of us? Well WTF are people doing sitting listening to them moralizing for then?

Seriously?

ChikiChiki

volchitsa wrote: »

So how would you suggest the average person, possibly not very well educated and probably finding it hard enough to make ends meet for their own families as things were, could change that themselves? Take up arms?

People live with the society they find themselves in. Just as not all Afghan men are personally responsible for the Taliban's cruelty to women, those who use those laws to beat and mistreat their wives are responsible for their actions, not for the law itself.

The people responsible are those who commit the acts. And those who knowingly cover up for them. I agree that some parts of society were complicit. That doesn't remove one iota of the church's guilt - which is what the Archbishop is trying to do - and nor does it make everyone equally responsible. That's a cop out.

Ballot box. There are other options!

volchitsa

ChikiChiki wrote: »

Ballot box. There are other options!

For an individual, there really aren't: as you said yourself, both FF and FG were as bad as each other, and blaming people for not voting for a minority party that can't possibly win on a single issue that nobody including the media was genuinely informing them about at the time just smacks of the Archbishop of Tuam's disgusting attempt this weekend to remove some blame for those who committed the acts by smearing everyone else.

Collective responsibility requires actual knowledge of the crimes, and there's really no evidence that the whole of society really was aware of just how bad it was.

Electric Sheep

volchitsa wrote: »

jameorahiely wrote: »

Societies views and complicity in sending their daughthers to these homes is not relevant you reckon? I would disagree and don't see the reason for another thread on the same topic?

"Society" didn't all send their daughters there, afaiaa nobody in my family was ever sent to one of those places. And yes, some had children "out of wedlock".

You are rather missing the point if you think you would know if a family member was ever sent to one of those places.

volchitsa

Electric Sheep wrote: »

You are rather missing the point if you think you would know if a family member was ever sent to one of those places.

But I thought we were being told that everyone knew, because it was how society worked? And that everyone was responsible because "everyone" sent their pregnant daughters there in full knowledge of just how bad it was? Or else would have left them to die in the street otherwise? Bit hard to have it both ways, surely?

Samaris

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

It isnt really a case of fault or blame, rather of thats just the way it was. And thank God it is better now. A country as a while took a certain course as a country, and no individual or institution was out of step with what the country set as an appropriate standard and policy.
It isnt 'everyone is to blame', it 'no one is to blame'.

That is a very bystander attitude.

So, in your view, the people who were mistreated in these homes, tis all very sad for them and all, but they should shut up because that's how things were and this is how things are?

That society has changed at all is most certainly not down to attitudes like that.

FA Hayek

Deleted User wrote: »

It's an awful pity that Ireland never replicated Spain in the 1930s and just dragged thousands of these twisted rightwing, conservative, pro-imperialism, pro-fascism, poor-hating servants of the Roman Catholic Church out and kept executing them. Perfect bedfellows for the British Empire in Ireland.

Ireland may have been many things in the 1930's but pro imperialist and fascist? It seems you are using this as yet another excuse to engage in your own xenophobic rants about the Brits and anyone else who does not share your world view.

What you are calling for is basically a violent overthrow of a legitimate government, calling for those who resit to be executed. With no mandate mind. Fireside solders.

volchitsa

FA Hayek wrote: »

Ireland may have been many things in the 1930's but pro imperialist and fascist? It seems you are using this as yet another excuse to engage in your own xenophobic rants about the Brits and anyone else who does not share your world view.

What you are calling for is basically a violent overthrow of a legitimate government, calling for those who resit to be executed. With no mandate mind. Fireside solders.

If a "legitimate government" is deliberately ignoring abuse of whole groups of women and children, the most vulnerable in its society, leading to huge death rates and terrible suffering, to what extent are the rest of society responsible if they don't try to overthrow the government?

Do you think that only the church has any responsibility here?

Or are you trying to have it both ways - you admit no right for ordinary people to take effective individual action, but they still get the blame for not stopping it all the same?

BlinkingLights

I wouldn't call it pro imperialist by any stretch of the imagination.

It wasn't fascist either and had a lot of ideals about democracy, but it had (and still has) large elements of an unusual type of corporate, religious authoritarianism which is probably more in line with parts of Latin America or perhaps the direction that some US Red States have been headed only without the moderation of the secular ideologies contained in the US constitution.

The church was given a direct role in provision of state funded education, health and social care and often with seemingly no meaningful state oversight, no transparency and no regulation to ensure that it was behaving as a fair and reasonable provider, working in the national interest, the social good and in line with human rights and democratic principles.

We still seem to be unable to disentangle the notion that church and school are not the same thing or, get our heads around the idea that you can run schools as a genuine state service, open to all, without actually disenfranchisement or upset to any religious group. It's just a matter of separating church and state so we can have public services in education and health that are open to all on an equal basis. That's not anti religion. It's just about making sure that state services are open to everyone. You can still make space for religion to function along side that just without actually imposing on people who do not subscribe to that religion.

The healthcare system is actually far more progressive than the school system in many respects and I think we have arrived at a situation where public hospitals like the Mater and so on are capable of offering genuine public services on an equal basis. They're certainly not prioritising Catholic patients ahead of say athiest or Protestant patients, whereas schools still seem to think that's acceptable.

I do genuinely think that the early decades of the state featured a situation where this republic was hijacked by vested interests who wanted to morph it into a catholic state. I don't think that is a sane or sensible path for Ireland and I think we need to be very careful not to conflate Irishness and being catholic. The two are completely separate things and there's nothing wrong with that.

Ireland has moved on in a lot of areas and I think we need to look towards being a genuine republic and live up to ideals of democracy, liberty, equality and fair treatment of all by all aspects of the state.

We failed badly to live up to the ideals of the proclamation and we have failed horribly to live up to the ideals of republicanism.

If we ever want a prospect of a united Ireland and a fair, open and equal opportunity based society we need to learn from these horrors and actually create a society that values transparency and genuine republican ideals.

Being a republic is a statement of values it's not just being "not the UK"

mickstupp

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

It isnt 'everyone is to blame', it 'no one is to blame'.

Except the people who did it.

If you kill someone, you're to blame for killing them. If you cover up the existence of a whole lot of dead children, then you're to blame for covering up the existence of a whole lot of dead children. There is blame. There is right and wrong.

The particular brand of moral relativism you're peddling is kinda disgusting.

volchitsa

mickstupp wrote: »

Except the people who did it.

If you kill someone, you're to blame for killing them. If you cover up the existence of a whole lot of dead children, then you're to blame for covering up the existence of a whole lot of dead children. There is blame. There is right and wrong.

The particular brand of moral relativism you're peddling is kinda disgusting.

Wish I could give this more likes.

I'd also add that if you cover up the existence of dead children (and/or child trafficking) while setting yourself up as the moral arbiters for the whole society, so that you also run schools and are generally the official commentators on what's acceptable behaviour and what's not, then your responsibility is even greater than if your day job was, say, a golf club or any other random group of people with their own rules.

Colser

The whole scenario is beyond comprehension when you really think about it.It's as if the women just got pregnant on their own ...no thought or questions in relation to who the fathers were ..totally bizarre really.What was the sin that these women and babies were being punished for if the men were not also guilty?I'm not making this into men versus women but it just makes no sense.

The Rape of Lucretia

Samaris wrote: »

That is a very bystander attitude.

So, in your view, the people who were mistreated in these homes, tis all very sad for them and all, but they should shut up because that's how things were and this is how things are?

That society has changed at all is most certainly not down to attitudes like that.

Thats not my attitude and I didnt say that. Certainly people can tell their stories. Its the lynch mob, bring someone, somebody, anybody, some institution, to justice mentality, that need to cool it and come down from thier high moral ground. It puts them in the same boat of the people of that era who did run things in a manner we now consider unacceptable. Maybe some people havent changed that much...

Babies and infants have died in all times. Some from whooping cough, some from illnesses like TB, which their families and the homes didn't want becoming public knowledge. What good would come of exhuming these bodies? Better to consecrate the ground and let their Souls Rest In Peace. It's decades too late to go looking for a scapegoat.

Samaris

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Thats not my attitude and I didnt say that. Certainly people can tell their stories. Its the lynch mob, bring someone, somebody, anybody, some institution, to justice mentality, that need to cool it and come down from thier high moral ground. It puts them in the same boat of the people of that era who did run things in a manner we now consider unacceptable. Maybe some people havent changed that much...

Yes, but you indicate that even if the perpetrators of the abuse are still alive, they should be left alone because ah sure, it's all of society.

Sure, society was involved. The society of the day were accessories so to speak. But the people that actually committed the acts are still around in some cases. To keep saying it's no-one's fault carefully exonerates people who specifically did specific things to other specific people, in some cases, resulting in their deaths or a lifelong shame and worry.

I do not blame Bon Secours as an order, I blame the specific people involved in the abuse and in perpetuating the abuse by indoctrinating others the same way. Same as I don't blame Fine Gael/Fianna Fail specifically, I blame the people involved in the acts - and in the cover-ups.

Maybe you're right and people haven't changed that much. There certainly seems to be a lot of "the blame belongs to everyone so the blame belongs to no-one, oh well, let's find something else to worry about".

volchitsa

Deleted User wrote: »

Babies and infants have died in all times. Some from whooping cough, some from illnesses like TB, which their families and the homes didn't want becoming public knowledge. What good would come of exhuming these bodies? Better to consecrate the ground and let their Souls Rest In Peace. It's decades too late to go looking for a scapegoat.

There's a difference between wanting to identify the guilty parties and looking for a scape goat.

What you're suggesting is just covering up a possible crime.

And what's the point in consecrating the ground now?
Will it make a difference to God at this stage, or is it just more covering up, symbolically this time?

jameorahiely

Samaris wrote: »

Yes, but you indicate that even if the perpetrators of the abuse are still alive, they should be left alone because ah sure, it's all of society.

Sure, society was involved. The society of the day were accessories so to speak. But the people that actually committed the acts are still around in some cases. To keep saying it's no-one's fault carefully exonerates people who specifically did specific things to other specific people, in some cases, resulting in their deaths or a lifelong shame and worry.

I do not blame Bon Secours as an order, I blame the specific people involved in the abuse and in perpetuating the abuse by indoctrinating others the same way. Same as I don't blame Fine Gael/Fianna Fail specifically, I blame the people involved in the acts - and in the cover-ups.

Maybe you're right and people haven't changed that much. There certainly seems to be a lot of "the blame belongs to everyone so the blame belongs to no-one, oh well, let's find something else to worry about".

Would you add to that list

The girls parents for putting her in there?
The aunties ans uncles who kne it was happening?
The fathers of the children for not taking responsibility?
The neighbours for keeping quiet and not reporting it?
Her friends who knew about it?
The girls themselves for not reporting it, to prevent it deom happening to others.
The gardai who turned a blind eye and returned girls to the home.
The people who lived around the homes for not investigating what all the digging was about.
People in the area for not investigating why all pregnant girls were going in and coming out without babies.
The doctors
The goverment
...and so forth

If nobody knew what was going on, how did they know who to contact to when faced with a unwanted pregnancy in the family?

volchitsa

jameorahiely wrote: »

If nobody knew what was going on, how did they know who to contact to when faced with a unwanted pregnancy in the family?

Peter Mulryan, on the LLS last week, said the priest turned up at his grandfather's house having learned that the daughter was pregnant, and instructed him as to where to send her.

jameorahiely

volchitsa wrote: »

Peter Mulryan, on the LLS last week, said the priest turned up at his grandfather's house having learned that the daughter was pregnant, and instructed him as to where to send her.

So gave him the adress, he didn't throw her in to a sack and drag her there. No, the womans family made the final decision to send her there.

Was he calling for his grandfather to be put on trial?

volchitsa

jameorahiely wrote: »

So gave him the adress, he didn't throw her in to a sack and drag her there. No, the womans family made the final decision to send her there.

Was he calling for his grandfather to be put on trial?

So here's the thing : the guilty people are the ones who harmed her.
If he knew that was happening, or was going to happen, then I agree that he was guilty, any more than the priest was, but all that makes no difference whatsoever to the guilt of the nuns for their actions. None.

Samaris

jameorahiely wrote: »

The girls parents for putting her in there?

Yes.

jameorahiely wrote: »

The aunties ans uncles who kne it was happening?

Depends.

jameorahiely wrote: »

The fathers of the children for not taking responsibility?

If they were aware of it and many times they weren't.

jameorahiely wrote: »

The neighbours for keeping quiet and not reporting it?

No, who were they going to report it to?

jameorahiely wrote: »

Her friends who knew about it?

Unsure you're getting the secrecy that attended these situations.

jameorahiely wrote: »

The girls themselves for not reporting it, to prevent it deom happening to others.

No. Who would they report it to?

jameorahiely wrote: »

The gardai who turned a blind eye and returned girls to the home.

Yeeees, although I grant they felt that was the only place to bring them. On the other hand, they should have seen the state many of these women were in.

jameorahiely wrote: »

The people who lived around the homes for not investigating what all the digging was about.

That assumes digging was even noticeable and wasn't perfectly well explainable.

jameorahiely wrote: »

People in the area for not investigating why all pregnant girls were going in and coming out without babies.

What pregnant girls? Mostly they'd know that "shamed" women went there, and the nuns would look after the children. As long as it wasn't their own family members, they'd have little reason to poke around.

jameorahiely wrote: »

The doctors

Doctors who saw evidence of illness, neglect and high mortality rates, yes.

jameorahiely wrote: »

The goverment

See for doctors and reports into the homes.
...and so forth

jameorahiely wrote: »

If nobody knew what was going on, how did they know who to contact to when faced with a unwanted pregnancy in the family?

There is a distinct difference between not knowing the harm that was being done to these people and not knowing what a Home was.

jameorahiely

volchitsa wrote: »

So here's the thing : the guilty people are the ones who harmed her.
If he knew that was happening, or was going to happen, then I agree that he was guilty, any more than the priest was, but all that makes no difference whatsoever to the guilt of the nuns for their actions. None.

Yes.

So the grandfather, you reckon, mughtn't have known what was happening..really? Even after he packed her off to the adress the priest gave him and she came home without a baby?

Are you for real?

end of the road

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Thats not my attitude and I didnt say that. Certainly people can tell their stories. Its the lynch mob, bring someone, somebody, anybody, some institution, to justice mentality, that need to cool it and come down from thier high moral ground. It puts them in the same boat of the people of that era who did run things in a manner we now consider unacceptable. Maybe some people havent changed that much...

no it doesn't. how women and children were treated at the hands of the church was wrong. end of. no discussion to be had. children died and were effectively dumped. these homes ran by the church had a higher then normal death rate dispite the church being a very rich organisation. the church covered this, and the abuse carried out at the hands of some members up. no excuses.

Deleted User wrote: »

Babies and infants have died in all times. Some from whooping cough, some from illnesses like TB, which their families and the homes didn't want becoming public knowledge. What good would come of exhuming these bodies? Better to consecrate the ground and let their Souls Rest In Peace. It's decades too late to go looking for a scapegoat.

not at all. any investigation would be worth it. every penny and resource. especially considering what happened to the people in these homes. we have a genocide on our hands, the truth must be got at all costs.

volchitsa

jameorahiely wrote: »

Yes.

So the grandfather, you reckon, mughtn't have known what was happening..really? Even after he packed her off to the adress the priest gave him and she came home without a baby?

Are you for real?

Wait, you seem to think people are arguing that families didn't know that homes gave the babies away for adoption. Nobody is arguing that, well I'm not.

jameorahiely

Samaris wrote: »

1. Yes.

2. Depends.

3. If they were aware of it and many times they weren't.

4. No, who were they going to report it to?

5. Unsure you're getting the secrecy that attended these situations.

6. No. Who would they report it to?

7 Yeeees, although I grant they felt that was the only place to bring them. On the other hand, they should have seen the state many of these women were in.

8 That assumes digging was even noticeable and wasn't perfectly well explainable.

9. What pregnant girls? Mostly they'd know that "shamed" women went there, and the nuns would look after the children. As long as it wasn't their own family members, they'd have little reason to poke around.

10.. Doctors who saw evidence of illness, neglect and high mortality rates, yes.

11.See for doctors and reports into the homes.
...and so forth


12. There is a distinct difference between not knowing the harm that was being done to these people and not knowing what a Home was.

I've added numbers for ease of reply
4. The gardai, the media
5. The secrecy.. Marys gone doen the country for a few months holiday. In a time when holidays were few and far between. No suspicion there. Everybody knew, nobody may have said it, but the majority knew. I think you're over estimating the secrecy.
6. The Gardai, the media

8. 800 graves dug and no vegetables growing, no suspicious activity going on, the just like digging
9. A lot of women going in and no children outside playing? You've answed this one though. As long as it wasn't their own family, they didn't care
12. There was a woman on the radio the other day who got pregnant twice and was in 2 different homes. Girls talked to their friends. People knew, although few will admit it noe

jameorahiely

volchitsa wrote: »

Wait, you seem to think people are arguing that families didn't know that homes gave the babies away for adoption. Nobody is arguing that, well I'm not.

Right. So will granny and granddad in that case and all equilivant others be up on trial?

volchitsa

volchitsa wrote: »

If a "legitimate government" is deliberately ignoring abuse of whole groups of women and children, the most vulnerable in its society, leading to huge death rates and terrible suffering, to what extent are the rest of society responsible if they don't try to overthrow the government?

Do you think that only the church has any responsibility here?

Or are you trying to have it both ways - you admit no right for ordinary people to take effective individual action, but they still get the blame for not stopping it all the same?

They did much more than ignore it. They were directly responsible for 2,500 women being sent to these homes.

http://www.thejournal.ie/magdalene-l...83428-Feb2013/

Senator Martin McAleese’s report, published this afternoon, reveals that more than 2,500 women who were incarcerated in the Magdalene Laundries were sent in directly by the State. In reality, that number is higher but many records did not survive.

Deleted User wrote: »

Babies and infants have died in all times. Some from whooping cough, some from illnesses like TB, which their families and the homes didn't want becoming public knowledge. What good would come of exhuming these bodies? Better to consecrate the ground and let their Souls Rest In Peace. It's decades too late to go looking for a scapegoat.

Mothers and siblings of these babies in some cases want the remains returned.

Do you think it's too much to ask?
I don't!

end of the road

end of the road wrote: »

no it doesn't. how women and children were treated at the hands of the church was wrong. end of. no discussion to be had. children died and were effectively dumped. these homes ran by the church had a higher then normal death rate dispite the church being a very rich organisation. the church covered this, and the abuse carried out at the hands of some members up. no excuses.

not at all. any investigation would be worth it. every penny and resource. especially considering what happened to the people in these homes. we have a genocide on our hands, the truth must be got at all costs.

A tad hysterical that. Babies and people die. FACT. The bodies were wrapped in some sort of cloth and placed in an unused underground chamber. Let them Rest In Peace.