Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Vigil for mothers and unborn babies in Knock with alleged PAEDO protector Sean Brady

Options
12357

Comments

  • Options
    #122
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,993 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    That would be a bizarre situation; if "The National Maternity Hospital" sued "The State".

    Here's a list of the National Mat. Hospital's ex officio (unelected) Governors;

    Dr Diarmuid Martin, (Archbishop of Dublin – Chairman)
    Naoise Ó Muirí, (Lord Mayor – Vice Chairman)
    Dr Michael Robson, (Master)
    Very Rev. Patrick Finn (Parish Priest of the Parish of Haddington Road)
    Very Rev. John McDonagh (Parish Priest of the Parish of Sandymount)
    Very Rev. John Gilligan (Administrator of the Parish of St. Andrew, Westland Row)


  • Options
    #123
    Bannasidhe
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 19,219 Mod ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    recedite wrote: »
    That would be a bizarre situation; if "The National Maternity Hospital" sued "The State".

    Here's a list of the National Mat. Hospital's ex officio (unelected) Governors;

    Dr Diarmuid Martin, (Archbishop of Dublin – Chairman)
    Naoise Ó Muirí, (Lord Mayor – Vice Chairman)
    Dr Michael Robson, (Master)
    Very Rev. Patrick Finn (Parish Priest of the Parish of Haddington Road)
    Very Rev. John McDonagh (Parish Priest of the Parish of Sandymount)
    Very Rev. John Gilligan (Administrator of the Parish of St. Andrew, Westland Row)

    Not a womb between them and 4 out of the 6 have taken vows of celibacy....I wish I was surprised. But I'm not. Which is sad. :(


  • Options
    #124
    lazygal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    What makes one very reverend rather than reverend?


  • Options
    #125
    Turtwig
    Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    eyescreamcone wrote: »
    I believe that the medics can not conscientiously object in cases of emergency. They can in the other cases - of ill-health or suicide.
    Open to correction though?!

    Yep, from the bill itself.
    However, an individual’s right to conscientious objection is not absolute and often has limitations. This is because the right to conscientious objection must be balanced against someone else’s competing rights, for example, the right to life in the case of a medical emergency. The balance is reflected by the provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights in which freedom of conscience is qualified by Article 9(2), “Freedom to
    manifest one’s religion or beliefs shall be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of public safety, for the protection of public order, health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of
    others”.


  • Options
    #126
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,993 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    lazygal wrote: »
    What makes one very reverend rather than reverend?
    Depending on how much you are revered by your people, you can be the "very reverend" "the very very reverend" or (as I like to style myself) "the most reverend".


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #127
    Bannasidhe
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 19,219 Mod ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    recedite wrote: »
    Depending on how much you are revered by your people, you can be the "very reverend" "the very very reverend" or (as I like to style myself) "the most reverend".

    I quite like the sound of 'The Rather Reverend'.


  • Options
    #128
    Sarky
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,967 ✭✭✭✭Sarky


    Reverend enough?


  • Options
    #129
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,993 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    I quite like the sound of 'The Rather Reverend'.
    Its a bit..... Anglican. Better to go the whole hog, or not bother at all.


  • Options
    #130
    Sarky
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,967 ✭✭✭✭Sarky


    The Really F*cking Reverend?


  • Options
    #131
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,993 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    Too evangelical. You'd need one of those glass churches and a private jet to pull that one off.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #132
    jimd2
    Registered Users Posts: 789 ✭✭✭jimd2


    the culture of deference wrote: »
    I seriously worry about the future of this country when we see the stupidity with a crowd of around 4,000 people taking part in a rosary procession around Knock Shrine as part of a national prayer vigil for mothers and the unborn. The manager of Knock, (why does it need a manager) Pat Lavelle, is expecting a larger number of people to attend a mass in the Basilica at 3pm, where the chief celebrant will be Cardinal Sean Brady.


    A widely suspected paedophile enabler saying mass for the rights of the unborn.

    000751d8-642.jpg




    "A blessing of expectant mothers will be performed during the service.
    Pilgrims attending the vigil have been expressing their concern about proposed legislation that would allow for termination of pregnancy in limited circumstances. Many of those who have travelled to take part in today's event say they fear any liberalisation of the abortion laws here could lead to terminations on demand in future."








    The event is being supported by the Irish Bishops' Conference and comes after they said the proposed Protection of Life during Pregnancy Bill represented a dramatic and unacceptable change to Irish law.



    http://www.rte.ie/news/2013/0504/390390-knock-prayer-pregnancy/

    Disgraceful thread opening post that has no place on this or an other forum on Boards. I suggest that you read the charter as this post is on dangerous ground in relation to the charter.

    As far as I was aware A&A was not set up as a mouthpiece for anti catholic bigots. The thread would be actually more appropriate in the christianity forum but you have chosen to put it here as you probably didnt have the stomach for an argument there.

    Go and ask permission to form the Anti Religious Bigots forum instead of contaminating what is normally a reasoned debate on this forum.


  • Options
    #133
    Play To Kill
    Closed Accounts Posts: 485 ✭✭Play To Kill


    jimd2 wrote: »
    Disgraceful thread opening post that has no place on this or an other forum on Boards.

    I agree, none of this should be discussed anywhere ever, sweep it all under the carpet like in the good old days :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #134
    MrPudding
    Registered Users Posts: 9,788 ✭✭✭MrPudding


    jimd2 wrote: »
    Disgraceful thread opening post that has no place on this or an other forum on Boards. I suggest that you read the charter as this post is on dangerous ground in relation to the charter.

    As far as I was aware A&A was not set up as a mouthpiece for anti catholic bigots. The thread would be actually more appropriate in the christianity forum but you have chosen to put it here as you probably didnt have the stomach for an argument there.

    Go and ask permission to form the Anti Religious Bigots forum instead of contaminating what is normally a reasoned debate on this forum.
    Could you provide some more details on your problems with the OP? Perhaps what dangerous ground it lies on?

    MrP


  • Options
    #135
    catallus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭catallus


    Play To Kill wrote: »
    I agree, none of this should be discussed anywhere ever, sweep it all under the carpet like in the good old days :rolleyes:

    It's not about sweeping anything under the carpet, although it seems that we will have to realise that the hiding and tacit acceptance of sexual abuse was a more widespread phenomenon than anyone would like to acknowledge. The recent media hounding of English media personalities shows that it wasn't just in the religious arena that this stuff was happening.

    The problem I have with the OP is that it is a very blunt and unsophisticated attempt to conflate anti-abortionists with "PAEDO protection".

    And it is saddening to see that the whole thread is focussing on that.


  • Options
    #136
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users Posts: 11,851 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    What do you think "not reporting paedophilia to the police" can be classified as?


  • Options
    #137
    redfacedbear
    Registered Users Posts: 891 ✭✭✭redfacedbear


    catallus wrote: »
    The problem I have with the OP is that it is a very blunt and unsophisticated attempt to conflate anti-abortionists with "PAEDO protection"

    I don't agree that it attempts to do this. It merely makes the point that Brady has no moral authority given his past actions. I don't think this is unreasonable - it is also quite specific to Brady and to claim it's tarring all anti-abortionists is a stretch.


  • Options
    #138
    catallus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭catallus


    Nobody has "moral authority": Brady is probably a son-of-a-bitch, a dog-collar doesn't make him less or more so.

    What Brady is: he is a member of a church and he was heading up a mass for a particular group of people who are united in their beliefs about mothers and the unborn; given the current media coverage of the proposed legislation for doctors to carry out specific treatments for pregnant women, the OP decided to use the past failings of one man to denigrate a group of protesters.

    I might be wrong about the whole thing, maybe that wasn't the OP's intent but that is how I read it when it appeared. But that's only because that is how it reads.

    And the worst part about it is that a lot of people join in in the church-bashing; it is unthinking vitriol. It is dangerous. Next time it could be "kill the Muslims" or "Burn the Tinkers" or "Nuke the Chinese". When are you going to shout stop?


  • Options
    #139
    Bannasidhe
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 19,219 Mod ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    catallus wrote: »
    Nobody has "moral authority": Brady is probably a son-of-a-bitch, a dog-collar doesn't make him less or more so.

    What Brady is: he is a member of a church and he was heading up a mass for a particular group of people who are united in their beliefs about mothers and the unborn; given the current media coverage of the proposed legislation for doctors to carry out specific treatments for pregnant women, the OP decided to use the past failings of one man to denigrate a group of protesters.

    I might be wrong about the whole thing, maybe that wasn't the OP's intent but that is how I read it when it appeared. But that's only because that is how it reads.

    And the worst part about it is that a lot of people join in in the church-bashing; it is unthinking vitriol. It is dangerous. Next time it could be "kill the Muslims" or "Burn the Tinkers" or "Nuke the Chinese". When are you going to shout stop?

    Hyperbole drive engaged Captain.


  • Options
    #140
    catallus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭catallus


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    Hyperbole drive engaged Captain.

    "And as things fell apart, Nobody paid much attention".

    We are so much smarter now than the people of 1913?


  • Options
    #141
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    PopePalpatine wrote: »
    Is it just me, or do those hooded nuns look a bit Klanish?

    Ironic considering the KKK were anti-Catholic - and not "anti-Catholic" a

    Those are apparently not nuns but "maidens". And no, I've no fucking clue.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #142
    swampgas
    Registered Users Posts: 3,537 ✭✭✭swampgas


    catallus wrote: »
    Nobody has "moral authority": Brady is probably a son-of-a-bitch, a dog-collar doesn't make him less or more so.

    What Brady is: he is a member of a church and he was heading up a mass for a particular group of people who are united in their beliefs about mothers and the unborn; given the current media coverage of the proposed legislation for doctors to carry out specific treatments for pregnant women, the OP decided to use the past failings of one man to denigrate a group of protesters.

    Surely this group of people bear some responsibility for who they choose to lead them? Did they really think that Brady is an appropriate man to represent them on such an important matter, given his self-confessed failings in the past? These people were there voluntarily, and to some extent are indicating their support for Brady. By doing so, they are denigrating themselves.


  • Options
    #143
    endacl
    Registered Users Posts: 22,249 ✭✭✭✭endacl


    jimd2 wrote: »
    Disgraceful thread opening post that has no place on this or an other forum on Boards. I suggest that you read the charter as this post is on dangerous ground in relation to the charter.

    As far as I was aware A&A was not set up as a mouthpiece for anti catholic bigots. The thread would be actually more appropriate in the christianity forum but you have chosen to put it here as you probably didnt have the stomach for an argument there.

    Go and ask permission to form the Anti Religious Bigots forum instead of contaminating what is normally a reasoned debate on this forum.

    Nah. It's grand here. Thanks for caring though. I feel held.


  • Options
    #144
    endacl
    Registered Users Posts: 22,249 ✭✭✭✭endacl


    catallus wrote: »

    And it is saddening to see that the whole thread is focussing on that.

    Could be worse. Some threads over here focus on biscuits.


  • Options
    #145
    catallus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭catallus


    swampgas wrote: »
    Surely this group of people bear some responsibility for who they choose to lead them? Did they really think that Brady is an appropriate man to represent them on such an important matter, given his self-confessed failings in the past? These people were there voluntarily, and to some extent are indicating their support for Brady. By doing so, they are denigrating themselves.

    Brady was heading a mass, not leading them.

    If we're going to mix up voluntary attendance at a mass with support for a priest then I have to fold.

    There are good aspects to Brady and there are bad aspects; I wouldn't be too zealous in condemning him for failing to report things that happened about 30 years ago. It wasn't on peoples' moral radar.

    This whole thread, from the first post on, has been used as an anti-religion, and particularly, an anti-catholic diatribe.


  • Options
    #146
    Bannasidhe
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 19,219 Mod ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    catallus wrote: »
    Brady was heading a mass, not leading them.

    If we're going to mix up voluntary attendance at a mass with support for a priest then I have to fold.

    There are good aspects to Brady and there are bad aspects; I wouldn't be too zealous in condemning him for failing to report things that happened about 30 years ago. It wasn't on peoples' moral radar.

    This whole thread, from the first post on, has been used as an anti-religion, and particularly, an anti-catholic diatribe.

    Perhaps it wasn't on some people's moral radar but I was a fully grown adult and a mother of a young son 30 years ago and it was sure as **** on my moral radar.


  • Options
    #147
    endacl
    Registered Users Posts: 22,249 ✭✭✭✭endacl


    catallus wrote: »
    Brady was heading a mass, not leading them.

    If we're going to mix up voluntary attendance at a mass with support for a priest then I have to fold.

    There are good aspects to Brady and there are bad aspects; I wouldn't be too zealous in condemning him for failing to report things that happened about 30 years ago. It wasn't on peoples' moral radar.

    This whole thread, from the first post on, has been used as an anti-religion, and particularly, an anti-catholic diatribe.

    Did he not have a moral radar 30 years ago? I was under the impression that he had spent his career in the 'moral radar' business?

    And a slight correction. The forum, if you want to be black and white about it, would be broadly not-quite-in-favour-of-religion. This thread, well ok, it's kinda anti catholic.

    Feel free to browse. We're here all night!


  • Options
    #148
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,401 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    catallus wrote: »
    I wouldn't be too zealous in condemning him for failing to report things that happened about 30 years ago. It wasn't on peoples' moral radar.
    As I said recently here, thirty years ago, the church mightn't have known that abusing children was bad in the sense of a moral absolute, but it knew that it was relatively bad enough that that the best thing that Brendan Smyth could do was to move somewhere else prontissimo, to swear his victims to life-time secrecy and keep their parents, the police and the judiciary totally in the dark.

    I kind of suspect it was on their moral radar. Quite a lot actually.


  • Options
    #149
    endacl
    Registered Users Posts: 22,249 ✭✭✭✭endacl


    jimd2 wrote: »

    Go and ask permission to form the Anti Religious Bigots forum instead of contaminating what is normally a reasoned debate on this forum.
    I'd be happy enough to +1 the new forum.

    Just to be sure though, before the request goes in, are you sure you didn't mean to type 'Anti-Religious Bigots'? Couldn't back that one. I'd be anti-bigot.


  • Options
    #150
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    catallus wrote: »
    ..............
    There are good aspects to Brady and there are bad aspects; I wouldn't be too zealous in condemning him for failing to report things that happened about 30 years ago. It wasn't on peoples' moral radar.
    ....

    ...yet sex between consenting adults was, which suggests that - when it suited - the radar was turned off.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #151
    Turtwig
    Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    catallus wrote: »
    It wasn't on peoples' moral radar.
    Nor is gay marriage now, the majority seemingly support that yet the Church is taking a strong position on that.

    The Catholic Church believes in absolute morality. It seems to forget that from time to time. The cynic in mean would say that it seems awfully strange that this memory loss seems to occur when circumstances may reflect negatively on the church. But, perhaps, I'm just being cynical. Either way the cultural excuse should not be accepted, least of all by practising Catholic's themselves. Unless, of course, they believe the Church follows relative morality.


Advertisement