Jimmy Savile And Other Paedophiles

[legov]

....what?

 

For many Catholics, their beliefs are based on God; they don't worship the pope. You make it sound like it's a group, with memberships. Some just identify themselves as Catholics because of their views on God and Transubstantiation. Not because they like the pope.

 

This.

 

Minus the transubstantiation bit

[limpid]

I completely deplore religion and believe it's caused more harm than good in human history, but I wouldn't tell somebody with faith that and use that as a reason to whip them with. Let people believe what they want and most everyday Catholics aren't hurting anybody.

 

Remember there are people that treat evolution with the same scorn that we treat certain religious beliefs with. If somebody has grown up with a belief, it's incredibly hard to get rid of it.

In your definition was Jimmy an "everyday Catholic"? He can't have thought he was doing much wrong when his church (who claim to speak for his God) kept rewarding him. He was brought up to accept that God is revealed in the words of his priest and those priests were therefore reinforcing his actions. Magic thinking is dangerous.

 

I concur that indoctrination is evil and religion has no place in schools. Indoctrination of children should be recognised as abuse. Except for indoctrination into the Villa. Obviously.

[mjmooney]

 

indoctrination is evil and religion has no place in schools. Indoctrination of children should be recognised as abuse.

 

I agree (as you know). But this is the irreconcilable sticking point between believers and atheists. (Some of them) consider it a form of indoctrination to teach science/rationality and a sceptical attitude. They're wrong of course, but that's what they sincerely believe. And it terrifies them to think that their kids are being deprived of God's love, blah blah blah.

 

It's basically a battle for childrens' souls/minds (choose your preferred term), and somebody will end up being very unhappy with the outcome.

[PaulC]

 

I completely deplore religion and believe it's caused more harm than good in human history, but I wouldn't tell somebody with faith that and use that as a reason to whip them with. Let people believe what they want and most everyday Catholics aren't hurting anybody.

 

Remember there are people that treat evolution with the same scorn that we treat certain religious beliefs with. If somebody has grown up with a belief, it's incredibly hard to get rid of it.

In your definition was Jimmy an "everyday Catholic"? He can't have thought he was doing much wrong when his church (who claim to speak for his God) kept rewarding him. He was brought up to accept that God is revealed in the words of his priest and those priests were therefore reinforcing his actions. Magic thinking is dangerous.

 

I concur that indoctrination is evil and religion has no place in schools. Indoctrination of children should be recognised as abuse. Except for indoctrination into the Villa. Obviously.

 

 

 

That is absolute rubbish.

[mjmooney]

 

 

I completely deplore religion and believe it's caused more harm than good in human history, but I wouldn't tell somebody with faith that and use that as a reason to whip them with. Let people believe what they want and most everyday Catholics aren't hurting anybody.

 

Remember there are people that treat evolution with the same scorn that we treat certain religious beliefs with. If somebody has grown up with a belief, it's incredibly hard to get rid of it.

In your definition was Jimmy an "everyday Catholic"? He can't have thought he was doing much wrong when his church (who claim to speak for his God) kept rewarding him. He was brought up to accept that God is revealed in the words of his priest and those priests were therefore reinforcing his actions. Magic thinking is dangerous.

 

I concur that indoctrination is evil and religion has no place in schools. Indoctrination of children should be recognised as abuse. Except for indoctrination into the Villa. Obviously.

 

 

 

That is absolute rubbish.

 

 

So, you take a young and impressionable mind, eager to learn, and you - a responsible adult, that they look up to and trust - tell them, in all seriousness, that there is an invisible being that made everything, and that he split himself into three, and could do magic things, and he was killed, but came alive again, and he knows everything they are doing and thinking, and if they don't obey his rules they run the risk of being burned in hell, but if they do they will live forever?

 

And you're telling me that's not indoctrination? (Quite apart from being deranged in its own right).

[legov]

 

 

 

I completely deplore religion and believe it's caused more harm than good in human history, but I wouldn't tell somebody with faith that and use that as a reason to whip them with. Let people believe what they want and most everyday Catholics aren't hurting anybody.

 

Remember there are people that treat evolution with the same scorn that we treat certain religious beliefs with. If somebody has grown up with a belief, it's incredibly hard to get rid of it.

In your definition was Jimmy an "everyday Catholic"? He can't have thought he was doing much wrong when his church (who claim to speak for his God) kept rewarding him. He was brought up to accept that God is revealed in the words of his priest and those priests were therefore reinforcing his actions. Magic thinking is dangerous.

 

I concur that indoctrination is evil and religion has no place in schools. Indoctrination of children should be recognised as abuse. Except for indoctrination into the Villa. Obviously.

 

 

 

That is absolute rubbish.

 

 

So, you take a young and impressionable mind, eager to learn, and you - a responsible adult, that they look up to and trust - tell them, in all seriousness, that there is an invisible being that made everything, and that he split himself into three, and could do magic things, and he was killed, but came alive again, and he knows everything they are doing and thinking, and if they don't obey his rules they run the risk of being burned in hell, but if they do they will live forever?

 

And you're telling me that's not indoctrination? (Quite apart from being deranged in its own right).

 

 

Is that evil? Because I think that's what the bit in bold is about.

[PaulC]

 

 

 

I completely deplore religion and believe it's caused more harm than good in human history, but I wouldn't tell somebody with faith that and use that as a reason to whip them with. Let people believe what they want and most everyday Catholics aren't hurting anybody.

 

Remember there are people that treat evolution with the same scorn that we treat certain religious beliefs with. If somebody has grown up with a belief, it's incredibly hard to get rid of it.

In your definition was Jimmy an "everyday Catholic"? He can't have thought he was doing much wrong when his church (who claim to speak for his God) kept rewarding him. He was brought up to accept that God is revealed in the words of his priest and those priests were therefore reinforcing his actions. Magic thinking is dangerous.

 

I concur that indoctrination is evil and religion has no place in schools. Indoctrination of children should be recognised as abuse. Except for indoctrination into the Villa. Obviously.

 

 

 

That is absolute rubbish.

 

 

So, you take a young and impressionable mind, eager to learn, and you - a responsible adult, that they look up to and trust - tell them, in all seriousness, that there is an invisible being that made everything, and that he split himself into three, and could do magic things, and he was killed, but came alive again, and he knows everything they are doing and thinking, and if they don't obey his rules they run the risk of being burned in hell, but if they do they will live forever?

 

And you're telling me that's not indoctrination? (Quite apart from being deranged in its own right).

 

 

If you goto a RC school I would guess you should come from a catholic family then religious education is a key part of a child education. If you don't want your child to be taught religion then don't send him or her to a catholic school. Are you seriously telling me religion should not be taught in a catholic school?

[mjmooney]

I'm telling you that Catholic schools should not exist.

 

Sadly, we can't stop parents filling their kids heads with crap, but we shouldn't allow it in schools.

[PaulC]

That would be discriminatory against the Roman Catholic religion. What would be next getting rid of churches!

[BOF]

That would be discriminatory against the Roman Catholic religion. What would be next getting rid of churches!

Not allowing the existence of RC schools (or any religious school) is not discriminatory at all. What right does any church have to be teaching children in the first place? You are a church, a religion, a belief system (and a very selective one at that). School lessons should be academic. And it does not follow logically from that that churches should be banned. That's just silly. By all means a person should be allowed to go to a church if they wish. You can choose to go to church in the same way that you can choose to go to any other building. But a child can not legally choose to go to school. They have to go. So therefore they should not be brainwashed while they are there.

This notion that by being a church you somehow have the right to steer a child's mind within a captive school environment is so anachronistic and damaging.

[Houlston]

 

This notion that by being a church you somehow have the right to steer a child's mind within a captive school environment is so anachronistic and damaging.

 

Why is it damaging?

[legov]

That would be discriminatory against the Roman Catholic religion. What would be next getting rid of churches!

Should madrasahs exist? If so, what should they be allowed to teach? Should they be allowed to teach the sexist, homophobic parts in the name of religious freedom?

 

To illustrate my point further.....say (for example) that I believe Quetzalcoatl created the earth to be flat, and that the sun and stars revolve around it. How do I know this, well Quetzalcoatl told me so, and wrote it down in a book. Maybe I should open my own schools, and teach these parts of my religion that completely fly in the face of science.

 

I believe in religious freedom but as with most of the freedoms we hold sacred there is a limit to it as well. If what the school teaches is blatantly pseudoscientific, or promotes hatred, then it has crossed the line imo. If a school tramples on religious freedom by forcing minority students to pray the same way as most of the students do, that it has also crossed the line imo.

 

Now, some might say, well we are progressive and we teach good science and believe that women and gays should not be discriminated against etc etc so we have no problem. Fair enough, I don't see any problem with a school like that........except that that really sounds to me like a secular school in all but name, even if you call it a madrasah, a Catholic school, or an Anglican school.

 

See why many of us think religious schools are a bad idea now? If we want to be a society that is tolerant and scientifically progressive, schools have to be secular, if not officially then at least in practice.

[PaulC]

 

That would be discriminatory against the Roman Catholic religion. What would be next getting rid of churches!

Not allowing the existence of RC schools (or any religious school) is not discriminatory at all. What right does any church have to be teaching children in the first place? You are a church, a religion, a belief system (and a very selective one at that). School lessons should be academic. And it does not follow logically from that that churches should be banned. That's just silly. By all means a person should be allowed to go to a church if they wish. You can choose to go to church in the same way that you can choose to go to any other building. But a child can not legally choose to go to school. They have to go. So therefore they should not be brainwashed while they are there.

This notion that by being a church you somehow have the right to steer a child's mind within a captive school environment is so anachronistic and damaging.

 

 

I wonder why many non catholic parents send their kids to catholic schools? You talk about religion like its so bad. There so much evil in the world which is not connected to religion. In many ways because was brought up a catholic I learnt good moral values. That in many ways has gone out of the window these days. Yes we have more tolerance but not to all sections of society. There's still tons of discrimination, like against the unemployment, people with mental health problems.

[legov]

 

 

That would be discriminatory against the Roman Catholic religion. What would be next getting rid of churches!

Not allowing the existence of RC schools (or any religious school) is not discriminatory at all. What right does any church have to be teaching children in the first place? You are a church, a religion, a belief system (and a very selective one at that). School lessons should be academic. And it does not follow logically from that that churches should be banned. That's just silly. By all means a person should be allowed to go to a church if they wish. You can choose to go to church in the same way that you can choose to go to any other building. But a child can not legally choose to go to school. They have to go. So therefore they should not be brainwashed while they are there.

This notion that by being a church you somehow have the right to steer a child's mind within a captive school environment is so anachronistic and damaging.

 

 

I wonder why many non catholic parents send their kids to catholic schools? You talk about religion like its so bad. There so much evil in the world which is not connected to religion. In many ways because was brought up a catholic I learnt good moral values. That in many ways has gone out of the window these days. Yes we have more tolerance but not to all sections of society. There's still tons of discrimination, like against the unemployment, people with mental health problems.

 

 

Why do you need religion to teach good moral values? Genuine question.

 

The most irreligious countries on earth are also in most cases the ones that have the most socioeconomic equality and the most peace.

 

If I were to teach my kids to be tolerant of others I would just try to be a nice and tolerant person myself, maybe explain it a little, like "Would you want people to treat you that way?". No religious instruction needed.

[Eames]

 

That would be discriminatory against the Roman Catholic religion. What would be next getting rid of churches!

Not allowing the existence of RC schools (or any religious school) is not discriminatory at all. What right does any church have to be teaching children in the first place? You are a church, a religion, a belief system (and a very selective one at that). School lessons should be academic. And it does not follow logically from that that churches should be banned. That's just silly. By all means a person should be allowed to go to a church if they wish. You can choose to go to church in the same way that you can choose to go to any other building. But a child can not legally choose to go to school. They have to go. So therefore they should not be brainwashed while they are there.

This notion that by being a church you somehow have the right to steer a child's mind within a captive school environment is so anachronistic and damaging.

 

 I know that you reside in a foreign nation state and all, but here in the UK that is not the case, children don't have to go to school.

Edited May 9, 2013 by Eames

[BOF]

OK Paul you call yourself a catholic. Are you homophobic? If you are a catholic then I'm afraid you are obliged to be. And no that is not facetious or argumentative. It might be provocative but it's still a fact. You can't just choose to ignore that bit. If you're married, was your wife a virgin for the wedding? Don't answer that but just so you know, according to your good book she should be executed if she wasn't. That's another bit you can't just choose to ignore. Your religion advocates slavery on other human beings too in case you were wondering. Perhaps talk about the original sanctity of marriage? With Solomon's 700 wives and 300 concubines. Don't go down the road of pretending that religion somehow invented morals. Morality predates christianity. Religion has certainly tried to adopt morality as its own in an attempt to imply by extension that atheists lack morals, but the fact is your religion advocates and teaches horrible atrocity on humanity which catholics either choose to ignore or don't know in the first place. Not to mention the general theme of this very thread and the spectacular prevalence of firstly the screwing of kids and then protecting those who do by abusing the enormous power that institution has. Whether you like it or not, inaction, indifference and a continued association with that church is a form of advocacy. Just one more uncomfortable truth that will no doubt be dismissed. Your all-knowing all-powerful God, judging by that book, created everything. That includes followers of all other religions that you are told to hate, the very gays you are told to hate. The people it tells you to enslave. And by some wonderfully contradicting but typical logic, the very Gods that he tells you not to worship and which you might claim don't exist while yours does.

I am a far more conscientous person than most of what I see going on every day and yet I don't even have the threat of an angry sky fairy forcing me to be that way. I choose to be a good neighbour, relative, friend, human because I have a common decency and a knowledge that it is the way I want to behave as a human being. Not because I was told to do it by someone or something else.

[PaulC]

I will read through all that later but no I do not consider myself homophobic. I think you have to consider that even Catholics move with the times and don't stick with outdated doctrines. Moral standards have dropped though and has that not coincided with families not been brought up with religion as part of their lives?

[dont_do_it_doug.]

This is lovely and all, but none of it appears to be about paedophilia. You have a god thread so sod off there.

 

Well, don't "sod", he won't like that. 

[BOF]

I think you have to consider that even Catholics move with the times and don't stick with outdated doctrines.

But that's my point. There is no new bible that has moved with the times. You don't get to choose which of their rules to live by. If you are saying that you no longer identify with or stick with the 'outdated doctrines' then I'm afraid if you look at it in the cold light of day you're probably not actually a catholic any more. Because those outdated doctrines are your bible and that bible is still the current edition. Hence me mentioning anachronism earlier

Moral standards have dropped though and has that not coincided with families not been brought up with religion as part of their lives?

Schools are still influencing children with religion every bit as much as they ever did. The opinion that moral standards have dropped is a subjective one but it would be very hard to quantify to what extent or to tie it to something that itself has not waned within schools. Anyway, the dog botherer is right about our god bothering.

[mjmooney]

OK, all over to the religion thread, those that want to carry on with this.