POSTS IN THE HARMS OF THE CATHOLIC FAITH
thejournal.ie regarding the up and coming abortion referendum of 2018
Do you really want to force a woman to carry an unwanted baby? Does a child's right to life go that far? Thought experiment: What if eggs, sometimes they do, start turning into babies without sperm? We would all agree that the woman can abort. Do we really consider somebody terminating at 12 weeks to be the equal of somebody who kills a baby in a cot? No. And the relationship between law and morality is that the law is about public order and thus abortion is a private matter and none of the laws business.
http://freethinker.co.uk/2015/09/03/father-forgive-us/
Confession is disgusting. It has you apologizing to God through the priest for
sin instead of apologising to the people you hurt. Religion is a placebo for
“sin”. The process of facing the person you have hurt and saying sorry is far
more important than any confession to a god or priest. In fact to say anything
else matters insults both victim and perpetrator. Anybody who hurts a child and
apologising to God is more important to him than to the child even if he does
apologise to the child should be told to keep his insulting apology. Religion
invents sins too thus making people seem worse than they are which helps you
feel better about the bad things you have done. It brings them down to your
level. Sin itself is an invention. It is not the same thing as wrongdoing. Sin
is breaking God’s commands. Wrongdoing is about hurting not about breaking God’s
commands.
A comment regarding how a poll showed that 65% of Irish
thirty-somethings would still get babies baptised
So 65 % would still have their babies baptised? People are not told the truth
about the meaning of baptism by the Church. It is supposed to be a huge deal
even more important than marriage for it marries you to God and the Church. To
take a child for baptism while not intending to make her or him a believing
Catholic as opposed to a dishonest cherry-picker is akin to perjury. Church
teaching is that a child that fails to seriously live up to baptism will be
damned forever in Hell. Is it really right to imply that people can be accused
of being capable of such an evil when there is no hard evidence for anybody
going to Hell? Also, is it really right to raise a child in a religion when you
have made little or no effort to make sure the religion in terms of morality and
honesty and evidence really is the best to raise the child up in?
Evil Catholic fundamentalist, Mary Doherty of the
Christian Solidarity Party Donegal defended Cardinal Sean Brady.
Brady had known of the crimes of serial child sex abuser
Father Brendan Smith and took notes and did absolutely nothing. This was
revealed - not by sneaky Brady we must add! And he refused to resign and gave an
insincere apology when forced and delayed that apology for as long as he could!
How sincere it was! Doherty argued he did right as it was not his place to try
and get Smith exposed. Because of Brady's silence, the abuse escalated and even
the parents of the victims were kept in the dark. Charmer Bishop Boyce of Raphoe
was as bad as her.
MY REACTION: Doherty knows her Bible and she is a total hypocrite like Bishop
Boyce another defender of Brady. Jesus Christ though a Jew believed that
religion should exist for man and not man for religion. He even committed the
sacrilege of attacking the money changing and market stalls in the Temple to
make the point that religion should not try to make a profit. The lesson of the
day is that you break the rules for the greater good. Brady did not have enough
compassion to break the rules in order to protect children. It was easy for him
to learn that nothing had been done about Smith. Jesus considered the fact that
nobody else was breaking the rules for the greater good as a reason for him to
do it. Brady knew that ending the culture of silence and protection of the
abuser needed to start with somebody. He should have become the whistleblower.
instead he cooperated with the culture of silence. he had to know his inaction
would have had horrendous consequences for the innocent. its alarming to think
that a woman would defend his inaction and his stubbornly arrogant and
unrepentant attitude. I thought women experienced nurturing tendencies to
protect children...!
Some try to pretend you can be a good Roman Catholic while deliberately
opposing the doctrine that the bread and wine literally become Jesus Christ
during the Eucharist. The idea of a chance is an essential Catholic teaching.
Richard Dawkins correctly observed that whoever does not believe and who scoffs
at it is not a Roman Catholic but deceiving themselves if they say they are.
MY REACTION: Every religion has to have rules about who
is a member. The Catholic Church regards the Catholic who repudiates
transubstantiation as a Protestant - ie a Christian who has declared
independence from the Roman Church. The person who knows a teaching is essential
for being a Catholic and rejects it should look for another Church. He should
not be pretending to be a Roman Catholic. To go through the motions of staying
when he can join his local Anglican Church smacks of sectarianism. If he is to
be considered a Roman Catholic then the word hypocrite becomes meaningless. You
cannot be a genuine member of any community if you reject its ideals. Any
Catholic who does not believe but who is trying to can be a Catholic. The one
who is not trying is not. Moreover, an individual Catholic who acts as if he can
pick and choose what to believe is not recognising the Pope as the head teacher
of the Church who allegedly stands in the place of Jesus Christ.
Papal documents were being leaked by Vatican staff causing a scandal for the Pope.
MY REACTION: The stuff that is not leaked is scandalous
enough by itself! Few know that the Church has a shocking attitude towards
attempts by married couples to be responsible about how many children they will
have. It says it is a morally neutral issue! The Church allows “natural” family
planning despite banning contraception. It merely permits it and does not praise
it. That is warped! Those who have children they cannot feed are bad eggs end of
story! This is the same hypocritical faith that claims to be against
contraception as it allegedly indicates that the birth of a child is a burden
and a mistake!
See Catechism of the Catholic Church 2368, 2370, 2399. It says the motive to
regulate births is neither good nor evil, as long as there is an openness to new
life. Even seeing a child as a curse would be as good as that kind of teaching!
Re Catholic Church looking for exemption to Obamacare on the grounds
that it forces it to provide birth control
People who look for exemptions to the law on religious grounds, always plead for
their case on the basis of religious freedom and human rights. It is strange for
Christians to do that because ultimately for them it is God's rights that should
matter as everything comes from God and he deserves all the love that is in us.
Christ said that the first commandment is to love God totally and to love our
neighbour not totally but as ourselves - ie we are to love only God ultimately -
and love our neighbour for his sake and not ours or theirs. Thus if the law
allows contraception and God forbids it there is a conflict.
http://freethinker.co.uk/2015/07/18/paedophile-priest-70-jailed-for-12-years/
I remember when the paedophile priest scandal was at its worst here in Ireland
how many Catholics treated those clerics responsible for the cover-up like
celebrities. To this day, the priests bleat, "We are not all bad". That is a
sign that they are unrepentant because the point is not that they are not all
paedophiles but that not a single one of them supported the victims or said
anything to stop the abuse. That is the bottom line and they have been told it
and they still keep trying to entice people into the Catholic faith by
misdirection.
