Customer Discussions > religion discussion forum

German catholic church halts inquiry into child abuse.


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 76-100 of 126 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on 6 Feb 2013 10:23:45 GMT
Bellatori says:
Me to. I await details of the report with great interest. I doubt anything much changed however. The catholic church is almost completely inured to change. It takes court cases and demands for money and compensation to cause a real shift. If they have to cut down on the pomp and finery then, as with bankers bonuses, they start to pay attention.

Posted on 6 Feb 2013 13:18:00 GMT
Roma says:
The way women were treated in such institutions was wrong.As were the parents who disowned them, the men who got some pregnant and abandoned them, society at large who disapproved and offered no support. The nuns did try to help, albeit in a misguided way. The rest of society did nothing to help. I don t think nuns can be blamed in isolation for the way mistreatment was meted out to such women.

In reply to an earlier post on 6 Feb 2013 16:04:02 GMT
Bellatori says:
Have you ever met any nuns in a work environment. At schools in the 60s and 70s they were some of the most vicious people it has ever been my misfortune to meet. They believed being a nun gave them a sanctity that allowed them to do anything. In many ways they were worse than the monks. They are entirely responsible for the extreme cruelty that they handed out. They do not deserve your attempt to whitewash the situation.

In reply to an earlier post on 6 Feb 2013 16:34:34 GMT
C. A. Small says:
Roma- these institutions were barbaric, cruel, evil and sadistic.

In reply to an earlier post on 6 Feb 2013 16:42:10 GMT
According to the Metro this morning, some of the orders have issued full apologies, but only a minority.

The Irish government IS taking the flak because it actually set up the laundries (at least that is how I understood the article I read) and allowed the Catholic Church to run them.

They also sent their own unwanteds there - orphans for example - the youngest surviving victim at 60 says she was taken away from home at 12 years old and her identity was changed so she basically dropped out of the system.

THIS Irish government had nothing to do with it, but the Irish of the past should never have allowed things like this to start, let alone continuing them until 1996.

In reply to an earlier post on 6 Feb 2013 17:28:36 GMT
Last edited by the author on 6 Feb 2013 17:29:15 GMT
"I don t think nuns can be blamed in isolation for the way mistreatment was meted out to such women. "

Can they be blamed in isolation? No. Ireland was a theocracy in all but name, and that was responsible for the suffering the cover-ups.

Can they be blamed for insulting and abusing the women under their care, most of them put there for fairly spurious reasons? Absolutely.

In reply to an earlier post on 6 Feb 2013 17:45:29 GMT
Ian says:
Thanks WD.

How can the youngest surviving victim be 60? This brings me back to my original though - when they say the last laundry closed in 1996 was it a massively different place from the horrific descriptions we are hearing of the 50s and 60s?

In reply to an earlier post on 6 Feb 2013 17:57:47 GMT
Ian says:
Roma, I agree that the nuns are not to blame in isolation and your description of trying to help in a misguided way seems about right.

I guess it's like Animal Farm...

My first child was born in a maternity unit run by nurses, not doctors. It had been set up to counter the accusations that doctors (who were predominantly men when the facility opened) didn't really listen to pregnant mothers-to-be and the whole system would be much better if it was run midwives (at least partly because they were predominantly women). The experience that my wife and I had was exactly what anyone who has read Animal Farm would expect. Far from being better at listening to what the parents to be wanted the midwives were more domineering and didactic than any medical professionals I have ever come across, with a terrible "midwife knows best attitude". They believed they were helping and running a unit which was much better because experienced midwives were in charge, not doctors.

I'm sure most of the nuns believed they were doing the right thing and they are certainly not alone in shouldering the blame (but nor are they completely innocent).

Is the Irish government to blame because they set up the institutions or is the Catholic Church to blame for how they were run or is it the fault of the staff on the ground behaving so inappropriately? All of them must share the responsibility.

In reply to an earlier post on 6 Feb 2013 19:51:00 GMT
Spin says:
IN: Is not the civilian population also guilty of being complicit in these crimes? The population votes for a government and chooses to bow to a religious organisation. The population of Ireland also failed to act. Are we to demand an apology and compensation from the Irish citizens? Or are they to be forgiven for allowing their sons and daughters to be taken from them and abused? Further, is the British public to demand an apology and compensation, from the government (the only remaining institution that was present at the time) for "Workhouses" and the ill-treatment of children as labour?

Posted on 6 Feb 2013 20:30:33 GMT
Roma says:
That was the point I was making. These girls weren t kidnapped or dragged from loving, caring and forgiving parents.They were disowned by their parents for bringing shame on their family. The poem Limbo by Seamus Heany deals with issue of religious hypocrisy well. Based on a true event of fishermen catching a newborn baby in their nets, it presents a scenario where the baby had been tenderly drowned by its mother, so afraid was she for her "shame" to be discovered. Sadly, in trying to uphold its beliefs, society often forget that the basis of most religions is love and compassion.

In reply to an earlier post on 6 Feb 2013 20:50:47 GMT
Ian says:
If the government of Ireland pays compensation to anyone then it is the population of Ireland that pays - the government don't have any money, except that which they take from the population.

The victim I heard interview on The Today Program was put into a Magdalene Laundry at 15 to protect her because she was being abused by her stepfather - so she was punished for being a victim and he (presumably) lived out the rest of his life without ever facing any consequences. Do I hold her mother responsible for allowing the daughter to be taken into 'care'? Rather less than I blame the government, the nuns, the Catholic Church and the stepfather. Nobody is innocent here except the 15 year old.

As far as I'm aware the British public has no right to any compensation or an apology from anyone - however offended we might be.

Stories like this make you want to believe in Heaven & Hell, reincarnation, karma or whatever.

In reply to an earlier post on 6 Feb 2013 21:11:29 GMT
C. A. Small says:
Roma- so because a parent has failed that gives carte blanche to the religious sadists to behave as they wish? At the time Ireland was pretty much a theocracy, and the control over government and the legislature was from the catholic church.

In reply to an earlier post on 6 Feb 2013 21:12:20 GMT
Spin says:
IN: In my humble opinion, one cannot blame or seek apology or compensation from the current society because of the crimes commited by its past population. How far back in the past do we go in seeking apology and compensation? It is the lessons learned that are of value to us and our youth, not verbal or financial recompense.

In reply to an earlier post on 6 Feb 2013 21:13:17 GMT
Ian says:
"It is the lessons learned that are of value to us and our youth, not verbal or financial recompense"

A moment of wisdom from Spin.

In reply to an earlier post on 6 Feb 2013 21:18:36 GMT
Roma says:
Absolutely not. I don t condone the mistreatment of anyone nor will I defend it.

In reply to an earlier post on 6 Feb 2013 21:33:13 GMT
AJ Murray says:
A rare thing indeed. Stopped clocks manage to be correct twice a day, whereas Spin only manages to be correct once every few months.

Posted on 6 Feb 2013 21:56:10 GMT
R. Kroell says:
Some more on the case that a raped woman was dinied medical Treatment by two catholic hospitals.
According to a Statement by leading catholic Bishops here in Germany, the prescription of the emergency contraception is allowed only in the case that the female egg is not fertilized.
There was also a funny Statement by a catholic priest, who was asked "would Jesus reject a violated woman in Need for help?"
The priests answer was "Jesus was no physician".
I am also wondering why the head of the catholic church did not take Position on this case.

In reply to an earlier post on 6 Feb 2013 22:23:47 GMT
Ian says:
"prescription of the emergency contraception is allowed only in the case that the female egg is not fertilized"

So you can only have emergency contraception if you don't need it?

Posted on 6 Feb 2013 22:34:46 GMT
Last edited by the author on 6 Feb 2013 22:34:57 GMT
R. Kroell says:
Yes, that pretty much narrows it down.
Another mercy from the catholic church for the help-seeking.

In reply to an earlier post on 6 Feb 2013 23:27:22 GMT
TomC says:
"So you can only have emergency contraception if you don't need it? "

It's a bit like that old joke about a banker - he's a man who is happy to lend you an umbrella until it starts to rain, at which point he will snatch it back from you.

Posted on 7 Feb 2013 08:32:49 GMT
With regards to the Irish government in this case and why people wanted an apology from them, it was because the government recommended something like 25% of the women to these facilities who were at the time in the care of the government

In reply to an earlier post on 7 Feb 2013 17:34:07 GMT
C. A. Small says:
TOM C - "It's a bit like that old joke about a banker - he's a man who is happy to lend you an umbrella until it starts to rain, at which point he will snatch it back from you. "- not a funny joke- in the current climate of business banking it is the norm!

Posted on 7 Feb 2013 17:45:51 GMT
Spin says:
Banks: The modern equivalent of "money-lenders" and "Usurers". But legal.

In reply to an earlier post on 8 Feb 2013 14:45:04 GMT
Last edited by the author on 8 Feb 2013 14:45:57 GMT
""prescription of the emergency contraception is allowed only in the case that the female egg is not fertilized"

So you can only have emergency contraception if you don't need it?"

The onyl other way of looking at it I can see is you can have it BEFORE the egg is fertalised, so it would prevent fertilisation but not abortion of the fetus (or is it zygote at that stage). Either way there is no test available that will tell you if an egg has been succesfully fertalised within 72 hours (the timeframe for EC) of intercourse so how could they ever make the decision accurately?

In reply to an earlier post on 8 Feb 2013 14:51:21 GMT
[Deleted by the author on 8 Feb 2013 14:51:38 GMT]
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


More Customer Discussions

Most active community forums
Most active product forums

Amazon forums
 

This discussion

Discussion in:  religion discussion forum
Participants:  20
Total posts:  126
Initial post:  10 Jan 2013
Latest post:  11 Feb 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 1 customer

Search Customer Discussions