Two contradictory claims in the same sentence? Which is it?
Explain exactly how what I said was contradictory.
Are you, they didn't seem to worry about protecting paedophile priests en masse?
Yes - I'm sure that the Catholic Church would not have honored any of those who committed such crimes if they were open about them.
Yes, opposing equality, and equal human rights.
How so?
It speaks to the RCC's lack of credibility on their claims to be any kind of arbiter on what is moral, and their risible claims to any kind of moral ascendancy.
A Bishop is an arbiter - for he has authority to settle such disputes.
Even if you could find evidence of this particular Bishop doing something immoral - that wouldn't matter.
The Catholic Church has its doctrine based on the interpretation of scripture and they have every right to live by it.
Ad hominem, and your posts suggest you understand little, and you know nothing of me that is for sure.
No - you must be one of those that doesn't know what an
ad hominem is.
Ad hominem is directed at a person rather than their argument.
Since I immediately addressed your comment after mentioning your echo chamber - it is not an
ad hominem.
Straw man - where have I said there are not, and what's your point anyway, such parades are not mandatory, so a particularly irrelevant straw man at that.
How is it a straw man?
Nope, maybe I can Google it though, sounds like it's worth seeing.
Your desire to see such a spectacle speaks volumes about you and explains a lot.
I have found this kind of puritanical histrionics to be laughably unfounded whenever I encounter it.
How is it "unfounded"?
The fliers literally encouraged children to attend.
I have attended pride parades locally and almost the entire town turned out, including children of all ages, and it was a great day that everyone seemed to enjoy.
Now this is a strawman.
I mentioned the one event in L.A. - where a celebrity was dancing around with a huge green dildo strapped to her - and how children were encouraged to attend that event.
That display is not appropriate for children.
Spreading a message of tolerance and inclusion.
And they can't do that without huge green dildos and children?
If anyone doesn't like it they are not obliged to attend.
Children rarely have the authority to decide what events to attend.
Some people I have found, are simply looking for things to be outraged about.
I am outraged by lewd behavior at Pride activities - because it tends to make members of the LGBT community look bad.
I am outraged that anyone would want to have children to be associated with any lewd behavior.
The sexualizing of children is a real and current phenomenon.
Citation please, as you seem to be plucking made up claims out of thin air again.
Sure - as soon as you provide a citation of everyone enjoying your local pride parades.
However even if you had not made it up on the spot, it still gets a so what, since no one is obliged to attend such events.
Except the children who are dragged there by their parents.
Either way - this has nothing to do with my point.
I never made any such claim, I just don't see any need to accept homophobic bigotry, or any claims to be moral arbiters, from an organisation responsible for decades if not centuries of child abuse, and covering it up, and allowing offenders to move away from justice and continue to rape children in their care, and then wilfully obstructed international justice officials by not releasing all records to help those abused seek proper compensation, and try and salvage their lives. At every turn they have though only about the image of their organisation.
I understand your need to say this over and over - to go after the low handing fruit and to focus on it - no one condones what those abusers did or those who covered up their crimes - but it is ridiculous to keep insisting that this is a uniquely Catholic problem - are you going to claim that any and all secular institutions that have been involved in covering up sexual scandals should not be allowed to exist or operate any longer?
I guess you would advocate that the Olympics be abolished?
Despite what some in the Catholic Church have done - the Church still has authority to decide what causes it openly supports.
It is not even a claim about morality.
The fact they knighted someone like Saville, or canonised the awful Albanian nun, doesn't suggest they have a firm grasp of morality as I understand it.
Ok. So what?
Certainly not for the physical and emotional well being of others, which take second place to archaic superstition and religious dogma.
Wow - how "moral" of you - and taking down a flag doesn't hurt anyone.
Their opposition of contraception, especially in developing nations, some of them where AIDS was endemic, has cause untold suffering and death.
Sure - ok - and they were forcing people to have unprotected sex at gun point?
yet they get hysterical about the termination of an insentient blastocyst.
Murder of not-yet-born children.
What is a woman?
