Should religion be tolerated?

[Storm]

With figures like that is obviously is a policy.

Apparently you don't know what "policy" means, either.

And systemic means affect the whole. Are you saying that just because 6-12% of priests partook in child sex abuse, it did not affect the whole. It affected the whole organisation alright...and families, and society...and the legal system.

No, systemic means it pertains to a system.

Funny how you can trivialize the use of one tiny little word to side step an entire issue.

No, I just dislike it when people make false accusations. Especially regarding child abuse and pedophilia. Not my fault you can't discuss the issue without doing that.

 

[DarkMaster24]

You think this is rage? I envy your sheltered life.

And the insults have come back into play..

First off you don't know me or my life, so for you to say that is not only condescending but extreemly ignorant to.

People like you are the reason i think so low of the religious. Nice going being a walking stereotype.

It must be a nice veiw up there from your high-horse.

 

[Storm]

Fine, just look it up for yourself if you don't believe me, but not believing it doesn't make it untrue.

Look up what? "A credible magazine?" Even if it were my responsibility to verify your claims, you haven't given me anything to work with.

 

[DarkMaster24]

Apparently you don't know what "policy" means, either.


No, systemic means it pertains to a system.


No, I just dislike it when people make false accusations. Especially regarding child abuse and pedophilia. Not my fault you can't discuss the issue without doing that.

Now you're just making crap up to attack people. How did he misuse the word "policy"?

No, according to my Oxford dictionary set on my desk his definition is right. Systemic means of the whole or affecting the whole. He got the definition to a T.

They're not false. I also recall hearing the numbers he gave on a news broadcast. They're very accurate. Not our fault you have to bring personal attacks into a debate on what's supposed to be a site for intelligent debate.

 

[Storm]

And the insults have come back into play..

I said I envied you, how is that an insult?

First off you don't know me or my life, so for you to say that is not only condescending but extreemly ignorant to.

If you think a little annoyance is "great rage," you've led a sheltered life. Can't have your cake and eat it, too. So which is it? Are you sheltered, or lying?

People like you are the reason i think so low of the religious. Nice going being a walking stereotype.

Ah, so people who get annoyed at your bigotry are the justification for it, now? I think you're looking for excuses.

It must be a nice veiw up there from your high-horse.

Pot, have you met my friend kettle?

 

[Storm]

Now you're just making crap up to attack people. How did he misuse the word "policy"?

CIte me one Catholic teaching that says it's ok to molest little boys.

No, according to my Oxford dictionary set on my desk his definition is right. Systemic means of the whole or affecting the whole. He got the definition to a T.

Only if you dishonestly use the technical definition from biology:

sys⋅tem⋅ic

1. of or pertaining to a system.
2. Physiology, Pathology.
a. pertaining to or affecting the body as a whole.
b. pertaining to or affecting a particular body system.
3. (of a pesticide) absorbed and circulated by a plant or other organism so as to be lethal to pests that feed on it.

In general discussion (not biology), mine is the correct definition.

Technicalities aside, since when is 6-12% "the whole?" That's even accepting the numbers you refuse to verify.

They're not false. I also recall hearing the numbers he gave on a news broadcast. They're very accurate. Not our fault you have to bring personal attacks into a debate on what's supposed to be a site for intelligent debate.

I heard a broadcast saying that no Catholic priests have ever displayed inappropriate behavior with a minor.

See, I can say anything, too.

 

[DarkMaster24]

I said I envied you, how is that an insult?


If you think a little annoyance is "great rage," you've led a sheltered life. Can't have your cake and eat it, too. So which is it? Are you sheltered, or lying?


Ah, so people who get annoyed at your bigotry are the justification for it, now? I think you're looking for excuses.


Pot, have you met my friend kettle?

It was an insult becuase you said it in a sarcastic way, unless I wread you wrong.

Ok, I admit that I may of misswread you, but keep in mind that it's hard to read emotion on the internet. Again, you don't know me so you shouldn't make broad statements like that.

I'm not looking for excuses, just defending myopinion's factual arguements. It is well-known universal fact that the Catholic church's priests, the 6-12% of them molested little boys. I'm floored you don't know this.

 

[DarkMaster24]

CIte me one Catholic teaching that says it's ok to molest little boys.

Only if you dishonestly use the technical definition from biology:

sys⋅tem⋅ic

1. of or pertaining to a system.
2. Physiology, Pathology.
a. pertaining to or affecting the body as a whole.
b. pertaining to or affecting a particular body system.
3. (of a pesticide) absorbed and circulated by a plant or other organism so as to be lethal to pests that feed on it.

In general discussion (not biology), mine is the correct definition.

Technicalities aside, since when is 6-12% "the whole?" That's even accepting the numbers you refuse to verify.

I heard a broadcast saying that no Catholic priests have ever displayed inappropriate behavior with a minor.

See, I can say anything, too.

I don't know of any. However, the preists might feel vindicated by the lies of religion in knowing that if they repent it is ok.

Nope, it wasn't misusing any term for Biology or semantics. The fact that the few priests that did molest those boys does affect the whole church, as it denigrates the church's reputation.

Well, that statement made my the broadcasting network would be false, since it's a universal fact that the Catholic church is notorious for it's sick pedophiles that have a thing for unsuspecting little boys.

 

[Storm]

I'm not looking for excuses, just defending myopinion's factual arguements. It is well-known universal fact that the Catholic church's priests, the 6-12% of them molested little boys. I'm floored you don't know this.

I have never heard that figure until this thread. If it's so universally known, what's the problem providing a source? Don't tell me to do your legwork for you.

I don't know of any. However, the preists might feel vindicated by the lies of religion in knowing that if they repent it is ok.

This displays a deep ignorance of what repentance is about.

Nope, it wasn't misusing any term for Biology or semantics.

BS. Unlike you, I posted my source, which clearly defined your usage as a biological term, after giving my definition.

The fact that the few priests that did molest those boys does affect the whole church, as it denigrates the church's reputation.

I'm not arguing against that. But that doesn't make the abuse itself systemic, as was originally claimed.

Well, that statement made my the broadcasting network would be false,

My point just went sailing right over your head didn't it? I posted that obvious falsehood to illustrate that you can claim anything, and it means nothing without a credible source.

since it's a universal fact that the Catholic church is notorious for it's sick pedophiles that have a thing for unsuspecting little boys.

Why is it that you harp on the notoriety of the Church when the vast majority of such abuse is perpetrated by a family member. Are fathers notorious for molesting their children? It happens more often. (And no, I don't have any sources handy, but if you like I'll go find some.)

Don't get me wrong, I'm as horrified as the next person - probably more than most, in fact - by the actions of those few priests. However, I regard them as the aberrations they are, rather than trying to condemn the entire institution.

 

[my opinion]

I have never heard that figure until this thread. If it's so universally known, what's the problem providing a source? Don't tell me to do your legwork for you.
Yep...you do the legwork...you are not interested in the actual debate so I'm not wasting my legwork on you...ultimately you will have another defense for them once the figures are presented..

Don't get me wrong, I'm as horrified as the next person - probably more than most, in fact - by the actions of those few priests. However, I regard them as the aberrations they are, rather than trying to condemn the entire institution.

ah...this institution that you so fervently defend, takes little action against these animals...other than to move them on so they have fresh stock to molest.
And where do you get off saying that you would probably be more horrified than most...your entire tone, posts, info, opinions suggests that you are defending them. And by the way..'Them" means the institution that has turned a blind eye for all of this time, and, now that it's public, refused to take action...like burning them at the stake like they did to women...
just thought I'd throw some irrelevant ideas in there...I'm sick of you doing it on your own...

 

[my opinion]

I don't know of any. However, the preists might feel vindicated by the lies of religion in knowing that if they repent it is ok.

Nope, it wasn't misusing any term for Biology or semantics. The fact that the few priests that did molest those boys does affect the whole church, as it denigrates the church's reputation.

Well, that statement made my the broadcasting network would be false, since it's a universal fact that the Catholic church is notorious for it's sick pedophiles that have a thing for unsuspecting little boys.

Touche! My friend Touche!

 

[Storm]

And where do you get off saying that you would probably be more horrified than most...

Simple. I'm a survivor of childhood sexual abuse. Which makes me rather sensitive to people exploiting the issue, like you're doing.

your entire tone, posts, info, opinions suggests that you are defending them.

Read more carefully.

 

[Apex]

Well last I checked we weren't looking for 'plu'. I am sure you will find 18,100,000 entries with the letters plu next to each, as you will blu, tan, fro, pre, ....so what's your point?

That the number of results on a google hit mean absolutely squat.

Your comments are facetious, and just demeans and belittles anything you say. Can't any of you express and intelligent point of view...? It is the most common theme running through your posts.

I can not make sense of these sentences nor figure out what they have to do with my post you quoted.

 

[my opinion]

Look Storm, I have done some serious soul searching to see what it is that keeps us at opposing views. Our philosophy is very similar so I am at odds as to explain the friction.

You believe, according to the link you provide about your beliefs that:
Rhys:
Rhymes with hiss when whispered. Plural, rhys. If you can say it loudly, you're saying it wrong.
1)The divine consciousness
2)The divine seed of mortal consciousness, not seeming (my rhys; our rhys)

I get this rhys/hiss too, but it's using when I'm on the toilet first thing in the morning.

Kaleria (kah-LEE-ree-ah):
A moment of overwhelming awe and wonder at the glory of life.

I thought that was a new strain of venereal disease, but hey...I hear ya man.

Droichan (droy-KHAHN):
Os seemings. Serial killers, despotic dictators, Osama bin Laden.... droichan.

Now come on, your just plain making this up. He left Star trek at the end of series 3.

Sidhe (shee)/Others:
Beings that we don't understand. Earth spirits, angels, demons... I believe they exist, because the diversity of life seems to demand it.

This one caused me great embarrassment the first time I pronounced it.. I tried to pronounce it the way it is written and the way it is actually pronounced all at the same time...and I came with shiddy!! Need I say more...

 

[J Bryson]

Reduced to mere mockery and weak puns rather than rational debate.

 

[my opinion]

That the number of results on a google hit mean absolutely squat.

I can not make sense of these sentences nor figure out what they have to do with my post you quoted.

Well if you can't read you won't get far on a forum...

 

[Apex]

Well if you can't read you won't get far on a forum...

So is it impossible for you to carry on an intelligent conversation or do you just enjoy handing out petty insults?

 

[J Bryson]

Check out his posts in this thread and take a wild guess.

 

[Apex]

Check out his posts in this thread and take a wild guess.

Good point...

 

[my opinion]

J Bryson:Reduced to mere mockery and weak puns rather than rational debate.

Well I've just checked out some of your previous debates...and I'm still Rhyssing myself laughing.