If the evidence is there, notmyself, why does the state (whichever state you refer to) not use it? In the case of Protestant countries, it is simply just not true that the state hushes things up; they'd be delighted to smear the Catholic Church (they wouldn't admit it, but it's true).

I would agree up to a point but any faith is better than no faith.

Why was Ireland as a state reluctant to take any action on the evidence of the Ryan Report?

The Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse (CICA) is one of a range of measures introduced by the Irish Government to investigate the extent and effects of abuse on children from 1936 onwards. It is commonly known in Ireland as the Ryan Commission (previously "the Laffoy Commission"), after its chair, Justice Seán Ryan. Judge Laffoy resigned on 2 September 2003, following a departmental review on costs and resources. She felt that: "...the cumulative effect of those factors effectively negated the guarantee of independence conferred on the Commission and militated against it being able to perform its statutory functions." The Commission's work started in 1999 and it published its public report, commonly referred to as the Ryan report, on 20 May 2009.

The Commission's remit was to investigate all forms of child abuse in Irish institutions for children; the majority of allegations it investigated related to the system of sixty residential "Reformatory and Industrial Schools" operated by Catholic Church orders, funded and supervised by the Irish Department of Education.[1]

The Commission's report said testimony had demonstrated beyond a doubt that the entire system treated children more like prison inmates and slaves than people with legal rights and human potential, that some religious officials encouraged ritual beatings and consistently shielded their orders amid a "culture of self-serving secrecy", and that government inspectors failed to stop the abuses.[2]

Among the more extreme allegations of abuse were beatings and rapes, subjection to naked beatings in public, being forced into oral sex and even subjection to beatings after failed rape attempts by brothers.[3] The abuse has been described by some as Ireland's Holocaust.[4][5] The abuse was said to be "endemic" in the institutions that dealt with boys.[6] The UK based Guardian newspaper, described the abuse as "the stuff of nightmares", citing the adjectives used in the report as being particularly chilling: "systemic, pervasive, chronic, excessive, arbitrary, endemic".[7]

The Report's conclusions section (Chapter 6) supports the overall tenor of the accusations without exception.[8] However, the Commission's recommendations were restricted in scope by two rules imposed by the Irish government, and therefore do not include calls for the prosecution or sanction of any of the parties involved.

Double standards because it is a religious organisation and therefor to some extent, above the law.

I can't answer your question about the Ryan commission, notmyself; I simply don't know.

What I can do is quote a personal observation by Colm Toibin, also in Ireland.

"From that time" (his schooldays) " I know five priests who have been "in the news". One is in jail in the North, one received a suspended sentence, one fled to another jurisdiction, two others are facing serious charges."

I actually quite like the current Pope, he recently warned of the prospect of Christianity being completely eradicated in the Middle East. However the portents are not good regarding a peaceful year, the two peace doves he released were promptly attacked by predatory birds.

http://www.smh.com.au/world/angry-birds-attack-peace-doves-released-by-pope-francis-20140127-hv9xt.html

I actually quite like the current Pope, he recently warned of the prospect of Christianity being completely eradicated in the Middle East. However the portents are not good regarding a peaceful year, the two peace doves he released were promptly attacked by predatory birds.

http://www.smh.com.au/world/angry-birds-attack-peace-doves-released-by-pope-francis-20140127-hv9xt.html

Birds will be birds, Dan.

Personally, I object to the use of doves in this manner. There is no way they can survive in the wild, and a quick death is probably the best thing which can happen to them.

I actually quite like the current Pope, he recently warned of the prospect of Christianity being completely eradicated in the Middle East. However the portents are not good regarding a peaceful year, the two peace doves he released were promptly attacked by predatory birds.

http://www.smh.com.au/world/angry-birds-attack-peace-doves-released-by-pope-francis-20140127-hv9xt.html

Birds will be birds, Dan.

Personally, I object to the use of doves in this manner. There is no way they can survive in the wild, and a quick death is probably the best thing which can happen to them.

I get doves in my garden. Why can't they survive in the wild?

White ones, Sustento? Which will let you handle them?

Doves used in this kind of 'ceremony' are bred in captivity and used to being handled. As they have been supplied with food from birth, they cannot find their own food.

No they're wild, a grey colour, and get bullied by the local pigeons.

I also get both collared doves and turtle doves in my garden, plus pigeons, magpies and other pests. These are all perfectly capable of looking after themselves in the wild, in fact they have driven off most of the smaller birds that I remember from my mother's garden. Great pity.

However the white, captivity-bred species are raised for all these displays, such as the 2012 Olympics, and after flying off most are caught by various raptors or, as IB said, starve because they don't know how to forage for food in the wild.

These birds are bred for one display, then no one cares that they are almost certain to die within hours. A fashionable display that should be stopped. Now.

I love magpies. I wish they'd come into my garden more often.

In an effort to shore up the CC, Pope Insanity IX has 'made up' 19 unscrupulous members in an effort to avoid further accusations of wrong doing.

Pope Francis has appointed 19 new cardinals at a ceremony in Rome - the first such appointments of his papacy.

Cardinals are the most senior Roman Catholic clergymen below the pontiff.

Correspondents say the inclusion of prelates from places such as Haiti and Burkina Faso reflects the Argentine Pope's commitment to the poor.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26301947

Hmm

To become a full member of the Mafia or Cosa Nostra to become a man of honour an aspiring member has to pass a Mafia initiation ritual. The ceremony involves significant ritual, oaths, blood, and an agreement is made to follow the rules of the Mafia as presented to the inductee. The first known account of the ceremony dates back to 1877 in Sicily.[1]

The typical sequence of the ceremony according to several distinct descriptions has common features. First, the new recruit is led into the presence of other members and presented by a member; the association is explained including its basic rules; then his finger is pricked with a needle by the officiating member; a few drops of blood are spilled on a card bearing the likeness of a saint; the card is set on fire; finally, while the card is passed rapidly from hand to hand to avoid burns, the novice takes an oath of loyalty to the Mafia family.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mafia_initiation_ritual

Second quote is from Wiki and therefore not subject to copyright infringement.

I should perhaps report your last post, notmyself, as it is clearly abusive, but it is so silly that I haven't bothered.

I should perhaps report your last post, notmyself, as it is clearly abusive, but it is so silly that I haven't bothered.

Cheers

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/09/pope-francis-revitalising-catholic-church

A summary of the Pope's first year in office.

And here is the real outcome of the first year.

Brings exciting new spirit of youthful vigor and renewal to position by only being 77 years old

Displays solidarity with worlds poor by trading in traditional 37-inch papal hat for less ostentatious 18-incher

Most progressive pope in Vatican history reaffirms belief that marriage should only be between a man and a woman

http://www.theonion.com/articles/highlights-from-pope-francis-first-year,35521/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=SocialMarketing&utm_campaign=LinkPreview:1:Default

......

Most progressive pope in Vatican history reaffirms belief that marriage should only be between a man and a woman

http://www.theonion.com/articles/highlights-from-pope-francis-first-year,35521/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=SocialMarketing&utm_campaign=LinkPreview:1:Default

And what is wrong with that?

I most wholeheartedly agree that marriage is a solemn covenant between a man and a woman to love, cherish and honour their partner, to live together in harmony and, God willing, to have children, raise them within the rules and laws of the nation within which they dwell and work to improve their community.

I do not approve of same-sex partnerships, nor those between a human and animal, diverse animals, aliens or ghosts. It is a rule that has served my church well for almost 2,000 years and my temple for over 2,500 years. Why change?

It's hardly a crime, or even a sin, to be 77 years old! I shall be there myself next month.

I agree with you, HB, that marriage should be between a man and a woman. However, I am in a position where it's got to be a same-sex partnership or nothing at all, so I won't agree with your last paragraph. Things change over 4,000 years, though.

I don't usually bother to object to the use of the word 'marriage' for a same-sex partnership, though, because it seems obvious to me that, language being what it is, 'marriage' will be the word everybody uses for same-sex unions, whatever their official name. It's just a matter of time.

And here is the real outcome of the first year.

Brings exciting new spirit of youthful vigor and renewal to position by only being 77 years old

Displays solidarity with worlds poor by trading in traditional 37-inch papal hat for less ostentatious 18-incher

Most progressive pope in Vatican history reaffirms belief that marriage should only be between a man and a woman

http://www.theonion.com/articles/highlights-from-pope-francis-first-year,35521/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=SocialMarketing&utm_campaign=LinkPreview:1:Default

Some people have said, I think quite fairly, that the Pope's first year has been more about style than substance. But you have to make people look in the right direction before you can make them do the right things.... and I think that is what Pope Francis has done.

And here is the real outcome of the first year.

Brings exciting new spirit of youthful vigor and renewal to position by only being 77 years old

Displays solidarity with worlds poor by trading in traditional 37-inch papal hat for less ostentatious 18-incher

Most progressive pope in Vatican history reaffirms belief that marriage should only be between a man and a woman

http://www.theonion.com/articles/highlights-from-pope-francis-first-year,35521/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=SocialMarketing&utm_campaign=LinkPreview:1:Default

Some people have said, I think quite fairly, that the Pope's first year has been more about style than substance. But you have to make people look in the right direction before you can make them do the right things.... and I think that is what Pope Francis has done.

It's certainly been uneventful.

I don't see how it is anyone's business if 2 people wish to get married regardless of their gender.

It's certainly been uneventful.

I don't see how it is anyone's business if 2 people wish to get married regardless of their gender.

And after that - people 'marrying' animals?

Clare Balding marrying her favourite stallion?

Cruft's winner marrying their winning dog/bitch?

I am not against friendships between people of the same sex, or people being very fond of their pets. What I do object to is the carrying of such friendships into perverted sexual liaisons. I cannot see that these are good for anyone, whether they participate or observe, or even accept that such relationships are normal.

It's certainly been uneventful.

I don't see how it is anyone's business if 2 people wish to get married regardless of their gender.

And after that - people 'marrying' animals?

Clare Balding marrying her favourite stallion?

Cruft's winner marrying their winning dog/bitch?

I am not against friendships between people of the same sex, or people being very fond of their pets. What I do object to is the carrying of such friendships into perverted sexual liaisons. I cannot see that these are good for anyone, whether they participate or observe, or even accept that such relationships are normal.

The same argument was used against interracial marriage which I can only presume you are also against. There is no rational reason to object to same sex marriage so an irrational one has to be introduced such a perceived leap from 2 adults in love be they MM MF FF getting married to interspecies marriage. Another argument often put forward against same sex marriage if that it would (supposedly) lead to paedophilia. Neither of these two objections to same sex marriage hold any water.

I am not against friendships between people of the same sex, or people being very fond of their pets. What I do object to is the carrying of such friendships into perverted sexual liaisons. I cannot see that these are good for anyone, whether they participate or observe, or even accept that such relationships are normal.

HB, how dare you? I had never thought of you as an ultra-conservative homophobe (even Pope Francis is not that!).

We are not perverted. We were born that way, just as others were born left-handed, or red-haired, or with six toes on each foot. And why should we not have a one-on-one sexual relationship, with all the civil rights of partners, like the other lot, who happen to be in the majority?

It's certainly been uneventful.

I don't see how it is anyone's business if 2 people wish to get married regardless of their gender.

And after that - people 'marrying' animals?

Clare Balding marrying her favourite stallion?

Cruft's winner marrying their winning dog/bitch?

I am not against friendships between people of the same sex, or people being very fond of their pets. What I do object to is the carrying of such friendships into perverted sexual liaisons. I cannot see that these are good for anyone, whether they participate or observe, or even accept that such relationships are normal.

The same argument was used against interracial marriage which I can only presume you are also against. There is no rational reason to object to same sex marriage so an irrational one has to be introduced such a perceived leap from 2 adults in love be they MM MF FF getting married to interspecies marriage. Another argument often put forward against same sex marriage if that it would (supposedly) lead to paedophilia. Neither of these two objections to same sex marriage hold any water.

Nothing wrong with inter-racial marriage, as long as it is between a man and a woman.

And paedophiles are very often in a 'normal' relationship with a partner of the opposite sex - their perversion does not preclude the act of 'normal' sex in a routine way - it is, I assume, just insufficient stimulation for their desires. The man who abused me as a te/eleven year old was the family doctor who was married and living with his wife. He conducted his abuse while his wife was in the house. I assume she knew about it and did nothing. He was a serial abuser who regularly pointed out previous victims as we drove around the village, which was probably done to show me how powerful he was - the local doctor, the church bell-ringer-in-charge, the man with the big Humber car, etc., etc.

So your assumptions of my views seem to be in error.

I object to the idea of homosexual sex acts because to me they are obscene. Shoving your member up someone else's anus is not an act of love, it is an act of domination and power.

I am not against friendships between people of the same sex, or people being very fond of their pets. What I do object to is the carrying of such friendships into perverted sexual liaisons. I cannot see that these are good for anyone, whether they participate or observe, or even accept that such relationships are normal.

HB, how dare you? I had never thought of you as an ultra-conservative homophobe (even Pope Francis is not that!).

We are not perverted. We were born that way, just as others were born left-handed, or red-haired, or with six toes on each foot. And why should we not have a one-on-one sexual relationship, with all the civil rights of partners, like the other lot, who happen to be in the majority?

Being born left-handed or red-haired is solely nature.

Homosexuality has not been proved to be either wholly nature or wholly nurture. My feeling is that it is mainly nurture. In my twenties I was involved for a few years in the London West End scene, sharing flats with many different people, of many different persuasions. And lots of parties. Several of the males made advances, but all were turned down. As I have previously said, I have no objection to friendships between like-minded people, just the sex act(s) performed other than as nature intended, where the equipment fits together properly.

It's certainly been uneventful.

I don't see how it is anyone's business if 2 people wish to get married regardless of their gender.

And after that - people 'marrying' animals?

Clare Balding marrying her favourite stallion?

Cruft's winner marrying their winning dog/bitch?

I am not against friendships between people of the same sex, or people being very fond of their pets. What I do object to is the carrying of such friendships into perverted sexual liaisons. I cannot see that these are good for anyone, whether they participate or observe, or even accept that such relationships are normal.

The same argument was used against interracial marriage which I can only presume you are also against. There is no rational reason to object to same sex marriage so an irrational one has to be introduced such a perceived leap from 2 adults in love be they MM MF FF getting married to interspecies marriage. Another argument often put forward against same sex marriage if that it would (supposedly) lead to paedophilia. Neither of these two objections to same sex marriage hold any water.

Nothing wrong with inter-racial marriage, as long as it is between a man and a woman.

And paedophiles are very often in a 'normal' relationship with a partner of the opposite sex - their perversion does not preclude the act of 'normal' sex in a routine way - it is, I assume, just insufficient stimulation for their desires. The man who abused me as a te/eleven year old was the family doctor who was married and living with his wife. He conducted his abuse while his wife was in the house. I assume she knew about it and did nothing. He was a serial abuser who regularly pointed out previous victims as we drove around the village, which was probably done to show me how powerful he was - the local doctor, the church bell-ringer-in-charge, the man with the big Humber car, etc., etc.

So your assumptions of my views seem to be in error.

I object to the idea of homosexual sex acts because to me they are obscene. Shoving your member up someone else's anus is not an act of love, it is an act of domination and power.

I'm, sorry to hear about your past but does not excuse what you are saying.

Not happy with not having to have a same sex marriage you object to others having one. Freedom of belief is freedom to think what you like, it is not freedom to impose your beliefs upon others.

I am not against friendships between people of the same sex, or people being very fond of their pets. What I do object to is the carrying of such friendships into perverted sexual liaisons. I cannot see that these are good for anyone, whether they participate or observe, or even accept that such relationships are normal.

HB, how dare you? I had never thought of you as an ultra-conservative homophobe (even Pope Francis is not that!).

We are not perverted. We were born that way, just as others were born left-handed, or red-haired, or with six toes on each foot. And why should we not have a one-on-one sexual relationship, with all the civil rights of partners, like the other lot, who happen to be in the majority?

Being born left-handed or red-haired is solely nature.

Homosexuality has not been proved to be either wholly nature or wholly nurture. My feeling is that it is mainly nurture. In my twenties I was involved for a few years in the London West End scene, sharing flats with many different people, of many different persuasions. And lots of parties. Several of the males made advances, but all were turned down. As I have previously said, I have no objection to friendships between like-minded people, just the sex act(s) performed other than as nature intended, where the equipment fits together properly.

This is not the place for a nature/nurture argument! All I will say is that increasingly the evidence seems to be that it is genetic. Many of us have never had any inclination towards the opposite sex, and feel, for what that's worth, that that is how we were made. I would go so far as to say that, if God made me that way, or even allowed me to become that way through nurture, He would not penalise me as a result. Only Man has done that.

Great! Now I can disagree with everybody!

HB, shoving your member up another person's anus is not an exclusively homosexual act. Nor, before you bring that in, is oral sex.

Notmyself, freedom of belief is not freedom to act on that belief.

Great! Now I can disagree with everybody!

HB, shoving your member up another person's anus is not an exclusively homosexual act. Nor, before you bring that in, is oral sex.

Notmyself, freedom of belief is not freedom to act on that belief.

Presumably, member Humpty Bear would accept same sex marriage if they were both eunuchs?

It's certainly been uneventful.

I don't see how it is anyone's business if 2 people wish to get married regardless of their gender.

And after that - people 'marrying' animals?

Clare Balding marrying her favourite stallion?

Cruft's winner marrying their winning dog/bitch?

It's certainly been uneventful.

I don't see how it is anyone's business if 2 people wish to get married regardless of their gender.

And after that - people 'marrying' animals?

Clare Balding marrying her favourite stallion?

Cruft's winner marrying their winning dog/bitch?

I am not against friendships between people of the same sex, or people being very fond of their pets. What I do object to is the carrying of such friendships into perverted sexual liaisons. I cannot see that these are good for anyone, whether they participate or observe, or even accept that such relationships are normal.

Unfortunate that you choose Clare Balding as one of your ludicrous/sad examples of your prejudice, given the fact that she has been with her partner for the last 8 years and is keen that they should get married. Her partner's name...Alice Arnold.

You really need to get over this bizarre hang-up of yours. What people do in their private life has nothing to do with you or anyone else. Also getting married is the most conservative act anyone can indulge in and as for gay marriage destroying the concept of marriage...heterosexuals have done a pretty good job of doing that, thank god gay folk want to commit to each other in the act of marriage.

It's certainly been uneventful.

I don't see how it is anyone's business if 2 people wish to get married regardless of their gender.

And after that - people 'marrying' animals?

Clare Balding marrying her favourite stallion?

Cruft's winner marrying their winning dog/bitch?

I am not against friendships between people of the same sex, or people being very fond of their pets. What I do object to is the carrying of such friendships into perverted sexual liaisons. I cannot see that these are good for anyone, whether they participate or observe, or even accept that such relationships are normal.

The same argument was used against interracial marriage which I can only presume you are also against. There is no rational reason to object to same sex marriage so an irrational one has to be introduced such a perceived leap from 2 adults in love be they MM MF FF getting married to interspecies marriage. Another argument often put forward against same sex marriage if that it would (supposedly) lead to paedophilia. Neither of these two objections to same sex marriage hold any water.

Nothing wrong with inter-racial marriage, as long as it is between a man and a woman.

And paedophiles are very often in a 'normal' relationship with a partner of the opposite sex - their perversion does not preclude the act of 'normal' sex in a routine way - it is, I assume, just insufficient stimulation for their desires. The man who abused me as a te/eleven year old

The fact that you were abused as a 10 year old doesn't give you the right to condemn people who enter into consensual relationships that don't fit in with your view of 'normality'.