A Fulda drugstore is not allowed to sell condoms - Germany

Right now I'm reading TT and later on Im going to take a shit.

Are you suggesting that TT and my shits are illusions?

Is that a rhetorical question?

My wife dearly hopes not in the latter case.

@parnell

Anyone can apply for an extradition, neither of the links you posted show the Vatican arresting and handing over people requested.

BTW, thanks for the second link, it quite clearly shows the moral failings I mention.

I wish Mr.Moonboots shits were just illusions

@parnell
Aha! so she has to do your bum like Mary Mag did to the other chappie

Umm back to lying and falsifying I see...

second link shows emigration to Vatican provides no "protection" as you claimed.

on "moral failings"...


which as the second link shows is plainly wrong and a lie - since you are now aware of its falsity.

Ok Parnell, live up to your own standard.

I said it is not possible to extradite someone from the Vatican

You called me a liar, and showed extradition warrants being issued.

I simply asked you show me someone who was extradited from the Vatican.

You again called me a liar without providing the requested evidence.

People might very well have been extradited successfully from the Vatican, but in this case you simply aren't living up to the high standard of proof you place on other people. Of course the reason why is quite obvious: You aren’t interested in the facts, or having your mind changed. You simply use a constant request for more specific and detailed information as a debate tactic, preferring to wear down your opponents instead of sticking to the larger issue I brought up:

The Catholic church covered up sexual abuse of minors, allowing it to continue, and shielding those responsible, instead of stopping it. This lead to more abuse, for which they are directly morally responsible.

@ thefirelane

Check your posts chum. Where is your request for such evidence?

As to my not being interested in the facts? Rather laughable since the sources I quoted blew your protection ruse out of the water. But carry on in your delusion.

in parnells weirdy-beardy world of falsifiers, liars and great big boggled eyed monsters it would appear that my objection to church teaching and church campaigns against life saving treatments amounts to ME being "hate-filled". Interesting.

I quite clearly stated that those posts did not show someone being extradited, which is what I claimed Law was being protected from.

Is't it an awful pity that condoms weren't available when Parnell's parents were at it!
We have to get this thread back to Johnnies.

Quite clearly? Try this:


So no you stated that residence in the vatican precludes his actual prosecution , which the evidence - provided - contradicts.

Yes that and the almost constant anti-Catholic bias shrieking from your posts , which others - non Catholics and non Christians alike call you on , the odd VERY hate-filled PM I have received from you and the opinions of others expressed on the board down through the years.

Is this an illusion or is it only the Home Rule & Land League supporter?

Talk about rubbers again please, please, please.

warrant for arrest does not equal prosecution. My statement remains correct. He remains immune from (to be clear for the dense) trial in the US, because a prosecutor from Boston will not, in any practical sense, be able to extradite him from the Vatican.

I await the requested evidence, again.

I might be missing something but though Cardinal Law resigned I wasn't aware he had committed any crime that the police were chasing him for. Is that not the case.

On the matter of extradition - the Vatican as I understand it has no extradition treaties with any other nation though.

suggest you ask people who know me whether I am hate filled. It is not really something most people would associate with me actually. Yourself excepted seemingly.

I would suggest to you that your new found defence of laziness on the part of Boston lawyers is not the fault of the Vatican.

As I've replied to your daft ranting PM to me before , you're probably not the best judge of yourself. I'd happily add that I'm probably also not (of either you or myself).

That all you got parnell?

You called me a liar for stating his residence in the Vatican prevents his being prosecuted under US law because he will not be extradited from the Vatican

As "evidence" you showed people getting warrants issued, but you have not yet shown someone being extradited.

I again, request the evidence.

People viewing this thread might, rightly so, question why I’m even bothering with parnell, as he’s shown a total disinterest in discussing the overarching issue which I initially commented on. My answer is: I’m not terribly interested in convincing him, because even the links he cites as defense clearly show the massive moral failing of the church… so is these facts haven’t convinced him, one lone idiot on the internet won’t either.

Rather, I do this, because I’m personally curious how people who continue to support the church, continue to do so knowing the facts of what has transpired. Through chats such as this, the sad truth becomes apparent.

I once had a keychain like this.

but don't you see thefirelane, your opinions mean that you are just a hate-filled ranter, falsifier, liar etc etc while parnell is an object lesson in balance and equanimity ...

...and Catholic.

post #144 demonstrates that extradition orders can be successfully made to residents against the Vatican.

Once again you do not seem to or have not the facility to understand the English language :

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/panorama/5389684.stm


Ergo the Vatican does not provide protection against extradition. You lose. The End.

nevermind Parnell, you're right, I see the light.

The poor Vatican is dying for someone to remove the child molesters from their mist. If only the lazy prosecution would simply ask, they would be able to do something about them.

Fact remains: If no one has ever been successfully extradited, they are effectivly protected from extradition. At the very least any prosecutor would face an insurmountable up-hill battle, and political suicide, without any guarantee of even seeing justice served (yes, somehow they just happen to "escape")

If this is the straw you need to support your world view, fine, enjoy it.

If they were serious about stamping out child molestors, why not?

I find this quite interesting too. Crimen Sollicitationis interpretation. The actual document makes for heavy reading, but the summary is quite good:






Ratzinger wrote this before he became pope. Now he could say:


Why doesn't he do that?

But thanks for the link, Parnell. Shows a good insight into how the church deals with child molesters.

And the winner of the most ACCURATE posted description of a TTer for the season 2008-2009 goes to Parnell !!!

As a matter of FACT, I'm sure if you looked theFreLane up in his trusted Wikipedia, this is the description that would follow.

LMFAO!

everyone, just ignore dj. He's TT's regular crazy person.

I cornered him intellectually about his views on the "fake" moon landing, and he ran away with his tail between his legs.

He's not worth arguing with, don't bother. If he posts (since I'm on his ignore), just reply with: "dj, please answer thefirelane's moon landing questions"

That should probably shut him up... no matter what he writes, just reply with that.

Listen you're being rather rubbish about this , I showed u a case where an extradition order was successfully fought against a paedohpile priest - therefore there is no super protection of which you spoke.

It was you who said "practical reasons" would mean they wouldnt bother , not I. Are there any charges against Cardinal Law in any court may I ask?

Finally on "happening" to escape - what do you think the Vatican is? Have you ever been there? It's not like there's a private police force running round putting people into cells.


Apparently the problem isnt child molesters , or to be more specific , the increased numbers of child molesters within the ranks of Catholic priests , its the fact that they tried to hush it up 10-20 years ago. Uh that's thefirelane's view anyhoo.

And you're welcome for the link.

Sure Parnell, keep parsing it all you want. My specific comment was that going to the Vatican makes them protected. That is true, and there are no two ways to parse it. By being there, they will not face prosecution in the US, due to the legal and political minefield of doing so. If he had stayed in the US, he would have faced trial, since he fled, he does not.

You can spin it any way you like, you can try to lure me into some garbage debate about whether never extraditing someone technically means safe from extradition even though the warrant is issued.


I have been there, they do actually. The guys have nice uniforms and big pointy sticks.


My view, in case it isn't clear enough, is that the handling and coverup of the child abuse within their ranks is a total failure of moral judgement at a systemic level. It renders any claim to moral authority on their part null and void. Furthermore, as I illustrated with Law, many of the people directly responsible for sexual abuse against children are still living their, and being supported, at the very least financially, by regular Catholics. Anyone who can support, never mind defend, such people shows a total lack of ability to tell basic right from wrong.

But again, I'm not posting here because I'm keen on sharing my opinion, or because I think I can convince you. As I said, I'm interested in the mind of someone who could defend such actions and people... So let's try this another way. I'm curious on your views on these questions:

1) What level of responsibility do you feel Bernard Law has for the children molested by priests he moved around
2) What should his punishment be?
3) Should Catholic clergy be subject to the laws in the countries they live?
4) If the Vatican knows someone broke laws while in a foreign country, should they allow that person to stay there?
5) In your view, should the Vatican be held to a higher moral standard than a secular government?

Ooh ooh flap flap, shit he's writing something nasty about me, flap flap, look in to my eyes, don't look around the eyes...look in to the eyes...flap flap, ok just ignore him he's nuts, yeah that's it...

Same old same old, you got ignored for being a twat, something you seem to be expert at (among your many other talents!), Now if only your good old dad had been protestant, aah there's a thought !

You just proved yet again how accurate the description of you was earlier.

Flap falp, he's a nutcase, doesn't know what he's talking about, I'm far more intelligent, etc, etc...

YAWN !

@thefirelane

Does Law face any charges in the US , yes or no?

EDIT :

Nother question: Is there any extradition warrant issued for Law?

Right:

1) What level of responsibility do you feel Bernard Law has for the children molested by priests he moved around?

Did he move them around , if yes - then a fair bit. I think the Church had a problem and they fucked up , big time in not just de-frocking the lot of those priests the minute they got word that they had a problem on their hands?

2) What should his punishment be?
Since the offences you charge him with - although I've never heard of a charge called "moving some paedos around" then the full extent of the US law. However the onus rests on US lawmakers and legislators to pursue extradition and judicial process...

3) Should Catholic clergy be subject to the laws in the countries they live?
Answered above , yes.

4) If the Vatican knows someone broke laws while in a foreign country, should they allow that person to stay there?
Allow? Of course , if however those laws say "Let some poor fucker starve" then no because that's contrary to moral law.

5) In your view, should the Vatican be held to a higher moral standard than a secular government?
I think they already are - they don't go running a bunch of wars for oil for example.
Whether murder , rape and looting are worse than what your and many other governments have been responsible for - well I can't really say.
As another example remember the last guy who shot the Pope? Forgiven - then and there , awesome move by the Pope and a sign of an awesome dood.

I find it rather worrying that he knows the inner wokings of the catholic church in regards to Paedophilia rather well. Speak from experience do we TFL? Choir boy memories flooding back?

I would doubt it. Due to the way the laws were written at the time, criminal charges of chid endangerment could only be brought against specific professions (priest or clergy not being one). This was later expanded due to his gross negligence. He faced numerous civil suits, but I don't imagine these are ongoing.

And that's exactly where I feel your arguments fall apart. For the following reasons:

1) The first instance of a priest molesting a child falls squarely on the shoulders of that priest. No doubt about it. Child molesters will go into professions where children are present. However, since you appear unaware of it, in the US the church would move priests in order to keep the community from talking. They would molest children in one location, then be transfered to another, knowing the cycle would continue. Every additional instance that transpires is 100% the fault of those who knew about the priests past, and did nothing.

I might add, that by creating an environment where child abuse was covered up, it could quite easily be argued that this would attract child molesters and therefore exacerbate the problem. I tend to believe this to be the case, but my previous point is damning enough without having to debate the later.

There is no way to spin that. It is not "a fair bit" or a "fuck up". It is a total moral lapse of a most heinous nature. It is not something that can be excused or defended with semantics as you are fond of doing.

2) As a church body, the Vatican should be subjected to a higher moral code. You can't play this game where they are a moral authority in one instance, then when its convenient treat them like a secular government who simply needs to wait for paperwork to be filled out before they can begin a judicial process. The onus does not rest on US lawmakers, to believe so would be to simply cast the Vatican as another amoral secular government which only looks out for its best interests without concern for either its citizens, or "extended citizenry' in the form of the world Catholic population. If you want to argue it is, fine, that's actually closer to what I believe... but I don't think you actually do, and that you are just using it as a convenient argument, which I find disingenuous.

Well I disagree with you there , because 100% means "all" which means that 0% belongs to the priest actually committing the offence. That's a bit counter-intuitive.
When the whole paedophile thing blew up , there weren't too many stats on recidivism . They had a problem , they still do I think , how do you deal with it? I think they handled it very badly but to say they KNEW the cycle would continue - well that's bullshit frankly.

EDIT: Society in general still has a huge problem with paedophilia , would you say they deal with it successfully now?

Here's something interesting on the topic of moving:

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



Uh u seem to be confused. "Covering up" means no one finds out about it , you can hardly argue that a successful cover up attracts people. Arguing with you is fun.


Ok God , if you say so. Are you pursuing Bush Cheney et al in court right now? Fuckups happen. Welcome to life.


The Catholic church doesnt have official punishments , that's exactly the problem with Sharia law. I agree with that. You don't ? Stoning at 3 o clock and you"ll sign up?

Roman catholic church has just too much money. They own unbelievable amount of lands, shares, companies, gold, jewellery and art. Every year, they get roughly 20 billions Euro subsidies from tax payers' money only in Germany. The biggest joke is that they are owners of Hedge funds, private equities and of course, they hold a lot of pharmacy stocks also for investment purpose. What are these pharmacy companies producing ? Anti baby pills and condoms. It's only hypocrisy. Church, mafia and politics are everywhere there where it is about big money.

If you are interested to get to know more about two big churches in Germany, you can go to :

www.theologe.de

But it's in German language.

So Sofia , burn the Frauenkirche to the ground huh?

Nothing at all about the 1000s of Catholic missions. Right.

Parnell,
Who gets anything out of doing so ? What do you want to tell me by "Nothing at all about the 1000s of Catholic missions" ?

The missions? I rather fancy the poor. Who did you think? Hedge fnud managers?

Problem of the church is that they are sitting on vast amount of money, getting richer and richer and they shit on the poor people. At the same time, they tell poor to be grateful and humble. Church has joined hands with industries, big rich guys and politicians. Church missions brainwash people in third world countries with their ridiculous ideas, make them mentally ill and dependent. If one wants to forbid Scientology, what is also important, one has to be consequent and thus forbid Roman catholic church also. The Protestant church is not any better. But at least, less influential and rich.

You're so right Sofia. The Church "brainwashed" my parents when they educated them in the poverty stricken Irish state. My mother who worked with Mother Teresa wasn't really feeding those people , she was shitting on them. wow , you HAVE opened my eyes.

Ok, to be more precise, I believe that the responsibility for the action taking place falls increasingly on the shoulders of the person moving around the priest. To argue that someone "just couldn't know" that abuse would continue after repeatedly seeing the same thing happen, just strikes me as sticking one's head in the sand. To argue that in the 50s the recidivism wasn't know... maybe, but as the decades passed, both advancements in modern phycology and the churches own experience makes this a less plausible argument.


My point being, it was an "open secret"... It was always rumored that the Priesthood was were the child molesters were. However, I'm talking about cover up in the sense that no specific legal action could be taken. But, no, it was not entirely covered up... I don't believe "A priest, a rabbi, and a lawyer are on a sinking ship" was coined in 2003.


No, but I also don't consider them moral authorities.


Really? What were the recommendations for dealing with people who were caught speaking about the child abuse, in the link you posted.

Poor Guy, you look very handsome but you are a fool like all the others. You seem to know nothing about "Mother Teresa". I don't believe that your mom had to do with her. So please don't tell me nonsense lines. Here you are some links, by the way:

http://www.mutter-teresa.info/
http://www.heise.de/tp/r4/artikel/15/15888/1.html !!!
http://www.livenet.ch/www/index.php/D/article/191/10723/
http://members.lycos.co.uk/bajuu/ !!!
http://www.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/bsz/613/2a.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mother_Teresa
http://www.das-weisse-pferd.com/98_19/vatikan_mafia.html
http://www.kirchenopfer.de/dieopfer/kindsm...rauch/index.php
http://www.schmidt-salomon.de/scientopus.htm
http://www.freie-christen.com/reichtum_der...t_blutgeld.html

Read this link at least if you don't understand German:

http://members.lycos.co.uk/bajuu/

According to the links: Mother Teresa collected all the money but did not help the poor. She sent the money to Vatican. May be, we are talking about money that is several hundred millions up to billions. She let people die. She did not help them. She only gave them Baptism to make them Christians. Then she let them die after she had converted them to Roman Catholics. The donation money that was collected from many many people and companies in hope that Mother Teresa will do good work for the people, it disappeared on the account of Vatican bank. It's written that she snatched away children from poor parents to give them for adoptions. May be, your mom assisted her in bringing the kids to abroad in a proper Roman Catholic parent's house like you were brought up.

Thanks for the handsome comment. Clearly you're very smart. We are all fools except you. Are you Ming the Merciless? You sure sound like him.

Everybody should be able to realise that the religions are all men made and only a tool for
power, war, moneymaking... right from the beginning only. By the way: Modern theologists know much more
than they are ever allowed to tell on sunday. One could mention: Gerd Lüdemann, Eugen Drewermann, Küng, Deschner, etc.

God however is not an illusion! One has to become spiritual - not religious to manage one's life.
Never switch off your brain!

nothing units two previously waring factions like a common enemy idiot

aw c'mon now , we're not warring , jousting exuberantly maybe.