|
29438. alistairconnor - 3/20/2009 4:08:22 PM A teaching moment... 29439. wabbit - 5/23/2009 1:20:57 AM I may well be the only confessed atheist here, but I don't understand this at all. How these so-called Christians can do what they know is wrong, and excuse themselves for such specious reasons, escapes me entirely. Said Rembert G Weakland:We all considered sexual abuse of minors as a moral evil, but had no understanding of its criminal nature. Weakland, who retired in 2002 after it became known that he paid $450,000 in 1998 to a man who had accused him of date rape years earlier, said he initially:Accepted naively the common view that it was not necessary to worry about the effects on the youngsters: either they would not remember or they would ‘grow out of it’. Really? I mean, really really?? Do we honestly need the threat of hell or the promise of heaven or sanctioned forgiveness to keep morality in the front of our brains? It seems the most sanctimonious among us are those who should shoulder the most shame.
Talk about someone born to live down to his name.29440. arkymalarky - 5/23/2009 3:23:28 AM Judith is an athiest, as well, but any belief should find them repugnant and as for Christianity, that and one other sin are what Jesus expressed as it would be better the sinner were dead or never born. So how they could really believe what they said they did and do that is something else. 29441. arkymalarky - 5/23/2009 3:26:29 AM And why that doesn't carry the death penalty or at the very least life without parole is beyond me. 29442. judithathome - 5/23/2009 1:07:47 PM Yes, I'm an atheist but I was a Christian at one time and the thing that got me out of there was the hypocrisy...the church I attened "withdrew" from a woman who fell in love with a man not her husband...after her husband, a deacon, had cheated on her for several years. I was 18 when that happened and decided I didn't want to be part of the church...then a lot of reading and thinking for myself led to me a few years later giving up on the whole fairytale.
Didn't Jesus say "Suffer the little children"? I don't think any translation, no matter how inferior, could make that into "MAKE the little children suffer."
...the common view that it was not necessary to worry about the effects on the youngsters: either they would not remember or they would ‘grow out of it’.
Oh, this made me sick to my stomach and I haven't even had breakfast. So it's okay to rape so long as the victim doesn't recall it or matures enough to understand people have needs? Where is all that bullshit about God Sees Everthing We Do? Right...that's covered by the old canard "Jesus died for our sins and God forgives us all of them if we only believe..."
What total and utter bullshit.
29443. alistairConnor - 5/23/2009 7:18:45 PM I suppose I'm an atheist (but it's a bit like asking a nun her marital status, or an Amazon tribesman his favourite TV show). I don't blame religion, in the present case. What it is : children should not be put into the unsupervised care of an all-male institution of any kind, certainly not an authoritarian one with no checks and balances. I see no point in blaming individuals for very ordinary human weaknesses (well yes, the individuals should be punished, but that's sort of beside the point). Rather, it's the institution that is ineffective at best, perverse and corrupt at worst. I'm not anti-religious in the slightest, still less anti-Catholic, but I believe it's time for the temporal power of the Church to be destroyed. 29444. judithathome - 5/23/2009 7:44:05 PM I see no point in blaming individuals for very ordinary human weaknesses (well yes, the individuals should be punished, but that's sort of beside the point).
Okay, I'll admit I've had a toddy this afternoon but I see no way to understand WTF you mean by this. OF COURSE one can blame individuals for "ordinary human weaknesses" if those include fucking little kids. And also, what do you mean by that parenthetical statement? That these pederasts should be punished for it but can't be blamed for it?
I daresay your remarks would not be the same if your daughters had been accosted by the local priests who had the opinion that it was okay for them to be molested because they'd "get over it."
(And I apologize for that last statement in advance but WTF???? I am astonished by your response!) 29445. arkymalarky - 5/23/2009 8:06:41 PM Such individuals should be put where they can't destroy children's lives, but instead many churches and other institutions create havens and venues for these monsters and it needs to stop. We had a boy in my hometown who murdered his parents and sister and he'd been abused by a Scout master. He should never have been placed in a position where that abuse was possible in the organization's normal functions. 29446. alistairConnor - 5/23/2009 8:28:34 PM these pederasts should be punished for it but can't be blamed for it?
Human nature being what it is, one should never be surprised by base actions. War crimes are committed by ordinary people who don't have a strong moral compass. Sex crimes likewise. Those individuals are not to blame for the war; that doesn't mean they should be let off the hook, but one shouldn't lose sight of the big picture if you're interested in actually solving the problem. The current situation is as if the death-camp guards were tried and punished, but Hitler was left in power.
Trust me, I will not put my children in the power of anyone who would be in a position to abuse them sexually. The problem is that people wrongly confided children to the care of an institution that was not trustworthy. The fact that it's a faith-based institution provides a sort of overarching alibi, they didn't need to be accountable in the past. That just doesn't wash any more. That's why I think the institution should be neutered. Mandatory inspections by public welfare authorities. That sort of thing. 29447. arkymalarky - 5/23/2009 9:06:00 PM Liability of the institutions and those in charge of them for negligence wouldn't hurt either. 29448. judithathome - 5/23/2009 11:00:00 PM Well, Alistair, I wonder if people should be wary of letting their children be put in the charge of the Boy Scouts of America...where the fathers of young boys are usually the troop leaders...or in the schools where, say, the swimming coaches or the sports coaches are routinely put in charge of young people?
Here in my town, a man who was well-respected and in high social circles was found to have been molesting young boys he taught diving to...several men the age of my son recently came forward to testify that this man had been molesting them 35 years ago and that the guy had continued to do so to other boys up until he retired.
Seriously, how does one know whom to entrust their children to when churches, social organisations, and schools have this sort of history? Even relatives have been known to do this...
It seems to me there are very many hazards out there that we might never know about...it's left up to individuals to rely on their own moral compasses and there's simply no way to know if anyone is a safe haven for kids anymore.
29449. anomie - 5/24/2009 12:31:56 AM Atheist here too.
The hypocrisy of religious people would be almost entertaining if it wasn't so cruel and vicious. 29450. Ms. No - 5/24/2009 5:56:46 AM Also atheist but with a deep affection for the Church. Call me a weirdo. I don't mind. ;-> 29451. Ms. No - 5/24/2009 6:03:47 AM The hypocrisy of religious people would be almost entertaining if it wasn't so cruel and vicious.
Hypocrisy is a human failing regardless of spiritual affiliation.
The problem for most of us is that Christianity as an institution is supposed to be about love and striving for right.
The hypocrisy of theists is often more offensive to us because we have higher expectations for the institution they belong to.
A molesting priest who says gays should burn in hell is no more or less hypocritical than a child-care provider who abuses kids, but the appeal to authority backing theists is what seems to tip the scales of outrage.
Or at least it does mine. I resent like hell those who give religion a bad name by behaving badly. I find it blasphemous.
Hard to understand, perhaps, coming from an atheist, but just because I lack Faith doesn't mean I have abandoned my beliefs about what Church is supposed to be about. 29452. judithathome - 5/24/2009 2:12:55 PM Well, easy enough to feel that way since they never tire of telling us how good they are...actions notwithstanding. 29453. Ms. No - 5/24/2009 9:46:40 PM Well, easy enough to feel that way since they never tire of telling us how good they are...actions notwithstanding.
Ha! Yes, and this is what bugs me.
I grew up in the Church quite happily. Of course, I grew up in a liberal-minded congregation dedicated to community service. I don't remember anyone ever preaching about going to Hell ---- you were already in Hell if you were so separated from God as to not have compassion for your fellow man. If you weren't doing your best to make the world better for mankind you had already cast yourself out...but you were welcome to change your ways at any time and rejoin the fold.
I never got the message that sex was evil or that God makes some people rich because he likes them better or that white people are inherently better than brown people or that there is ever any call to nuture hatred in one's breast. I also never got the message that I had any kind of obligation to go around telling everyone I was a Christian self-righteously beating my breast and trying to drag them to Mass.
I didn't become an atheist because I disliked my Church --- actually, we moved away from that congregation years ago and eventually stopped going to church. I became an atheist because I couldn't reconcile myself to the belief in a sentient and eternal creator.
But lack of belief in God doesn't mean I think what I learned was a crock. The point of a good argument is that it doesn't rely on an appeal to authority and what I was taught makes sense to me. We should be kind, caring, accepting and helpful, not because somebody who could crush us told us to but because it is the right way to be.
I heartily resent all of these self-proclaimed Christians who have made that word a bad taste in the mouth. I find that I am prejudiced against people who tell me they are Christian or who talk about their church. I am leery of them and mistrustful and try to avoid them because too many loud-mouthed hate-mongers have stepped up to try and claim Christianity for their own.
It makes me sick. They have stolen something from me. Perverted something that I loved and believed in. They have made me fear and mistrust and avoid people who are more often than not good and caring individuals.
THAT'S why I detest the so-called Christian Right.
29454. judithathome - 5/25/2009 2:31:25 PM That is an excellent post!
The church I went to was the polar opposite of the one you experienced...100%.
In fact, I blame that church for ruining part of my childhood...when I was between the ages of 10-12, boys were my pals...they were the ones I went on hikes with, explored the river with, rode horses with, and formed "clubs" with. I was a tomboy and boys were more fun than girls because they didn't bother with dolls and a little dirt never bothered by boy "friends".
Then one day two ladies from the church told my mom that I seemed to be a little too "boy crazy" and she should keep an eye on me and curtail my activity with the boys. Well, my mom, bless her soul, was not going to let me ruin her reputation as a parent and after that, I was told to curtail all my running around with "the boys"...and this not only pissed me off but made me wonder why. What was so dangerous and special about my boy pals?
And over the next year, of course I found out. And the boys I found out with were older because the pals my own age were just as dumb about it all as I was...I didn't become a sex-crazed teenage but I certainly did everything I could get away with...and by today's standards, that was about equal to first base.
However, that church never ceased to expect the worst from all us teens. No dancing, no "mixed bathing" (swimming together), no mixed parties and God forbid, no rock and roll! It was all verboten...so of course, we ALL snuck around for our fun and none were more fun than the preacher's kids.
It was definitely a two-faced education...and the more the adults said "no", the more we all wanted to do..and DID...whatever they said not to.
Almost all of my girlfriends from those church days left the church after they grew up. I ran in to a friend from my little group from high school the other day and was shocked to see her...she's still in the church and looks a full 10 years older than I...Keoni was amazed we were the same age. I don't know how to explain it but she looks "cramped"...
And the amazing thing is, she is the daughter of the woman who was "kicked out" of that church, the event that caused me to finally sever ties forever with that sanctimonious body of hypoctites.
(I saw a bumper sticker yesterday that I loved: it said "I'm a Christian AND a Democrat") 29455. wabbit - 5/25/2009 2:46:21 PM I see I am in good company here!
Like Ms. No, my atheism stems from an inability to get my head around belief in a sentient and eternal creator. However, like JaH, I also ran into problems with organized religion — not with pastors or priests so much as with the congregants.
When I was maybe six, our church (Lutheran) had an Easter Egg hunt in the small fenced yard. It was strictly for the young kids, no adults allowed, and my mother was keeping my two brothers, who were too young to fend for themselves, out of the hunt. I was looking forward to helping my sister, a year younger than me. But when we got in there, we found ourselves being pushed aside by grown people who were carrying their kids and grabbing up everything in sight, literally just about knocking those of us over who did not cheat. I couldn't understand why there were rules when nobody was required to follow them, or why the pastor didn't boot those grown men (and unbelievably, most of the adults in the yard were men) out of there.
Young as I was, I recognized the Sunday Christians for what they were, and I never felt the same about church again. I stopped going to church altogether when I was about eight or nine.
I enjoy the pageantry, the art and architecture, even the music, and have been to all kinds of religious services, but strictly as an observer. 29456. arkymalarky - 5/25/2009 5:39:55 PM I need a bumpersticker that says what Judith saw, plus "and I don't go to church." Church is too often a way to power trip and get in everyone's business, and they're pushy about getting people involved in their social activities, which is a big turn-off for me, as I didn't go to hang out with people and be pressured with a lot of useless additional things to do. I enjoyed the little church up the road until a handful decided to target the preacher and everything kind of blew up. I hate drama, and I'm certainly not going to sit through it in church, so I just stay hpme.
My grandparents got a lot out of their church and the congregation in Dallas, but my parents got little from the same church. 29457. pelty - 6/22/2009 8:37:00 PM "THAT'S why I detest the so-called Christian Right."
Sounds like you have mistaken a political movement for a theologically-conservative Christianity. Whatever the case, only you allow your self-confessed prejudice to perpetuate. No one "makes you" be prejudiced.
"I never got the message that sex was evil or that God makes some people rich because he likes them better or that white people are inherently better than brown people or that there is ever any call to nuture hatred in one's breast."
This is what annoys *me* about self-righteous atheists, that they take the extreme positions in the church, those that most Christians would denounce, and assign them to all theologically-conservative Christians. Guess what? I have never heard anyone say "sex is evil." In fact, I have heard quite the opposite. Now, the context in which it is permitted for Christians may be different than what you might personally prefer, but that is a different matter.
I do not deny that there are political groups that try to legislate sexuality and, while I may agree with their desire to have humans employ their sexuality in a godly context (i.e., within the bonds of marriage), I think it is foolish and impossible to try to do so through legal channels.
Similarly, I have NEVER heard any sort of racism from any pulpit (again, quite the opposite) and I attend a church that is comprised of a broad range of ethnicities and nationalities. It is disappointing that you feel you must stoop to the lowest common denominator in order to make an argument.
You do have a point that people try to tell others about Jesus and that this might be an annoyance to you, but we all are proselytized to in some form or other about things with which I might vehemently disagree or find annoying, but different opinions add a good and necessary flavor to life, I find. I can certainly disagree with you, which I most definitely do, without hating you or having the type of prejudice to which you admit.
|
