Catholic Priest tries to hire hitman to kill teen he raped at gunpoint

Good old catholic priest's, at least they are consistent in their sado-sexual wickedness. Buggerer's and heathens rarely divert from the game plan.

This doesn't surprise me since Catholic priests have a rep of being child molesters. My religious views are agnostic.

reply to post by Sherlock Holmes


.....because you can tell whether people "Listen to what the pope has to say" based on birth-rates of catholic and non-catholic countries. They are falsely correlated. (non-sequitur)

We agree that's it's an effective method of boosting their followers; you disagree that this is the primary function of this propaganda.

reply to post by InfamousJL3


If you can't be black or white... why not be grey, ay? nay

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
.....because you can tell whether people "Listen to what the pope has to say" based on birth-rates of catholic and non-catholic countries. They are falsely correlated. (non-sequitur)

No they're not falsely correlated.

Clearly many people in Catholic countries are using birth control and having abortions, as they have similar birth rates to comparable non-Catholic countries.

Unless you're suggesting that people in Catholic countries are having considerably lower amounts of sex than in non-Catholic countries, or are practicing a large amount of onanism ( which is probably frowned upon by the Catholic Church as well ).

reply to post by madnessinmysoul

To be fair, the article (and that is my only source of information about this story), makes no mention of the church "supporting" him, and definitely does not support his actions- so I'm confused how ordaining female priests enter the equation. It is their religion, so it would be their rules- so if they say that women cannot be priests, and someone ordains female priests, it is not illogical that they'd then say "okay, but then you are not catholic".

I'm pretty sure that if you went to a catholic (or a catholic priest), and asked "Is rape and attempted murder worse or is ordaining a female priest worse?" they'd either say they are both equal (if they subscribed to the understanding that all sin is equal, and the wages of sin is death, etc.), or they'd say that rape and attempted murder is worse.

reply to post by Sherlock Holmes


There are other factos such as disease, infertility due to the lack of medical care. In a catholic country it could be that atheists, agnostics, deists and theists have similar birth-rates. Just because some people in a country support abortion doesn't mean that the Christians in that country are going to overtake them in terms of birth-rate. What nonsense.

All i've said is they have tried to use this propagranda to fulfil their population agenda, to spread Christianity, just like Islam thinks it's doing the righeous thing by spreading it's vile religion.

reply to post by babloyi


According to recent changes to Canon law, one of the gravest offenses as priest can make is ordaining a female priest. It universally results in defrocking and excommunication. No chance for appeal, no chance at anything. Immediate termination of duties and damnation of the soul. There has not been a single instance of a priest who practiced pedophilia being excommunicated or defrocked publicly.

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
There are other factos such as disease, infertility due to the lack of medical care. In a catholic country it could be that atheists, agnostics, deists and theists have similar birth-rates.

That's why I said ''comparable countries''.

Italy ( 87% Catholic ), can generally be compared with countries such as the UK, France, Germany etc. in terms of socio-economic conditions.

Italy has one of the lowest birth-rates in the world. It also has a higher rate of terminated pregnancies than Germany, Belgium and the Netherlands, which are all countries with far lower Catholic populations.

Slovakia ( 60% Catholic ) has a higher rate of abortion than the neighbouring Czech Republic ( 27% Catholic, and one of the least religious countries in Europe ).

There are many other examples of predominantly Catholic countries having similar birth-rates and abortion statistics to neighbouring countries who have a Catholic minority.


I'm not saying that the correlation between birth-rates, abortion and Catholicism in a country is ideal to work out whether people are listening to the ''advice'' of the Catholic Church or not, but it's surely a strong indicator that many people in traditionally Catholic countries are ignoring the Pope on this issue.

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
Just because some people in a country support abortion doesn't mean that the Christians in that country are going to overtake them in terms of birth-rate.

Not Christians, but Christian fundamentalists.

As I've already pointed out, many moderate Christians are clearly using birth control and having abortions.
This means that both non-religious and moderately religious people will tend to have lower birth-rates, while the evangelical types will continue to have larger families.

This is just a simple equation.


I'd also be interested to know what parts of the Bible encourage racism, especially against black people, which you mentioned earlier.

I have not heard about this before, and after googling for more information, the only example of racism that I can find is God's apparent preference for his ''chosen people''.

reply to post by madnessinmysoul


They account for very little, yet you seem to have a sample size based on "comparable" non-catholic and catholic that brings you to a certain conclusion. Besides, "fundamentalists" how did you manage to work out birth-correlation by only fundamentalists. No one admits they're a fundamentalist LOL, well stupid people do.

wow, i cant say i am surprised though.

Originally posted by Danbones
Then there is the franklin savings and loan scandle and the connection to boys town.
this like 911 is one hell of a rabit hole.

star for u
I was wondering if somebody was
gonna bring up boys town or not
so thank you

I'm glad I found this thread cuz I was
about to post the same thread
in this forum. Thanks to the OP
for beating me to it.

Such appalling action by the clergy
but as Dan pointed out, this just
isn't tied to any one religion.
This is going on world wide.
And probably will continue unabated
til the rapture.

Me heartfelt sympathies go out the
families of the victims and the victims
themselves. We as a populace have
failed to keep you safe.

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
Opposing these doctrines and the alledged word of GOd is the reason women now have equal rights, the reason that racism is finally clearing up, the reason that the Pope has all of a sudden had to change his mind on condoms.

To press you once more...

Whereabouts does the Bible advocate racism, especially against black people ( as you inferred in another post ) ?

I'm not a Christian, nor am I even the religious type, so the falsehoods that you post don't offend me on that level.

However, I'm absolutely disgusted by intellectual dishonesty, and the lies that you post are shameful, and tell us a lot about your character and the weakness of your ''arguments''.


If you knew anything of what you were talking about, or had knowledge about it, then you would be aware that the British abolitionist movement was spearheaded by Quakers, who were appalled by slavery, as they believed that treating other human beings this way went against the teachings of Christ.

As always, religion is neither good nor bad, and it depends on how individual people interpret it.


There's nothing wrong with holding any particular viewpoint, but using lies and misrepresentations of the truth to ''support'' or ''justify'' one's viewpoint is a very poor show.

reply to post by madnessinmysoul


Well you are damning all Christians when you fail to bring a real solution to the table. You know in my community, the Assyrian community, we have adult males as deacons who help the priest. I don't understand where people started making children their alter boys.

The reasoning for having men up their is that they have endured rigorous life experiences and they understand religion more than a child.

reply to post by Sherlock Holmes


I never intent to misinform people, and call me up on points where i have made a mistake but don't patronise me with your babel.

And it's a very "in-the-middle" approach you uphold to religion almost like you defend it's obvious tyranny and the very fact it poses a threat to civilisation and has done for years.

Maybe i was wrong about racism, but fundamentlist Christians, especially in America ,over time, have been known to be the most racist people around, often taking on black people as slaves. God condones taking "foreigners" as slaves, even Genocide of the amalekites; a whole race of people - maybe that was my misunderstanding of racism in the abrahamic doctrines

I'm going to say why i dislike religion because I'm sick and tired of people thinking i'm some kind of arrogant, smarmy user who will just twist an argument for the sake of winning:-

I dislike religion because at the very core of it is a totalitarian edict, the master and slave concept. You are a sick human being, sinner by nature and you need to be commanded well, if only you can read a few lines in a bible that man written and follow your local preist.

It's pure control, the very concept of eternal damnation is enough to ingest fear into any person let alone children, it's utterly despicable that this is forced upon many children or that we have "faith" schools here in the UK.

It separates society, separates viewpoints causes hate and causes good people to do bad things just because they think they have "GOD" on their side. "If only i bomb this church i will get my 72 virgins in heaven", the idea of martyrdom is the sickest thing man has ever thought of. And the idea that "GOD" can be on a certain countries side in a War is such a despicable thought.

And the scapegoating for morality- the idea of passing responsibility of your sins onto someone else, God himself, his son, the holy ghost or anyother form of metaphorical pseudo-intellectual nonsense.

Religion was created in man's intelliectual infancy and was used where knowledge for things was not understood, we thought tsunamis, earthquakes, volcanoes erupting were "punishment" from "GOD" we thought disease was punishment, because we didn't understand about bacteria and micro-organisms.

It was created when man knew little, but now we know more, i'm not saying we know everything. But we certainly don't know "everything" before we know anything.

I just find it hilarious that with the little knowledge they had back then, they seemed to KNOW that there was a God of this universe, when they didn't even know the earth was spherical, most Christians anyway.

I also find it very amusing, and find it in my favour religious debates that no scientist, no mathematician, no philosopher, no theologian has ever demonstrated the existence of supreme supernatural being that has created the universe.

Every scientific descovery so far we have made, there is no need to include the theory of God, it works perfectly well without it.

It's offends intelligent people, that you could have conclusive proof of something without any evidence, and then get all butthurt when it's legitamacy is questioned in debate.

It's a childish idea but i'm willing to give it the courtesy of my respect outside the arena of debate, the same way i respect and tolerate a child explaining his love and need to believe in Santa Claus.

Heed my words, in the arena of debate i don't think religion demands respect, in insults our intelligence and our own innate ability to be moral, ethical creatures. It scares children and separates society. I'm here to emancipate those who are willing to think for themselves, to think critically, to see past the power hierarchy in organised religion. To those who are sitting on the fence.

We don't need God to be moral people.

On the bright side of all this, It's no secret that birth rates in predominantly Catholic countries are lower than non-Catholic countries.(The reason why is beside the point) So it is therefor a mathematical certainty that eventually we will not have to be bothered with such nonsense as "men of God" sinning in various ways.

If you don't breed, you don't survive. It's that simple.

reply to post by InTheShadows


Basically as an end to my comments in this thread:

God isn't real, God was made up by man, you don't need a supreme dictator to be moral.

Thanks for listening. Bye

reply to post by madnessinmysoul


what a shame. Man rapes a boy then tries to have him silenced for harming him. Great examples being kept. THe Catholic should be BEHEADED FOR HIS IGNORANCE. BUT THE LEGAL SYSTEM WILL FEED HIM CLOTH HIM PROVIDE T.V. FOR HIM AND EVEN MORE YOUNG INMATES TO PLAY WITH. sPELLS aRS BACKWARDS SYSTEM. There is no need to allow him to continue to steal oxygen.

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
And it's a very "in-the-middle" approach you uphold to religion almost like you defend it's obvious tyranny and the very fact it poses a threat to civilisation and has done for years.

Religion is neutral; it's neither good nor bad.

Talking about ''religion's obvious tyranny'' is just as much as a stupid generalisation as talking about ''religion's obvious charity'', due to all the good causes that are one in the name of religion.

As always, some people use it for good, others for bad. Nothing to get too worked up about.


How can it ''pose a threat to civilisation'' ?
Again, ''civilisation'' is a neutral term, and one's interpretation of it is subjective.

Religion has played a part in just about every single documented human civilisation, so to ascertain whether it has been beneficial or negative to human advancement, as a whole, is impossible.

For all we know, humanity may have died out without religion in early human civilisations.

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
Maybe i was wrong about racism, but fundamentlist Christians, especially in America ,over time, have been known to be the most racist people around, often taking on black people as slaves. God condones taking "foreigners" as slaves, even Genocide of the amalekites; a whole race of people - maybe that was my misunderstanding of racism in the abrahamic doctrines

That is fair enough, and I retract my claim about intellectual dishonesty. I'm sorry about that.

The thing about religious texts is that they are usually quite ambiguous, so people can usually find something there that can support their viewpoint.

As I said, Wilberforce and the Quakers were evangelical Christians who were appalled at the idea of owning another human being as a slave, and were greatly influenced by the teachings of Christ, that preach equality.

So, one set of Christians may find some support for enslaving ''foreigners'' in the Bible, but another group will find support for the alternative viewpoint.

That is why I tend to think that religion is largely neutral, as it depends on the person who holds the views.

Just because some sick-minded individual decides to blow himself and everyone else in his vicinity up, that doesn't mean that Islam is largely responsible for his actions.

He is most likely psychologically disturbed and suicidal. It's no different to someone in the USA shooting up their workplace or school. Just because someone claims to do it in the ''name of Allah'' doesn't mean that it is any worse than someone who does it for no apparent reason.

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
I'm going to say why i dislike religion because I'm sick and tired of people thinking i'm some kind of arrogant, smarmy user who will just twist an argument for the sake of winning:-

I dislike religion because at the very core of it is a totalitarian edict, the master and slave concept. You are a sick human being, sinner by nature and you need to be commanded well, if only you can read a few lines in a bible that man written and follow your local preist.

I'm not really going to comment on your appraisal of religion.

But if you don't believe any of this is true, then it is just in the believer's head, so why do you care what philosophy or religious belief someone else holds ?


Now I'll tell why I personally dislike non-religious people who obsess about religion, and exhibit all the negative traits of the religious fundamentalists that they claim to be diametrically opposed to...

Firstly, they are ignoring someone's individual freedom to choose to adhere to a religion or not. You may not agree with it, but who are you to say what they should and shouldn't believe in ?

Constantly treating people like children that need to be ''guided'' to believe in the same worldview as you is rather embarrassing.
At its core, lies intolerance; militant atheist types just can't stand the thought of someone else believing in something that doesn't correspond to their own worldview.

I think what gets me about non-religious people who are fixated with religion, is that they are wasting precious time worrying and arguing about something that they believe is bunk.

Think about it; you are obsessing about something that you think doesn't exist !
This just seems really sad to me, and a shocking waste of time and effort.

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
It's pure control, the very concept of eternal damnation is enough to ingest fear into any person let alone children, it's utterly despicable that this is forced upon many children or that we have "faith" schools here in the UK.

It can only cause fear if you believe it to be true. I can't say that I believe in hell, so the whole concept causes me no fear.

If I chose to believe in a religious doctrine that said I could suffer eternal damnation if I didn't obey certain guidelines, then that would be my choice to do so, and it shouldn't be any concern to anybody else.

Still, some people seem to pay way too much attention prying into what other people choose to believe or not believe in.

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
It separates society, separates viewpoints causes hate and causes good people to do bad things just because they think they have "GOD" on their side. "If only i bomb this church i will get my 72 virgins in heaven", the idea of martyrdom is the sickest thing man has ever thought of. And the idea that "GOD" can be on a certain countries side in a War is such a despicable thought.

Your entire argument could be used about politics, only replace ''GOD'' with ''< political ideology >''.

Political views separate society, separates viewpoints, causes hate, and causes ''good'' people to do bad things because they think that their ideology is right.

Why aren't people like you constantly complaining about political views and beliefs, when people do equally as bad things in the name of a political ideology ?

You only have to look at the crimes committed by communist and fascist regimes in the last century to see what happens when people take their political views too far.


For goodness sake, just look at football violence !

Here you have people of the same race, culture, social class and religion fighting each other just because one supports a different football from exactly the same city.

You have just got to accept that humans are imperfect, volatile and potentially violent creatures, that will find any reason necessary to justify attacking and killing somebody that is different.

It's part of human nature, and we probably be wouldn't be around today without it.

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
Religion was created in man's intelliectual infancy and was used where knowledge for things was not understood, we thought tsunamis, earthquakes, volcanoes erupting were "punishment" from "GOD" we thought disease was punishment, because we didn't understand about bacteria and micro-organisms.

That's one idea, there are many others, as well.

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
It was created when man knew little, but now we know more, i'm not saying we know everything. But we certainly don't know "everything" before we know anything.

I just find it hilarious that with the little knowledge they had back then, they seemed to KNOW that there was a God of this universe, when they didn't even know the earth was spherical, most Christians anyway.

You are falling in to the trap of mixing up faith with empirical knowledge.

They ''knew'' there's a God of the universe through faith.

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
I also find it very amusing, and find it in my favour religious debates that no scientist, no mathematician, no philosopher, no theologian has ever demonstrated the existence of supreme supernatural being that has created the universe.

Well, nobody has come up with any evidence to explain existence, so it's a bit unfair to just single out believers in God as people who have failed to provide any evidence.

To me, this sounds like the ''argument from ignorance''.

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
Every scientific descovery so far we have made, there is no need to include the theory of God, it works perfectly well without it.

Unfortunately, this is impossible to argue for or against, without first knowing the ''ultimate truth'' ( if such a thing exists ).

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
It's offends intelligent people, that you could have conclusive proof of something without any evidence, and then get all butthurt when it's legitamacy is questioned in debate.

Again, you are mixing up faith with empirical knowledge.

People who have faith in a higher power do have conclusive proof to themselves.

If your reality is based on personal faith, then how can it ever be represented objectively ?

Sorry wrong thread