Cardinal Brady "apologises" to abuse victim after BBC exposure

[The Heff]

#1. you do not believe in the ultimate morality giver or His standard, how can you demand people to act with such moral authority when you do not believe in it?

Religion does not have a monopoly on morality. In fact, given the history of the mainstream religions in the world today I would argue your religions have the least valid claim to it.

It's funny how religious people seem to think non-believers cannot have morals simply because we do not believe in the same thing as you.

Arrogance.

It would be like me claiming you have no intellect based on the fact you do not believe the teachings of science (which you shouldn't, that's what evidence is for). You clearly do because you are able to debate finer points of detail with some degree of credibility.

A. If you believe like some evolutionists that morality came from animals then you have no authority to interfere as animals do not stop child molestation.

Evolution led to complex systems like the human brain which allowed humans to start to think. Thinking led to the creation of societies based on crude barter systems, religions and eventually laws. Many of these laws are written to protect others from intolerance, abuse and unnecessary suffering.

Treat others as you would like to be treated. I have to assume Catholic priests would all like to be molested and have their abusers protected in the process. Mind you, would they even consider it abuse? Most of them probably like it anyway.

B. If you think the standard of morality came from other humans, then that standard is subjective and the people involved can claim they committed no crime because their standard of morality allows them to treat children in such a way.

In other words, you could not attack or stop Hitler because he was a power and he had hisown standard ofmorality that was not subject to yours.

See point above.

C. If there is a higher standard of morality that is greater than any humans which grants moral authority to act, then you would have to dispense and discard your argument that God does not exist for morality and its demands for certain behavior provide the evidence that He exists.

You cannot have it both ways. Either there is a higher moral standard and God exists or there is not and no one has the right to demand moral action from others for their standards are different than other people's and not superior to them.

Religion does not have a monopoly on morality, no matter how hard you try to claim it. You are arguing in philosphy and beliefs yet you cannot provide one shred of evidence to back up your claims.

Please prove, definitively, that religion has a monopoly on morality. That means evidence my friend. Not your ramblings or interpretations of an ancient book, but clear evidence of your claims. (FYI - I expect ramblings and ancient books)

#2 To demand action from others is implying that you believe that each and every person is trained to recognize the difference between crime and accidental behavior. One cannot assume that accrime took place but must firstinvestigate honestly to get to the truth then take the appropriate action. HEARSAY is NOT EVIDENCE. {Ask minimalist about the Arizona's official who uses hearsay)

Not everyone is trained to tellthe differenced and assumption, interpretation, leaps to conclusions are not evidence that a crime took place.

I don't need training to spot child abuse, especially when the child comes out and just says at. If Cardinal Brady needs training... Oh dear. He really is devoid of intellect.

Maybe that's it, maybe it's an intellectual problem and not a moral one? Cardinal Brady is just dense.

#3. Keyboard courage. Filing a false police report is a crime; falsely accusing someone opens you up to a lawsuit; think because if you do it wrong you are the one in trouble.

Wrong. It is a crime if the report is filed with the intent to maliciously harm another without good reason.

#4. There probably is NO CHURCH denomination guideline BUT there is a scriptural one. That excuse tells you that they are not following God but their own ideas and gives evidence that they are not of God.

The church have failed to act in this matter and are as much to blame as Cardinal Brady. How many other abuses have been uncovered in recent years? I recall a story about castration in the not too distant past, I believe that was the Catholic church too.

#5. No. In today's world, everyone is looking to criminalize each other and that is the wrong way to go. You do not have justice on th emind but a 'gewt the religioous people' mentality and that leads to kangaroo courst, vigilantism and innocent people getting hurt. Think before you act.

Wrong. You are making assumptions about people you don't actually know.

Oh and innocent people did get hurt, they were the children.

Nobody is blaming Cardinal Brady for the crime, the crime committed was by another. Cardinal Brady failed to act in the best interests of the children who were abuse and prevented justice being done.

Feel free to quote everything above word for word, dissect it as you will. Though I don't know why you bother, I have no right to assign morality to events because I don't believe in God.