The Catholic Church And Magdalen Laundries

[Randy Carson]

RANDY PROVED RIGHT AGAIN

The ink was hardly dry on my post here, when Nope proves my point about anti-Christians employing scatter shot tactics.

Just as the arguments concerning the "pedophile priest" issue were being mopped up, Nope starts drilling another hole with this thread.

See how "Whack-A-Mole" is played?



But hey, why let truth spoil the game?

[abaris]

But hey, why let truth spoil the game?

The truth, eh?

Why don't you inform yourself about Magdalen Laundries before speaking about the truth? And by inform I don't mean using the Catholic league or atheists for that matter, but serious news sources such as the BBC.

And while you're at it, it would be just taking another step to have a look how orphanages were run in general in Ireland at the time in question. How this, not against their will really worked, given the realities of the 50ies, 60ies and 70ies. What was sufficient reason to take away a child from it's natural parents would also be a good question.

When you've got all these informations, you can talk again about the truth. But I get it, you're a one source person. And if that's questioned, you're pulling the copping out manouevre, since the reality of the matter is, outside of catholic dogma and apologetics you know next to nothing.

[FatAndFaithless]

(Or hell...just read the summaries of the McAleese report)

[jesus_wept]

Don't worry about it.  I'm sure fucking jesus told them it was fine.

And if not, they'll be forgiven by Jesus so it's a win win situation for them.

[Nope]

I'm quoting others in direct response to the hate-filled lies being spread by Nope.

Beyond what Brendon O'Neill and the physicians who investigated this have said, what more do I need to add?

You don't need to add to it. You can summarize or paraphrase it. But quoting huge chunks of text, especially when you've already provided the link and not including anything from yourself is way annoying. It disturbs the flow of the conversation, and it's not how discussion works. So please don't do that

This is from Brendon O'Neill's wikipage. Apparently he used to be very to the left and now he has switched to the far right.

Broadly libertarian,[citation needed] he considers efforts to combat racism in football to be "a class war" driven by "elites' utter incomprehension of the mass passions that get aired at football matches".[4] Referring to high-profile cases of racial abuse and alleged racial abuse, he argued, "these incidents and alleged incidents are not racism at all, in the true meaning of the word", due to the levels of passion involved, describing anti-racism efforts as "a pretty poisonous desire to police the ... working classes".[4]

O'Neill has described himself as "an atheistic libertarian". He is opposed to the legalization of same-sex marriage in Australia, arguing that it has been "attended by authoritarianism wherever it’s been introduced"[5] and has criticised opposition to Pope Benedict XVI's visit to the United Kingdom as intolerant and fearmongering.[6]

[12]

I have no idea why his atheism would impress when I apparently don't agree with any other stance he takes.

[Jenny A]

RANDY PROVED RIGHT AGAIN

The ink was hardly dry on my post here, when Nope proves my point about anti-Christians employing scatter shot tactics.

Just as the arguments concerning the "pedophile priest" issue were being mopped up, Nope starts drilling another hole with this thread.

See how "Whack-A-Mole" is played?

---

---

But hey, why let truth spoil the game?

Perhaps the problem is an over population of moles?  Seriously, finding church scandal is as easy as finding sports scandal, except it's been going on longer and with far, far, greater consequences.  

However, this thread was not addressed to you in particular.  If you feel obliged to defend the church, or god, or Catholicism, from all attack on an atheist forum, you are by the very nature of where you are going to feel overwhelmed.

If you do want to make a point though, I suggest that RANDY PROVED RIGHT AGAIN in full caps, like most declarations of victory over people who still strongly disagree with you, is not going to convince anyone.  It reminds me of a piece of advice to a young attorney:

If the law is on your side hammer of the law.  If the facts are on your side hammer of the facts.  If neither the facts nor the law are on your side, hammer on the table. 

I think of late you have been reduced to hammering on the table.

[Nope]

This is the first time that I have ever been accused of being anti Christian. LOL

Apparently I am very naive because I did not expect anyone to defend the laundries.


http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-29307705

Some of the women's stories:

They changed my name to Enda, a man's name. They shaved my head and I had to wear a uniform. So straight away your identity is taken because my name is changed, my hair is cut and I'm not wearing my own clothes," she says.
"And I'm stuck in there and I have to answer to the name Enda, which is a man's name. How do you cope with that at that age?"

and

"

I was in one of the orphanages, which they called industrial schools in those days. I was so hungry that I stole some apples from the orchard. The nuns told me that they had found a 'situation' for me and sent me to the High Park Laundry in Dublin and told me that I had to stay there until I learned not to steal. They kept me there as an unpaid worker for 14 years. You don't even get that for murder these days."
She remembers that the work was so hard and the regime so cruel that she broke a window and ran away in to the town where she asked a priest for help. The priest raped her. The nuns did not believe her when she was picked up by the police and returned to the laundry.
She was put in the windowless punishment cell, a room two metres square. "One of the nuns came down there and she cut my hair to the bone and then I was taken up and I was made to kneel in a room with all the women there, kneel down, kiss the floor and say I was sorry for what I did and promise not to run away again which I didn't promise, of course."

and

Yes, the nuns made money off of slave labor

The Irish Examiner newspaper, which has investigated the finances of the religious orders involved in running the laundries, says they owned assets in 2012 of 1.5bn euros ($1.9bn, £1.2bn)

[25point81]

The Irish Examiner newspaper, which has investigated the finances of the religious orders involved in running the laundries, says they owned assets in 2012 of 1.5bn euros ($1.9bn, £1.2bn)

But the babble says that it's easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man or (nun) to enter the kingdom of heaven.  Does this mean that the nuns can't go to heaven because they are fat cat rich?

[Nope]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uuEw1--wMKI

An interesting documentary about the laundries that includes eye witness accounts. It is only about 14 minutes long

[Crossless2.0]

I'm thinking of starting a draconian laundry (tax-free, of course) for the betterment of immoral whores who are a blight on society. Bill Donohue can be the first 'volunteer'. I promise not to beat him too hard.