Case (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
case) wrote in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
fandomsecrets2012-11-15 05:19 pm
case) wrote in fandomsecrets2012-11-15 05:19 pm
[ SECRET POST #2144 ]
⌈ Secret Post #2144 ⌋
Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.
01.
__________________________________________________
02.
__________________________________________________
03.
__________________________________________________
04.
__________________________________________________
05.
__________________________________________________
06.
__________________________________________________
07.
__________________________________________________
08.
__________________________________________________
09.
__________________________________________________
10.
__________________________________________________
11.
__________________________________________________
12.
__________________________________________________
13.
__________________________________________________
14.
__________________________________________________
15.
__________________________________________________
16.
__________________________________________________
17.
__________________________________________________
18.
__________________________________________________
19.
__________________________________________________
20.
__________________________________________________
Notes:
Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 023 secrets from Secret Submission Post #306.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.
no subject
You're constantly harping on how I can't judge Catholics if I'm not a Catholic. Literal judges judge people who are things that the judge is not ALL THE TIME. It's a dumb argument that you keep going to.
Bottom line, no crushing wall of text necessary: You're granting moral authority to to the authorities in the Catholic church BY BEING A CATHOLIC.
You're forgiving and supporting enablers of child abuse in the leadership, all the way up to the Pope himself BY BEING A CATHOLIC.
You have a responsibility to NOT DO THAT. Whether the option is easy, or whether it's the hardest thing you've ever had to do. Whether you succeed, or whether you fail. You have to do it. If you don't, all you get in the end is your precious relationship with something that's a complete sham. What good is that, really? And I will not be ashamed of "acting like a child" when I know that I am right, and you are wrong. Giving credibility to something that is guilty of what the Catholic church is guilty of, and not even trying to make it be accountable, is utterly abominable. And if you understand that; it doesn't matter you ramble, or someone thinks you're incoherent and using flawed analogies, and you have naive expectations. YOU ARE RIGHT. There's no argument here. When the subject is THE RAPE OF CHILDREN AND WHETHER THE PEOPLE WHO ALLOWED IT GET AWAY WITH THAT SCOTT FREE, then there is RIGHT. And there is WRONG.
no subject
(Anonymous) 2012-11-20 08:19 pm (UTC)(link)Show me one instance where I have said this. You are free to judge whomever you choose. Just don’t be surprised when other Catholics laugh in your face after finding out your judgments are based on the fact that we won’t collectively throw a hissy fit and stomp out of the church.
And now we finally get to the crux of the matter. Your “logic” in this argument basically boils down to “if you are a Catholic then you support child molesters.” A deeply disturbing yet charmingly hilarious notion. Since you have ardently ignored 90% of what I said in my last two posts in favor of reiterating the same garbage, I will not waste any more of my time. It is clear that you never had any intention of participating in an actual discussion, which begs the question of why you even bothered to make your initial query in the first place. And you absolutely should feel ashamed not only for acting in a childish manner, but for unabashedly flaunting your ignorance and acting like you know how the Church works more than Catholics.
You refused to counter this point (surprise, surprise) the last two times it was brought up, but perhaps now it can finally pierce through that haze of hatred and ignorance: who do you think brought it to light that children were being abused? Non-Cathoilics? No parent wants to see their child molested. No sane person should want to see ANY child molested, especially by someone who is supposed to represent all things good. I absolutely have no idea why you think parishioners are A-OK if there’s a known enabler in the ranks. If they know for a fact that someone is abusing children then they let it be known. Hence why you see all these cases in the news.
I already explained, at length, as to why the joke you call a solution is not practical or realistic. Since you have made zero effort to counter any of the points I made, I assume you realize the inherent stupidity of such a plan, but do not want to admit it so as not to appear in the wrong.
One thing we do agree on is that child abuse enablers have no place in the church. You, however, seem to be under the impression that if all the Catholics rally together the Vatican will topple and there will be rainbows and unicorns for everyone, whereas I take a more practical approach. But hey, whatever helps you sleep at night.
no subject
Okay.
"unabashedly flaunting your ignorance and acting like you know how the Church works more than Catholics."
There. Right in this reply. Okay, you didn't say I "can't", but I mean that colloquially for "can't legitimately". You must be one of those kind of people who say "ahem, you mean 'may I?' not 'can I?'."
And I never said if you're a Catholic you support child molesters. Or if I ever did, then it was a slip. I tried to always say "child abuse ENABLERS", and looking back I can confirm I was pretty diligent about that. And to your point that it was Catholics who turned in child abusers, anyone who is familiar with this scandal (and with the fact that I say "enablers"), the nature of the scandal is not merely that children were abused, it's that when they were a great many of the abusers were not turned into the police when Catholics turned them in to the clergy... they were protected and relocated, where they continued to abuse more children. This is why the congregation has to turn against the leadership.
I think Catholics "throwing a tantrum" about this is the only appropriate reaction. Do you know what this abuse did to people? Do you see the way that you try to shame me the way you would a child? Saying I'm acting like a child, and that my solution is throwing a tantrum? Nice job of using the same psychology tactics on me that child abusers use on their victims. And downplaying the seriousness of making each and every person that did or enabled such things accountable. "It wouldn't be practical or realistic to raise a stink about a thing such as this. Just get over it."
I do care whether I am or am seen as hateful, but if you think it's hateful to expect people not to associate with institutional enabling of child abuse... HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! and also FUCK YOU.
I refuse to engage with you on most of your points because they are BESIDE the point. I couldn't possibly care less if I am or if you think I am laughable, throwing a hissy fit, childish, ignorant, naive, impractical, unrealistic, stupid, and have visions of rainbows and unicorns dancing in my head. If even the Catholic church lost even half of it's church-attending membership over this scandal, it absolutely would topple the Vatican. You think anyone's going to put up with the world's Catholic population being halved? COME ON. And what's more, if it didn't result in the Pope being thrown out, you'd be insane to think that you lost anything by shrugging off the Catholic church in the first place. And it's not hateful to say that, because if my conditions were met, I'd fully support the flock returning and my feelings about Catholics would reverse, and my complaints about Catholics would disappear. It's okay to condition such things on NOT ENABLING CHILD ABUSERS OR CHILD ABUSE ENABLERS.
no subject
(Anonymous) 2012-11-21 12:51 am (UTC)(link)The sentence of mine you highlighted was taken AFTER you already made the (false) claim that I said you couldn’t judge Catholics. And still, you admitted that I said nothing about your right to express whatever sentiments you desire, which was my point. And yes, I absolutely believe demonstrating limited knowledge on what you are talking about undermines your legitimacy.
“And I never said if you're a Catholic you support child molesters… I tried to always say "child abuse ENABLERS"
Enablers are just as bad, if not worse. Due to the nature of this scandal (and I am well aware of what plagues my Church, so your summary is not needed nor appreciated) and how hushed it can be, parishioners would not necessarily be aware if there were any cover-ups in their diocese. Keep in mind that those doing the shuffling of criminal priests are the bishops/cardinals/etc., i.e, people the average churchgoer never speaks to. If it is found out, then attention obviously is drawn to it. Do you really think the parents of children would just let people they know were involved walk away?
“I think Catholics "throwing a tantrum" about this is the only appropriate reaction. Do you know what this abuse did to people? Do you see the way that you try to shame me the way you would a child? Saying I'm acting like a child, and that my solution is throwing a tantrum? Nice job of using the same psychology tactics on me that child abusers use on their victims. And downplaying the seriousness of making each and every person that did or enabled such things accountable. "It wouldn't be practical or realistic to raise a stink about a thing such as this. Just get over it."
I do care whether I am or am seen as hateful, but if you think it's hateful to expect people not to associate with institutional enabling of child abuse... HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! and also FUCK YOU.”
And you were doing so well until this paragraph, too.
Once again, the arrogance you display here astounds me. You have the NERVE to ask me, a Catholic, if I knew what the abuse did to people? Amazing. Simply astounding. I’m not sure if there’s officially such a thing as “Protestant (?) privilege” but good Lord, you have it in spades. You think that I’m not paranoid about what could happen to my future children? You think I don’t know about the devastation this corruption has done to families and lives? You think I’ve never seen or interacted with a victim? You are unbelievable. Absolutely and utterly unbelievable.
And better yet, you have the gall to compare me to child abusers. This is incredibly offensive not just for myself, but for all the victims, comparing serious psychological damage to a fucking fandomsecrets comment. Unbelievable. You truly have no idea what the fuck you are talking about if you think the two are in any way, shape, or form comparable. I called your actions childish because that is ABSOLUTELY what they are, and your newest post just reinforces that. I was calling a spade a spade, and nothing you have said since then has made me change my mind. I get that you want the child enablers to get out of the church. That is something every Catholic layperson agrees with. But this...it’s incredible. Truly, it is. I have no idea how old you are, but please say you’re in high school.
“I refuse to engage with you on most of your points because they are BESIDE the point.”
No, they’re not. You don’t understand why Catholics won’t do this, and I provided you with many valid reasons why.
“If even the Catholic church lost even half of it's church-attending membership over this scandal, it absolutely would topple the Vatican. You think anyone's going to put up with the world's Catholic population being halved? COME ON.”
So 500 million is suddenly an insignificant number? Anyway, your claim, unsurprisingly, is flawed. I explained why the chance of your plan actually working in 2012 is incredibly miniscule, but let’s throw logic out the window and assume for a minute that it works. No doubt, there would have to be some compromises. But one thing I guarantee you is that there will still be some form of hierarchy. As with any large organization, there is still plenty of room for corruption. Whose to say that the they are being truthful when they claim all enablers have been dismissed? Whose to say corruption will never again gain hold? And it absolutely will, because you CANNOT have any organization with over a billion people and NOT have some degree of corruption.
“And what's more, if it didn't result in the Pope being thrown out, you'd be insane to think that you lost anything by shrugging off the Catholic church in the first place.”
Says you. I personally wouldn’t have any problems with the Pope being thrown out, but there are PLENTY of Catholic-only practices that can be very important to an individual that they can no longer have by “shrugging it off.”
“if my conditions were met,”
Lol. Like you’re really in any position to be making demands.
“I'd fully support the flock returning and my feelings about Catholics would reverse, and my complaints about Catholics would disappear.”
I’m sure the millions of Catholics worldwide will be eagerly waiting with anticipation and bated breath for your much-coveted approval.
“It's okay to condition such things on NOT ENABLING CHILD ABUSERS OR CHILD ABUSE ENABLERS.”
Well, then it’s a good thing no Catholic layperson wants child abusers/enablers in the clergy!