Mjpb “These demeaning comments are at the least disrespectful”

“Disrespectful” is a subjective assertion which is nothing like “hate”.

I would observe, the opposite of disrespect is “respect”.

“Respect” is something which needs to be earned and should not be assumed as a “right”.

re RCC “I believe that is God’s will.”

Your “Subjective opinion” is not fact.

I believe people are better off for finding God through the pursuit of their lives, without holding fealty to a corrupt organisation.

That is my “subjective opinion” and it holds equal authority with the subjective opinions of each and every Roman Catholic.

“vile inaccurate comments” Oh no – are you denying the abuse of children by paedophile priests?

Are you denying the systematic abasement of children in some Catholic Schools?

I can find too many sexual and social abuse, perpetrated in the name of Catholicism and hidden from public criticism by the catholic hierarchy (and parallel cover-ups by other religious orders too, recalling one Australian GG required to resign)
I am happy to post them again if needed!

Whilst the comments might have been “vile”, it was because they referred to the vilest of acts by priests (who would claim to hypocritically hold the moral high-ground in society) but they were still “accurate”.

So will you please identify where a comment of mine was “inaccurate”

“working in a co-dependent relationship with family and society.”

That is complete bunkum.

“Working” usually with a focus which had a detrimental impact on family relationships and most often for a “goal” which “society” was completely oblivious to.

As for “co-dependency”, which you appear to believe is beneficial,

“Codependency is a progressive disease brought about by child abuse,”

source www.habitsmart.com/cdpnt.htm

that explains how the RCC keeps its flock. Corrupt them into dependency with a diseased set of relationship values.

type co-dependency into google.

The entries are all from different professional mental health organisations

After your last post Meg1 – you need to go read article you can find and then seek serious help.

I have described the disease and you are certainly displaying its symptoms.

Hi all

Bosk (post 8:10:24 AM 27/2/06)

Scepticism of history is an interesting approach. I was a sceptic most of my life - still am on many issues. But a sceptic of accurately documented history? Certainly not all history.

Science itself is very fallible. It also comes in two forms - process or operational science & historical or origins science. Very interesting what one discovers when one does a study of a science such as Carbon Dating. The depleting levels of C14 within deceased former-living organisms gives most life-forms an age of about 10,000-years maximum. In theory, there ought not to be any C14 present beyond about 50,000-years. That makes the whole hypothesis of Evolution very questionable.

So, there's another science, Darwinism, which ought to be challenged - just as results in Medical Science which prove to be controvercial &/or counter-productive ought to be. Research Scientists & Medical Practitioners are no-less necessarily corrupt than any other members of society. They have their biasses, prejudices & pride - not to mention any financial inducements.

The Holy Bible is the most questioned & challenged text in history. The trouble is: the more one tries to disprove its inerrancy the more one comes unstuck. That's of course if one doesn't investigate with a preconceived expectation which is immoveable. I was an Atheist & Humanist. My former-beliefs changed when they were ultimately found wanting.

But a discussion on history isn't what this post is all about. Abortion is the topic. I opposed abortion before my Christianity. It is murder of an early developed & developing human. It is sad that abortion has its advocates.
(27/2/06)

Brownie (post (1) 11:12:27 PM 15/2 (2) 5:57:15 AM 22/2 (3) 4:05:19 PM 27/2/06)

15/2/06:
Catholicism has much to answer for from its activities during the Middle Ages - & since. But that doesn't mean that all Catholics are demons & that many facets of Roman Catholicism aren't desirable.

I am not Catholic.

22/2/06:
Women & abortions: some women whom I know have had up to 7. ...

....(t.b.c)

Cheers all

Hi all

Brownie (cont)

... Whether (psychologically) sought or not might be questionable. Promiscuity & self-indulgence - at the taxpayers' expense - might be one legitimate observation. Irresponsible? An understatement.

Regards Catholic energies into re-education: Catholicism is one of the few organisations, outside the Family Planning Association, to be doing so. The R/Cs are ultra-conservative in their teaching - & that isn't always bad. You might refer to Family Life International (Aust).

I agree that men need to be much more responsible. Marriage also ought to be a life-long contract - not a partial commitment with built-in obsolescence.

Shane WARNE is a selfish, self-indulgent, uncaring dimwit. Tragically, he is also very good at cricket - from which he is conjecturally over-paid. He is undoubtedly a poor role-model to his children & to society generally. Quite likely he will have dysfunctional children. Catholic? Not to my knowledge. He's not even Christian if my sources are correct.

27/2/06:
Your comment: "I bet your hubby is screwing his secretary."
A pretty disgusting insinuation & very uncalled for. I hope that you apologise to Meg 1.
(27/2/06)

Col Rouge (post 5:57:41 PM 27/2/06)

Comments from/to Te:
I personally don't mind if someone makes comment to me about the way I rear my children. I figure that I don't know everything, & if someone is more skilled than I & has commentary then that's fine. I can simply accept, reject &/or ignore the comments. But it is wise to listen.

It probably is a compliment that Te cares enough about other people to bother making suggestion. I would certainly hope that my 20-year old daughter's boyfriend respects & thinks sufficiently of her to ask me if he could marry her. Old fashioned? Maybe. Respectful? Most certainly - to my daughter & her/our family values. It probably indicates a commitment & a sense of responsibility on the boy's part too.

Comments to Meg1/about Catholicism:
I am a critic of Catholicism when it is due. ...

...(t.b.c.)

Cheers all

RE: Yabby, you have mentioned only the forms of contraception that involve money-making by your corporate mates.

The same mates that are responsible for much of the world's poverty and inequity while they pay themselves tens of millions and more annually...there's your problem. Solve the problems of inequity and you'll solve your chimp-eating problem.

NATURAL family planning is just that, NATURAL and cost-free. In fact it is liberating for both the woman and man as they both share responsibility and are then aware of 'safe' days or days more likely to result in conception. It is a benefit to any marriage and will solve your dilemma of women carrying all the responsibility with present artificial contraceptives.

For any true environmentalist, surely a proven NATURAL method would be preferable to the costly artifical methods you espouse?

Col, your verbal diatribe again resists any urge to provide useful or factual dialogue, so I will allow you to wallow in your own pit of hostility and hope someone can draw you back into the real world one day to offer positive commentary and factual content. :)

Littleagreeablebuddy raises a statement by Brownie (and some other relevant points on this thread). Suffice to say that while Brownie's spurious comment indicates he/she may lack the capacity/desire for factual content, I am, in fact, my husband's secretary :), so I would ask him/her to stop peeping through our bedroom window and get his kicks elsewhere. :(

Well said Meg1 - to choose to abstain from enjoying the marriage act is perfectly legitimate - one chooses it when someone is ill, not 'in the mood' and occasionally if it is ovulation time.

Col - you sound like a rather angry bitter man - I feel sad for you that phrasing your opinion respectfully just doesn't appear to be within your grasp.

Funnily enough, most pro-aborts scream from the rooftops that "Abortion isn't a men's issues" when the "men" are pro-life. But the silence is deafening when the 'man' is pro-abort.

Each does have a right to their own opinion - however that opinion needs to be formed on fact and intelligent consideration and the more I read on this forum, the less it appears to be based on this.

It now appears to be "Kick the Catholics" instead of 'Semantics of Abortion' - get back on track.

WHERE ARE THE MODERATORS ON THIS FORUM?

Oh Lordy, Meg1 promotes natural family planning. The rhythm method.

How many women on this forum have 28 day cycles and bleed for 4 days? A friend of mine had a period about every 10 months, we were all jealous. What about the anaemic sucker on a 14 day cycle with 9 days bleeding.

How many women out there have a regular cycle?

Yeah so what happens if your body decides to flip from 28 days to 35 days cycles and you get pregnant. Raise the tyke?

Poor Meg1 has never experienced the full throws of passion when your brain goes into reverse and you commit acts of total folly, lustfully and joyfully.