'i just have little regard for your opinions'

...yet you continue to ask for my opinion, that's another contradiction. If you're serious, then don't ask for it...

Every thing you don't want to answer is labelled, 'irrelevant', so ditto to you...

Every one of your posts is irrelevant to the thread's issues...it's really a pointless exercise reading them.

Good Luck with finding peace with your 'choices'.

Ditto to your 'friend' o2, who's 'totally in control'...lol. How interesting but irrelevant to the topic...and I'm really not interested in your delusions of grandeur either...

Good Luck with that issue too...

I notice you're very touchy about journalists...and didn't answer if you're the writer of the article...interesting he only sees one issue and that's a story, too bad for the victims who didn't want the issue raised again so they could get on with their lives...typically, all that comes a poor second to too much of the grubby side of journalism under the guise of 'information'. There are a lot less journos than clergy of all religions too...I wonder what the ratio of paedophiles amongst journos is these days...

You protest too much your innocence...'I'm not anti-Catholic'. ROFL Not much and you're not a bigot either, ROFL, God is watching you too.

I'm pleased you acknowledge that he is watching me and that's ok by me...

You make some weird statements amongst that last garbled lot o2, what do you suggest the Church does with 'sinners'? Should they be hanged or fed to the lions? You really are painting yourself into a corner now...

As I'm not a victim of sexual abuse, I don't have any info for the police and don't make it up to give the police or the public a 'good' story either. As I stated, unless the Church had first hand info, they would be presenting 'here-say evidence', not info. Inadmissable in a court of law.

If you researched your stories and your posts past a few mis-interpreted quotes, you'd know that.

If the bible holds such interest for you, you should try to live it...post resurection!

meg1, of course you were never obliged to answer any of my questions. yes, you might have declined a week ago, saving you the trouble of writing a dozen or so strident and obfuscatory and misdirecting and presumptuous posts. but, each to their own.

but of course, by pretending so long, and failing so dismally, to reply to my one simple question, you have made everything crystal clear. the fact of the matter is, you have absolutely no reason to regard homosexuality as immoral. it is indeed thoughtless bigotry on your part.

you have a fine example to follow in jesus. it is a shame you don't follow him a little more, and your priests a little less.

How amusing bushbasher, even though contradictory, you insist that I, 'have a fine example to follow in jesus (Jesus). It is a shame you don't follow him a little more and your priests a little less.'

This thread was written about the St Mary's push to follow Fr Kennedy … which you have supported … how hypocritical of you! You tell me I should follow Jesus more and priests less and in the same breath argue that Fr Kennedy should 'pied piper' us all to your homosexual nirvana where all things are ok and acceptable. 'No rules' heaven...well, that is unless you all decide you want some rules...

Talk about 'thoughtless bigotry', you take the cake...

Threads are there to post your comments, you seem to think others have an obligation to bare their souls to you, yet you prickle right up when asked to spill on yourself...there's a clue, I'm not threatened by you, nor do I intend pandering to your bullying and bigotry. I answer relevant and reasonable questions, not bigoted harassment...you qualify for the latter every time.

Well, we do seem to have slipped off the original issue somewhat. (Author here) So may I please raise a specific question?
If we believe all Scripture is inspired and useful for teaching and correcting - and that this refers to the Old Testament - then how do we understand, learn from and obey the following:
Adherents of other faiths must be killed by stoning. Deut 17:5
Stubborn children must be killed by stoning. Deut 21:21
A girl raped by a stranger must marry the rapist and never be divorced. Deut 22:29
A couple who have sex during the woman’s period must be excommunicated. Lev. 20:18
This question – how we understand these commandments today – is a serious one to which there are acceptable answers. Plural. Dealing with this provides a basis for other questions, which may be valuable to pursue later.
I am genuinely interested in your responses. Meg1? Opinionated2? Bushbasher? Others?

meg, you're a treasure.

alan, i apologize for contributing to the derailment of your thread. i just have little tolerance for bigots, especially ones with god on their side.

i'll answer your question from my point of view, but i don't think it's the point of view you're seeking.

>> If we believe all Scripture is inspired and useful for teaching and correcting ...

well, i simply don't believe this. moreover, i am astonished that any thoughtful, rational person would believe this. isn't it obvious that the books of the bible are a human product, and are products of their times? isn't it obvious that certain aspects of the bible are "inspired" by fear and anger and vengeance?

if you want to take it as an axiom (or pretend to have proved) that all scripture has some godly inspiration, then i don't know how you escape the conclusion that your god is more than a little bit schizo.

but, in fact i don't believe you (alan) believe that all scripture is thus inspired. look at the nasty passages you chose for questioning. how did you choose those passages? you chose them exactly because they are morally repugnant. that is, it seems to me that you are yourself judging biblical passages by an externally derived morality.

and thank god you do (so to speak). alan, to say this is not to pick on you, it is to praise you. the alternative is to take barbaric biblical nonsense on faith. it is thus to encourage a tedious and distasteful bigotry, the likes of which the catholic and anglican churches still refuse to shake.

Thanks bushbasher, others agree I'm a treasure too... :)

I believe God's on everybody's side, it's nice you acknowledge He's on mine too. : )

Alan A, RE: your comment on the Old Testament being 'inspired and useful for teaching and correcting' and the quoted Old Testament verses as being 'commandments' presumably fromGod for us to obey...

I have never heard the Catholic Church teach that the Old Testament was to be regarded as inspired and used as a literal interpretation or for teaching as doctrine/instruction on how to live&behave...if that's so then...

Leviticus 19:19 instructs that you shouldn't wear garments woven with two different threads...if you believe in a literal and binding translation of the Old Testament, that cuts out cotton or wool blends...hardly Church teaching...and certainly not adhered to, or preached by, the Catholic Church.

The books of the New Testament, however, ARE regarded as inspired writings...

Other religions may place more or less emphasis on taking instruction from the Bible (both New and Old Testament) than the Catholic Church , as the primary source of instruction in some cases. (although bible readings and studies feature in daily/weekly Masses, Liturgies and bible study groups, etc. and Catholics are encouraged to read their bibles on the understanding that Jesus came on earth and gave his followers contrary instructions to what they had done for generations, i.e., the Old Testament 'laws' they were following. You will find New Testaments being used in Catholic Schools to instruct students...not Leviticus or Deuteronomy, with instructions to stone or enslave anyone...please don't blurr the truth and confuse or encourage people to deamonise the Catholic or other Christian Churches any more than some on these threads already do.
(Cont...)