Guest thaiworthy Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 As reported late in February by Fountainhall in the "Pope Resigns" thread, the following story appeared yesterday: In a statement issued by the Catholic church in Scotland, Cardinal Keith O’Brien has addressed allegations made against him by five priests within the church, and admitted that his “sexual conduct” has been “below the standards expected” of him. Earlier this week, it emerged that a fifth claim of “inappropriate behaviour” towards a male priest had been made against Cardinal Keith O’Brien. The 74-year-old, former head of the Catholic church in Scotland, who contested the first set of allegations last weekend, resigned as leader of the Scottish Catholic Church on Monday. In the statement, released on Sunday, the Cardinal apologised, and asked for forgiveness, as well as admitting that, despite previously contesting the allegations, some were true. It read: “In recent days certain allegations which have been made against me have become public. Initially, their anonymous and non-specific nature led me to contest them. http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2013/03/03/cardinal-keith-obrien-admits-inappropriate-sexual-conduct-following-allegations/ Oh yeah, you're forgiven, you fucking, lunatic hypocrite! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TotallyOz Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 These problems will persist until the church allows priests to have sex. Sex is natural and healthy and the lack of it will always cause issues and mental instability. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kokopelli Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 He may be a hypocrite but why a lunatic? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thaiworthy Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 He may be a hypocrite but why a lunatic? Did you not read Michael's post above? Mental instability is lunacy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TotallyOz Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 Did you not read Michael's post above? Mental instability is lunacy.I firmly believe that the lack of sex in anyone's life leads to many mental issues. I think there would be less violence against women and children as well as other forms of violence if we lived in a society that has a positive attitude towards sexuality as opposed to one that has been created by the religious order to label it a sin. When I was in NYC, my best friend for many years was an Nark agent for the NYPD. He said that the number one person hiring transsexual prostitutes in meat packing district was Hasidic Jews. I have heard many times from many people that the more you suppress sexuality, the farther one goes in the opposite direction. Sex is healthy. Masturbation is healthy. Hiring a prostitute is healthy. Of course, I am biased as I like all 3 of the above. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kokopelli Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 It does seem then that the cardinal should have hired a prostitute in which case he would only be a hypocrite and not a lunatic. . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 It makes my day when the holier-than-thou-hypocrites get caught with pants down. He's a confessed liar and, apparently, a sexual predator. What a worthless excuse for a leader of any organization. [Michael: What's a Nark? You mean a "narc" as in narcotics agent?] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TotallyOz Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 [Michael: What's a Nark? You mean a "narc" as in narcotics agent?]hehe Yep, he worked in Narcotics and Vice. He was my study group partner in law school in NY and he always had great stories for us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 If one looked around the courtrooms in my area and looked for the creepiest and skuzziest person, it was about a 99% sure bet he was a narc...hehe. They sure as hell played the part well. (On the other hand, too often I heard a defendant confess to some drug offense and then acknowledge he had far more drugs on him than was ever turned in as evidence. Sorta magically disappeared.....) TotallyOz 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kokopelli Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 Since no one really knows the extent of the cardinal's indiscretions I am not sure he could be referred to as a sexual predator and perhaps not even as a sex offender or even anything criminal. Depending on what he did or did not do maybe sexual harassment might be the case? Apparently he was "hitting on" priests and novices but to what extent? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest scottishguy Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 To the extent that they complained - and that there is a clear pattern - as we are now have 4 (possibly 5) different complainants all alleging the same inappropriate behaviour by the Cardinal over a period of decades! He has now admitted the behaviour and taking that into account with the pattern of behaviour over many years, and bearing in mind that the people he "preyed" on were his direct inferiors, it's justified to deem him a sexual predator. But not to worry - the Catholic Church have appointed the perfect replacement - the recently installed Archbishop of Glasgow has taken temporary charge of Cardinal O'Brien's bishopric http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/pope-names-archbishop-glasgow-philip-1733687 This is the same man - Philip Tartaglia - who recently blackened the name of a deceased gay MP/shadow Govt. Minister who died at the age of 44 from Acute Pancreatitis. The insinuation from this Archbishop was that the unfortunate victim died because he was a "practising homosexual" and as such his physical and mental health was in danger! There is added irony in that the deceased politician was an ex-roman catholic priest! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-18996913But it gets worse - in an effort to calm the ensuing furore, the Catholic church then put a spokesman up on live TV - who then proceeded to dig the Church into an even bigger hole by declaring that "Gay behaviour leads to early death...and gay people will die 10-20 yrs early":http://news.stv.tv/scotland/112513-gay-behaviour-leads-to-early-death-catholic-church-spokesman-claims/Uproar ensued with this story leading the national news for 2 or 3 nights running - eventually the Archbishop apologised "if anybody took offence" (in other words not an apology at all - he is maintaining the slur and is only apologising that some people took offence). The deceased politician's partner isn't letting this lie and has demanded a public apology and the Archbishop's resignation. In response the Archbishop has offered to meet the deceased politician's partner "in private" after slandering the MP in public.http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/2012/07/26/partner-of-tragic-mp-blasts-coward-archbishop-for-not-meeting-him-in-public-86908-23913170/ Now, coming right back up to date - the latest is that the Stonewall gay rights group (who in 2012 awarded Cardinal O'Brien the title of 'Bigot of the Year'), has demanded that he issue an apology to all the gay people he offended by his inflammatory language over the years whilst he was secretly diddling other Priests. "Following the cleric's latest statement, the director of Stonewall Scotland, Colin Macfarlane, said: "What we would like to see is the cardinal apologise for some of the often cruel and sometimes vicious language which he has used, and we are saddened that he has not been able to do that in his statement. "But we also actually think it is quite sad that in this day and age somebody feels they have to lie about their sexuality to themselves and to other people as well." So, it is all bubbling away nicely for the Catholic Church in Scotland - and (as far as I'm concerned) long may their discomfort continue! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jomtien Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 If one looked around the courtrooms in my area and looked for the creepiest and skuzziest person, it was about a 99% sure bet he was a narc...hehe.Nah.....I'm betting it was the lawyer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fountainhall Posted March 5, 2013 Share Posted March 5, 2013 The item from STV News deserves a fuller airing, in my view, because the tactics used in the interview by the director of the Scottish Catholic Media Office, Peter Kearney, not only give an object lesson on how to divert an interview away from its main subject (in this case comments by the incoming Bishop Tartaglia), it betrays the latent homophobia at the heart of his religion. "There has been . . . a conspiracy of silence around the vast array of medical evidence that exists to suggest that same-sex behaviour is hazardous, is harmful, and is dangerous. "The wider question really is, as a society, why don't we debate that; why don't we have that discussion? Why don't we look at it in the same way, for example, that we've been happy to look at how smoking, how alcohol, how overeating, how drug addiction can cause harms to people's health?" Mr Kearney went on to insist that medical studies had shown that homosexual conduct shortened life expectancy by up to 20 years. "There is a link between same-sex sexual practice and early death. That's not something that the Catholic Church believes; there is an overwhelming body of medical evidence to suggest that. One study has shown that the life expectancy of a practising homosexual man will be reduced by something between 12 and 20 years. As usual when interviewees do not answer questions put to them and instead twist the ‘spin’ to the question they’d prefer to answer, the director seems to gets away with his nonsense about being gay cutting your life by between 12 and 20 years! Where on earth did he pick that up? And where is the “overwhelming body of medical evidence.” Unfortunately, it seems the interviewer let him get away with it. Good on the representative from the Equality Network who said - ". . . the Catholic Church should stop peddling this nonsense." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted March 5, 2013 Share Posted March 5, 2013 Nah.....I'm betting it was the lawyer. Lol. Yea, on rare occasions, I guess it probably was! Koko, you're right that I probably should have referred to sexual harrassment rather than sexual predation. I probably wasn't being too fair with the cardinal and perhaps unfairly imagining that an ugly postcript will hit the news soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thaiworthy Posted March 5, 2013 Share Posted March 5, 2013 It does seem then that the cardinal should have hired a prostitute in which case he would only be a hypocrite and not a lunatic. . I don't know about that. I hire prostitutes all the time and I am still crazy. But that's me. Koko, you're right that I probably should have referred to sexual harrassment rather than sexual predation. I probably wasn't being too fair with the cardinal and perhaps unfairly imagining that an ugly postcript will hit the news soon. How is inappropriate sexual conduct the same as sexual harassment? He has now effectively admitted he breached the church's strict rules on celibacy and its bar on homosexuality since he became a priest – and during his 10 years as a cardinal. It was alleged that some of these incidents were "drunken fumblings". One case reported by the Observer involved repeated sexual contact. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/04/cardinal-keith-obrien-vatican-inquiry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted March 5, 2013 Share Posted March 5, 2013 How is inappropriate sexual conduct the same as sexual harassment? I'm guessing the "inappropriate" word was used by the cardinal given that cardinals are not supposed to be having sexual contact with anybody under any circumstances, i.e., he violated church rules (although he might have meant immoral conduct, I'm not sure). As concerns the "harrassment" level, it involves the fact this guy was the boss or superior of the subjects involved. For example only, according to the newspaper articles, the earliest (known) complaint allegedly occurred in 1980 and involved a 20-year-old seminarian and the cardinal (the cardinal was his "spiritual director" at the time). You can read more about the alleged incidents and particularly telling comments from the 20-year-old here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/feb/23/cardinal-keith-o-brien-accused-inappropriate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fountainhall Posted March 5, 2013 Share Posted March 5, 2013 Into this quagmire has now stepped the former Archbishop of Westminster, Cardinal Cormac Murphy O’Connor, a churchman who by all accounts is highly respected. Perhaps that is about to change. In a BBC interview, he has insisted that - “issues such as O'Brien's behaviour and the abuse of children by other Catholic clergy was due to the weakness of individuals rather than any structural or institutional failings by the church” This surely has to be one of the more astonishing statements to have come out of this sordid affair! Can he really have said that? And does he really mean it? Speaking from Rome where he is involved in the discussions over a pope to replace Benedict, although at eighty he is too old to vote, O'Connor said the church did not need a reformer as its new head, rather "a spiritual man" and "a man of governance". Cases such as that of O'Brien or priests who abused children did not diminish the overall authority of the church, he argued: "It doesn't come from them. It comes from the Lord."…Following the exposure of widescale child abuse and its subsequent cover-up, he said: "The leadership of the church has been on a learning curve" and measures were in place to protect victims. Even cases such as that of O'Brien did not justify structural reforms, O'Connor said. "Always there is reform. But I prefer the word good governance than reform." Did I really read that correctly? “The Church is on a learning curve?” Does this man seriously believe that, after two millennia, the Church has only just awoken to the fact – o misery me! – that priests, bishops, cardinals, even Popes have enjoyed sex in all its manifold varieties? Did the Cardinal never till now consider that many of its berobed flock through the ages had been having sex in almost every form imaginable, and that this was not merely against Church doctrine, it was often against the law of the land?Perhaps it is time for the Cardinal to go back to school, methinks!And then there is this: “Measures were in place to protect victims!” The victims? What about measures being in place to punish that those who commit such “misdemeanours” and scar youngsters virtually for life? What about identifying them and ensuring they face the criminal courts around the world? Or will banishment to another parish, a few Hail Mary’s and a vow never to be a naughty boy again still be the Church’s answer to the perpetrators?Thank goodness Cardinal O’Conner is too old to vote. Alas, he is in Rome having lengthy discussions with those who are able to vote, no doubt putting forward his mantra for good governance rather than reform.http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/04/cardinal-keith-obrien-vatican-inquiry?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thaiworthy Posted March 5, 2013 Share Posted March 5, 2013 More like Bloody Marys than Hail Marys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest scottishguy Posted March 5, 2013 Share Posted March 5, 2013 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fountainhall Posted March 5, 2013 Share Posted March 5, 2013 Classic Dave Allen! I can see this is going to turn into one of those threads!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thaiworthy Posted March 6, 2013 Share Posted March 6, 2013 These problems will persist until the church allows priests to have sex. Sex is natural and healthy and the lack of it will always cause issues and mental instability. The Cardinal O'Brien Eye Test: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest scottishguy Posted March 6, 2013 Share Posted March 6, 2013 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thaiworthy Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogie Posted March 15, 2013 Share Posted March 15, 2013 Celibacy! Not something many readers of this forum are likely to be contemplating, but interesting nevertheless. Why do some people do it? Following revelations about the sexual indiscretions of Cardinal Keith O'Brien, some questioned how feasible it is to live a celibate life. Many people wrote in to share their own stories and experiences of celibacy, abstinence and otherwise living without sex. Here's one man's response: I am English and have been a Buddhist monk (bhikkhu) for 22 years, and celibate for a lot longer. I was earlier married for many years. I am not impotent, and enjoyed a relationship. Celibacy is not for everyone, but this can also be said for any life style. However I have found the solitary celibate life, when embraced fully, offers a whole different relationship toward oneself and others. I like the play on the word - "alone-ness" and "a-oneness". This has to be seen through experience from the inside. It is very easy for celibacy to be criticised from the outside looking in. In truth if I could choose my life again I would choose to be celibate from youth. Vimalo (Bhikkhu), Kanduboda ,Sri Lanka Many other men and women's stories on this link: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21739640 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest scottishguy Posted March 15, 2013 Share Posted March 15, 2013 Fresh allegations have today come to light which serve only to further reveal the extent of this outwardly-homophobic man's utter hypocrisy: "Cardinal Keith O'Brien is facing legal action stemming from new allegations of sexual misconduct, with a former trainee priest claiming he was abused by the disgraced cleric as a teenager...." http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/new-scots-abuse-victim-to-sue-cardinal-obrien.20506070 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
