Religion Pell Guilty!

[Scallop Industry Thug]

Anyone that tries to turn this into an issue about homosexuality, and not institutionalised abuse of power, is a ****ing dog.

 

[Pie eyed]

I find it strange that there has been absolutely no mention during the RC of the Liberal parties major donor cult "the Exclusive Bretheren"

This cult kept Howard inpower more than once, donated to the libs and sexually abused children within the cult.


Why not a single mention???

Why Isn't Bruce Hales in the stand?

 

[Pie eyed]

Seriously. Have read it.

What has pedophilia got to do with homosexuality? its zero by the way.

It's because the sack of shits are protected protected in the church. They are supposedly safe there.

The excuses of loneliness and other stuff is just garbage and looking for reasons.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

There are ....despite your concerns...reasons why men and women in positions of power force their will on the vulnerable such as children.

Identifying and understanding these reasons is the only sensible way to try and prevent these atrocities from happening.

Should we just throw our hands int he air?

 

[Colonial]

There are ....despite your concerns...reasons why men and women in positions of power force their will on the vulnerable such as children.

Identifying and understanding these reasons is the only sensible way to try and prevent these atrocities from happening.

Should we just throw our hands int he air?

Yeah the reasons are they are sick ****s.

No we should lock anyone who has those feelings up.

Something went wrong in their wiring and they can't be trusted around children.

You can't cure it.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[Frank Bunn]

Anyone that tries to turn this into an issue about homosexuality, and not institutionalised abuse of power, is a ******* dog.

No one did. But thoughts and prayers for your outrage anyway.

 

[Colonial]

No one did. But thoughts and prayers for your outrage anyway.

So why bring it up?

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[Frank Bunn]

So why bring it up?

I didn't.

 

[Scallop Industry Thug]

No one did. But thoughts and prayers for your outrage anyway.

Never said you did. Just heard some comments on the radio.

 

[Colonial]

I didn't.

My apologies. Misread a post.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[Pie eyed]

Yeah the reasons are they are sick ****s.

No we should lock anyone who has those feelings up.

Something went wrong in their wiring and they can't be trusted around children.

You can't cure it.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

You have had few too many beers me thinks.

How do you detect them before they do harm without an idea of what sets them off?

Just be indignant is a waste of time.

I am greatful we have people willing to study the reasons....

 

[Maggie5]

It's on the record and you well know it. Something to do with a dead bird. I think something to do with a weapon. I don't have the time to look it up. But Searson was an utter bastard (as well as being an abuser) and Pell wanted him out. Even the Vatican tried to get Pell to reinstate him and he refused.

What year were you an alter boy for Pell? Where was the church?

 

[Frank Bunn]

There are ....despite your concerns...reasons why men and women in positions of power force their will on the vulnerable such as children.

Identifying and understanding these reasons is the only sensible way to try and prevent these atrocities from happening.

Should we just throw our hands int he air?

Agree with that but there needs to be the political will to address the problems.

I think we've seen around the world a recognition of what was happening in religious groups such as the Catholic Church and steps have been taken. The cases seem to be from quite a few years ago so maybe the problem has largely been addressed from a going forward point of view.

In Britain in recent years there has been massive number of cases of young girls who have been abused by mainly men of Pakistani and Bangladeshi origin. For a long time the situation was not apparent because people in authority refused to act for fear of being accused of being racist. This too seems to have been mainly addressed now.

I'm less convinced by the situation in Australian outback communities. It's an ongoing problem that we turn a blind eye to.

There has been 714 cases of sexual offence involving children under the age of 16 during the past five years in the Northern Territory.​

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-...rnment-to-address-tennant-creek-abuse/9473002

Other indicators suggest that these departmental figures may under-estimate child abuse and neglect more among Indigenous children than among non-Indigenous children (for example, Gordon, Hallahan and Henry 2002; Memmott et al. 2001). The Robertson Report (2000: xiii) stated: 'Violence is now overt; murders, bashings and rapes, including sexual violence against children, have reached epidemic proportions with both Indigenous and non-Indigenous people being perpetrators.'

Statistics from the Western Australian criminal justice system reveal that in 2000, the rate of reports to police of sexual assault of Indigenous girls was approximately double that of non-Indigenous girls (Ferrante and Fernandez 2002, reported in Gordon, Hallahan and Henry 2002). Yet it is estimated that less than 30 per cent of sexual assaults on children are actually reported to police and that this reporting rate is lower in Indigenous communities than non-Indigenous communities. Further, it was noted in the Robertson Report (2000) that 88 per cent of all rapes in Indigenous communities go unreported. Thus, it would appear that the documented extent of assault in Indigenous communities is just the tip of the iceberg.​

https://aifs.gov.au/cfca/publications/child-abuse-and-neglect-indigenous-australian-communities

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

Anyone that tries to turn this into an issue about homosexuality, and not institutionalised abuse of power, is a ******* dog.

Tell that to Counsel Assisting and to the Royal Commissioner.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

Anyone that tries to turn this into an issue about homosexuality, and not institutionalised abuse of power, is a ******* dog.

Tell that to Counsel Assisting and to the Royal Commissioner.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

What year were you an alter boy for Pell? Where was the church?

What year did you get your degree in body language?

 

[Maggie5]

What year did you get your degree in body language?

Just asking as that is what you posted in the RC thread. Was that a lie?

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

Just asking as that is what you posted in the RC thread. Was that a lie?

And I’m declining to answer because clearly you don’t understand boundaries.

 

[Maggie5]

And I’m declining to answer because clearly you don’t understand boundaries.

Why post it in the first place if you don't want to discuss?

 

[sherb]

And I’m declining to answer because clearly you don’t understand boundaries.

Clearly neither does your hero Pell.

If he did, we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

 

[Colonial]

All in the money



Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

Why post it in the first place if you don't want to discuss?

I see a number of people in this thread have divulged their experience of abuse I presume to give context to their arguments. I’m not about to ask them for chapter and verse about their experience (although if they’d like to chat privately I’m very willing to meet because like everyone I have a lot to learn).

You may have seen an earlier post I wrote about not being here to convince the likes of you.

 

[RupieDupie]

Why are you assuming the events are independent?

The maths in finding the probability of the event will just be the multiplication of the independent odds, which will ultimately lead to a very small probability.

An alternative is to use Bayes’ Theorem formulated by a priest, Thomas Bayes. Apparently formulated to remove this very small probability (through multiplication of odds of independent events) and therefore could be used to support miracles.

Say if there is a coin, and we presume the coin to be fair, yet after tossing the coin 100 times, we find the result to be 75 heads. We can update the probability, so the probability of a heads is no longer 0.5.

Therefore, we have a series of Catholic priests, and we independently present children to these priests. To not be biased, in the beginning, and by their faith, we presume they’re not talking shite, yet by observing the interaction between priests and children over time we update our probability of the chances of a priest offending.

Therefore after some time the chance of the next priest in the line offending is not at the initial probability.

The probability presented by Richter makes the event seem impossible, yet when we consider the probability based on Bayes’ Theorem...

 

[Maggie5]

I see a number of people in this thread have divulged their experience of abuse I presume to give context to their arguments. I’m not about to ask them for chapter and verse about their experience (although if they’d like to chat privately I’m very willing to meet because like everyone I have a lot to learn).

You may have seen an earlier post I wrote about not being here to convince the likes of you.

Okay, it is a lie, I get it.

 

[Dan]

 

[Seeds]

The maths will just be the multiplication of odds leading to a very small probability.

An alternative is to use Bayes’ Theorem formulated by a priest, Thomas Bayes. Apparently, formulated to remove small probability, through this multiplication of probabilities, and therefore could be used to support miracles.

Say if there is a coin and we presume the coin to be fair, yet after tossing the coin 100 times, we find the result to be 75 heads. We can update the probability, so the probability of a heads is no longer 0.5.

Therefore, we have a series of Catholic priests, and we independently present children to these priests. To not be biased, in the beginning, and by their faith, we presume they’re not talking shite, yet by observing the interaction between priests and children over time we update our probability of the chances of a priest offending.

Therefore after some time the chance of the next priest in the line offending is not at the initial probability.

The probability presented by Richter makes the event seem impossible, the probability based on Bayes’ Theorem...

You had me at bayes theorem