The Vatican Advises On Sexual Abuse

The Vatican has advised bishops around the world  of the importance of co-operating with police if complaints have been laid about specific priests raping and molesting children. Bishops were asked to develop guidelines for preventing sex abuse by May 2012.

How can Bishops prevent sex abuse by following ‘guidelines’ unless the priest under suspicion is reported to police immediately and is barred from performing official duties while under investigation?  Neither of these necessary actions have been insisted on by the Vatican.

The communique from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (formerly Office of the Holy Inquisition) made no provision to ensure the bishops actually follow any guidelines, and victims groups immediately denounced the recommendations as “dangerously flawed” because they stress the exclusive authority of bishops to determine the credibility of abuse allegations.  And we all know where that has led.  It seems that this is another release from the Pope to lull the faithful into a false sense of security regarding their children in the hands of priests, while nothing has changed!

“There’s nothing that will make a child safer today or tomorrow or next month or next year,” said Barbara Dorris, outreach director for the main U.S. victims group Survivors Network for Those Abused by Priests.

The sexual abuse of children continues:

The communique is being issued at a time when the sex abuse guidelines of the U.S. bishops have been put into question after a Philadelphia grand jury earlier this year indicted a high-ranking church official on child endangerment charges for allegedly transferring predator priests. Four co-defendants — two priests, an ex-priest and a former Catholic school teacher — are charged with raping children.

The grand jury found “substantial evidence of abuse” committed by at least 37 other priests who remained in active ministry at the time of the report. Philadelphia’s archbishop, Cardinal Justin Rigali, initially insisted that no archdiocesan priests in ministry had an “admitted or established allegation” against them. But he later suspended two dozen of the 37 priests. The archdiocese says many of the 37 were accused not of actual molestation but of so-called “boundary issues,” including inappropriate touching or sharing porn with minors — the latter a canonical crime in and of itself.  These are mere “boundary issues”??

How about this for a pathetic excuse: It was explained by a spokesman that the Vatican didn’t make reporting abuse cases to police mandatory because different countries have different laws which bishops must abide by. The Vatican states such a binding  rule would be problematic for priests working in countries with repressive regimes.  Who would the leaders of repressive regimes be more harmful to, the abusive priests or the abused children?

If this is the Vatican’s idea of a ‘transparency drive’, perhaps the Vatican hierarchy needs to look up the meaning of transparency in the dictionary, that’s if they possess one.  The newly published guidelines also outline the different ways that abusive priests can be disciplined by the church’s internal courts [my emphasis]. In “very grave cases”, (aren’t they all grave?) the pope may issue a decree dismissing a priest from the clerical state.   You mean the ‘E’ word?  But this has never yet happened, has it?

><

The Vatican Speaks

><

The following statement has to be the most idiotic the Vatican has ever released in relation to paedophile priests:

The pope’s secretary of state, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone risked new controversy by claiming that paedophilia was linked to homosexuality. “Many psychologists and psychiatrists have shown that there is no link between celibacy and paedophilia but many others have shown, I have recently been told, that there is a relationship between homosexuality and paedophilia,” he told a news conference in Santiago.   Can we please have the names of these many psychiatric experts, and are they all Catholic?  What about the thousands of ‘celibate’ priests who have raped hundreds of thousands of girls and boys?  Still more questions than answers.

Perhaps The Church’s fantastical teachings has made it easy for priests to delude themselves into believing that they weren’t really having sex with their victims.  It was women, those evil temptresses they had to avoid, as I write in  Catholic Dichotomy of Females.  I cannot believe that the problem is solely down to paedophilia or homosexuality.  It is much more psychologically complicated than that.

More…Vatican, Is It The Gay Men’s Club?

&   Celibacy and Sexual Abuse

&    Paedophilia In Italy

&    Kiss Of Betrayal

Strauss-Kahn & Sarkozy

(Reuters) – Dominique Strauss-Kahn’s arrest on sexual assault charges removes the toughest rival to French President Nicolas Sarkozy for the 2012 presidential race, bumping up his chances of re-election to a second term.

><

Strauss-Kahn greets Sarkozy

><

By Liliana Franco, from Washington DC:
‘I admit I’m surprised since within the Fund’s board there are some members that pretend to be more Catholic than the pope by taking a fundamentalist position’, the head of the International Monetary Fund, Dominique Strauss-Kahn said during his first conversation with the press since the beginning of the IMF’s Spring Assembly. Why does this happen? he wondered. ‘For decades this organization said that capital control was like the devil. We don’t want this. We’re fighting against it’.
><

The IMF currently admits the existence of some capital controls, even though it staunchly rejected them in the past.

><

As acknowledged by the Argentine delegation, countries should take advantage of Strauss-Kahn’s time in office, since there are changes currently taking place within the organization that suggest that the IMF really is interested in working alongside member countries instead of just imposing its own recipes. Of course, Strauss-Khan’s changes are not happening because of personal beliefs. Long ago, he conducted a survey in countries at odds with the IMF in order to listen to their complaints and hear their suggestions. Many people in the organization believe that the recent changes within the IMF have taken place due to the confidential report redacted after the survey.

><

“Power Corrupts – Total Power Corrupts Totally”  Do these aging politicians think they are bullet proof?

World News Item:

On 14 May 2011, NY police removed Strauss-Kahn from an Air France  flight to Paris at JFK Airport  moments before takeoff, and arrested him for allegedly sodomising a hotel maid in his room at the midtown Sofitel NY hotel shortly before leaving for the airport. He was held at a police precinct overnight and charged with “a criminal sexual act, attempted rape, and unlawful imprisonment”. The maid is reported to be a single mother from Ghana who has worked at the hotel for four years and is said to be well liked.Strauss-Kahn’s lawyer said he will plead ‘not guilty’.

Kurt Taylor Gaubatz, an associate professor at Old Dominion University wrote that the IMF’s limited form of diplomatic immunity known as ‘acts immunity,’ probably doesn’t apply inasmuch as it ‘only covers actions taken in the course of his duties.’

NOT THE FIRST ALLEGATIONS:

In 2007, 22 yr old  Tristane Banon accused Strauss-Kahn of having attempted to rape her in 2002. Banon, a French journalist and writer, did not press charges.  (However, an older Ms Banon is now pressing attempted rape charges against DSK in 2011)

In 2008 Strauss-Kahn was involved in a scandal at the IMF over his affair with a subordinate, economist Piroska Nagy, who was married at the time.   Wikipedia.

World News 17 May 2011:

In February 2007, Tristane Banon was a guest on a television chat show and recounted how a senior politician had lured her to a virtually empty apartment in the guise of agreeing to give an interview and then assaulted her.

In the broadcast version of her comments the name of the politician, whom she branded a “rutting chimpanzee”, was bleeped out, but a year later Banon confirmed to the AgoraVox website that she was referring to Strauss-Kahn.

><

Dominique Strauss-Kahn, often referred to in the popular press as DSK, is  a French economist, lawyer and politician, and is a member of the Socialist Party of France.  He became the Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in September 2007, with the backing of his country’s president, Nicolas Sarkozy.  Dominique Gaston André Strauss-Kahn  was born 25 April 1949 in the wealthy Paris suburb of Neuilly-sur-Seine, Hauts-de-Seine. He is the son of Gilbert Strauss-Kahn, a legal and tax advisor and Russian/Tunisian journalist Jacqueline Fellus. His family is of mixed Sephardic and Ashkenazic Jewish origin.

He is full professor of economics at the Paris Institute of Political Studies.

><

Official portrait of Dominique Strauss-Kahn

><

Radio Islam:

Dominique Strauss-Kahn, a leading French Jew that sees the building of Israel in his political actions as proven in his own statement above, has both had positions of influence in France – taking part in the contest to be the new French President – but has since risen to the absolute highest of positions that are attainable; since 2007  this man is Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

Getting such a devout Zionist in such a sensitive top position must surely have generated celebrations with champagne in crystal glasses among the Zionist circles in Israel and elsewhere. In 1987 Dominique Strauss-Kahn led a delegation of the Socialist Party to Jerusalem, the city he considers is the capital of the Jewish state. And in 1991 he was part of solidarity delegation to Israel, organized by the Conseil représentatif des institutions juives de France (CRIF), in the middle of the First Gulf War on Iraq.

Among his later acts of support of the Jewish state we can note that Strauss-Kahn, among  others, was a speaker at the Annual Meeting of the American Jewish Committee (April 29-May 3, 2008). And when Israel celebrated its 60th anniversary in 2008, Strauss-Kahn was one of the dignitaries invited to celebrate the Jewish state.

Political outcomes in France

Strauss-Kahn has a long history of engagement in French politics, he has for instance been Minister of Finance and Economy.

In 2007 Strauss-Kahn mounted an unsuccessful political campaign to secure the presidential socialist nomination ahead of the general election of this year. His challengers were former Prime Minister,  Laurent Fabius and Ségolène Royal. Strauss-Kahn finished second, behind Royal. Here it is interesting to note that Ségolène Royal was married to the Secretary General of the Socialist Party, François Hollande.

><

See Sarkozy is a Gaul

&  Catholic Dichotomy of Women

Saint? Pope?

Newly elected Pope John Paul ll uplifting his “pilgrims” in St Peter’s Square at the Vatican

Karol Wojtyla, later  John Paul ll, was passionate about religion. He maintained a devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary, choosing as his personal motto Totus tuus  which is Latin for “All yours”, (Mary) .   To my mind, this left him with a distorted and unrealistic view of women.  (see my post Catholic Dichotomy of Females). To his detractors, he was a reactionary trying to turn back the clock on modern reality. Some harshly criticized his ultra-conservative theology, which prohibited female ordination, birth control and abortion. He branded the notion of global overpopulation a myth and said the use of condoms as a precaution against AIDS only encouraged the behaviour that led to the spread of the disease. Yet companies associated with the Vatican earn millions from the manufacture of contraceptives.

In a 1993 letter to his bishops, John Paul said both sex before marriage and contraception were intrinsically evil. He also broadened the definition of mortal sins to include abortion, euthanasia, drug dealing and drug taking. No mention here of the abuse of innocent children by Catholic priests being a mortal sin. During his time as Pope and head of the Catholic Church, John Paul worked closely with Joseph Ratzinger (the present Pope Benedict), at the Congregation For The Doctrine of Faith,  to cover up widespread paedophilia within the Catholic clergy and arranged  offending priests to be sent  from one parish to another without warning parishioners of the dangers these evil men posed.  During this time, no priestly child abusers were reported to police and the vast majority have never paid for their crimes.  But of course, the Vatican paid out millions in cash to those victims who wouldn’t shut up!

Many liberal Catholics believed John Paul centralized power during his reign and blocked the democratization of the church. (see my blog  ‘Are We But A Flock Of Sheep?)

In April 2002, John  Paul  called 12 U.S. cardinals to the Vatican for an extraordinary two-day session to discuss the growing scandal of priestly sexual abuse of children in America. The Pope told the visiting cardinals that sexual abuse of children by priests and religious is “rightly considered a crime” and is “an appalling sin in the eyes of God.”   All talk!  Paedophile priests are still protected by the Church.  I wonder how many of those same cardinals had themselves sexually abused children in the past.

The most fabulous smoke screen of all time is being puffed out right now!   John Paul has been canonised a saint, ie: a first miracle has been credited to him.  As usual, it is a woman (nun) who has been cured of some fatal illness.  Now we await his second miracle so that this ex pope can be beatified and so entitled to have the word ‘saint’ installed in front of his name.  Meanwhile, unwanted children continue to be born. Men, women and children die of AIDS in their millions.   The trail of sexual abuse victims left behind is truly gigantic.  This abuse can affect families for generations to come and I write about these consequences in my book ‘Whatever Happened To Ishtar?’

Change in the Arab World?

This is the word that inspires SeifAndBeirut

There are all sorts of suggestions flying around the world presently.  “Empower and educate women in the Middle East and other islamic regions, and they will influence their men to embrace  peace.”   This could be true. Some people believe change will encourage the war mongers and the religious fanatics to desist in killing  innocent women and children. But it will take many more thousands of years for any drastic changes to take place; change has always been painfully slow in Arab countries.  For one, religion might have to take second place in schools, and I can’t see that happening any time soon.  (It was the best thing that ever happened in western countries.)  Look what has just taken place in Pakistan, for instance.  A politician speaks out against blasphemy laws: a woman can be stoned to death for using the name Mohammed in the wrong context.  This is blasphemy?  Then this liberal politician was shot at close range by his body-guard and it seems the whole of Pakistan is rejoicing.  Hundreds of thousands of uneducated, brain washed (or brain-dead) rabble waving placards and praising the bodyguard as a hero.  How frightening this must be for minority Christians and the women awaiting death in brutal prison cells.  It is obvious the Pakistani Judiciary will not be able to punish the guard because that will just inspire more killings.  Where were the thousands of protestors when women accused of murdering their brutal husbands, were stoned to death by men in the street?   None of it makes any sense.  But that’s religion for you.

See previous posts: The Problem Being Female &  Dichotomy of  Women.

I agree with Seif;  there is no doubt that the Arab World needs to CHANGE.   But when?

Last Judgment & Babies

One of the damned being dragged to the fires of hell by demons – Part of Last Judgment hanging in the Sistine Chapel, Vatican

World News: VATICAN CITY – Pope Benedict XVI baptized 21 newborns in an intimate ceremony in the Sistine Chapel on Sunday that marked the end of the Christmas season.

Standing under Michelangelo’s magnificent “Last Judgment” fresco, the pope poured water on the foreheads of 13 baby boys and eight baby girls. Some babies screamed, other squirmed, some slept through it. Benedict prayed for their “life and health so they can grow and mature in the faith.”

Or perhaps to be molested by paedophile priests.   Until the pope and the Vatican hierarchy make changes within Catholicism, nothing will change! Call me a cynic, but years of being brainwashed with stories of hell-fire and brimstone as a child, have made me so. The nightmares a large part of my childhood. (Whatever Happened To Ishtar?) The Last Judgment fresco is an amazing artistic achievement by Michelangelo, I have seen it for myself in person.  But the scene which covers most of a wall in the Sistine Chapel is horrifying, and is what is promised for our innocent children if we do not baptise them in the ‘Faith’. What he is really saying is: get them young, so they can grow up indoctrinated in the ‘Faith’ and the money will continue to roll in and continue to  enrich the Vatican.

‘The Pope was quoted as saying  that, in an ever-changing society without firm cultural references, it has become more difficult to educate children in the faith, and urged parishes and parents to cooperate. The babies — aged between four weeks and four months — are all children of Vatican employees.’

What a contrast in the two images, but an accurate portrayal. The fact is that not all in Catholicism is light & happiness, that is the problem.  There are too many dark, dark depths that have not been dealt with satisfactorily by the Pope and the Vatican power brokers, and until that is done, they should not be allowed near children.  Anyway, that’ s my opinion.

Christian Targets in Iraq

Muslims firebomb Christian Church in Egypt

Some Muslims are nothing more than thugs consumed by hate, disguised as religious fanatics. The problem is that there are thousands of them swarming across the Middle East and Christians are soft targets. At least Christianity has moved forward with the times, but Islam is still fomenting in the dark ages. No wonder the uneducated masses are following a religious belief system that is just plain stupid.

Muslims have been targeting Christians for hundreds of years.  Muslims were the reason my Lebanese ancestors fled from Iraq to the hills of Lebanon in the 14th Century. It is one of the reasons my Grandparents  left Lebanon for New Zealand in the late 19th Century.  More in  my book ‘Whatever Happened To Ishtar?’ .  Nothing has changed.  My heart goes out to the minority Christian communities in Iraq and other muslim countries.  Christmas, the focal point of Christian beliefs, is a time of fear for Christians in Muslim countries instead of a time for celebration and joy.  See world news item below:

BAGHDAD – Militants attacked at least four Christian homes Thursday night with a combination of grenades and bombs, killing two people and sending fear into the already terrified tiny Christian community.  It was the first attack against the country’s Christian community since al-Qaida-linked militants last week threatened a wave of violence against them. Christians went so far as to tone down their Christmas celebrations in what was a peaceful holiday, but the attacks Thursday night demonstrated the intent of militants to keep up their deadly pressure on the Christian community.

In the deadliest attack, assailants in southwestern Baghdad threw two grenades inside the home of a Christian family, killing two people and injuring five more, police said. In a different neighborhood in eastern Baghdad, militants planted a bomb near a Christian home. Two people were injured in that attack. Then another bomb planted near a Christian house in western Baghdad exploded, injuring one member of the family as well as a civilian who was driving by, police said.

Iraqi military spokesman Maj. Gen. Qassim al-Moussawi confirmed that two people were killed Thursday evening; he said a bomb planted near the fence of a Christian home in southern Baghdad also exploded but he had no information about casualties in that incident.  “The aim of these attacks is to prevent Christians from celebrating the New Year’s holiday,” al-Moussawi said.

There was no immediate claim of responsibility, but such attacks have generally been the work of Sunni militants linked to al-Qaida.  The casualties were confirmed by hospital officials. All the officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not allowed to talk to reporters.  The attacks are sure to ratchet up tension in the tiny Christian community still living in Baghdad. At least 68 people were killed in October when militants stormed a Baghdad church during Mass and took the congregation hostage.

Thousands of Iraqi Christians have fled to northern Iraq, fearing further attacks.  Father Mukhlis, a priest at the Our Lady of Salvation church in Baghdad where the Oct. 31 hostage incident occurred, called the Thursday attacks “direct oppression” against Iraqi Christians.

He said one Christian family already was staying at the church because they were worried about militants targeting their home. The family was planning to travel Friday to the Ninevah Plains area of northern Iraq which is home to a large Christian community and much safer than the rest of Iraq.  Last week, al-Qaida warned of further violence against Christians, leading many in the community to tone down their Christmas celebrations and cancel many events such as evening Mass and appearances by Santa Claus.

The Christmas holidays also coincide this year with the Shiite holy month of Muharam, an important holiday for the country’s Shiite Muslim majority.

Some Christians said they were also playing down the Christmas holiday this year out of respect for their Shiite neighbors, but other Christians reported intimidation by members of the Mahdi Army, a Shiite militia backed by anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, who pressured them not to celebrate the holiday publicly.   Christian leaders estimate 400,000 to 600,000 Christians still live in Iraq, according to a recent State Department report. At one time before the war, that number was as high as 1.4 million by some estimates.   – Associated Press writer Qassim Abdul-Zahra contributed to this report.

Another interesting post from: seifandbeirut.com

Lebanon has alway been home for minorities in the Middle East. A haven for those persecuted, chased out of their homes, and face destruction in their original homes. The Armenians, Palestinians, Assyrians, and even many Syrians have taken refuge inside of Lebanon over the years… their treatment, whether good or bad, has always seemed irrelevant. We simply focus on the fact that “hey, we take in all the refugees of the Middle East”.

I think its time, finally, to tackle the treatment of refugees inside the country. We have almost 250 000 – 300 000 Palestinians inside Lebanon, almost 150,000 Armenians (who are now Lebanese citizens, and not considered refugees anymore), and now 50, 000 Iraqi refugees in Lebanon. This post, for specific reasons,  is going to focus specifically on the latter group as it is the most recent group of refugees in the country. Most, almost 79%, of Lebanon’s Iraqi refugees are Iraqi Christians who fled Iraq for their safety after sectarian groups threatened their safety. Now for the sake of making things clear, sectarian groups in Iraq represent very small portions of the population, keeping in mind Iraqi Christians and Muslims have lived along side each other for hundreds and hundreds of years prior to this time, with very little tensions and fighting.

 

Overtaken By Belief

Texas A&M professor says he’ll warn colleagues before `screaming’ Bible studies lesson

(for a look at the ‘funny’ side of Christianity)

You would think that a professor of this standing would get out of the past – say 5000 years ago – and think about the 21st Century;  Palistine and Israel?????    See article below:

An example by Raphael of God at his ‘smiting’ best:

LOT flees from Sodom; 'The Lord rained sulphur & fire from the sky on Sodom & Gomorrah devastating those cities and all the valley' -The Raphael Loggias.

Source: Associated Press COLLEGE STATION, Texas (AP) — A Texas A&M professor promised to notify colleagues in the future before he re-enacts a Bible story in class that involves screaming about killing people.

The Nov. 23 outburst by Richard Stadelmann, a philosophy and religion professor, led a worried teacher in a nearby room to call police and led students in a neighbouring classroom to take cover under their desks. Stadelmann was leading a religious studies class when he loudly slammed a door and began yelling about Jonah’s rage at God for not smiting the Assyrians (my emphasis). (See Religious Beliefs Questioned)

 

Date Chart from 'Egypt, Greece & Rome' author: Charles Freeman. (click on image to enlarge)

Stadelmann, who is ordained in the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), says he was into character and “genuinely angry.”

Police were called off when it became clear that nobody was in danger.

Religious Beliefs Questioned

Biblical Scene: 'Noah's Sacrifice' Giovanni Benedetto Castiglione known as Grechetto (early 17th Century)

The interesting and thought-provoking  article below reinforces musings on my previous post - Are We But a Flock of Sheep?

I am sure that the beautiful religious images painted by Italian artists helped persuade many a young mind toward belief in Catholic dogma and biblical stories.  I know I was captivated by their depictions of saints and martyrdom.

Article below. Source: Council for Secular Humanism:

Author: Peter Singer

Freedom of speech is important, and it must include the freedom to say what everyone else believes to be false, and even what many people take to be offensive. Religion remains a major obstacle to basic reforms that reduce unnecessary suffering. Think of issues like contraception, abortion, the status of women in society, the use of embryos for medical research, physician-assisted suicide, attitudes towards homosexuality, and the treatment of animals. In each case, somewhere in the world, religious beliefs have been a barrier to changes that would make the world more sustainable, freer, and more humane.

So, we must preserve our freedom to deny the existence of God and to criticize the teachings of Jesus, Moses, Muhammad, and Buddha, as reported in texts that billions of people regard as sacred. Since it is sometimes necessary to use a little humor to prick the membrane of sanctimonious piety that frequently surrounds religious teachings, freedom of expression must include the freedom to ridicule as well.

Yet, the outcome of the publication of the Danish cartoons ridiculing Muhammad was a tragedy. More than a hundred people died in Syria, Lebanon, Afghanistan, Libya, Nigeria, and other Islamic countries during the ensuing protests and riots. In hindsight, it would have been wiser not to publish the cartoons. The benefits were not worth the costs. But that judgment is, as I say, made with the benefit of hindsight, and it is not intended as a criticism of the actual decisions taken by the editors who published them and could not reasonably be expected to foresee the consequences.

To restrict freedom of expression because we fear such consequences would not be the right response. It would only provide an incentive for those who do not want to see their views criticized to engage in violent protests in the future. Instead, we should forcefully defend the right of newspaper editors to publish such cartoons, if they choose to do so, and hope that respect for freedom of expression will eventually spread to countries where it does not yet exist.

Unfortunately, even while the protests about the cartoons were still underway, a new problem about convincing Muslims of the genuineness of our respect for freedom of expression has arisen because of Austria’s conviction and imprisonment of David Irving for denying the existence of the Holocaust. We cannot consistently hold that it should be a criminal offense to deny the existence of the Holocaust and that cartoonists have a right to mock religious figures. David Irving should be freed.

Before you accuse me of failing to understand the sensitivities of victims of the Holocaust or the nature of Austrian anti-Semitism, I should tell you that I am the son of Austrian Jews. My parents escaped Austria in time, but my grandparents did not. All four of my grandparents were deported to ghettos in Poland and Czechoslovakia. Two of them were sent to Lodz, in Poland, and then probably murdered with carbon monoxide at the extermination camp at Chelmno. Another one fell ill and died in the overcrowded and underfed ghetto at Theresienstadt. My maternal grandmother was the only survivor.

So, I have no sympathy for David Irving’s absurd denial of the Holocaust-which, in his trial, he said was a mistake. I support efforts to prevent any return to Nazism in Austria or anywhere else. But how is the cause of truth served by prohibiting Holocaust denial? If there are still people crazy enough to deny that the Holocaust occurred, will they be persuaded by imprisoning some who express that view? On the contrary, they will be more likely to think that views people are being imprisoned for expressing cannot be refuted by evidence and argument alone.

In the aftermath of World War II, when the Austrian republic was struggling to establish itself as a democracy, it was reasonable, as a temporary emergency measure, for Austrian democrats to suppress Nazi ideas and propaganda. But that danger is long past. Austria is a democracy and a member of the European Union. Despite the occasional resurgence of anti-immigrant and even racist views-an occurrence that is, lamentably, not limited to former Nazi nations-there is no longer a serious threat of any return to Nazism in Austria.

Austria should repeal its law against Holocaust denial. Other European nations with similar laws-for example, Germany, France, Italy, and Poland-should do the same, while maintaining or strengthening their efforts to inform their citizens about the reality of the Holocaust and why the racist ideology that led to it should be rejected.

Laws against incitement to racial, religious, or ethnic hatred, in circumstances where that incitement is intended to, or can reasonably be foreseen to, lead to violence or other criminal acts, are different, and are compatible with the freedom to express any views at all.

In the current climate in Western nations, the suspicion of a particular hostility towards Islam, rather than other religions, is well justified. Only when David Irving has been freed will it be possible for Europeans to turn to the Islamic protesters and say: “We apply the principle of freedom of expression evenhandedly, whether it offends Muslims, Christians, Jews, or anyone else.”

---

Peter Singer, professor of bioethics at Princeton University, New Jersey, is the author of, among other books: Pushing Time Away: My Grandfather,  and the Tragedy of Jewish Vienna.

Female Sex Workers Recognised by The Pope

Well, the Pope must have read my post on Tuesday 23 November 2010………..I pondered why (actually I knew)  he only mentioned male prostitutes when he wrote in his book that they could wear condoms (see ...Catholic Dichotomy of Females

><

By Michael Day in Milan:

Wednesday, 24 November 2010

The Vatican has appeared to expand the Catholic Church’s tolerance of condoms as a means of fighting HIV, backing their use by female prostitutes, days after the Pope said their use by male sex workers was better than spreading the virus.

Pope Benedict XVI was quoted at the weekend saying condom use by male prostitutes could be a good thing, indicating the user’s intention to protect others from a deadly infection, apparently condoning the use of contraceptives for the first time. The Vatican yesterday confirmed that the same message applied to women sex workers.

><

Previous statements about condoms  issued by The Vatican:

March 28, 2009|By Faith Karimi CNN

• 
  Thousands of Facebook supporters plan to send condoms to the Vatican.

Critics took to the social networking site Facebook to voice their fury over Pope Benedict’s remark that condoms do not prevent HIV.

Thousands have pledged to send the pontiff millions of condoms to protest the controversial comment he made to journalists as he flew to Cameroon last week.

“You can’t resolve it with the distribution of condoms,” the pope told reporters. “On the contrary, it increases the problem.”

Pope Benedict XVI has made it clear he intends to uphold the traditional Catholic teaching on artificial contraception. The Vatican has long opposed the use of condoms and other forms of birth control and encourages sexual abstinence to fight the spread of the disease.

Condom Confusion in Catholic Church

Pope Benedict & his cardinals

By Nick Squires in Rome and John Bingham 5:46PM GMT 21 Nov 2010 -

(My Comments)

In a book to be published this week, Benedict XVI said there could be “justified individual cases” in which condoms could be used, softening Rome’s blanket ban on contraception, one of the most controversial issues facing the Church.

“In certain cases, where the intention is to reduce the risk of infection, it can nevertheless be a first step on the way to another, more humane sexuality,” the head of the world’s 1.1 billion Catholics said, giving as an example a male prostitute having sex with a client.

I wonder about a female prostitute who has aids or any other STD!

But he gave no guidance on the long-standing moral and religious question of whether it would be permissible for a married couple, in which one partner is HIV positive, to use condoms in order to prevent the other partner from becoming infected.  Just more confusion.

While the Pope restates Catholicism’s objections to contraception and stresses its emphasis on abstinence as the best policy to fight Aids, he says that using a condom could be a responsible act if it is intended to prevent the spread of the virus.   What about the spread of unwanted children with no chance for a decent life?

The pontiff’s comments are made in a book to be published by the Vatican this week, which has been the subject of increasing anticipation.   The publicists were not exaggerating when they sent out an email last week saying the Pope delivers “answers that will surprise and impress both critics and his fans”.

“Benedict XVI has shown himself time and again to be the ‘Pope of surprises’,” it said. After decades of staunch opposition from the Catholic Church to the use of condoms, his comments are likely to cause astonishment.

Not only does it represent a hugely significant shift in the Church’s teaching, but the softening in its position is coming from a Pope who took office with a reputation for being hardline and fundamentalist.  Perceived as the Vatican’s enforcer after heading its Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith – formerly known as the Holy Office of the Inquisition, he is challenging this image by showing himself willing to embrace change.

The Pope’s reluctant support for condom use in certain circumstances is likely to dismay the most conservative Catholics who believe it is impossible to distinguish the use of condoms as contraceptives and their use as preventers of the transmission of Aids.

Yet it reflects a growing consensus amongst theologians that the stance now adopted by the Pope can be morally justified.

Cardinals, such as Godfried Danneels and Lozano Barragan, have argued that it must be better for an infected man to use a condom if the intention is not to avoid life but to prevent death.      But what if a man is using a condom for both reasons?  Will he go to hell?

Earlier this year, the Most Rev Vincent Nichols, the Archbishop of Westminster, indicated he was sympathetic to a more tolerant approach to condom use, saying he could see “why, in the short term, [the] means that give women protection are attractive”.

Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, his predecessor, was told by Pope Benedict XVI – who was then Cardinal Ratzinger – that the Church needed to reach an agreed position on the morality of the use of condoms.  How pathetic!  when we consider all the really significant  problems the world has to deal with at  present; rampant paedophilia,  terrorism, brutal wars, aids, dying children etc etc.

Although they acknowledged that there was a need to clarify the Church’s teaching on the use of condoms, cardinals and senior figures in Rome were ultimately too concerned that it was impossible to do so without being misinterpreted.

These concerns appeared to be well founded after Pope Benedict was fiercely criticised for his comments in Africa, which were effectively no more than repeating a well-established Church view that condoms are not the solution to Aids.   Forget about the solution to Aids – what about the reality of  children infected with Aids suffering and dying in their millions?

Rather than promulgate an edict he has chosen to do it in an interview with Peter Seewald, a German journalist whom he trusts and knows well from his time as Cardinal Ratzinger.  Speaking at the Frankfurt Book Fair earlier this year, Mr Seewald said: “The events in the news around the abuse scandals and the wider situation of the Church naturally give this conversation an incredible explosiveness and I can only reveal to you now that you are expecting a very exciting, very extensive book.”

While the Pope tackles many controversial subjects in the book, from the sex abuse crisis to the Church’s teaching on clerical celibacy, his comments on condoms are likely to cause the greatest shock.  They may not go far enough to appease Catholics such as Cherie Blair, who argue for a total acceptance of contraception.

His stance will help to distance the Church from some of its more embarrassing statements, such as the claim by a cardinal that the HIV  virus can pass through tiny holes in the rubber of condoms.   What on earth can these cloistered, brain washed men,  possibly know about pregnancy, giving birth and the hardships of  life in the real world!   And then there is the hypocrisy;  The Catholic Church has financial interests in the manufacturing of contraceptives through the all-powerful Vatican Empire.

Crucially, it may go further in ensuring the Church’s relevance in public debate, presenting it as more humane and more flexible – even at the risk of people thinking the Church has changed its mind on the issue. This desire to secure the Church’s place in the public square is at the heart of Pope Benedict’s thinking and no doubt the guiding reason behind such a brave move.

What does he mean by these statements? …….”I was, naturally, not always simply against things, exclusively and as a matter of principle” ……………….. “Ultimately someone who is in opposition could probably not endure life at all”, quotes the Pope in the book.

><

See More…

Females Sex Workers Recognised by the Pope