Honour Crimes Continue

[Curvaceous Kate]

Full Article Here

If the Church had allowed them to grow up to be functioning adults in Irish society it would have ran the risk of demonstrating that the institution of marriage was not absolutely integral to the moral well-being of a person. Women were not allowed keep their babies because the shame that their existence brought upon the community would be far too great. They were imprisoned within Magdalene Laundries to atone for their sins of honour, and their babies were removed from them as part of their punishment - women who dishonoured the community were deemed to unfit to parent.

Please do read the full article, but I have picked this paragraph out, as I feel it has such deep engraved parallels with the situation we find our selves in now. This article is with regard to the 796 bodies that were found in Galway, belonging to the babies and children of single Mothers allegedly cared for by the Church.

Why did these poor defenseless children die? Not because they were ill, or evil or any natural reason, but because the church was scared that their future successes in life would undermine their survival.

In the same way today, members of the church are trying to stop Sex Workers having a voice, that would show that very normal, average, intelligent and above average women are actively choosing Sex Work, because it is the right choice for them at this moment in time. If anyone speaks up, who does not fit the stereo type of drug addict, rock bottom, destitute alcoholic, then they will single them out and say they are the exception and not the rule and for that reason they don't matter.

The charitable organisations appear to be run by members of the Church and have connections with the Sisters of Mercy and the Magdalane Laundries. These people are protecting their income, as they get huge funding for a relatively small problem and then when they are able to help a Sex Worker who wants help, there are conditions and one of them appears to be brain washing. If you want their services, then you need to be willing to change your attitude towards Sex Work and believe that you have been raped repeatedly. It can't be as simple as just wanting to stop and move on.

I don't know about you, but articles like this, make me wonder if anyone really believes in God or the religion that they are preaching to people. Surely if your belief is strong, you don't have to suppress and murder to keep people in their place and make them do as you say? I have nothing against marriage, I even tried it myself once, but marriage should not come before life and life can be born out of marriage and grow to be great. Who knows if the next Oscar Wilde, Peter 'O' Toole, or even Spike Milligan wasn't amongst the deceased, who never got the opportunity to enrich the Country they were born in.

It's hard to believe that the church is still being heard with regards to morals and the law even today. Even now they are fighting to keep the church by suppressing people's free will and more ashamedly their actions are going to hurt the truly vulnerable, the real coerced and trafficked victims, who's voices will never be heard or found, because the industry will be forced even deeper underground.

Give mercy to those poor lives that are being threatened by there unashamed attempt to keep control!

I wonder if the general public will ever cotton on to the fact that there is absolutely nothing wrong with two consenting adults having sex, with or without payment? Or will it always be used as a weapon to hit people with and attempt to degrade them?

[Jiberjabber]

That article is a fairly damning indictment. Some of the comments regarding the unholy alliance struck between the church and state after our independence were spot on too. You've made some enlightening correlations with the plight of Sex Workers, certainly food for thought.

Perhaps it's time our country returned to its proper pagan place, drive Saint Patrick out and let the snakes of ancient gods back in if you will.

[Curvaceous Kate]

That article is a fairly damning indictment. Some of the comments regarding the unholy alliance struck between the church and state after our independence were spot on too. You've made some enlightening correlations with the plight of Sex Workers, certainly food for thought.

Perhaps it's time our country returned to its proper pagan place, drive Saint Patrick out and let the snakes of ancient gods back in if you will.

There certainly is an irony in the fact that these people do the damage under the guise of 'caring' whilst actually doing the exact opposite. Who would have known that these lowly young girls finding themselves with child, would be sealing the death of their unborn babies by being handed over to them? Who in their right mind would have handed anyone over to them, to be treated like sub humans, purely for doing the most natural thing in this world?

When you consider that these same young women were being sold to men for their dowry's in years gone by, or for the good name of the family, it seems all so hypocritical.

When you think about it, through history there has always been a warped sense of what sex is for.

* Sex to keep the blood line going.
* Sex for love
* Sex for lust and desire

The first one is the only reason that seems to have always been acceptable. Sex for love was only acceptable if you fell in love with the right person, or the right stock/family/religion. Sex for lust or desire has only really ever been acceptable for men, as women who have done this have been labelled with derogatory names, like whore.

I believe sex is often used in society as a form of manipulation and this is another reason why religion steers against it. I wonder how many people have forfeited their Sunday trip to the Church, in preference to a lie in and sex with their partner? There is also the fact that both men and women will use sexual denial to control their partner. This doesn't work if sex is readily available else where, which is why often people who are otherwise not at all relgious or moralistic get on the band wagon and protest against Sex Workers. Nothing to do with feminism or caring for those that are vulnerable, but looking after number one.

[Empirical]

...
...I don't know about you, but articles like this, make me wonder if anyone really believes in God or the religion that they are preaching to people...

Certainly, in the Church of England, entry into the clergy was more or less what was left to the second son. He wasn't expected to believe, just to carry out his duties. Belief, for him, wasn't anyway essential.

However; I've read many articles about the #800Babies, the Industrial Schools, the Magdalene Laundries...and I sometimes wonder, "what's next"? And, "what's the common factor".

Leave aside the honour bit for a moment; all these stories have children who are outsiders, who need help; and people who actively deny them this. There are several groups of damaged people here. There are the children who suffered all sorts of emotional, physical and sexual abuse, sometimes over many years.

Secondly, there are the abusers—for want of a better word; what were their motivations? Did they really believe that they were somehow doing God's work? Rather, I strongly suspect that they too had been indoctrinated or "brainwashed" at an early age; and that it was somehow expected in their family that one of the siblings would become a priest or nun. And yet, you can read the actions of many as those of thoroughly desensitised people, people who came to realise that they could never experience the entirely natural feelings of sexual desire; they were thwarted and resentful, and, rather than blaming the institution that made them so, took their revenge on the children.

And then there is society, those people whose "honour" must be upheld, without them realising what honour really means; you might say that the parable of the prodigal son and the fatted calf had entirely passed them by. And from where did society get its notion of honour? What is "honour"? Mostly, it seems, acceptance of sexual norms and customs. Where did these come from? From society's clerical leaders, who got their sense of morality, particularly sexual morality, from selected passages in the Bible, and from the sayings* of the early "Doctors of the Church".

Eve was created from Adam, thus an afterthought, a second-rate person; Eve did the tempting with the apple†, therefore she and women are bad; to get to heaven you must be pure, and as sex is bad, therefore you should be a virgin; but, recognising that this policy, if rigorously enforced, would be self-destructive, sex was permissible when sanctioned, and ideally only for the begetting of virgins, and certainly not for fun or enjoyment. Anything else was bad, shameful, and a stain on your "honour", your armor propre, your propriety. Of course, as women were literally the property (and under the guardianship) of the father until they were married‡, when they became the property of the husband, anything that the woman did could be blamed on the man; and if what she did was shameful, it was because the man was feeble, weak and perhaps negligent, and so the blame and shame became his blame and shame.

I wasn't raised in the Catholic faith, but this is my understanding of how we got to be where we are now; if I'm in error, let me know. As for fixing these societal ideas, I have no easy answers. Start with a complete decoupling of church and state, make education entirely secular—by all means let religion be taught, but not as "education" but as "belief". A recognition that the blame must stop where it belongs—with us. We can't atone for all this through indulgences or whatever; you are talking about a major change in society's attitudes, something that usually takes a generation or two. But such a change is possible; homosexuality has gone from being a crime to acceptance and normalisation, even if gay marriage isn't possible—all in my lifetime.

* If you really want to see just what these Doctors and other theologians thought, I can post again.
† The Bible mentions "fruit", unspecified. One explanation for the apple is, that when an apple is cut into two, the cut surface resembles a vulva. Really; some people can see sex and filth anywhere.
‡ "Who giveth this woman to be married?"

[Curvaceous Kate]

Yes your right Kate, the church has controlled us for a long time. Did you know that it was a sin for even married people to have sex in anything other than the "missionary" position and even a sin to undress her!
Its all about power and control I'm afraid

Empirical, fantastic post. I really enjoyed reading it and agree with you on so many levels.

MickyDipping, agreed, it is all about control. It amazes me that no one seems to have questioned the fact that we have erogenous zones and were designed to enjoy sex, beyond procreation.

Why does a man have a g-spot up his bum?
Why does a woman have a cliterous?
Why are our nipples sensitive in a sensual way?

I strongly believe that sex is also the bodies way of naturally dispersing stress. All the hormones that are produced not just by orgasm, but by bodily contact with another person, releases a whole cocktail of different hormones that give us a complete sense of well being.

We have been living against the grain for hundreds of years due to Religion and look at the outcome? It's not looking good. The world would be a lot better place (as it was in the 60's from what I read), if we were exercising a lot less restraint and a lot more free loving. Just remember safe sex

[habebe2]

Excellent posts here as it is important to understand what motivated large groups of irish people to carry out such dreadful acts.
I would like to think that society can learn from this but I have my doubts because as ck says these people haven't gone away and are even now peddling their filth as we speak.

[Empirical]

Yes your right Kate, the church has controlled us for a long time. Did you know that it was a sin for even married people to have sex in anything other than the "missionary" position and even a sin to undress her!
Its all about power and control I'm afraid

I've been reading "The Most Dangerous Book" by Kevin Birmingham, the story of the publication difficulties of James Joyce's 'Ulysses". there's quite a lot about the obscenity laws in the UK and US, and part of the thesis is that these laws were actually used for social control. Anyhow, there's a bit about the sectarian riots in the UK in the mid 1850s; partly, this started because of the publication of "The Confessional Unmasked", a protestant publication supposedly recording theological Catholic tracts. Questions that priests might have to consider in the confessional included:

Q: Are looks or filthy words between married couples sinful? A Sometimes
Q: Was it a sin to think of your deceased wife while having intercourse with your second wife? A Yes
Q: Does a widow sin by deriving pleasure from memories of intercourse? A yes, grievously
Q: Is it sinful if couples copulate in an unnatural position? A: An unnatural position is, if coition takes place in a different manner, viz, by sitting, standing, lying on the side, or from behind, after the manner of cattle; or if the man lies under the woman: all are sinful.

Sadly, we aren't told how it was decided that all of this is sinful.

[Curvaceous Kate]

I've been reading "The Most Dangerous Book" by Kevin Birmingham, the story of the publication difficulties of James Joyce's 'Ulysses". there's quite a lot about the obscenity laws in the UK and US, and part of the thesis is that these laws were actually used for social control. Anyhow, there's a bit about the sectarian riots in the UK in the mid 1850s; partly, this started because of the publication of "The Confessional Unmasked", a protestant publication supposedly recording theological Catholic tracts. Questions that priests might have to consider in the confessional included:

Q: Are looks or filthy words between married couples sinful? A Sometimes
Q: Was it a sin to think of your deceased wife while having intercourse with your second wife? A Yes
Q: Does a widow sin by deriving pleasure from memories of intercourse? A yes, grievously
Q: Is it sinful if couples copulate in an unnatural position? A: An unnatural position is, if coition takes place in a different manner, viz, by sitting, standing, lying on the side, or from behind, after the manner of cattle; or if the man lies under the woman: all are sinful.

Sadly, we aren't told how it was decided that all of this is sinful.

It beggars belief that people actually lived by this code. What a load of utter crap!

[Davidontour]

Full Article Here



Please do read the full article, but I have picked this paragraph out, as I feel it has such deep engraved parallels with the situation we find our selves in now. This article is with regard to the 796 bodies that were found in Galway, belonging to the babies and children of single Mothers allegedly cared for by the Church.

Why did these poor defenseless children die? Not because they were ill, or evil or any natural reason, but because the church was scared that their future successes in life would undermine their survival.

In the same way today, members of the church are trying to stop Sex Workers having a voice, that would show that very normal, average, intelligent and above average women are actively choosing Sex Work, because it is the right choice for them at this moment in time. If anyone speaks up, who does not fit the stereo type of drug addict, rock bottom, destitute alcoholic, then they will single them out and say they are the exception and not the rule and for that reason they don't matter.

The charitable organisations appear to be run by members of the Church and have connections with the Sisters of Mercy and the Magdalane Laundries. These people are protecting their income, as they get huge funding for a relatively small problem and then when they are able to help a Sex Worker who wants help, there are conditions and one of them appears to be brain washing. If you want their services, then you need to be willing to change your attitude towards Sex Work and believe that you have been raped repeatedly. It can't be as simple as just wanting to stop and move on.

I don't know about you, but articles like this, make me wonder if anyone really believes in God or the religion that they are preaching to people. Surely if your belief is strong, you don't have to suppress and murder to keep people in their place and make them do as you say? I have nothing against marriage, I even tried it myself once, but marriage should not come before life and life can be born out of marriage and grow to be great. Who knows if the next Oscar Wilde, Peter 'O' Toole, or even Spike Milligan wasn't amongst the deceased, who never got the opportunity to enrich the Country they were born in.

It's hard to believe that the church is still being heard with regards to morals and the law even today. Even now they are fighting to keep the church by suppressing people's free will and more ashamedly their actions are going to hurt the truly vulnerable, the real coerced and trafficked victims, who's voices will never be heard or found, because the industry will be forced even deeper underground.

Give mercy to those poor lives that are being threatened by there unashamed attempt to keep control!

I wonder if the general public will ever cotton on to the fact that there is absolutely nothing wrong with two consenting adults having sex, with or without payment? Or will it always be used as a weapon to hit people with and attempt to degrade them?

Excellent post and thread.

Religion in my opinion has little or nothing to do with belief in god -- it is used as a weapon and a control system for purposes of power and money. The attempts to control all aspects of sexuality is nonsensical on the surface but underneath it serves the purpose of instilling guilt and controlling others.

There can be fewer more heinous crimes than the abuse of children, yet the church in Ireland have done so on a huge scale and appear to not only be largely getting away with it, but are being funded towards further potential abuse via NGOs. Deference to organised religion in this country needs to end.

[Empirical]

It beggars belief that people actually lived by this code. What a load of utter crap!

The need for the codes suggest that people weren't living by them—and, of course they are crap. There's one asking if fellatio is always a mortal sin; the ambiguous answer is "opinions vary". Sounds as if people were much like today, except they had great doses of guilt and shame rammed down their throats.