Vatican secrecy ‘let German school abusers go unpunished’

Germany has blamed a “wall of silence” created by the Vatican for hampering investigations into decades of abuse of schoolchildren by Catholic clergy.

Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger, the Justice Minister, said that Vatican secrecy rules, including a 2001 directive requiring even the most serious cases to be investigated first by Church officials, were complicating efforts to shed light on claims of abuse at some of Germany’s most highly regarded schools.

Read full article...

So, religion is now a factor during sentencing in court?

In August last year, Shamso Miah, a twenty-five year-old man from northeast London, went from prayers at a mosque to a bank, where he got into an altercation with Mohammed Furcan over who was first in the queue. The argument resulted in Miah punching Mr Furcan in the face before running away. Furcan followed Miah, who proceeded to knock him to the ground and break his jaw. Miah claimed that he had been acting in self-defense, but CCTV footage made it clear that he had not. So, Miah assaulted a man, ran away, and then lied about it. He eventually pleaded guilty at the Inner London Crown Court.

Judge Booth (aka Mrs Cherie Blair, wife of the ex-Prime Minister), in delivering sentence said:

'I am going to suspend this sentence for the period of two years based on the fact you are a religious person and have not been in trouble before. You are a religious man and you know this is not acceptable behaviour.'

There was an immediate outcry, and a complaint was made by the National Secular Society to the Office of Judicial Supervision. The President of the NSS said:

'This is a very worrying case of discrimination that appears to show that religious people get different treatment in Cherie Blair’s court.'

As it turns out, the sentence itself was not particularly spectacular. As a first time offender, regardless of his religious convictions, Miah would most likely have received a suspended sentence from any judge in the land. But what about that reference to his religious beliefs?

The inference was certainly, as religious faith and good character seem to go hand-in-hand in Cherie Blair's mind, that a person without faith would lack any moral compass. Furthermore, Miah's religious beliefs were not raised in mitigation, so Mrs Blair chose to raise the matter of her own accord. Miah's religious faith must have been so prominent in her mind that she felt compelled to highlight it.

What concerns me is not this case specifically, as Miah seems to have received the same sentence that any other man in his position, whether religious or not, would have received. What concerns me is the fact that, regardless of the sentence, Mrs Blair was influenced by Miah's faith and was compelled to state her belief, in court, that the religious are, for no reason other than that they are religious, automatically good.

Miah assaulted a man, fled, and lied about it. In what way is that good behaviour? In what way did his devout faith affect his actions in a positive manner? He had just left a mosque, so had been praying shortly before the assault, but this did not prevent him from breaking Mr Furcan's jaw.

Also, Mrs Blair seems to be wholly ignorant of the connection throughout history between devout faith and bad behaviour, though it seems impossible that she should not be aware of the crusades, the inquisition, 9/11, etc.

In this instance, the man who stood before her did not receive a more lenient sentence, but Mrs Blair has demonstrated that she is influenced by the existence, and therefore also the absence, of religious faith. So, what about next time?

The dissemination of false information

I believe that this video is meant to show Comfort's recent distribution of his 'special' edition of Darwin's 'The Origin of Species' in a positive light. It simply demonstrates that evangelising Christians will go to any lengths to snare unsuspecting and otherwise rational individuals with tricks and misinformation.

What makes Christianity appealing?

Remove the reward system from the Christian religion and the number of believers would drop dramatically. The idea that believers go to a wonderful place called Heaven, where they have mansions and streets paved with gold, is a huge draw. The idea that non-belief results in a trip to that nasty place called Hell is a great incentive to believe. Belief is motivated by a desire to continue beyond this existence in paradise - belief is selfish. Despite the insistence of Christians that their love for God is the driving force behind their continued faith, it is a selfish desire to continue on beyond this existence that motivates them. This is borne out by the techniques used to convert others to their faith.

I'm including a video of Ray Comfort on the Pier at Huntington Beach, CA, preaching the gospel in the open air. Comfort's technique is typical of every other evangelising Christian out there:

1. Persuade the person that they are bad.
2. Introduce them to the concept of Hell.
3. Introduce them to the idea of salvation.
4. Persuade them to save themselves.




To begin with, the Christian idea of what constitutes a 'bad' person is derived entirely from the Bible. It has absolutely nothing to do with the way a person behaves towards his fellow man and relates only to his breaking of the rules outlined in scripture. Did Comfort ask the man if he gave to charity, helped the elderly, made an effort to be kind, or worked hard? He had no interest in whether or not that young man was a humanitarian. The reason? It is irrelevant. It doesn't matter how kind and generous you are; if you have blasphemed you are bad, if you have lied even once then you are bad, if you've looked at a woman or man in a lustful manner then you are bad.

Consider the fact that it's impossible to go through life without ever telling a lie ('does my bum look fat in this?' - 'no, honey'). It's impossible to never look at a man or woman in a lustful manner. In short, if you have been human all your life then you are bad. So, with no reference whatsoever to how you actually interact with your fellow humans - how good a dad or husband you are, how much you contribute to society - you are declared to be a bad person.

Notice how part of Comfort's routine involves making the person feel small? The use of the words liar, thief, and murderer are all supposed to make the person feel ashamed - shame is a natural response to being outed as a liar and thief after all. Demoralisation is a big part of the conversion process.

I've never personally seen a video in which Comfort managed to get his way. He tends to view just having a person listen to him as a success, regardless of how little impact his words are having. But let's imagine that he manages to humiliate a person enough to have them feeling that they are worthy of some sort of punishment. Then along comes the promise of personal salvation. Not salvation for everyone if you convert, just salvation for you personally. Your family doesn't get to go to Heaven just because you convert, the poor aren't fed, the homeless aren't homed, and the world remains just as it it. By converting you have not aided anyone but yourself.

It is the base nature of man, the individual's desire to save himself, that makes conversion possible. Christians like Comfort recognise this fact, and that's why they place so much emphasis upon forcing their listeners to confront the idea of Hell. Who wouldn't want to avoid going to live in a fiery pit after all?

Belief for the love of God? Heck no... for the love of self.

Stephen Fry speaks out against the Catholic Church

Part I:



Part II:

So, who and what am I?

Who am I? My name is Cenza Grillo and I'm a writer. A writer who is concerned for the physical and mental health of the human species if the church is allowed to go on as it is.

What am I? It's generally expected that anyone writing about the ills of revealed religion will be an atheist. I am not. I am a deist - more precisely, I am a non-religious philosophical agnostic deist. In truth, all deists are agnostic and accept that we cannot know what is out there, but as many people don't realise this it makes sense to add on that tag to be clear. I do not believe in a god or gods, I do not go to church, worship, pray, expect to be rewarded in the afterlife, or adhere to any rules laid out in any written scripture. My own simple belief is that the big bang was possibly brought about by some First Cause, whatever that may have been, and that evolution kicked in from there. I am a philosophical deist because I invest more in considering the possibility than accepting it as a reality. There is nothing more to it than that, and I shan't be suggesting to anyone who reads this blog that they should consider converting to deism themselves. I am offering this information about my personal belief system in the spirit of full disclosure, in case anyone makes the assumption that I am an atheist and is disappointed to discover otherwise at a later date.