Mayhem in Canada

  

Category:  News & Politics

By:  vic-eldred  •  3 weeks ago  •  269 comments

Mayhem in Canada
“I can’t help but think that burning down churches is actually depriving people who are in need of grieving and healing and mourning from places where they can grieve and reflect and look for support.”

Recently Canada has been experiencing a deluge of Church burnings and vandalism. It is almost reminiscent of the "Kristallnacht" in many ways. In British Columbia four Catholic Churches were burned in the past week. Over 20 have been burned or vandalized. On "Canada Day" the statues of Queen Victoria, Queen Elizabeth and other historical figures were attacked and/or vandalized. In Victoria, British Columbia, a statue of Captain James Cook was dismantled and thrown into the harbor. There hasn't been much coverage of it here in the US, of course, we got our own dose of it in 2020. It now seems like the radical left is on the march everywhere in North America. Canada being to the left of the US, it is no surprise that the government had little response. Justin Trudeau waited a weak before responding.

9294567c-7802-11e9-933d-71f872cf659b_image_hires_020917.JPG?itok=cXJKJPU4
Justin Trudeau

At that point, all he could muster was:

It’s real and it is fully understandable given the shameful history we are all become more aware of.” 

“I can’t help but think that burning down churches is actually depriving people who are in need of grieving and healing and mourning from places where they can grieve and reflect and look for support.”. ....Justin Trudeau.

Trudeau introduced an anti-hate crimes bill into the Canadian Parliament that is targeting mean tweets and facebook posts and in the meantime there are literally places of worship being torched, which is an obvious hate crime via antifa style terrorists. All of that must have been for show because when real hate crimes happen Trudeau is practically silent on the matter. 

As in the US there are government officials who are actively supporting the mob:

The executive director of the BC Civil Liberties Association (BCCLA) is facing criticism over comments she made on social media in response to the burning of multiple churches in the wake of the discovery of human remains in unmarked graves at former residential schools.

AALLW0o.img?h=511&w=768&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f&x=276&y=198
Harsha Walia

In a June 30th tweet responding to a news article about a pair of Catholic churches burning down, Walia wrote "burn it all down."

As of today she still has her job.



As usual, the radical left has an excuse for all this destruction. A very familiar one. There have been numerous reports of a discovery of more than 600 unmarked graves in southern Saskatchewan and another report of 215 bodies in British Columbia. All in the vicinity of Church run schools. As with the US, the complaint typically involves very old history and the remedy begins with the left's ideological formula of establishing oppressor and victim. After that off come the gloves and everything is allowed.

Canadian school children will most likely have to be taught that approximately 150,000 Indigenous children were once forced to attend residential schools, which operated for more than 120 years in Canada. More than 60% of the schools were run by the Catholic Church and thus the modern Catholic Church is now the object of this colossal hate.

That's today's lesson.





Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1  author  Vic Eldred    3 weeks ago

Dark days are here for religious freedom in Canada.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
1.1  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    3 weeks ago
It is almost reminiscent of the "Kristallnacht" in many ways.

It is NOT reminiscent of the "Kristallnacht" in ANY way Vic. Just STOP!

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.1.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Dulay @1.1    3 weeks ago

Twenty Churches were burned down. How is that not  reminiscent of the "Kristallnacht" ?????

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
1.1.2  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.1    3 weeks ago

Vic, that's being hysterical.  Kristallnacht was an organized attack on innocent Jews.  The anger of the natives for the slaughter of the native children by the Catholic Church, with the Pope REFUSING to at least apologize for it, has boiled over.  I don't agree with the vandalism, but evoking Krystallnacht is like trivializing The Holocaust.  You're taking it too far.  There was an article on Canada Television News that many Catholics are leaving the Church because they have lost respect for it and don't want to be identified with it.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.1.3  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @1.1.2    3 weeks ago
Kristallnacht was an organized attack on innocent Jews. 

And are the modern Catholics of Canada not innocent?  Think of what you are saying?


 with the Pope REFUSING to at least apologize for it, has boiled over. 

That justifies the burning of 20 Churches?


I don't agree with the vandalism, but evoking Krystallnacht is like trivializing The Holocaust.  

Not in this case. Are you denying that the burning of 20 Churches is a hate crime?


You're taking it too far. 

Not in this case!


There was an article on Canada Television News that many Catholics are leaving the Church because they have lost respect for it and don't want to be identified with it.

There it is. I believe it is you that went too far. [deleted]

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
1.1.4  Trout Giggles  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.3    3 weeks ago

Leaving a Church is not persecution. And it's very rude to accuse Buzz of religious persecution.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
1.1.5  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.3    3 weeks ago

I said Krystallnacht was an ORGANIZED attack, organized and invoked by Hitler and his minions and carried out throughout Germany.  The Jews were dragged out of their shops and homes and beaten.  The burning of the churches were individual acts of terrorism, AND I SAID I DID NOT AGREE WITH IT.  There is no comparison.  Even the native leaders have been critical of the vandalism as has the government.  I did not say the vandalism was justified so do not accuse me of that.  Maybe it is a hate crime, I don't know for sure.  Yes you DID take it too far.  It was NOT even close to being like Krystallnacht - you have trivialized Krystallnacht.  If I had not posted this reply I would have flagged you for a personal insult for saying I would not defend a religion from persecution, but by responding I negated my right to do so.  

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
1.1.6  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.1    3 weeks ago
Twenty Churches were burned down.

Prove it. 

How is that not  reminiscent of the "Kristallnacht" ?????

First of all, there is NO evidence that the Church vandalism is based on religious animus. In fact, I would wager that the perpetrators are Christians and even Catholic. 

Secondly, the vandalism and/or arson of a couple of Catholic Churches doesn't compare to the destruction of over 200 synagogues, TENS OF THOUSANDS of Jewish businesses and the arrest of over 30,000 Jews. 

Thirdly, the Jews ONLY 'crime' was being JEWS. The Catholic Church is responsible for the death of thousands of First Nation children. The Catholic Church is responsible for LYING about the number of children who died while in their 'care'. The Catholic Church is responsible for burying those children in UNMARKED graves. The Catholic Church is responsible for refusing to live up to the PROMISE they made in 2007 to pay restitution to the victims and their survivors. EVERY other Church denomination that made that same PROMISE payed their part LONG ago. 

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
1.1.7  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.3    3 weeks ago
And are the modern Catholics of Canada not innocent?  Think of what you are saying?

STOP trying to pretend that we are talking about ancient history Vic. The last 'Native school' closed in 1996. There are victims alive TODAY. 

Oh and BTFW, the Roman Catholic Diocese of Saskatoon solicited 'modern Catholics of Canada' to donate to a fund to pay the 25 MILLION they PROMISED for victim and survivor restitution. The raised just $34,650. 

So as you can see, the answer to your question is FUCK NO. 

 
 
 
devangelical
PhD Principal
1.1.8  devangelical  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.1    3 weeks ago
How is that not  reminiscent of the "Kristallnacht" ?????

how is that not false equivalency?

 
 
 
Hallux
Freshman Principal
1.1.9  Hallux  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.1    3 weeks ago
Twenty Churches were burned down

Did Tucker name them?

I came up with 5 all of which were on Native Land. 10 churches were 'vandalized': see pic at 3.3 ... meanwhile the kids outside are playing street hockey in the "mayhem". 

There are no fools as tiresome as those who have wit, and there are no fools as dangerous as those who misuse words.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
1.1.10  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Hallux @1.1.9    3 weeks ago

I wondered about that quotation so I checked it out...

th?id=OIP.0TE4sxf68Fuq1Fgva1Fr4QHaLY&w=110&h=170&rs=1&qlt=80&o=6&pid=3.1
"No fools so wearisome as those who have some wit.  François de La Rochefoucauld, Maximes  (1665–1678), No. 451. Translation: J. W. Willis Bund and J. Hain Friswell (1871). Variant: No fools are so difficult to manage as those with some brains."
 
 
 
Krishna
Professor Principal
1.1.11  Krishna  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.1    3 weeks ago
How is that not  reminiscent of the "Kristallnacht" ?????

Either you'repoorly informed-- or deliberately being manipulative.

I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume your motives are positive-- and that you're just uninformed about Kristalnicht.

Two easy questions should clear things up quxikly and easily

1. What was the reason the  Nazis perpetrated Kristalnicht?

2. What was the reason the churches were attacked?

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
Professor Principal
1.1.12  Bob Nelson  replied to  Dulay @1.1    3 weeks ago
It is almost reminiscent of the "Kristallnacht"

This is a fascist two-fer.

1. The author renders a profoundly horrific moment in history... almost meaningless.

Kristallnacht was highly publicized. It was the Nazis announcement of what they intend to do to the Jews.

The murder of the NA children was silent, and has been kept hidden.

2. Truth and fact are muddied to unrecognizable. The Big Lie can only succeed if truth and fact are killed. 

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
1.1.13  Dulay  replied to  Krishna @1.1.11    3 weeks ago
What was the reason the churches were attacked?

Based on the majority of the comments from 'our readers' WHY the churches were attacked is irrelevant. 

Yesterday I read a Church media source that actually labels the vandalism of the churches as 'religious persecution'. Talk about gaslighting. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.1.14  Tessylo  replied to  Krishna @1.1.11    3 weeks ago
"I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume your motives are positive-- and that you're just uninformed about Kristalnicht."

jrSmiley_80_smiley_image.gif

You're a kind soul so please don't take my eye roll the wrong way

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Guide
1.1.15  Sean Treacy  replied to  Dulay @1.1.13    3 weeks ago
terday I read a Church media source that actually labels the vandalism of the churches as 'religious persecution'.

Of course it is. What don't you understand? Catholic Churches are being signaled out for destruction  because of their religious affiliation. It's textbook. 

Hopefully the terrorists  committing these acts spend a long time jail. Arson, terrorism and hate crimes add up to lengthy sentences.. 

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
1.1.16  Kavika   replied to  Sean Treacy @1.1.15    3 weeks ago
Catholic Churches are being signaled out for destruction  because of their religious affiliation. It's textbook. 

LOL, what a load of BS...They are being, as you call it, signaled out for the religious affiliation because they caused the death of thousands of indigenous children through sexual abuse, physical abuse, forced labor et al...and all the while trying to hide what they are doing.

Sad that whiney pissants feel that the RCC is justified in the destruction of indigenous children.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.1.17  Tessylo  replied to  Kavika @1.1.16    3 weeks ago

Forever victim blamers.

It's sad and shameful and deplorable.  

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Guide
1.1.18  Sean Treacy  replied to  Kavika @1.1.16    3 weeks ago
t whiney pissants feel that the RCC is justified in the destruction of indigenous children.

..Of course you justify terrorism.  When your only principle is "is it my side doing it?" there's no crime can't justify.  

So you agree that descendants of white settlers in Minnesota, for instance, can commit terrorist acts against Indian property for all the heinous crimes Indians committed against women and  children in 1862, for instance?  Historical acts justify present terrorism would at least be a principle....

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
1.1.19  Kavika   replied to  Sean Treacy @1.1.18    3 weeks ago

I didn't justify anything, I pointed out to you since you don't have the ability to see the RCC as a purveyor of death of Indigenous children is what it really is about. 

So you agree that descendants of white settlers in Minnesota, for instance, can commit terrorist acts against Indian property for all the heinous crimes Indians committed against women and  children in 1862, for instance?  Historical acts justify present terrorism would at least be a principle....

LOL, another strawman, which of course has nothing to do with the article and what the discussion is about.

If you chose to ignore or justify what the RCC was done to indigenous children that's on you, although it's not a good look but not surprising considering the source.

 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Guide
1.1.20  Sean Treacy  replied to  Kavika @1.1.19    3 weeks ago

I didn't justify anything

Great, then we agree the people targeting Catholic Churches for destruction are terrorists guilty of hate crimes. 

OL, another strawman, which of course has nothing to do with the article and what the discussion is abou

Sure. Since we agree that the people burning Catholic Churches are terrorists and deserving of lengthy prison sentences, I withdraw my statement. 

you chose to ignore or justify what the RCC was done to indigenous children that's on yo

Now that's a strawman. Textbook example. 

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
Professor Principal
1.1.21  Bob Nelson  replied to  Kavika @1.1.16    3 weeks ago
Sad that whiney pissants feel that the RCC is justified in the destruction of indigenous children.

jrSmiley_79_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
1stwarrior
Professor Expert
1.1.22  1stwarrior  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.1.20    3 weeks ago

Sean - you're reaching.  Discuss the substance of the thread and please quit trying to put words and thoughts into other's mouths/heads.

 
 
 
1stwarrior
Professor Expert
1.1.23  1stwarrior  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.1.18    3 weeks ago

Like to see those "heinous" crimes the Indians committed.

How 'bout some examples and links to support that statement.

 
 
 
1stwarrior
Professor Expert
1.1.24  1stwarrior  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.1.15    3 weeks ago

No, Catholic Churches are being signaled out because of their actions - not their affiliation.

Hell, if it was for their affiliation, then the "destruction" would be against their affiliation claims of being "Godly" and doing "God's will".

BS.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Guide
1.1.25  Sean Treacy  replied to  1stwarrior @1.1.24    3 weeks ago
atholic Churches are being signaled out because of their actions

Yes, that's the justification for almost all acts of terrorism. 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Guide
1.1.26  Sean Treacy  replied to  1stwarrior @1.1.23    3 weeks ago

You can start with this. An example:

Stephen and Clarissa Henderson lived near Beaver Creek, very near the Earle and Carrothers families on Section
22. Clarissa was ill the morning of the war. The Earle, Henderson, White and Carrothers families made plans to
escape together and lay Clarissa on a feather mattress in the family buggy. One-half mile from their homes, they
were attacked by the Dakota. Henderson, who was fluent in Dakota, attempted to negotiate their release by
surrendering their wagons and animals but keeping the buggy which they would then have to pull by hand. They
thought they had an agreement, but suddenly the Dakota began firing at them. The men dropped the buggy and ran.

The Dakota pulled Clarissa and the mattress from the buggy and set it on fire. Clarissa, her two daughters,
one named Lydia, age 2, and the other name unknown, age 9 months, were savagely burned to death.
Stephen miraculously escaped and later joined the Joseph Brown burying party that buried Clarissa and their
daughters. That next day, September 2, Stephen was killed at the Battle of Birch Coulee, so there were no
Henderson family survivors. 

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
1.1.27  Dulay  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.1.25    3 weeks ago
Yes, that's the justification for almost all acts of terrorism.

You keep throwing around the terrorism label yet you obviously don't understand what terrorism is. 

Tell me Sean, what 'political aim' are the vandals seeking? 

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
1.1.28  Dulay  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.1.15    3 weeks ago
What don't you understand?

The willful ignorance of your comment. 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Guide
1.1.29  Sean Treacy  replied to  Dulay @1.1.27    3 weeks ago
 keep throwing around the terrorism label yet you obviously don't understand what terrorism is. 

Lol.. That's rich, coming from someone who doesn't understand what  vandalism is. 

Burning a church down isn't "vandalism"

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
1.1.30  Dulay  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.1.29    3 weeks ago

So you don't have an answer to my question. Got ya. 

You should note that the seed states that churches were 'vandalized' multiple times. I'm pretty fucking sure that qualifies as 'vandalism'.

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
1.1.31  Kavika   replied to  Sean Treacy @1.1.20    3 weeks ago

You Sean that supports the church that committed pedophilia, murders, child slavery, and cultural genocide against indigenous children are concerned about the burning of Cathloic Churches and call it terrorism. 

What would you call what the RCC did, a ''time out''...

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Guide
1.1.32  Sean Treacy  replied to  Kavika @1.1.31    3 weeks ago
ou Sean that supports the church that committed p

LOl... Nice Strawman.   Put every criminous clerk in jail. 

rned about the burning of Cathloic Churche

Yep. I like most people oppose arson.  I guess you don't. 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Guide
1.1.33  Sean Treacy  replied to  Dulay @1.1.30    3 weeks ago
. I'm pretty fucking sure that qualifies as 'vandalism'.

Lol.. As you dishonestly ignore the destruction of churches.  You are so ham handed with your attempts to minimize what happened.

Let's have a laugh and imagine your shrill posts if if right wing loons were destroying mosques as some sort of retribution campaign.  Let's see you pretend you'd ignore the destruction of mosques, refer to them only as vandals and deny the mosque destroying campaign wasn't terrorism.   Your ham handed bias  makes it impossible to take your claims seriously. 

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
1.1.34  Dulay  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.1.33    3 weeks ago
Lol.. As you dishonestly ignore the destruction of churches.  You are so ham handed with your attempts to minimize what happened.

Oh DO please explain how recognizing the vandalism of churches indicates that I am  ignoring the destruction of churches Sean? 

How about you also cite which of my comments minimizes what happened. Try not to be shrill in your reply. 

 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Guide
1.1.35  Sean Treacy  replied to  Dulay @1.1.34    3 weeks ago
plain how recognizing the vandalism of churches indicates that I am  ignoring the destruction of churches Sean

By characterizing people who destroy churches  as vandals.   Do you refer to  the destruction of the Twin Towers as vandalism, too?.  

ow about you also cite which of my comments minimizes what happened

Every time you call the people who destroyed churches vandals.  

 Try not to be shrill in your reply. 

Lol.. Now you moved onto projection.....

 
 
 
1stwarrior
Professor Expert
1.1.36  1stwarrior  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.1.26    3 weeks ago

And, as Paul Harvey, my hero and idol, would say - "Here's the rest of the story".

Nice try though Sean - almost got away with it.

 
 
 
Gordy327
Professor Principal
1.1.37  Gordy327  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.1.35    3 weeks ago

How do you characterize those who destroy churches? A vandal is someone who deliberately damages or destroys public or private property. So Dulay is correct in the usage of the term. 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Guide
1.1.38  Sean Treacy  replied to  1stwarrior @1.1.36    3 weeks ago

" Here's the rest of the story".

That doesn't address what I wrote.

To the extent it does,  pointing out that people were hung for those crimes proves they occurred. 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Guide
1.1.39  Sean Treacy  replied to  Gordy327 @1.1.37    3 weeks ago

So Dulay is correct in the usage of the term. 

When I see you and Dulay exclusively  referring to those involved in 1/6 as vandals, I'll take you seriously. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.1.40  TᵢG  replied to  Gordy327 @1.1.37    3 weeks ago
A vandal is someone who deliberately damages or destroys public or private property. So Dulay is correct in the usage of the term. 

This really blows my mind.   I have wasted a lot of my time here dealing with Dulay whining that I used the word 'mob' to connote a group of angry people engaging in vandalism and violence.   Yet here Dulay clearly recognizes at least the vandalism part.

Fascinating.

While I think anyone can understand why these people are angry (furious is justified) what is important is to make productive progress to right this wrong (as much as that is possible) and to ensure nothing like this happens again.

Violence typically is counterproductive to such an end since public opinion often looks harshly on those engaging in violence.   The violence diminishes their credibility.   There are plenty of productive methods of dealing with this.   Immediately, instead of violence one should consider directing all that anger, frustration energy into organized peaceful protests.   Use social media to organize and fund same.   Inform the media to get coverage.   Large groups of people who have been wronged protesting writ large with a clear message and behind-the-scenes networking to get the message out to the public would be, IMO, substantially more productive and positive.   That then strengthens efforts to use the legal system to go after the Catholic church.

Finally, when past efforts have failed, one does not just resort to violence.  One continues with creative new approaches.   If the court of public opinion is being used then it is better to use it with positive actions rather than as a result of violence.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Guide
1.1.41  Sean Treacy  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.1.39    3 weeks ago

I see you and Dulay exclusively  referring to those involved in 1/6 as vandals, I'll take you seriously. 

The more apt comparison would be if you exclusively call those involved in 1/6 trespassers. 

 
 
 
Gordy327
Professor Principal
1.1.42  Gordy327  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.1.39    3 weeks ago

The vandals are those who engaged in damage and/or destruction of property. It's not a difficult concept. So I'm not sure why that would seem to be difficult to understand. 

 
 
 
Gordy327
Professor Principal
1.1.43  Gordy327  replied to  TᵢG @1.1.40    3 weeks ago

I tend to agree. But as we've seen many times, people become emotional and irrational and react accordingly. Unfortunately,  violence is often the result, especially where large numbers of people are involved.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.1.44  TᵢG  replied to  Gordy327 @1.1.43    3 weeks ago

One could argue that violence is instinctual in most species;  we are all just wired that way (see the amygdala and the hypothalamus).    And while it is entirely understandable, it typically is counterproductive.  

 
 
 
Gordy327
Professor Principal
1.1.45  Gordy327  replied to  TᵢG @1.1.44    3 weeks ago

Correct on both points.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
1.1.46  Dulay  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.1.35    3 weeks ago
By characterizing people who destroy churches  as vandals. 

When did I do that Sean? I asked you a question about the vandals. I did NOT deny that there were arsonists.

Every time you call the people who destroyed churches vandals.  

So never. 

Lol.. Now you moved onto projection.....

I have no intention of following your practices Sean. 

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
1.1.47  Dulay  replied to  TᵢG @1.1.40    3 weeks ago
That then strengthens efforts to use the legal system to go after the Catholic church.

By now, you KNOW that the legal system utterly failed to 'go after the Catholic Church' in any substantive way. 

Finally, when past efforts have failed, one does not just resort to violence.  One continues with creative new approaches.   If the court of public opinion is being used then it is better to use it with positive actions rather than as a result of violence.

AGAIN, the 'court of public opinion' isn't the issue, it's the court that officiates the legal system that you continue to tout.

Instead of paying the restitution and being transparent, as they agreed to do, the Catholic Church chose to LIE about the events and instead invest in hiring a highly paid legal team to argue their position in court. They argued that the fulfilled their duty to use their 'best efforts' to raise the funds to fulfill their 25 million dollar promise.

Note that this is the CATHOLIC CHURCH that is estimated to have over 6 BILLION in bank holdings alone. But of course, they manage to convince all too many courts that it's Catholic Church Diocese are 'decentralized' so the Vatican itself isn't liable.   

As I posted, they only managed to collect $34,650. Yet during the same time period the Catholic Church managed to collect over 28 million to build ANOTHER cathedral in Saskatoon. The Bishop ADMITTED that there was 'a major effort' in the  fundraising effort for the cathedral while they were 'weak' in their efforts to raise funds to fulfill their promise. Their legal team managed to get the court to agree, behind closed doors, that the Catholic Church put forth their 'best effort'. 

It's a moral and ethical failure by the Catholic Church to manipulate the legal system to their advantage. The Canadian government at the time chose not to appeal. The current Canadian government should revisit that decision if they can. 

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
Professor Principal
1.1.48  Bob Nelson  replied to  Dulay @1.1.47    3 weeks ago

It's complicated. 

For two thousand years, the RCC has stood in both alliance and opposition to whatever temporal power was contemporaneous. It learned to follow its own rules. Considering the moral value of most secular powers, that was kinda logical.

We want the church to accept secular supremacy... in America... but to stand up to dictators elsewhere. It's understandable that the Church finds this... odd. 

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
1.1.49  Dulay  replied to  Bob Nelson @1.1.48    3 weeks ago
We want the church to accept secular supremacy... in America... but to stand up to dictators elsewhere. It's understandable that the Church finds this... odd. 

The Catholic Church takes advantage of 'secular supremacy in America' by holding TRILLIONS of dollars worth of real estate and business wealth while claiming 'non-profit' and 'tax-exempt' status. Add that to taxpayer funding to support their 'charity work'.

Hell, according to federal data, the Roman Catholic Church is among the biggest  recipient of PPP. The Roman Catholic Church lobbied the Trump administration to grant the Church 'special dispensation' of SBA regulations and then marshalled it's resources to help it's 'affiliates' to garner at least 3 BILLION from the fund. These funds went to many of the complicit Diocese that the supremacy of secular America found liable for horrid acts of abuse and caused them to pay civil restitution. 

In the case of the Church being granted a separate agreement and then a low ball 'buy out' in Canada, the Church manipulated the 'secular supremacy' of the Canadian court in a morally and ethically reprehensible way. The Church also violated the agreement by failing to be transparent about the treatment of First Nation children in their care. The Canadian government let them get away with it. 

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
1.1.50  Kavika   replied to  Sean Treacy @1.1.32    3 weeks ago
Yep. I like most people oppose arson.  I guess you don't. 

Most people oppose physically and sexually abusing children as well but there are those that think a Catholic Church is much more valuable than dead children. I guess you're one of those.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Guide
1.1.51  Sean Treacy  replied to  Kavika @1.1.50    3 weeks ago

It took you all that time to come up with that silly strawman? 

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
Professor Principal
1.1.52  Bob Nelson  replied to  Dulay @1.1.49    3 weeks ago

What you say is true.

What I said remains true, too.

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
1.1.53  Kavika   replied to  Sean Treacy @1.1.51    3 weeks ago

You should talk about strawman, you're the king of them.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.1.54  TᵢG  replied to  Dulay @1.1.47    3 weeks ago
By now, you KNOW that the legal system utterly failed to 'go after the Catholic Church' in any substantive way. 

My point is and has been that violence and vandalism is counterproductive.   It does not matter how many times a particular legal route has failed, violent acts harm the credibility of those engaging in the violence.  This is important because public opinion is always a factor in these matters.   Public opinion looks down on those who engage in violence.   Far better is to act in a way that increases public opinion (and awareness) to the cause by engaging in civil protests, social media campaigns, etc.     Not violence and vandalism.

AGAIN, the 'court of public opinion' isn't the issue, it's the court that officiates the legal system that you continue to tout.

Public opinion is most definitely a factor; it is stupid to dismiss it as irrelevant.   And what is this 'tout' crap?   I am not touting the legal system ... the legal system is, factually, the key mechanism of our society for righting (as much as can be done) wrongs in our society.    It is what it is.   This is not touting, this is recognizing reality.   

Note that this is the CATHOLIC CHURCH that is estimated to have over 6 BILLION in bank holdings alone. But of course, they manage to convince all too many courts that it's Catholic Church Diocese are 'decentralized' so the Vatican itself isn't liable.   

Yes the Catholic church is a powerful entity.   The only effective way to prevail against such a powerful entity is to leverage the power of civil society:  public opinion + legal system.   And do not come back again and simply note that it has not worked.   My response will again be that past failures do not mean that one should give up and simply engage in violence.  That will be counterproductive.   Instead, the most effective route is to keep trying with different methods that are constructive to the cause rather than those that harm the credibility of those wronged.

And if you claim that violence and vandalism is the only method that remains then I will tell you that your defeatist attitude will result in failure.  


What offends me most is that your comments continue to imply I have been defending the church.     

My position all along has been that violence and vandalism is counterproductive to the cause of those wronged and the most effective way to deal with issues is through the mechanisms of civil society (and that means legally supported by positive public opinion).   

The Catholic church has engaged in horrific acts and I want this to be dealt with as effectively as possible.  

My position is one that should not have any objection.   Yet here you are continuing to spin my position from one of finding the most effective way to right this wrong (as much as that is possible) into a pretense that I am in some way defending the Catholic church.

Cease engaging in this spin of my position.   Take your trolling elsewhere.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
1.1.55  Dulay  replied to  TᵢG @1.1.54    2 weeks ago
Cease engaging in this spin of my position.   

That's pretty hypocritical considering that you tried to spin MY position. 

I posted:

AGAIN, the 'court of public opinion' isn't the issue, it's the court that officiates the legal system that you continue to tout.

You reply with:

Public opinion is most definitely a factor; it is stupid to dismiss it as irrelevant. 

I neither denied that it is a factor OR dismissed it as irrelevant. 

Take your trolling elsewhere.

Cease your supercilious personal comments.

What offends me most is that your comments continue to imply I have been defending the church.  

You are the only one that can control your reaction to my comments. 

I have posted FACTS about the history of the issues that have come to a head in Canada between the First Nations and the Catholic Church.

Your incessant insistence that calm non-violent civility is the only correct and proper reaction comes across as a failure to empathize with the victims of the horror that the Church has perpetrated. 

Your posit that 'that violence and vandalism is counterproductive to the cause of those wronged' is refuted by our own history and the 'violent and vandalism' that predicated the American Revolution. 

 

 
 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.1.56  TᵢG  replied to  Dulay @1.1.55    2 weeks ago
Your incessant insistence that calm non-violent civility is the only correct and proper reaction comes across as a failure to empathize with the victims of the horror that the Church has perpetrated. 

Blatant dishonesty.  What is your problem Dulay?  

You take my position which I have stated repeatedly, highlighted, explained, etc:

The Catholic church has engaged in horrific acts and I want this to be dealt with as effectively as possible.  

and spin it into a notion that I do not empathize with the victims. 

What drives you to be so offensive?

I have repeatedly stated that violence and vandalism are counterproductive to the objective of dealing with this effectively.   Violence and vandalism typically hurts the credibility of those taking the action and harms the cause in general.    The most effective method for holding the Catholic church accountable is to leverage the power of public opinion (take actions to turn public opinion against the church, not the cause) and to leverage the power of the legal system.   Past legal failures does not mean one simply gives up and merely turn to violence and vandalism.   That is implicitly what you are arguing and my position is that will be counterproductive.

In short, I have stated all along what I think is the most effective way to right these wrongs (as much as possible).   You continue to spin that and pretend as though I am uncompassionate with the victims (dead and living) and am on the side of the church.

That is a flat out lie.   It is a disgusting display of intellectual dishonesty and trolling. 

Your posit that 'that violence and vandalism is counterproductive to the cause of those wronged' is refuted by our own history and the 'violent and vandalism' that predicated the American Revolution. 

The violence that preceded the American Revolution was the result of an ongoing conflict between American colonists as a whole and the British nation over increased taxation and forced monopolies.   The violence (e.g. the Boston Tea Party) did not predicate (serve as the foundation for) the American Revolution.   It was people expressing anger and frustration against occupation and exploitation by Britain.   The American Revolution was predicted on Britain's continued exploitation of the colonists; it was not predicated on specific acts of violence and vandalism (e.g. the Boston Tea Party).   

And, importantly, it was not a tiny group of people wronged;  the colonists as a whole were against the oppression.   The public opinion was against Britain.

The violence and vandalism by itself would have accomplished nothing.   On its own, it would have been dealt with by King George using his military might.   No way would Britain change its practices simply because of sporadic violence and vandalism events in the colonies.   The only way to change the practices of Britain was to defeat them in war (i.e. to leverage the power of the 'nation' akin to using the legal system + public opinion in this case).

You would have a (relatively speaking) tiny group of wronged individuals engage in continued violence and vandalism and somehow you think this will lead to bringing the Roman Catholic Church to its knees.   My position is that violence and vandalism turns public opinion against the vandals (and thus is counterproductive to the cause).   It creates a scenario of the Catholic Church as the victim and does absolutely nothing to force the church to be accountable for its acts.


What is your solution for this wrong?   You clearly support violence and vandalism so show me where this leads.   How does this right the wrongs against the victims?   Do you think the Catholic church is going to simply buckle and do the right thing because of vandalism?   The history of the Catholic church is that it uses its tools (money, influence, time) to make its problems disappear.  

Given you have implicitly argued against peaceful protests, against organized social media campaigns, against organized media involvement, against  engaging politicians and against  continuing to pursue legal avenues how will violence and vandalism right the wrongs?   Explain your grand plan.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
1.1.57  Dulay  replied to  TᵢG @1.1.56    2 weeks ago

Perhaps you should review how many times you've said 'My position' and how many DIFFERENT statements follow it. 

BTFW, I don't have a problem. 

Given you have implicitly argued against peaceful protests, against organized social media campaigns, against organized media involvement, against engaging politicians and against continuing to pursue legal avenues how will violence and vandalism right the wrongs? 

I thought you were averse to spin. That whole statement is BS. 

DO stop trying to hold me responsible for YOUR bias interpretation of my posts. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.1.58  TᵢG  replied to  Dulay @1.1.57    2 weeks ago

The word implicitly is operative.   You disagree with my position that violence and vandalism is counterproductive.   I have stated, explained and explained again that my position is that I want the wrongs to be righted as best as they can be.   You ignore that, suggest I have no empathy for the victims and fail to offer any other approach other violence and vandalism.   I have suggested how I would approach this and you have not once acknowledged any of my suggestions.

So your entire argument, by failure to even acknowledge the value of non-violent, no vandalism approaches, implicitly argues against these approaches.

Here you quote my question while failing to even recognize that I  presented how your collective posts have come across to me as the context on which I asked you to explain your approach.   I noted that your argument is implicitly against non-violent approaches and thus I would like to know how you expect to right these wrongs.   I asked you to explain your approach.

You ignored that too.   You have not explained your approach.   Instead you ignore the word 'implicitly' and deflect to more meta.


So do you have an honest direct answer to my question?:

TiG @1.1.56 ☞ "... how will violence and vandalism right the wrongs?       Explain your grand plan."
 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
1.1.59  Dulay  replied to  TᵢG @1.1.58    2 weeks ago
The word implicitly is operative. 

As are the words 'your interpretation'.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
1.1.60  TᵢG  replied to  Dulay @1.1.59    2 weeks ago

Correct, I gave you my interpretation of your series of comments.   Although you deeming my interpretation biased is not very persuasive given in this thread you have been the one on the spin attack while I have (until my last comment) defended my position, defended / explained (repeatedly) what I wrote and called out your intellectual dishonesty.

Given you recognize the meaning of ' implicitly ' as an operative adverb in my sentence, you should understand the context I provided for the question I asked you.

Yet again you do not answer my question:

TiG @ 1.1.56 ☞ "... how will violence and vandalism right the wrongs?       Explain your grand plan."
 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
1.2  XXJefferson51  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    3 weeks ago

I saw the subject matter of your seed on Fox News last night.  Totally despicable that it’s happening and that’s what the people doing it and tolerating it are as well. 

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
1.2.1  Kavika   replied to  XXJefferson51 @1.2    3 weeks ago

What is your religious excuse for the death of thousands of Indian children, XX?

 
 
 
Hallux
Freshman Principal
1.2.2  Hallux  replied to  XXJefferson51 @1.2    3 weeks ago

Tucker lied once again and once again you believed him.

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
1.3  Kavika   replied to  Vic Eldred @1    3 weeks ago
Dark days are here for religious freedom in Canada.

That is a fricking lie, just stop with your BS, Vic.

It is almost reminiscent of the "Kristallnacht"

More BS from those that refuse to acknowledge the horrors the Catholic Church, the Canadian government, the Anglican Church, and the Church of Canada inflicted on the Indian children of Canada. The ''Truth and Reconciliation Commission'' of Canada published their report in 2015 and verified the deaths of 4,000 plus Indian children in the Residential School, of which the Catholic Church operated by far the most. The deaths were from disease, sexual abuse, physical abuse, and suicide. Some of the children froze to death trying to escape the schools other were ''rented out'' as free labor to farmers and the like. Medical experiments were done on the children. The commission stated that it was difficult at best to get the records from the Catholic Church and stated that they believed there were many more children that died and now with the First Nation pushing and the use of ground-penetrating radar they have discovered, 215, 712 and 182 new unmarked graves and many more will be found before this is over. These horrors are not in some distant past, these schools operated into the 1990s in Canada and into the 1980s in the US. 

The Church as always is more concerned about lawsuits and money than on the horrors that they have inflicted on native people. The Pope has been asked for an apology by the PM and First Nations leaders. He HAS NOT APOLOGIZED. 

The Church agreed to pay $25 million the First Nations people as some sort of compensation in 2015, to date they have paid $3 million. 

It seems that the killing of thousands of native children doesn't reach the level of hate that that burning a building does with you. 

 
 
 
1stwarrior
Professor Expert
1.4  1stwarrior  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    3 weeks ago

Religious freedom??  Only if you're the Catholic Church and only you can murder and bury Indian children to "cleanse" them.

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
2  JBB    3 weeks ago

original

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  JBB @2    3 weeks ago

I guess, at least the picture is relevant to the topic. Good find.

A picture that points out the hypocrisy and sums up the left's grievance.

There is one thing it leaves out - the left's remedy!

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.1.1  Trout Giggles  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1    3 weeks ago

Those represent the skulls of all the children who died under the not-so-careful eye of the Catholic Church

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.1.2  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.1.1    3 weeks ago

Therefore, what are we to do with the Church & the faithful now?

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.1.3  Trout Giggles  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.2    3 weeks ago

Force them to acknowledge what they allowed to happen. Force the "faithful" to admit that the Church is seriously flawed

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.1.4  Trout Giggles  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.2    3 weeks ago

What makes you think this is a left issue? Hundreds maybe thousands of Indigenous children died while boarded in Catholic run schools. We have one very well known Native American conservative right here on NT. Have you asked him how he feels about the dead children?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.1.5  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.1.3    3 weeks ago

And what about the torching of Church property and the tearing down of national monuments?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.1.6  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.1.4    3 weeks ago
What makes you think this is a left issue?

The violence.


 We have one very well known Native American conservative right here on NT. Have you asked him how he feels about the dead children?

I know how he would feel.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.1.7  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.5    3 weeks ago

What about it?

 
 
 
devangelical
PhD Principal
2.1.8  devangelical  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.2    3 weeks ago

a friday night fish fry or spaghetti dinner has always worked for the church in the past...

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.1.9  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @2.1.7    3 weeks ago

I'll wait for post 2.1.5 to receive an answer.

It's a simple question.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.1.10  Trout Giggles  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.5    3 weeks ago

It's wrong. I never did like wanton destruction and vandalism

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.1.11  Trout Giggles  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.6    3 weeks ago

So only leftists are violent.

Got it. That's a pretty bigoted statement, there, Vic

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.1.12  Trout Giggles  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.6    3 weeks ago
I know how he would feel.

Really. So you read minds now?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.1.13  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.1.10    3 weeks ago

We agree on that point. Now I can address your points. If the Church acknowledges what happened - I think we would all be happy. So, I grant you that one. However, I disagree on having the faithful declare their church is flawed. There is a distinction between the modern Church and the Church that was once a missionary Church over a century ago. Even an apology would be empty IMO. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.1.14  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.1.12    3 weeks ago
So you read minds now?

Mind reading no!  I do have common sense.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.1.15  Tessylo  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.1.11    3 weeks ago

According to a certain poster on NT, crime only happens in 'leftist' 'blue' cities.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.1.16  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.9    3 weeks ago

I'll give you an answer as soon as you answer all of the questions asked of you, instead of deflecting/moving the goal posts/taking my words out of context.  

Plus, I don't answer to YOU or ANYONE.  

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.1.17  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.1.11    3 weeks ago
So only leftists are violent.

I never said that, however, violence has become the chief tool of the left. I think our readers might agree.


That's a pretty bigoted statement, there, Vic

And I can call your statements hate-filled.

[deleted]

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.1.18  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.14    3 weeks ago
"I do have common sense."

jrSmiley_91_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.1.19  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @2.1.15    3 weeks ago
According to a certain poster on NT, crime only happens in 'leftist' 'blue' cities.  

Are you sure that's what he said?  Or is that your interpretation?

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.1.20  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.17    3 weeks ago

"I never said that, however, violence has become the chief tool of the left. I think our readers might agree."

Sure you did!

DISAGREE.  

It's a tool of the right used to blame the LEFT.  

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.1.21  Trout Giggles  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.17    3 weeks ago
What makes you think this is a left issue?
The violence.

Yes, you did.

And I can call your statements hate-filled

Point out the hate in any of my comments regarding this seed.

Removed for context

Since when? And now you sound like you're whining...again

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.1.22  Trout Giggles  replied to  Tessylo @2.1.15    3 weeks ago

I remember that.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.1.23  Trout Giggles  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.19    3 weeks ago

No, that's what he said.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.1.24  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.19    3 weeks ago

It's exactly what the idiot said.  

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
2.1.25  XXJefferson51  replied to  Tessylo @2.1.15    3 weeks ago

I don’t remember anyone saying every crime happens only in blue cities.  The vast majority of it does though.  That’s one of the reasons those who can afford to leave who aren’t walled off rich progressive elitists do so.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.1.26  Tessylo  replied to  XXJefferson51 @2.1.25    3 weeks ago
"According to a certain poster on NT, crime only happens in 'leftist' 'blue' cities."
The vast majority of it does.  
Thanks for verifying that!
Funny how you knew who I was talking about when I didn't name any names.  

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
Professor Principal
2.1.27  Bob Nelson  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.1.4    3 weeks ago
What makes you think this is a left issue?

C'mon, TG!!

Since when do fascists care about the murder of "those people"? Sometimes they organize that murder...

384

Five Black Churches Have Burned To The Ground In One Week

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
2.1.28  XXJefferson51  replied to  Tessylo @2.1.26    3 weeks ago

I am clearly right.  The amount of crimes and the types of them are more severe in big blue democrat controlled urban areas than anywhere else. 

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
2.1.29  XXJefferson51  replied to  Tessylo @2.1.26    3 weeks ago

Please show how your sweeping generalization of “only happening in blue cities” matches what I said which allows that some crime does occur elsewhere?  

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.1.30  Trout Giggles  replied to  XXJefferson51 @2.1.25    3 weeks ago

Start here:

then here:

then here:

And while you're there read the responses and other goodies in that thread

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
2.1.31  Kavika   replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.13    3 weeks ago
There is a distinction between the modern Church and the Church that was once a missionary Church over a century ago.

The Residential and Boarding schools of Canada and the US operated until the 1990s in Canada and the 1980s in the US and the Church is still a missionary church. 

 
 
 
Hallux
Freshman Principal
2.1.32  Hallux  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.5    3 weeks ago

Churches can be rebuilt, children cannot. Monuments can be replaced, families cannot. Bricks and mortar can be reconstituted, blood and bones cannot. History is not just something that happened in the past, it is what shapes our todays and our tomorrows. Some like to look at history through rose colored glasses in order to paint the oppressor as the victim, others prefer an ever enlarging clear glass picture window. I prefer the later and it only takes an open spirit and an open mind.

Kristallnacht? The native populations of the Americas went through much worse from Cape Columbia to Tierra del Fuego ... but that history some would like us to ignore and those same people will one day ask the Jews to forget Kristallnacht. The vast majority of Historians are revisionists by nature, some like the author who only seek to bash the elements they do not like are negationists.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.1.33  Tessylo  replied to  XXJefferson51 @2.1.28    3 weeks ago
"I am clearly right.  The amount of crimes and the types of them are more severe in big blue democrat controlled urban areas than anywhere else." 
Thanks again for proving me correct.  

P.S.  jrSmiley_76_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.1.34  Trout Giggles  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.1.4    3 weeks ago

Correcting a statement: Thousands of children died at the hands of the Catholic Church

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.1.35  Tessylo  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.1.30    3 weeks ago

Oh my, that's not the idiot I was referring to!

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.1.36  Trout Giggles  replied to  Tessylo @2.1.35    3 weeks ago

Well, there are more than one idiot on this forum

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.1.37  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Hallux @2.1.32    3 weeks ago
Churches can be rebuilt, children cannot.

Does that mean you are ok with the burning down of Churches?

How about punishing those who did it?

 
 
 
Hallux
Freshman Principal
2.1.38  Hallux  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.37    3 weeks ago
Does that mean you are ok with the burning down of Churches? How about punishing those who did it?

No, but I understand it. If the perpetrators are caught they will be.

Any more squirrels?

 
 
 
Drakkonis
Senior Guide
2.1.39  Drakkonis  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.1.3    3 weeks ago
Force them to acknowledge what they allowed to happen. Force the "faithful" to admit that the Church is seriously flawed

Are you speaking of Catholic churches or all of them?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.1.40  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.1.21    3 weeks ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.1.41  Texan1211  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.40    3 weeks ago

Just because others can do it to you doesn't mean you can do it back to them.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.1.42  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.40    3 weeks ago

Then why do you continue to post?  If it's such a sham.  

 
 
 
devangelical
PhD Principal
2.1.43  devangelical  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.41    3 weeks ago

oh, is there a weasel claus on that whole eye for an eye religious dogma?

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.1.44  Trout Giggles  replied to  Drakkonis @2.1.39    3 weeks ago

All of them

 
 
 
Hallux
Freshman Principal
2.1.45  Hallux  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.40    3 weeks ago

One more effing time, I have a braille screen and your use of giant bold letters hurts my fingertips. Stop yelling! You also Tessylo.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.1.46  Tessylo  replied to  Hallux @2.1.45    3 weeks ago

I'm sorry Hal.  I'll behave now.  

 
 
 
Drakkonis
Senior Guide
2.1.47  Drakkonis  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.1.21    3 weeks ago
Yes, you did.

No, he didn't. There's a big difference between ...

What makes you think this is a left issue? (Trout Giggles) The violence. (Vic Eldred)

And...

So only leftists are violent? (Trout Giggles)

That's a strawman. There is nothing in or about his reply that states only the left uses violence. However, only an idiot would not recognize that the right's violence over the last year and a half doesn't begin to compete with the violence from the left. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.1.48  Tessylo  replied to  Drakkonis @2.1.47    3 weeks ago

Yes, he did.

 
 
 
Drakkonis
Senior Guide
2.1.49  Drakkonis  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.1.44    3 weeks ago
All of them

If you had to pick one or two of those flaws (I assume you probably have a list) what would they be?

 
 
 
Drakkonis
Senior Guide
2.1.50  Drakkonis  replied to  Tessylo @2.1.48    3 weeks ago

"Insisting" isn't really an argument. 

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.1.51  Trout Giggles  replied to  Drakkonis @2.1.49    3 weeks ago

The hush hush of sexual abuse (and we all know it didn't just happen in the RCC), the pandering of votes from the pulpit!, the constant money grubbing from charlatans that I don't hear a lot of Christians condemning, and the need to place your religion above all else including the Constitution. The USA is governed by a document and that document is not the Bible.

I won't even touch on the discrimination inherent in a lot of Christian churches

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.1.52  Trout Giggles  replied to  Drakkonis @2.1.47    3 weeks ago

I don't think that's a strawman but he implied that leftists are more violent than righties unlike you who stated it loud and clear.

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
2.1.53  Ender  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.1.51    3 weeks ago

I fell asleep last night with the tv on, which I rarely do. When I woke the 700 club was on. They were talking about how this woman was poor and couldn't pay the bills yet she just had to donate 20 bucks to the church. Then stated her finances started to grow and she believes it was the church so she kept on giving, larger amounts each time on up to a grand. Then states she is successful now and owes it all to them.

All I could think was it is a scam to get the people to send them money.

 
 
 
1stwarrior
Professor Expert
2.1.54  1stwarrior  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.37    3 weeks ago

Stick to the topic Vic - CATHOLIC CHURCHES being burnt down.  If you have any proof that there are other  religions - bring it on.

 
 
 
Drakkonis
Senior Guide
2.1.55  Drakkonis  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.1.52    3 weeks ago
I don't think that's a strawman but he implied that leftists are more violent than righties unlike you who stated it loud and clear.

Isn't it obviously true? Other than 1/6, how much news coverage of righties destroying city centers compared to leftists did you watch over the last year and a half? 

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
2.1.56  JBB  replied to  Drakkonis @2.1.55    3 weeks ago

I live in The Bronx and there has been no property damage here since last year in the wake of George Floyd's murder. New York has not seen any violent protests lately other than lousy Trump supporters from out of town...

You greatly overestimate the mayhem level.

Misinformation is a result of watching Fox...

 
 
 
Drakkonis
Senior Guide
2.1.57  Drakkonis  replied to  JBB @2.1.56    3 weeks ago
You greatly overestimate the mayhem level.

You simply ignore it.

Misinformation is a result of watching Fox...

Which would be relevant if I watched Fox. 

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
2.1.58  JBB  replied to  Drakkonis @2.1.57    3 weeks ago

I cannot ignore what is not happening. Then, did you give up Fox for Newsmax and OAN?

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.1.59  Trout Giggles  replied to  1stwarrior @2.1.54    3 weeks ago

Dammit! I hate when I have to defend Vic but this is his seed. Don't tell him what he can or cannot do in his own seed. You have a very bad habit of telling other people what to do

 
 
 
Drakkonis
Senior Guide
2.1.60  Drakkonis  replied to  JBB @2.1.58    3 weeks ago
Then, did you give up Fox for Newsmax and OAN?

(Sigh) No. Most of the time my news comes from the MSNBC homepage or this place here. 

 
 
 
Drakkonis
Senior Guide
2.1.61  Drakkonis  replied to  JBB @2.1.58    3 weeks ago
I cannot ignore what is not happening.

Everyone here knows the ridiculousness of that statement. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.1.62  Texan1211  replied to  devangelical @2.1.43    3 weeks ago
oh, is there a weasel claus on that whole eye for an eye religious dogma?

Will the day ever come when you post something to me that is actually related to my posts?

Is there even the remotest possibility of that happening?

 
 
 
Thomas
Sophomore Guide
2.1.63  Thomas  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.62    3 weeks ago

Woof!

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
2.2  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  JBB @2    3 weeks ago

That cartoon is an American Church, not a Canadian one.  Look at the spelling of "neighbour".

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
2.2.1  JBB  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @2.2    3 weeks ago

The thousands of Native and Aboriginal children crowded into Catholic churchyards are glaring reminders of the inhumanity of churchmen in all the places Europeans originally colonized from Africa to Australia to North and South America...

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
3  Paula Bartholomew    3 weeks ago

I have a feeling that this is tied to the recent mass graves of Indian children found.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @3    3 weeks ago

Is that the justification?

 
 
 
1stwarrior
Professor Expert
3.1.1  1stwarrior  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1    3 weeks ago

Depends Vic - are you  white???  then it don't matter.  Are you Indian??  Then it means a helluva lot.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
3.1.2  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1    3 weeks ago

Not at all.  It is just an educated guess.

 
 
 
SteevieGee
Junior Silent
3.2  SteevieGee  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @3    3 weeks ago

But...  The story says that's just an excuse for all the leftist destruction.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
3.2.1  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  SteevieGee @3.2    3 weeks ago

Time will see the truth revealed.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
3.3  Dulay  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @3    3 weeks ago

Ya think? 

512

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Masters Guide
3.3.1  Thrawn 31  replied to  Dulay @3.3    3 weeks ago

Hmmm… idk, the evidence seems pretty thin. 

For real though, which group’s children HASN’T the Catholic Church been responsible for murdering or molesting/raping? Definitely the greatest criminal enterprise in world history.

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
3.3.2  Ender  replied to  Thrawn 31 @3.3.1    3 weeks ago

They killed about 9,000 children in Ireland alone.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Masters Guide
3.3.3  Thrawn 31  replied to  Ender @3.3.2    3 weeks ago

Hah, the Irish, I raise you Jews and Native Americans.

 
 
 
devangelical
PhD Principal
3.3.4  devangelical  replied to  Thrawn 31 @3.3.3    3 weeks ago

I'll call that raise with 3 indigenous civilizations in central and south america.

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
3.3.5  JBB  replied to  devangelical @3.3.4    3 weeks ago

What do dead indigenous Australian children have to do to be recognized around here? 

The gaggiest comment I have read lately was from an alumni of American Catholic parochial schools who presumptuously assumed poor native and indigenous children in third world countries got the same treatment in their Catholic schools that he had received at his Catholic schools in America in the 1960-70s.

He was all, "I will have you know that my Catholic parochial schools provide me with an excellent education". As if Native kids in Catholic institutions had similar experiences.

 
 
 
Drakkonis
Senior Guide
3.4  Drakkonis  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @3    3 weeks ago
I have a feeling that this is tied to the recent mass graves of Indian children found.

As do I. While I don't condone the burning of churches, I see this as the RCC's chickens coming home to roost for a rather long history of problems. While I don't think people should bring the past forward to the present and make the current generation pay for it, this isn't really in the past yet. The Catholic church, and any others involved with this in North America need to be accountable for these atrocities, although I'm at a loss at how such things can be accounted for. Certainly, though, burning down buildings isn't going to do much. 

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
3.4.1  JBB  replied to  Drakkonis @3.4    3 weeks ago

Your views on Catholicism mirror the Klan's...

 
 
 
Drakkonis
Senior Guide
3.4.2  Drakkonis  replied to  JBB @3.4.1    3 weeks ago
Your views on Catholicism mirror the Klan's...

Aside from the fact you can't possibly know my views of Catholicism from one sentence in a post, what are you suggesting here?

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.4.3  TᵢG  replied to  Drakkonis @3.4    3 weeks ago
The Catholic church, and any others involved with this in North America need to be accountable for these atrocities, although I'm at a loss at how such things can be accounted for. Certainly, though, burning down buildings isn't going to do much. 

Agreed.   Vandalism and violence raises awareness in the media.   But to address the issues of something this horrific and grand in scope (dealing with the Catholic church) one must be calm, organized and strategic for a multi-year initiative.

I suppose burning and trashing feels good for some in the short term, but if one is truly focused on righting a wrong (as best as one can right such a wrong) and preventing its recurrence, one necessarily works within the mechanics of civil society.

 
 
 
Drakkonis
Senior Guide
3.4.4  Drakkonis  replied to  TᵢG @3.4.3    3 weeks ago

So one would think. 

 
 
 
Drakkonis
Senior Guide
3.4.5  Drakkonis  replied to  JBB @3.4.1    3 weeks ago
Your views on Catholicism mirror the Klan's...

Um, so no answer???

 
 
 
Thomas
Sophomore Guide
3.4.6  Thomas  replied to  TᵢG @3.4.3    3 weeks ago
I suppose burning and trashing feels good for some in the short term, but if one is truly focused on righting a wrong (as best as one can right such a wrong) and preventing its recurrence, one necessarily works within the mechanics of civil society.

Observation: Regardless of whether one agrees with the premise of people's actions, a person, people, individuals, groups, societies, eventually come to a point where the anger kept inside at a perceived injustice becomes rage. Rage is what is expressing itself now. Rage is what expressed itself in the wake of the Rodney King beating trial. Rage is what expressed itself when the knee and weight of Derek Chauvin held against an immobilized neck took the life of George Floyd.  Rage does not have a political party. Rage does not have a gender preference. Rage comes in all colors. Rage is not right or wrong. Rage just is. Rage is what comes from people trying to work within a system that is not of their creation and seems set up against the ends which they seek to attain.

Some people, very few, I would contend, are able to constructively channel rage into a form that is positive. Some channel it into self destructive pursuits such as alcohol abuse, let it show itself outwardly as abuse of self or others. Some contain it till it explodes with fury. All of these expressions do not matter inasmuch as the mere fact of the rage's presence within a body is indicative of problems within the sphere of existence. 

So, the real questions that we should be asking ourselves personally and as communities is," How do we keep this rage from occurring in the first place?" and, "How do we cool the rage that is already present?" 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.4.7  TᵢG  replied to  Thomas @3.4.6    3 weeks ago

I think it is still a question of channeling rage productively.   The rage certainly will manifest;  how can one not be enraged by the horrific actions expressed in this seed?   Rage can lead to counterproductive acts as you note or it can fuel the tenacity of productive endeavor (as you note).

How we more effectively channel rage at such brutality and injustice is a very good question.   I do not know how this is done for everyone, but I am confident that it is the correct way to deal with what has taken place.

 
 
 
Thomas
Sophomore Guide
3.4.8  Thomas  replied to  TᵢG @3.4.7    3 weeks ago

Why is the rage present in the first place?

If we can identify the actions or inactions, perceptions or misperceptions that preceded the engendering of rage in the present tense, should we not be able to head off not only the expressions of rage but forstall the formation of rage itself? Does it really take the discovery of thousands of graves to make anyone realize that killing is wrong? That, by creating the conditions under which someone would want to take their own life, we have commited murder just the same as if we put a gun to their heads and pulled the trigger?

Are we as humans so collectively obtuse that we cannot learn from that which has already occured? Or, are we just that shameless?

Martin Luther King Jr. said that rioting was giving voice to the voiceless, an outlet for rage that had no other place to go. He was not excusing rioting, but he was acknowledging the fact that rioting existed as an expression of rage. Dr. King knew how to constructively channel rage so that it rebounded on the source of the rage. He knew that rage does not come from the ones expressing it: Rage, unless someone is lying to generate the rage , is generated by the ones it is directed at, not by the ones who display rage. In all cases, the ones who cause the generation of rage should be held to account for the existence of that rage.

So, if someone is expressing rage, the ones whom they are directing that rage at are the cause of the rage . This simple fact seems to get lost on very many people of this forum who are quick to condemn any lawless behavior as strictly the fault of hoodlums and such, and quickly throw in any cause that might be associated with any of rioters or people displaying these expressions of rage in a grand attempt to make us look at the other, and treat them as such...  when that will only cause the situation at hand to perpetuate. 

(Honest, TiG, I am only using your comments as a jumping off point for my musings, not really picking on you.)  jrSmiley_9_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
Professor Principal
3.4.9  Bob Nelson  replied to  Thomas @3.4.8    3 weeks ago
Martin Luther King Jr. said that rioting was giving voice to the voiceless, an outlet for rage that had no other place to go. He was not excusing rioting, but he was acknowledging the fact that rioting existed as an expression of rage.

Excellent. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
Masters Principal
4  Sparty On    3 weeks ago

Nothing justifies wanton destruction of property like this.   Nothing ..... no matter how hard the Woke try to rationalize that it somehow does.

Let me know if you think it does though because next time your dog shits in my yard i'll be justified when i burn your house down for it.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
4.1  Tessylo  replied to  Sparty On @4    3 weeks ago

Who is justifying it?

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
4.1.1  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Tessylo @4.1    3 weeks ago

Apparently I am judging by responses to my post.jrSmiley_5_smiley_image.png

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
4.2  Dulay  replied to  Sparty On @4    3 weeks ago
Nothing justifies wanton destruction of property like this. 

How about destruction like this Sparty?

512512

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
4.2.1  Tessylo  replied to  Dulay @4.2    3 weeks ago

What about where the trumpturd dumbturds shit and pissed in the Capitol?

And the 'right' call us trash, vermin, scum, haters.

jrSmiley_98_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
4.2.2  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Dulay @4.2    3 weeks ago

Whataboutism?

January 6th is all you'll be left with after the next few elections.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Masters Guide
4.2.3  Thrawn 31  replied to  Vic Eldred @4.2.2    3 weeks ago

Lol yeah, okay. You do realize elections in America tend to be cyclical right? House/senate/presidency tend to shift hands every 4-8 years. Odds are the GOP will recapture the house in 2022 and maybe the senate, then probably lose the presidency again in 2024 if fat fuck is their candidate as well as the house or senate. Things will change hands the next round and so on and so forth.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
4.2.4  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @4.2.2    3 weeks ago
Whataboutism?

Actually, NO. I asked a question.

January 6th is all you'll be left with after the next few elections.

Since I had plenty before 1/6, what lead you to that ridiculous conclusion Vic? 

 
 
 
Sparty On
Masters Principal
4.2.5  Sparty On  replied to  Dulay @4.2    3 weeks ago

I could trump that shit 100 times over just from last summer alone but that would be off topic .... just like your post is off topic.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
4.2.6  Tessylo  replied to  Sparty On @4.2.5    3 weeks ago

Sure you could!

jrSmiley_80_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
4.3  Kavika   replied to  Sparty On @4    3 weeks ago

Nothing woke about it. The Church has committed horrific acts against native children in which thousands died and have done its best to hide them. They are now being exposed again for the horrors that they have committed. They have no excuse. 

I'm sure you would think it justified to burn someone's house down over dog shit, too bad you don't feel that way about how the church has treated the indigenous population. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
4.3.1  Tessylo  replied to  Kavika @4.3    3 weeks ago

Woke is just another moronic buzzword from the 'right'.  Means nothing.  

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Masters Guide
4.3.2  Thrawn 31  replied to  Tessylo @4.3.1    3 weeks ago

I tend to agree. I honestly can’t even give you a definition of the word because it seems like it means “I don’t agree with GOP talking points.” If Trump doesn’t think it then it is woke is the only definition I can provide.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
4.3.3  Trout Giggles  replied to  Kavika @4.3    3 weeks ago

I am simply amazed at those who are trying to justify the RCC's actions and try to defend them! Whenever another sexual abuse scandal is uncovered here in America, they are the first in line to condemn them

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Masters Guide
4.4  Thrawn 31  replied to  Sparty On @4    3 weeks ago

It IS the Catholic Church. Given its history it definitely deserves it. That is basically like saying the mob or drug cartels don’t deserve to have bad things happen to them. And yews I am absolutely placing the Catholic Church on their level, frankly they should strive to be as successful a criminal organization as the RCC.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
4.4.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Thrawn 31 @4.4    3 weeks ago
it definitely deserves it.

For our readers to remember!

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
4.4.2  Kavika   replied to  Vic Eldred @4.4.1    3 weeks ago
For our readers to remember!

I certainly hope so.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Masters Guide
4.4.3  Thrawn 31  replied to  Vic Eldred @4.4.1    3 weeks ago

I hope they do, the RCC has gotten away with waaaay too much since the fall of Rome.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Masters Principal
4.4.4  Sparty On  replied to  Thrawn 31 @4.4    3 weeks ago
It IS the Catholic Church. Given its history it definitely deserves it.

Not destroying property IS NOT a defense of any ills of the past.   Nor is such destruction warranted by the rules of any civil society.   That speaks to basic civic decency but hey, if this sort of thing is now SOP in society today it works for me.

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
4.4.5  Tessylo  replied to  Sparty On @4.4.4    3 weeks ago
"The progressive snowflakes of the world aren't going to like it much when i get done with them but what's good for the goose, is good for the gander.   Right?"

What exactly are you going to 'do with them'?

Oh, we're so scared!

jrSmiley_80_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
4.4.6  Kavika   replied to  Sparty On @4.4.4    3 weeks ago
The progressive snowflakes of the world aren't going to like it much when i get done with them but what's good for the goose, is good for the gander.   Right?

LMAO, big talk from behind a computer. If you want to try that just go up to Bay Mills or any of the other eleven Indian communities and spout that shit.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Masters Principal
4.4.7  Sparty On  replied to  Kavika @4.4.6    3 weeks ago

Lol ...... I'll talk shit where ever i choose to and no one at is gonna stop it.   Bay Mills or otherwise.   If the rules have changed fair is fair.    [removed

It is interesting though.   None of my very good Native American friends would ever support wanton destruction like this.   I guess that's just the radical factions eh?

 
 
 
1stwarrior
Professor Expert
4.4.8  1stwarrior  replied to  Thrawn 31 @4.4.3    3 weeks ago

And even before.  Remember that Crusades thingy??  "You ain't christian then you die".

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
4.4.9  Kavika   replied to  Sparty On @4.4.7    3 weeks ago
I'll talk shit where ever i choose to and no one at is gonna stop it.   Bay Mills or otherwise.   If the rules have changed fair is fair.   We'll vandalize and burn some of your shit down because one of your ancestors scalped one of my ancestors.

Of course, you will that's what idiots do. 

It is interesting though.   None of my very good Native American friends would ever support wanton destruction like this.   I guess that's just the radical factions eh?

Your so-called good Native American friends would never condone what the RCC has done to Indigenous people, you might want to ask your good friends about it.

BTW, please post where I condoned the burning of RCC churches. 

 

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
4.4.10  Tessylo  replied to  Sparty On @4.4.7    3 weeks ago

Such a badass!  Not.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Masters Principal
4.4.11  Sparty On  replied to  Kavika @4.4.9    3 weeks ago

Lol ... nice try on the spin.  

I never said i would do it.   I said if the rules have changed i'd do it.   I'm one of the people here denouncing wanton destruction.   That goes for ANY destruction for reasons like this.   Not sure how you missed that as i've been very clear about it here.

You didn't denounce that it i saw but fair enough.   This article is about trashing churches.   You can take a bold stand right here and pronounce how you against such wanton destruction for any reason.

I'll wait .....

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
4.4.12  Kavika   replied to  Sparty On @4.4.11    3 weeks ago

No, spin at all. 

You can denounce the RCC and their horrific practices against indigenous people and history of attempted forced assimilation, beatings, sexual abuse, physical abuse of tens of thousands of native peoples. 

Of course, the sexual abuse goes beyond the indigenous community although it was very prevalent there, it's a worldwide thing with the RCC.

I'll wait.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Masters Principal
4.4.13  Sparty On  replied to  Kavika @4.4.12    3 weeks ago

Yeah, that's what i thought.   No answer, which actually is an answer.

Weak!

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
4.4.14  Kavika   replied to  Sparty On @4.4.13    3 weeks ago
No answer, which actually is an answer.

That was your response as well. 

Not only weak but seems to support the RCC and their sexual and physical abuse and killing of native children. 

Nice that you outed yourself. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
Masters Principal
4.4.15  Sparty On  replied to  Kavika @4.4.14    3 weeks ago

Lol .... ah Kavika, i didn't realize you were so petty.   That said I'll remind you that it is bad form to ask another question before answering one that has already been proffered.

With that lesson you are dismissed until next time.

You have a pleasant day now ya hear .........

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
4.4.16  Kavika   replied to  Sparty On @4.4.15    3 weeks ago

So no response, not surprising you keep right on supporting the RCC.

So you're dismissing me...LMAO, too funny, it's your way of trying to stop looking the fool. 

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
4.4.17  Trout Giggles  replied to  Sparty On @4.4.13    3 weeks ago

Where did you ask a question?

 
 
 
Sparty On
Masters Principal
4.4.18  Sparty On  replied to  Trout Giggles @4.4.17    3 weeks ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Guide
4.4.19  Sean Treacy  replied to  Sparty On @4.4.18    3 weeks ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
4.4.20  Ender  replied to  Trout Giggles @4.4.17    3 weeks ago

I didn't see one.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
4.4.21  Trout Giggles  replied to  Sparty On @4.4.18    3 weeks ago

I didn't say I was putting you back on ignore.

Why do you make everything so personal?

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
4.4.22  Trout Giggles  replied to  Ender @4.4.20    3 weeks ago

Neither did I that's why I asked. I looked up and down...high and low...sideways and backwards...

you get the idea

 
 
 
Sparty On
Masters Principal
4.4.23  Sparty On  replied to  Trout Giggles @4.4.21    3 weeks ago
Why do you make everything so personal?

I don't but i suppose it might seem that way to some.   Specifically the ones that i simply disagree with and/or don't put up with their bullshit.   [deleted, meta]

[deleted, off topic & no value.]  

One never knows when you are being genuine and when you are not so ..... c'est la vie ....

 
 
 
Sparty On
Masters Principal
4.4.24  Sparty On  replied to  Ender @4.4.20    3 weeks ago
Why do you make everything so personal?

That ..... is not a surprise

 
 
 
1stwarrior
Professor Expert
4.4.25  1stwarrior  replied to  Sparty On @4.4.11    3 weeks ago

Actually Sparty - just about trashing Catholic churches who deserve it.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
5  TᵢG    3 weeks ago

Vandalism and violence is never the way to deal with issues.   One should calmly deal with the historical acts and verify that in modern times these organizations are safe and lawful.

Violent mobs are typically irrational and counterproductive.

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
Professor Principal
5.1  Bob Nelson  replied to  TᵢG @5    3 weeks ago
Violent mobs are typically irrational and counterproductive.

Like Lexington and Concord?

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
5.1.1  XXJefferson51  replied to  Bob Nelson @5.1    3 weeks ago

Really? 

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
Professor Principal
5.1.2  Bob Nelson  replied to  XXJefferson51 @5.1.1    3 weeks ago

What? They weren't violent?

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Masters Guide
5.1.3  Thrawn 31  replied to  Bob Nelson @5.1    3 weeks ago

He did say typically, not always. And I tend to agree with him.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
5.1.4  TᵢG  replied to  Bob Nelson @5.1    3 weeks ago

So what are you trying to argue, Bob?     Do you think violent mobs are typically rational and productive?

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
Professor Principal
5.1.5  Bob Nelson  replied to  TᵢG @5.1.4    3 weeks ago
Do you think violent mobs are typically rational and productive?

You're shifting the picture-frame. Originally you wrote "Vandalism and violence is never the way to deal with issues". My point is that "never" is never rarely appropriate. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
5.1.6  TᵢG  replied to  Bob Nelson @5.1.5    3 weeks ago

Is this petty, deflective nit-pick day?   You cannot recognize the use of a cliche’ and instead of understanding my obvious point deflect to pointless word choice pettiness?

Do you think that violence and vandalism is productive here?

My point is that we should work to deal with this tragedy.   That means deal with what happened in the past and also take actions in the present to ensure it does not recur.

Vandalizing property is counterproductive;  the energy should instead be directed to holding orgs and people accountable for the past and ensuring a safe future.

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
5.2  Kavika   replied to  TᵢG @5    3 weeks ago
One should calmly deal with the historical acts and verify that in modern times these organizations are safe and lawful.

That history was until the 1990s in Canada and the 1980s in the US. Those are modern times and it seems that the organizations are not all that safe and lawful. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
5.2.1  TᵢG  replied to  Kavika @5.2    3 weeks ago

What point are you making?   I have suggested that violence is not the answer but that we need to deal with the history and ensure the organizations are safe and lawful today.

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
5.2.2  Kavika   replied to  TᵢG @5.2.1    3 weeks ago

The point I'm making is that this is modern history, not the 1700s, and from a modern perspective the organizations are not safe for indigenous people.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
5.2.3  TᵢG  replied to  Kavika @5.2.2    3 weeks ago

By history I am referring to what has already taken place.   I did not specify a specific point in time.   Dealing with history means holding accountable those who can be held accountable for historical acts.   When I speak of ensuring the organizations are safe and lawful today I am suggesting that we act against the extant organizations to ensure that the historical acts are not repeated.

Do you disagree with any of what I have written?

My point also was that calm, rational actions will be most effective and that violence is typically counterproductive.

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
5.2.4  Kavika   replied to  TᵢG @5.2.3    3 weeks ago

If you're saying history is anything that happened from yesterday back then I will agree with that. 

Your comment about ensuring the organizations are safe and lawful, I have already responded that they are not for indigenous people. 

That's as clear as I can be.

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
5.2.5  Ender  replied to  Kavika @5.2.4    3 weeks ago

Even in this day and age when they sue to have the right to discriminate against who would be able to get a home with the kids in their care, I still do not trust them to do the right thing.

Shows me they don't really care about the kids.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
5.2.6  TᵢG  replied to  Kavika @5.2.4    3 weeks ago
If you're saying history is anything that happened from yesterday back then I will agree with that. 

Yes,   by history I am talking about what has already happened.

My comment is also that we must take action to ensure the organizations are safe and lawful;  implicitly for ALL people.

I am surprised that anyone would disagree with anything that I wrote.

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
5.2.7  Kavika   replied to  TᵢG @5.2.6    3 weeks ago

 I was very clear in that those organizations are not safe for indigenous people. Who is going to ensure that they are, the RCC the Canadian government? Their actual record doesn't instill any measure that much will be done, especially by the RCC.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
5.2.8  TᵢG  replied to  Kavika @5.2.7    3 weeks ago

I did not disagree with you Kavika.

My comment connotes that we need to act on this and that means at least answering your questions.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Masters Principal
5.2.9  Sparty On  replied to  TᵢG @5.2.6    3 weeks ago

You are dealing with a lot of chips, on a lot of shoulders.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
5.2.10  Tessylo  replied to  Sparty On @5.2.9    3 weeks ago

Sounds like you're the one with a chip on your shoulders dude,  A REALLY BIG ONE

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
Professor Principal
5.2.11  Bob Nelson  replied to  TᵢG @5.2.6    3 weeks ago

Also for Kavika 

There's a semantics problem here. "What has happened" is not "history". "What has happened" is "the past".

The difference between "history" and "past" is our ignorance... 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
5.2.12  TᵢG  replied to  Bob Nelson @5.2.11    3 weeks ago

You continue to focus on irrelevant, petty nonsense and have yet to comment on the point I made ... the point dealing with the topic of this seed.   You interpret my opening which offered the cliche ' violence is never the answer ' with a literal ' never ' while ignoring that in the very same comment I explicitly stated ' typically ' when I further explained with my own words.  

Now you focus on the word ' history '??

The history of a situation is the past for the situation.   The history of these churches = what happened in the past.   You understand words, etymology and the various usage semantics of same.   Thus I know you know what you are doing so my conclusion is that you are trolling me.   Why?

Oxford:  history = The whole series of past events connected with someone or something ."

WTF is going on today:  today is the day to alienate those who likely agree with you on this topic?? 

Do you care about the topic or are you just here to be obnoxious? 

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
Professor Principal
5.2.13  Bob Nelson  replied to  TᵢG @5.2.12    3 weeks ago

Forgive me for breathing. 

 
 
 
pat wilson
Professor Guide
5.2.14  pat wilson  replied to  Sparty On @5.2.9    3 weeks ago

Genocide is more than "a lot of chips".

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
5.2.15  Trout Giggles  replied to  pat wilson @5.2.14    3 weeks ago

It's the image of unmarked graves with tiny shoes adorning said graves

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
5.2.16  TᵢG  replied to  Bob Nelson @5.2.13    3 weeks ago

You have yet to reply on the point I made;  nothing but nit-picking on individual words whose meaning in context are clear.   Don't attempt to suggest that I am being unfair to you.

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
Professor Principal
5.2.17  Bob Nelson  replied to  TᵢG @5.2.16    3 weeks ago

I'm tired of getting my wrist smacked. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
5.2.18  TᵢG  replied to  Bob Nelson @5.2.17    3 weeks ago

I am tired of dealing with misrepresentation and deflection on my posts.   It seems as though some just want to argue even if the argument is utterly petty and deflective to the point.

I made the point that violence and vandalism are typically counterproductive and that it is better to use one's energy to address a situation using the legal mechanisms of civil society (as well as rational protests, exposés, etc.).

That does not strike me as a controversial opinion.   And it does not seem that anyone can object to the opinion but objections come nonetheless in the form of nit-picking words and focusing on irrelevant nuances one can tease out by playing with semantics.

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
5.2.19  Kavika   replied to  Sparty On @5.2.9    3 weeks ago

Another assumption by you. Those assumptions surely make you look the ass. 

I was simply clarifying my position with T,G. No chips involved except for the buffalo chip you're trying to lay. 

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
5.3  Dulay  replied to  TᵢG @5    3 weeks ago
Violent mobs are typically irrational and counterproductive.

I've reviewed a couple of the videos of the statues being toppled and they don't fit the description of 'violent mob' IMHO. 

As for the church vandalism/arson, there isn't any evidence that I could find that indicates that any kind of 'mob' perpetrated those crimes. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
5.3.1  TᵢG  replied to  Dulay @5.3    3 weeks ago
As for the church vandalism/arson, there isn't any evidence that I could find that indicates that any kind of 'mob' perpetrated those crimes. 

Call it whatever you want Dulay.   I am not going to debate petty semantics.   I called it a violent mob.   If you like, just shorten it to violence.   Good grief.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
5.3.2  Dulay  replied to  TᵢG @5.3.1    3 weeks ago
I am not going to debate petty semantics.

Semantics - the branch of linguistics and logic concerned with meaning. 

It seems to me that the meaning of the words used to characterize people is anything BUT petty. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
5.3.3  TᵢG  replied to  Dulay @5.3.2    3 weeks ago

As I stated, just call it violence then.   My point was about the irrationality and counterproductive nature of violence.

Instead of violence we are better served investigating and taking productive actions to address what happened and prevent it from happening in the future.

Why do you ignore my point and instead nit-pick?   That detracts from the topic and yields obnoxious and pointless sidebars like this.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
5.3.4  Dulay  replied to  TᵢG @5.3.3    3 weeks ago
As I stated, just call it violence then.

It's NOT what you called the ACTION, it's how you characterized those taking it that I have issue with. 

My point was about the irrationality and counterproductive nature of violence.

Sometimes violence is the only rational reaction. 

Instead of violence we are better served investigating and taking productive actions to address what happened and prevent it from happening in the future.

How many decades would should they wait for that remedy? How many promises and legal agreements have to be broken before they take the only action that seems to get a reaction from the Church? 

Why do you ignore my point and instead nit-pick?  

What was the point of you characterizing protestors as a mob? 

That detracts from the topic and yields obnoxious and pointless sidebars like this.

I made a very specific point in calling out your obnoxious and pointless mischaracterization. 

 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
5.3.5  TᵢG  replied to  Dulay @5.3.4    3 weeks ago
It's NOT what you called the ACTION, it's how you characterized those taking it that I have issue with. 

Totally irrelevant to my point!!  I referred to the violence as that by a group of people and (little did I know) triggered an emotional reaction when I chose, in passing, to convey this with the word 'mob'.   You expressed your concern and I immediately told you to use violence and ignore mob because the word 'mob' clearly was not my point.   Violence and vandalism is the point.    Why do you persist with this petty, off-topic nonsense when I have told you to ignore 'mob'  since I was not trying to characterize the people who engaged in the vandalism/violence and focus instead on the point I made??

Sometimes violence is the only rational reaction. 

Do you consider vandalism and violence here (this situation) to be the only rational reaction here (this situation)?   Do you reject my point that energy is better served trying to right the past wrongs (as best as can be done) and to ensure this does not recur? 

How many decades would should they wait for that remedy? How many promises and legal agreements have to be broken before they take the only action that seems to get a reaction from the Church? 

I don't know.  Neither do you.   So you are indeed arguing that you think violence and vandalism is the smart way to operate here.    So why not just engage in violence and vandalism all the time instead of working like responsible adults to actually solve problems?    After all, violence and vandalism will always get immediate attention.   Why do we in civil society try to resolve issues with our legal system rather than engaging in violence at every turn?   (I am shaking my head that I must even raise such a question.)

What was the point of you characterizing protestors as a mob? 

Still with this??   You just keep going on with this crap no matter what I write.   It was just a word I used when expressing violence and vandalizing by a group of people.  How many times must I repeat that 'mob' was not the point and that you should just use 'violence'?   Why do you persist on this obnoxious nit-picking when I have repeatedly told you to use alternate language other than mob?  

My point was not to characterize the people who engaged in violence and vandalism.   Mob, group, gang, hooligans, random people, concerned citizens, vandalism club, etc. are irrelevant details.   My point was that vandalism and violence is typically not the most effective way to get the desired results.   Ignore the word 'mob';  not the point, not relevant.

I made a very specific point in calling out your obnoxious and pointless mischaracterization. 

Then you are intentionally ignoring the point I made and instead choose to focus on a single word and ignore my response where I told you that the single word 'mob' is irrelevant -was never operative on my point- and to strike it or use whatever word you want because violence is the issue.

You refuse to accept that and continue with this pointless bullshit.  

Per my first response to you:   Strike the word 'mob'.   It was not relevant.   It had nothing to do with my point.   Use the phrase 'some group of people engaging in vandalism/violence' or anything that satisfies your needs. 


Violent acts by angry people are typically irrational and counterproductive.

Do you agree or disagree?

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
5.3.6  Dulay  replied to  TᵢG @5.3.5    3 weeks ago
I referred to the violence as that by a group of people and (little did I know) triggered an emotional reaction when I chose, in passing, to convey this with the word 'mob'.  

Well I for one don't think that it's acceptable to mischaracterize them whether it's done 'in passing' or not.

ignore my response where I told you that the single word 'mob' is irrelevant

The 'single word 'mob' is quite relevant because it describes how YOU view the people who took the action. 

It's well known that you choose your words carefully and are quite cogent in your comments. I fully understand if you regret saying it but trying to deny that characterizing them as a mob was meaningless is just ridiculous. 

It isn't up to me to change it to violence, it's more properly up to you to own your mischaracterization and do so yourself. 

You'll get no pass from me so move on. 

Why do we in civil society try to resolve issues with our legal system rather than engaging in violence at every turn?   (I am shaking my head that I must even raise such a question.)

The First Nations have TRIED for DECADES to resolve this issue through their legal system. The Catholic Church claimed to have furnished all information about the 'lost children' and they signed a 78 page AGREEMENT to pay restitution in 2005. NOW it's found that they LIED about the number of children lost AND they STILL haven't paid the MILLIONS that they promised to the victims and survivors. 

So you see, the Church's lack of truthfulness and upholding their agreements has caused anger and frustration to grow for decades and each new revelation of hundreds of MORE unmarked graves inflicts new wounds. 

But ya, they should stay calm and civil.../s

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
5.3.7  TᵢG  replied to  Dulay @5.3.6    3 weeks ago
You'll get no pass from me so move on. 

Of course not, you invented a controversy by taking one word, elevating it from placeholder status to the operative word of my point and then you refuse, repeatedly, to accept my correction to you that I meant nothing by that word other than to express a group of individuals acting on emotion.

Clearly, after repeated attempts by me, you are dead set on trying to change the entire focus of my post.   You insist on ascribing meaning that I have told you was not my intent.  

You chose to engage me as an adversary by REPEATEDLY AND STUBBORNLY ignoring my point and infusing your own meaning into my words.   I can deal with misunderstanding, but when I respond and state my intent, repeatedly, and you continue to push your narrative, there is no benefit of the doubt.   It is trolling.   Steer clear of me.

The First Nations have TRIED for DECADES ...

This would have been a far better first reply to me instead of jumping on the word 'mob' (pure tangent).   At this point, however, I have no interest in discussing anything with you.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
5.3.8  Dulay  replied to  TᵢG @5.3.7    3 weeks ago
you refuse, repeatedly, to accept my correction to you that I meant nothing by that word other than to express a group of individuals acting on emotion.

Actually, you 'corrected' nothing. You stated that your characterization of them as a mob was 'irrelevant' and that I should just ignore it. 

This would have been a far better first reply to me instead of jumping on the word 'mob' (pure tangent).   At this point, however, I have no interest in discussing anything with you.

IMHO, it would have been far better if YOU had looked into the history of the issue before you insist they should emulate 'civil society' by working through the legal system instead of resorting to violence. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
5.3.9  TᵢG  replied to  Dulay @5.3.8    3 weeks ago
Actually, you 'corrected' nothing. You stated that your characterization of them as a mob was 'irrelevant' and that I should just ignore it. 

My meaning of the word 'mob' was the correction.   Now you argue about the concept of 'correction'.  Unbelievable.

You insist on making the use of the word 'mob' a critical part of my point and I told you that it was not.   You refuse to accept that and continue to insist that my mere use of the word mob is some kind of intentional characterization.   It was not (ever read me say this)?   It was simply the word I used to describe a group of people engaging in violence and vandalism.

IMHO, it would have been far better if YOU had looked into the history of the issue before you insist they should emulate 'civil society' by working through the legal system instead of resorting to violence. 

My position is that resorting to violence and vandalism is typically the wrong use of energy.  You can see that in my opening comment @5.  I disagree with your apparent view that violence and vandalism are productive ways to address these wrongs in this case.  

We are done.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
5.3.10  Dulay  replied to  TᵢG @5.3.9    3 weeks ago
You insist on making the use of the word 'mob' a critical part of my point and I told you that it was not. 

I've done no such thing. I called you out for mischaracterizing them as a 'mob'. PERIOD, full stop. 

You refuse to accept that and continue to insist that my mere use of the word mob is some kind of intentional characterization. 

You didn't distance yourself from the characterization, you just insisted that it was irrelevant and that I should ignore it. I disagree and refuse.

It was simply the word I used to describe a group of people engaging in violence and vandalism.

Petty semantics? 

My position is that resorting to violence and vandalism is typically the wrong use of energy.  You can see that in my opening comment @ 5 .  I disagree with your apparent view that violence and vandalism are productive ways to address these wrongs in this case.   We are done.

At least my view is based on a thorough understanding of the wrongs in this case. 

 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
5.3.11  TᵢG  replied to  Dulay @5.3.10    3 weeks ago
I called you out for mischaracterizing them as a 'mob'. PERIOD, full stop. 

The mischaracterization is in your head.   What is your problem Dulay?   You objected to my using 'mob' to describe a group of angry people committing violence and vandalism.   I immediately explained that the word 'mob' was not significant to my point and told you to substitute your own label.   That means I was perfectly okay with using a different word.   You do recognize that this was a group of angry people committing violence and vandalism, right?

So, again, what is your problem?   I never insisted on using the word 'mob', told you upfront to pick a word you prefer, yet you keep harping and harping on this single word.   What does one need to do to shut you up?   What, exactly, am I to do when you refuse to accept an offer to delete 'mob' and use another word that is more preferable to you?   'Utterly unreasonable' is an understatement here.

At least my view is based on a thorough understanding of the wrongs in this case.

So now you are going to engage in a new line of trolling where you pretend that I am in some way diminishing the wrongs of this case?   Based on what I have observed from you, I am not surprised.

My position is that this is a horrific tragedy that needs action to right the wrongs (as best as that can be done) and to ensure this never recurs.   My position is that violence typically is counterproductive.   An organized peaceful protest, initiatives to energize the media on this, legal actions, etc. are typically the productive actions whereas violence often harms the credibility of the cause.   I have stated this numerous times in this seed.   And the failure of past actions does not mean one should simply resort to violence and vandalism.    You might know that if you did not spend all your time with me whining about the fact that I used the word 'mob' to describe a group of angry people engaging in violence and vandalism.

How obnoxious, petty and pointless can you be?  This seed speaks of horrific tragedy committed by the Catholic church and the resulting violence and vandalism by a group of angry people.   You could have written of ways to right this wrong but instead you fixated on an insignificant (to my point) word and stubbornly whined about it no matter what I wrote in response.

 
 
 
Gordy327
Professor Principal
5.4  Gordy327  replied to  TᵢG @5    3 weeks ago

True. In light of the recent (and also possibly including past) discoveries surrounding the church, people are angry and some are lashing out as a consequence. 

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
6  Ender    3 weeks ago

Thousands of children died. And the response of people on the right is, OMG someone vandalized a church. This cannot stand.

Some people need to get their priorities in order.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Guide
6.1  Sean Treacy  replied to  Ender @6    3 weeks ago

Right,,,, because kids in Canada were immortal unless they were in residential schools. No such thing as disease and child mortality in the 20th century.

How  many kids were killed?

OMG someone vandalized a church. This cannot stand.

lol.  Yeah, like everything else, it’s front page worthy terrorism if it can  be blamed on white supremacists, otherwise, it’s just vandalism. 

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
6.1.1  Ender  replied to  Sean Treacy @6.1    3 weeks ago

Go ahead. Deny subpar conditions and mass graves...

Only worry about a building.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Masters Guide
6.1.2  Thrawn 31  replied to  Sean Treacy @6.1    3 weeks ago

Sooooo killing people, or in this case murdering children, is okay because everyone dies eventually? Then why all the pissing and moaning about that insurrectionist bitch who got shot?

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
6.1.3  Kavika   replied to  Sean Treacy @6.1    3 weeks ago
How  many kids were killed?

Thousands and that is by the count of the Canadian government and of course, the thousands or so new unmarked graves will be adding to that total and there are many more waiting to be discovered.

The deaths were from diseases caused by lack of medical aid and unsanitary conditions. Also physical abuse, sexual abuse, suicide and those that died while running away from the schools of horrors. Some froze to death and of course, there were the medical experiments used on them. 

No one is blaming it on white supremacists we are blaming it on the Catholic Church. Even you should be able to see that.

Good to know that we can depend on you to have an impressive lack of knowledge.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Guide
6.1.4  Sean Treacy  replied to  Thrawn 31 @6.1.2    3 weeks ago
Sooooo killing people,

No. My great aunt died of diphtheria when she was 10. Did the Chicago Public School System kill her?

Kids died of disease very frequently generations ago and not  just in residential schools. People today don't comprehend that 

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
6.1.5  Tessylo  replied to  Sean Treacy @6.1.4    3 weeks ago

jrSmiley_76_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Guide
6.1.6  Sean Treacy  replied to  Ender @6.1.1    3 weeks ago
eny subpar conditions and mass graves

I'm not.  Although it's funny you think the conditions these kids came from weren't "subpar."  You realize that's one of the reasons progressive Canadians constructed residential schools, right? To give the kids a chance to escape poverty.

Only worry about a building.

so you believe arson should be legal? 

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
6.1.7  Ender  replied to  Sean Treacy @6.1.6    3 weeks ago

One does not escape poverty by living in it.

As for the rest, read 7.1.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
6.1.8  Dulay  replied to  Sean Treacy @6.1    3 weeks ago
Right,,,, because kids in Canada were immortal unless they were in residential schools. No such thing as disease and child mortality in the 20th century.

Sean, based on church records, Canada's Truth and Reconciliation Committee compiled a list of the over 4,100 children BY NAME that died under the Church's care. Thousands more are only being found NOW because the church buried them in UNMARKED graves and failed to adequately document their deaths. 

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Masters Guide
6.1.9  Thrawn 31  replied to  Sean Treacy @6.1.4    3 weeks ago

It is entirely comprehensible. Did your great aunt live at a Chicago public school and or depend on them for her care? Were the conditions unsanitary even by the standards of the time? Did she likely suffer the abuse that native kids did at the hands of the RCC? Was she dumped in an unmarked gave by the Chicago Public School System?

Id the answer is no then your is a horseshit comparison and deflection. Just admit that you don’t think the church was wrong and seem to approve of their behavior in the Americas.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Guide
6.1.10  Sean Treacy  replied to  Kavika @6.1.3    3 weeks ago
eaths were from diseases caused by lack of medical aid and unsanitary conditions.

Do you imagine kids only died from these diseases in residential schools?

o one is blaming it on white supremacists 

Where did I say you were? It was a pretty straightforward comparison.  Even you should be able to see that. 

Good to know that we can depend on you to have an impressive lack of knowledge.

Lol.  

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
6.1.11  Ender  replied to  Thrawn 31 @6.1.9    3 weeks ago

I should have added, I don't remember any outbreaks of disease during the fifties through the nineties.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
6.1.12  Dulay  replied to  Sean Treacy @6.1.4    3 weeks ago

I presume that your aunt was buried with a marker and her death is documented with a death certificate. 

In short, your comment represents a false equivalency. 

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
6.1.13  Kavika   replied to  Sean Treacy @6.1.10    3 weeks ago
Do you imagine kids only died from these diseases in residential schools?

No, I don't but that isn't what we are discussing. I also added the other ways that they died which you avoided. You should read the reports issued on this subject it will expand your very limited knowledge on the subject. Dr. Peter Bryce's reports are enlightening for the uninformed as are many of the Canadian government reports. 

Yeah, like everything else, it’s front page worthy terrorism if it can  be blamed on white supremacists, otherwise, it’s just vandalism. 

However you want to spin it, I really don't care but the blame is on the RCC, as they have actually admitted the atrocities that were outlined in the ''Truth and Reconciliation Commission'' before the latest mass unmarked graves were discovered.

You keep denying it but it really makes you look the fool with all the evidence and the Canadian government, Anglican, and the Church of Canada admitting to the horrors and paying restitution. The RCC as usual admitted to it and agreed to pay restitution of $25 million dollars but have only paid $3 million. 

Now that an additional thousand new unmarked graves have been discovered at RCC residential schools and I would guess more to come the RCC is once again being shown to be cultural and in many cases physical supporters of genocide against native people.

But keep trying to deflect and defend it's the perfect look for you.

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
6.1.14  Kavika   replied to  Sean Treacy @6.1.6    3 weeks ago
You realize that's one of the reasons progressive Canadians constructed residential schools, right? To give the kids a chance to escape poverty.

That is a flat out lie.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
6.1.15  Tessylo  replied to  Kavika @6.1.14    3 weeks ago

That's all he's got Kav.

 
 
 
pat wilson
Professor Guide
6.1.16  pat wilson  replied to  Sean Treacy @6.1.4    3 weeks ago

Was your great aunt forced into a residential school ?

 
 
 
1stwarrior
Professor Expert
6.1.17  1stwarrior  replied to  Sean Treacy @6.1.6    3 weeks ago

No Sparty - the schools were SPECIFICALLY built to reeducate the Indian children to quit being Indian - period.  There were absolutely no thoughts of helping them escape poverty since their government/churches/political allies put them there.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Guide
6.1.18  Sean Treacy  replied to  1stwarrior @6.1.17    3 weeks ago
There were absolutely no thoughts of helping them escape poverty since their government/churches/political allies put them there.

Of course there was. The schools were created and recommended by Progressives, who were trying to ameliorate what they saw as deplorable and  unsustainable living conditions among natives.  The whole idea was to allow native Canadians to be self sustaining, rather than having to rely on on "presents" from the government.   

 
 
 
1stwarrior
Professor Expert
6.1.19  1stwarrior  replied to  1stwarrior @6.1.17    3 weeks ago

Sorry - meant to say Sean - forgive me please :-)

 
 
 
1stwarrior
Professor Expert
6.1.20  1stwarrior  replied to  Sean Treacy @6.1.18    3 weeks ago

Make a deal with you Sean - you give me reliable links supporting your comment and I'll give you links to support mine - deal?

 
 
 
Hallux
Freshman Principal
7  Hallux    3 weeks ago

In 2019 the National Trust for Canada reported low numbers of people making up congregations, combined with the high repair costs for old churches, is driving up to 9,000 of the churches in Canada to close in the coming years. Many of those will meet their end with Christian wrecking balls, a few will meet their end by fire and that few will become a partisan rallying cry, the bull will shit once again and the baffled will eat it up.

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
7.1  Ender  replied to  Hallux @7    3 weeks ago

I actually do not believe in vandalism. I do think it is wrong, though I can see why people would lash out.

I always thought it is nice to make the old churches into unique homes. I would live in one, if I didn't catch fire walking through the threshold. I always wanted an old building to redo. Way out of my price league though.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Masters Guide
7.1.1  Thrawn 31  replied to  Ender @7.1    3 weeks ago

There’s an idea, the church could turn them into homeless shelters. Of course since the homeless can’t pay up its not a wise investment on their part.

 
 
 
Hallux
Freshman Principal
7.1.2  Hallux  replied to  Ender @7.1    3 weeks ago

I know several artists in Montreal who have turned them into studios and others who have turned them into theaters. 

 
 
 
Gordy327
Professor Principal
7.1.3  Gordy327  replied to  Thrawn 31 @7.1.1    3 weeks ago

Better yet, turn them into strip clubs. Watch people suddenly find "religion." Lol

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
Professor Principal
7.1.4  Bob Nelson  replied to  Thrawn 31 @7.1.1    3 weeks ago

The treasures... 

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
8  JBB    3 weeks ago

Canada in mayhem! New York and Portland burning!

Except all is well. It is just, "Another day in America".

In reality, everything is coming up roses in the USA...

And, Canada is still as cold and as boring as all hell!

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
Professor Principal
8.1  Bob Nelson  replied to  JBB @8    3 weeks ago
In reality, everything is coming up roses in the USA...

... not on Fox... 

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
9  Buzz of the Orient    3 weeks ago
"And, Canada is still as cold and as boring as all hell!"

LOL.  That could be one of the reasons why I left.  I have since enjoyed a new adventure in life. 

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online


Thomas
Tacos!
Ed-NavDoc


20 visitors