It's worth mentioning that Joe Pesci did SNL the following week and said "I would have gave [sic] her such a smack. I would've grabbed her by her ... eyebrows." AFAIK he has never apologized for this.

She didn't really explain much at the time though, and when she did it never got a lot of publicity. People thought she was just attacking Catholics as a whole.

All most people saw was her ripping up a picture, going "fight the real enemy" and then a bunch of smear articles about her going mental.

Sometimes, all it takes to be ostracised and threatened is to be the first to say something that's true.

I remember that and I still listen to Mandika.

Damn those fucking monsters. Worse of all I bet the lived with no consequences...

Is it possible to pin replies? For some reason this was almost at the bottom for me.

Also I can add some more sources, that Fox article is really bad:

• Arte.tv
  • The true horror of Irish mother and baby homes | ARTE.tv Documentary
  • Ireland's Forced Adoptions | ARTE.tv Documentary
• Part One: How The Catholic Church Murdered Ireland's Babies | Behind The Bastards
• Wikipedia article
• Tuam Home Survivors
  • Tuam Baby Death Records
• easy to find sources as they are all over the place

They're not pro-life. They're pro-forced-birth.

*pro-birther. If they were really pro life there'd be less school shootings, etc. pp.

If we do shit like this, imagine what they could do!

It's always projection

The band names are thick in the comments.

Understood, I will go and punch a nun.

I have never understood this pseudo-argument. Christian morality is based on the fear of eternal punishment. Do these fools even realize that?! Morality can be explained much more comprehensibly and naturally through evolution and empathy.

My main issue in discussions on religion is that either side generally claims that either "it makes us civil", as you say, or that "it's the cause of evil". In reality it's neither. Religion has traditionally been (still is, I'm afraid) a powerful form of crowd control that in past times has steered some believers into doing better deeds by the duality of the hell-heaven system, and likewise has twisted others into extremism and using religion as justification for evil acts. Most of the time it's just a simple way of life that rids you of the need to question the universe and to carve your own path. As a "Muslim" I sometimes, in some ways, envy those that simply view the etiquettes, laws, and traditions that govern their lives as unquestionable truths. There's no need to search for purpose, you're already born with it.

Humans are flawed and evil. That is true with or withour religion.

Sorry for rambling.

"civil"

Recently in England there was a Turkish man burning the koran... a Muslim guy came out and lunged at him several times with a knife he just happened to have on him shouting "you will not burn my holy book" or some such, the book burner was charged by the police (the bible can be burnt in England but for some reason the koran cannot). Kier Starmer didn't want to progress an investigation into child abuse because of how it will expose the Muslim men abusing working class young white girls because their religion states girls who don't cover their hair are sluts.

I’m pretty sure it’s more like: religions define what we find civil as a society. Personal spiritual beliefs define what people find acceptable and unacceptable. Religion align spiritual beliefs among social groups.

mental health nurses who work in an asylum/"hospital"/"mental health unit" too according to a friend who works in one as a nurse.

All inequality creates abuse.

Your last paragraph reminded me of Ashton Kutcher… I can’t watch that 70s show anymore. It was my favorite tv show of all time.

Look into any situation where there is a massive disparity of power between some people and other people and that's were you will find the most abuses and I totally agree it's for the reasons you said of there being far less risk for the abusers due to their "status" and that such places actually attract the worst people in society so it's a bit of self-fullfilling prophecy that putting too much power and not enough transparency and accountability in a position will invariably end up with it being abused, even if you start with the purest of people and the purest of intentions.

This is also probably why there was (and only time will tell if that's still or not the case) so much child sexual abuse in the Catholic church: adult in high standing in the community and implicitly trusted by all vs child (generally from a poor background).

Thinking about this over the years (mainly for Politics, but it applies to other areas) has led me to conclude that the "good" exercise of power is impossible to get from a static situation (i.e. the idealistic idea that "give power to honest people" solves it) and instead it has to be setup as a dynamic mechanism with frequent rotation of people and multiple unrelated (ideally, competing) people watching over each other other (which is probably where the ide behind the Three Pillars Of Democracy) and whose power balances.

The rosy romanticisation of what should be a humanitarian entity is probably worst with Buddhism. The Buddhist majority-Burmese oppressing the Rohyngian Muslims, some Buddhist monks advocating for dominance in South East Asia, and even pre-CCP Tibet where the dalai lama and his ilks were decadent and corrupt, seem unfathomable for many who view Buddhism as the most secular and least dogmatic religion. There was an article I have read lamenting this corruption in Buddhist communities, and I was like "they are still humans, what do you expect?"

Buddhist temple, tibetan monks, the dali lama? or are they on that list too?

One of the selling features of Christianity is that you just need to ask Jesus forgiveness and it will be granted.

Catholic Islam is a radical sect

Sorry *Christianity

Honestly if hell could be livestreamed I'd love to have a kick out of watching a 24 hour stream of them burning on it.

Because they didn't allow abortion. That's how

I'm guessing that God probably knows the infant mortality rates throughout history.

dna gives you parent gives you when they were there? assuming they kept records of who lived there.

The article is crap. The DNA is used to ID siblings, relatives. That's however not the only thing they got wrong

See here for example: The true horror of Irish mother and baby homes | ARTE.tv Documentary

Probably radiocarbon dating?