Jeremy Vine Show..should Passengers Be...
Film, Media & TV2 mins ago
I Saw This In A Forum About Pilgrimages. Is It Worth Sharing?
47 Answers
The Danish scientist, mathematician, inventor, designer, author, poet Piet Hein created many wise small poems. Here is one:
The road to wisdom? Well, it's plain
And simple to express:
Err
and err
and err again,
but less
and less
and less
The road to wisdom? Well, it's plain
And simple to express:
Err
and err
and err again,
but less
and less
and less
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by sandyRoe. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
//It looks as though the topic has slipped by under the radar of the Godless ABers. That's a pity as a squalid business like this is best dealt with by being exposed.//
This brings into question not only "...the radar of the Godless ABers" . . . unless it's some fancy way the 'Good Shepherd' has devised for testing the faith of His little lambkins whilst His gaze was conveniently fixated upon the sparrow.
This brings into question not only "...the radar of the Godless ABers" . . . unless it's some fancy way the 'Good Shepherd' has devised for testing the faith of His little lambkins whilst His gaze was conveniently fixated upon the sparrow.
Dear Sandy,
It's a pity you have included the RC row in the same thread as the Danish poem.
Nope it didn't slip under my radar when it appeared, I just found the poem more fun.
It does not take a "wicked atheist" to bring the RC business corporation (O.K. church if you like) into disrepute, they've done a much better job of it themselves!
Nice sarcasm jomifl. You started me on this track so it's your fault as usual:).
As an atheist, I do not believe that it is the responsibility of the UN to try to call any so-called religious organisation to order. Where would it end (?) as they are all a bunch hypocritical crooks preying on the innocent.
These disgraceful matters, not at all restricted to the RCs, are for the laws of individual states and for the congregations of their churches.
As in many areas the UN are impotent and hence ignored but this is a ridiculous step too far by them!
Thanks for the info sandy as I never knew that the UN saw such matters as part of their mandate.
Your atheist friend,
SIQ.
It's a pity you have included the RC row in the same thread as the Danish poem.
Nope it didn't slip under my radar when it appeared, I just found the poem more fun.
It does not take a "wicked atheist" to bring the RC business corporation (O.K. church if you like) into disrepute, they've done a much better job of it themselves!
Nice sarcasm jomifl. You started me on this track so it's your fault as usual:).
As an atheist, I do not believe that it is the responsibility of the UN to try to call any so-called religious organisation to order. Where would it end (?) as they are all a bunch hypocritical crooks preying on the innocent.
These disgraceful matters, not at all restricted to the RCs, are for the laws of individual states and for the congregations of their churches.
As in many areas the UN are impotent and hence ignored but this is a ridiculous step too far by them!
Thanks for the info sandy as I never knew that the UN saw such matters as part of their mandate.
Your atheist friend,
SIQ.
SIQ - "... I do not believe that it is the responsibility of the UN to try to call any so-called religious organisation to order. Where would it end (?) as they are all a bunch hypocritical crooks preying on the innocent..."
This matter goes far beyond giving people false hope and hoodwinking them out of their hard-earned money. This is about something quite different. This is about the systematic rape of children and the institutionalised covering up of these appalling crimes by a highly influential and powerful organisation that purports to stand for morality and good in the world.
And since the Church has been and continues to be glacially slow in responding to the allegations and evidence of child rape by its members then I really don't see the problem with the UN stepping in and demanding that it immediately ceases to shelter child raping paedophiles from within its ranks.
This matter goes far beyond giving people false hope and hoodwinking them out of their hard-earned money. This is about something quite different. This is about the systematic rape of children and the institutionalised covering up of these appalling crimes by a highly influential and powerful organisation that purports to stand for morality and good in the world.
And since the Church has been and continues to be glacially slow in responding to the allegations and evidence of child rape by its members then I really don't see the problem with the UN stepping in and demanding that it immediately ceases to shelter child raping paedophiles from within its ranks.
Dear birdie1971,
Thank you for explaining to me what the matter did not involve and what it did but I'm sorry to say you wasted your time as these heinous crimes have been public knowledge for years.
In my answer I described the matters as disgraceful. Of course I condemn the evil acts of people involved including those trying to hide the criminals.
My points are:
(a) the RC are not alone in this - the C of E, TV and its "celebrities" and various other bodies involved with children. I condemn all for the heinous acts and cover-ups. However should the UN be involved?
(b) If anyone believes the UN can influence any of these criminal and disgusting acts they are living in cloud-cuckoo land. Even individual states pick and mix which US resolutions to obey or disobey so what chance the so called "churches".
Please see my answer referring to individual state law and the congregation as the only solution.
By "where does it end?" I thought anyone would realise that I was asking how many religious attrocities should the UN be involved in solving. You now prompt me to add how many will it solve?
I am no apologist for any crimes against humanty and condemn them
out-of-hand.
Here on sandy's thread, poem apart, as I see it, it's all about the raison d'etre for the UN and the usual impotence of the UN.
Sure we all feel warm and good if someone other than ourselves is speaking out for us but it's all non-papal bull if the result is simply a big fat zero.
With Kindest Regards,
SIQ.
Thank you for explaining to me what the matter did not involve and what it did but I'm sorry to say you wasted your time as these heinous crimes have been public knowledge for years.
In my answer I described the matters as disgraceful. Of course I condemn the evil acts of people involved including those trying to hide the criminals.
My points are:
(a) the RC are not alone in this - the C of E, TV and its "celebrities" and various other bodies involved with children. I condemn all for the heinous acts and cover-ups. However should the UN be involved?
(b) If anyone believes the UN can influence any of these criminal and disgusting acts they are living in cloud-cuckoo land. Even individual states pick and mix which US resolutions to obey or disobey so what chance the so called "churches".
Please see my answer referring to individual state law and the congregation as the only solution.
By "where does it end?" I thought anyone would realise that I was asking how many religious attrocities should the UN be involved in solving. You now prompt me to add how many will it solve?
I am no apologist for any crimes against humanty and condemn them
out-of-hand.
Here on sandy's thread, poem apart, as I see it, it's all about the raison d'etre for the UN and the usual impotence of the UN.
Sure we all feel warm and good if someone other than ourselves is speaking out for us but it's all non-papal bull if the result is simply a big fat zero.
With Kindest Regards,
SIQ.
SIQ -
With all due respect, it would appear that you and I have some kind of communication problem. I'll take your comments one at a time so that (I hope) there's no further confusion:
SIQ - "... I'm sorry to say you wasted your time as these heinous crimes have been public knowledge for years..."
I find this comment somewhat odd. The fact that everyone now knows that the RC Church has harboured (and continues to harbour) paedophiles shouldn't be and isn't any barrier to the UN demanding that they stop giving succour to these vile individuals. I simply do not understand why you felt the need to make the above statement since it's completely irrelevant to the argument.
SIQ - "... the RC are not alone in this - the C of E, TV and its "celebrities" and various other bodies involved with children. I condemn all for the heinous acts and cover-ups. However should the UN be involved?..."
You're comparing apples with oranges. The Roman Catholic Church claims to have over 1 billion people within its ranks - a little under 20% of the entire human race - and it is one single organisation with a distinct hierarchy and a supreme leader. The C of E has roughly 25 million followers - just 2.5% of what the RC Church has - and although it too has been accused of covering up similar crimes, they are cannot hold the proverbial candle to the shear scale of the abuse that the RC Church presided over, covered up and continues to cover up. As for TV celebrities, they are not a group that follow any particular dogma nor do they claim as a group to be a bastion of morality in the world. In short, the RC Church are unlike any other single organisation on the planet, rendering your comparison moot.
SIQ - "... If anyone believes the UN can influence any of these criminal and disgusting acts they are living in cloud-cuckoo land..."
That's as may be but are you suggesting that it is somehow wrong of them to demand that this behemoth of an organisation stop sheltering predatory child rapists? Even if the UN's demands are ignored, it has brought the matter once again into the public consciousness. And as well it should since it is not a matter that has simply vanished; it is ongoing.
SIQ - "... By "where does it end?" I thought anyone would realise that I was asking how many religious attrocities should the UN be involved in solving. You now prompt me to add how many will it solve?..."
I have prompted you to do no such thing. I'm not sure why you believe this to be the case. I certainly didn't ask you.
SIQ - "... I am no apologist for any crimes against humanty and condemn them out-of-hand..."
For someone condemning out-of-hand crimes such as these, you seem to be doing quite a good job defending the RC Church whilst doing so.
With all due respect, it would appear that you and I have some kind of communication problem. I'll take your comments one at a time so that (I hope) there's no further confusion:
SIQ - "... I'm sorry to say you wasted your time as these heinous crimes have been public knowledge for years..."
I find this comment somewhat odd. The fact that everyone now knows that the RC Church has harboured (and continues to harbour) paedophiles shouldn't be and isn't any barrier to the UN demanding that they stop giving succour to these vile individuals. I simply do not understand why you felt the need to make the above statement since it's completely irrelevant to the argument.
SIQ - "... the RC are not alone in this - the C of E, TV and its "celebrities" and various other bodies involved with children. I condemn all for the heinous acts and cover-ups. However should the UN be involved?..."
You're comparing apples with oranges. The Roman Catholic Church claims to have over 1 billion people within its ranks - a little under 20% of the entire human race - and it is one single organisation with a distinct hierarchy and a supreme leader. The C of E has roughly 25 million followers - just 2.5% of what the RC Church has - and although it too has been accused of covering up similar crimes, they are cannot hold the proverbial candle to the shear scale of the abuse that the RC Church presided over, covered up and continues to cover up. As for TV celebrities, they are not a group that follow any particular dogma nor do they claim as a group to be a bastion of morality in the world. In short, the RC Church are unlike any other single organisation on the planet, rendering your comparison moot.
SIQ - "... If anyone believes the UN can influence any of these criminal and disgusting acts they are living in cloud-cuckoo land..."
That's as may be but are you suggesting that it is somehow wrong of them to demand that this behemoth of an organisation stop sheltering predatory child rapists? Even if the UN's demands are ignored, it has brought the matter once again into the public consciousness. And as well it should since it is not a matter that has simply vanished; it is ongoing.
SIQ - "... By "where does it end?" I thought anyone would realise that I was asking how many religious attrocities should the UN be involved in solving. You now prompt me to add how many will it solve?..."
I have prompted you to do no such thing. I'm not sure why you believe this to be the case. I certainly didn't ask you.
SIQ - "... I am no apologist for any crimes against humanty and condemn them out-of-hand..."
For someone condemning out-of-hand crimes such as these, you seem to be doing quite a good job defending the RC Church whilst doing so.
Birdie,
I respond to your last post as you are confused by my last two missives which make my over-riding points clear although there appear to be certain aspects which appear to open the door to determined nit-pickers.
(a) Forget the "With all due respect" as I detect no such thing in your post, merely insult, twisting of my points and a determination to start a personal argument. In the latter you will not succeed as it takes two!
(b) Re: the UN involvement, I maintain that they are impotent in most areas and particularly the religious one (as demonstrated in the article referenced by sandy). I repeat that these are matters for individual state law and the religious congregations.
(c) Regarding heinous sexual assaults on children or even adults you argue that it's all about the size of the institution and its religious affiliation that matters. See your own stats and conclusion "The C of E has just 2.5% of what the RC has".
So heinous crimes are proportonal to the size of the institution are they? And morality is about numbers not actions is it?
This implies that the UN has no role in sorting out similar/identical crimes and cover-ups in the C of E. or other religions or institutions. Has it or has it not, Birdie?
(d) It does not need the UN to heighten public awareness of these crimes as you allege. These have been and are being continually reported by the media, police and the victims themselves.
(e) Your last point about me "doing a good job defending the RC Church" is so ridiculous and insulting as to demean you more than me!
SIQ.
I respond to your last post as you are confused by my last two missives which make my over-riding points clear although there appear to be certain aspects which appear to open the door to determined nit-pickers.
(a) Forget the "With all due respect" as I detect no such thing in your post, merely insult, twisting of my points and a determination to start a personal argument. In the latter you will not succeed as it takes two!
(b) Re: the UN involvement, I maintain that they are impotent in most areas and particularly the religious one (as demonstrated in the article referenced by sandy). I repeat that these are matters for individual state law and the religious congregations.
(c) Regarding heinous sexual assaults on children or even adults you argue that it's all about the size of the institution and its religious affiliation that matters. See your own stats and conclusion "The C of E has just 2.5% of what the RC has".
So heinous crimes are proportonal to the size of the institution are they? And morality is about numbers not actions is it?
This implies that the UN has no role in sorting out similar/identical crimes and cover-ups in the C of E. or other religions or institutions. Has it or has it not, Birdie?
(d) It does not need the UN to heighten public awareness of these crimes as you allege. These have been and are being continually reported by the media, police and the victims themselves.
(e) Your last point about me "doing a good job defending the RC Church" is so ridiculous and insulting as to demean you more than me!
SIQ.
SIQ - "... there appear to be certain aspects which appear to open the door to determined nit-pickers... [you have a] determination to start a personal argument. In the latter you will not succeed as it takes two!..."
I'm not nit picking nor am I attempting to start an argument. What I am doing is explaining to you why your dismissal of the UN's report and subsequent demands to the RC Church is poorly judged. If you think that's trying to start an argument then you are mistaken. We are debating - no more and no less.
You state, "... I maintain that they [the UN] are impotent in most areas and particularly the religious one...", and I would largely agree with that. However, it doesn't really matter how impotent they are in other arenas. It's actually completely irrelevant; what matters is the message. For example, I personally don't have the money nor the wherewithal to give clean drinking water to the world. Does that mean I shouldn't speak up about it or promote the plight of those who can't turn on a tap and drink clean water? Should I and others who can't do anything about it just keep our mouths shut and ignore it? Your argument that the UN is impotent and should therefore be silent on this issue is absurd and defeatist.
You further state, "... So heinous crimes are proportional to the size of the institution are they? And morality is about numbers not actions is it? This implies that the UN has no role in sorting out similar/identical crimes and cover-ups in the C of E. or other religions or institutions. Has it or has it not, Birdie?..."
And you accuse me of "twisting your posts". How apposite. Of course all crimes of this nature should be exposed but I'm sure you can understand that the UN cannot attempt to intervene in every single instance? Instead they have chosen (quite rightly) to further highlight the issue of child rape by members of the RC Church and demand that action be taken by the powers that be in the largest religious organisation on the planet.
And again,"... It does not need the UN to heighten public awareness of these crimes as you allege...".
Doesn't it? Is it not imperative that the general public is aware that the largest single religious organisation in the entire world is actively harbouring child rapists? If you think that there is some limit that should be imposed on how loudly that message should be shouted, I'd be interested to hear your reasoning.
I'm not nit picking nor am I attempting to start an argument. What I am doing is explaining to you why your dismissal of the UN's report and subsequent demands to the RC Church is poorly judged. If you think that's trying to start an argument then you are mistaken. We are debating - no more and no less.
You state, "... I maintain that they [the UN] are impotent in most areas and particularly the religious one...", and I would largely agree with that. However, it doesn't really matter how impotent they are in other arenas. It's actually completely irrelevant; what matters is the message. For example, I personally don't have the money nor the wherewithal to give clean drinking water to the world. Does that mean I shouldn't speak up about it or promote the plight of those who can't turn on a tap and drink clean water? Should I and others who can't do anything about it just keep our mouths shut and ignore it? Your argument that the UN is impotent and should therefore be silent on this issue is absurd and defeatist.
You further state, "... So heinous crimes are proportional to the size of the institution are they? And morality is about numbers not actions is it? This implies that the UN has no role in sorting out similar/identical crimes and cover-ups in the C of E. or other religions or institutions. Has it or has it not, Birdie?..."
And you accuse me of "twisting your posts". How apposite. Of course all crimes of this nature should be exposed but I'm sure you can understand that the UN cannot attempt to intervene in every single instance? Instead they have chosen (quite rightly) to further highlight the issue of child rape by members of the RC Church and demand that action be taken by the powers that be in the largest religious organisation on the planet.
And again,"... It does not need the UN to heighten public awareness of these crimes as you allege...".
Doesn't it? Is it not imperative that the general public is aware that the largest single religious organisation in the entire world is actively harbouring child rapists? If you think that there is some limit that should be imposed on how loudly that message should be shouted, I'd be interested to hear your reasoning.
Birdie, I agree that the UN should make known to the world what the RC church is doing. We in western europe are aware because the RC church has relatively little influence over the organs of state or the press. In some counties such as the Phillipines or the South American states I doubt that the news reports re. RC church have been allowed to emerge because of the scheming and manipultions of the church.
Birdie1971,
If we are to reach a reasonably rational conclusion then let's do it in stages eh?
I should be grateful if you would stop using the phrase "expaining to you". I do not need you to explain anything to me - in fact you have yet to give me any hard information in any of your posts, merely your opinions as to where you think you are right and I am wrong. I'm a grown reasonably well educated and intelligent man and I should appreciate being treated as such or at least being treated with civility.
Verbal protesting against horrendous crimes is of course right (statement of the obvious to any decent citizen).
However yours, mine and the UN's voices are useless against the Vatican who will ignore us all. Maybe, and this is the worse outcome, they will paper over a few cracks. Why the worse outcome? Because it will allow the heinous criminality to proceed as per usual while satisfying many that the probems are solved.
They and their ilk in the C of E will only respond to force.
By force I mean state criminality prosecutions and congregational peaceful uprising. I would now add exclusion of the so-called "Holy See" from the UN. This is a powerful role allowing the "Holy See" to enter debates, influence UN decisions and debates.
Guess how many debates have occurred over the crimes in question.
Yup, you got it - None!
I want action and the criminals punished (not namby-pamby reformed). In these and certain other crimes, I believe in the death penalty. And "yes", I would pull the leaver!
Hence I should be grateful if you would withdraw your rude description of my views as "absurd and defeatist!
I must, stop for now, but will end by repeating my earlier question in simple isolated terms: "As well as addressing the RC sexual and other crimes of cover-up, should the UN also challenge the C of E in similar manner?"
Please answer with a straight unqualified "yes" or "no" if you can bring yourself to utter an answer which I doubt.
Regards,
SIQ.
If we are to reach a reasonably rational conclusion then let's do it in stages eh?
I should be grateful if you would stop using the phrase "expaining to you". I do not need you to explain anything to me - in fact you have yet to give me any hard information in any of your posts, merely your opinions as to where you think you are right and I am wrong. I'm a grown reasonably well educated and intelligent man and I should appreciate being treated as such or at least being treated with civility.
Verbal protesting against horrendous crimes is of course right (statement of the obvious to any decent citizen).
However yours, mine and the UN's voices are useless against the Vatican who will ignore us all. Maybe, and this is the worse outcome, they will paper over a few cracks. Why the worse outcome? Because it will allow the heinous criminality to proceed as per usual while satisfying many that the probems are solved.
They and their ilk in the C of E will only respond to force.
By force I mean state criminality prosecutions and congregational peaceful uprising. I would now add exclusion of the so-called "Holy See" from the UN. This is a powerful role allowing the "Holy See" to enter debates, influence UN decisions and debates.
Guess how many debates have occurred over the crimes in question.
Yup, you got it - None!
I want action and the criminals punished (not namby-pamby reformed). In these and certain other crimes, I believe in the death penalty. And "yes", I would pull the leaver!
Hence I should be grateful if you would withdraw your rude description of my views as "absurd and defeatist!
I must, stop for now, but will end by repeating my earlier question in simple isolated terms: "As well as addressing the RC sexual and other crimes of cover-up, should the UN also challenge the C of E in similar manner?"
Please answer with a straight unqualified "yes" or "no" if you can bring yourself to utter an answer which I doubt.
Regards,
SIQ.
Dear jomifl,
I don't know if you mean to support the nub of birdie's argument or mine.
I maintain that your statement supports my argument that the UN's talk without action will yield nothing, much as we would all like to see a really significant result.
If, as you say, South Americans and Filipinos are more ignorant of the RC crimes and cover-ups then it means that the UN's talks are an even greater waste of effort when viewed from a world perspective.
What point are you trying to make?
Kind Regards,
SIQ.
I don't know if you mean to support the nub of birdie's argument or mine.
I maintain that your statement supports my argument that the UN's talk without action will yield nothing, much as we would all like to see a really significant result.
If, as you say, South Americans and Filipinos are more ignorant of the RC crimes and cover-ups then it means that the UN's talks are an even greater waste of effort when viewed from a world perspective.
What point are you trying to make?
Kind Regards,
SIQ.
Dear sandy and peter,
Nice poem peter.
Sandy don't think "again" etc is onomatopoeic really - alliterative despite using same word but just repetitive - yup like a train's noise.
Diamond's clickety-clack onomatopoeic particularly re old train systems as they crossed regular junctions of short-length rails.
Kindest regards,
Not sick but
SIQ.
Nice poem peter.
Sandy don't think "again" etc is onomatopoeic really - alliterative despite using same word but just repetitive - yup like a train's noise.
Diamond's clickety-clack onomatopoeic particularly re old train systems as they crossed regular junctions of short-length rails.
Kindest regards,
Not sick but
SIQ.
SIQ -
Sorry for the delay in responding - I've been rather busy. This thread may be dead now so I shall be relatively brief. Your entire arguments rests on your statement, "... However yours, mine and the UN's voices are useless against the Vatican who will ignore us all...". This argument is just nonsense. What you are saying in effect is that since the RC Church will not lift a finger to expose the child rapists in their midst, then the UN shouldn't even bother to demand it of them. Quite frankly, your argument is absurd and is defeatist and I stand by those words. If this offends you then so be it.
In response to you question, "... "As well as addressing the RC sexual and other crimes of cover-up, should the UN also challenge the C of E in similar manner?" Please answer with a straight unqualified "yes" or "no" if you can bring yourself to utter an answer which I doubt...", my answer is yes.
Sorry for the delay in responding - I've been rather busy. This thread may be dead now so I shall be relatively brief. Your entire arguments rests on your statement, "... However yours, mine and the UN's voices are useless against the Vatican who will ignore us all...". This argument is just nonsense. What you are saying in effect is that since the RC Church will not lift a finger to expose the child rapists in their midst, then the UN shouldn't even bother to demand it of them. Quite frankly, your argument is absurd and is defeatist and I stand by those words. If this offends you then so be it.
In response to you question, "... "As well as addressing the RC sexual and other crimes of cover-up, should the UN also challenge the C of E in similar manner?" Please answer with a straight unqualified "yes" or "no" if you can bring yourself to utter an answer which I doubt...", my answer is yes.
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles2 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles2 mins ago
Crosswords3 mins ago
News5 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.