Sean Brady Steps Down

[Hardy]

So a-la-cartery is OK after all? I'm confused. But, then again, that's probably the whole idea. Abracadabra!

[The Iceman]

This thread in many ways nearly justifies some of Tony's rants. It has moved on from a discussion about Sean Brady to a full on 'Does God exist' debate and attack on Catholic teaching.
I mentioned in some of my posts recently there would always be axes to grind and there they are.

How you expect anyone to "debate" anything when it's Tony versus the army is beyond me. He or anyone is expected to answer questions, but not ask and respond to multiple people and then challenged when he can't or won't respond to the 5 different people on one page who just demanded the truth.

Smells a bit like a classroom when the teacher isn't around and the bullies come out to play..... 

[orangeman]

Brady well able to bully.

[The Iceman]

Brady well able to bully.

No doubt. But it doesn't negate my point orangeman

[Zip Code]

Sorry Iceman your patronizing rant doesn't mention Tony blaming parents of the abused or the abused children themselves, are we all to let his vile comments slide - catch a f**king grip of yourself kid.

[AZOffaly]

2 seperate issues Zip. Tony and his nonsensical defending of what Brady and the Church did, or didn't do, to stop the abuse is the first issue. The second issue is the carry on over is there a God or not. Those discussions are even more pointless than the other one at this stage.

[Zip Code]

Both interlinked here AZ Tony is using the God argument to justify Catholicism, which is rotten to the core. 

[Hardy]

2 seperate issues Zip. Tony and his nonsensical defending of what Brady and the Church did, or didn't do, to stop the abuse is the first issue. The second issue is the carry on over is there a God or not. Those discussions are even more pointless than the other one at this stage.

  Actually I thought I was getting somewhere last night in discussing (an aspect of) the god question with Tony. I thought we had a relatively civilised discussion for a change. I got an insight into his thinking (he believes because he has to because he's afraid of being damned if he doesn't and so he is impervious to all logical refutations of the claims of religion, however outlandish).

I don't see why such a discussion should be off limits, provided it's conducted with a modicum of respect. As regards Iceman's complaints about bullying of Tony, the man himself didn't seem to have any problem with the most recent discussion. To flog a cliché, Iceman seems to be confusing reluctance to accept catholic dogma with an attack on his religion. The fact that you're not prepared to discuss doesn't give you the right to ban discussion. "The freedom to criticise ideas, any ideas – even if they are sincerely held beliefs – is one of the fundamental freedoms of society."

[deiseach]

"The freedom to criticise ideas, any ideas – even if they are sincerely held beliefs – is one of the fundamental freedoms of society."

The Thin Blue Line was absolutely shit.

[The Iceman]

2 seperate issues Zip. Tony and his nonsensical defending of what Brady and the Church did, or didn't do, to stop the abuse is the first issue. The second issue is the carry on over is there a God or not. Those discussions are even more pointless than the other one at this stage.

  Actually I thought I was getting somewhere last night in discussing (an aspect of) the god question with Tony. I thought we had a relatively civilised discussion for a change. I got an insight into his thinking (he believes because he has to because he's afraid of being damned if he doesn't and so he is impervious to all logical refutations of the claims of religion, however outlandish).

I don't see why such a discussion should be off limits, provided it's conducted with a modicum of respect. As regards Iceman's complaints about bullying of Tony, the man himself didn't seem to have any problem with the most recent discussion. To flog a cliché, Iceman seems to be confusing reluctance to accept catholic dogma with an attack on his religion. The fact that you're not prepared to discuss doesn't give you the right to ban discussion. "The freedom to criticise ideas, any ideas – even if they are sincerely held beliefs – is one of the fundamental freedoms of society."

That's not my case at all hardy. We are talking about two seperate discussions. Sean Brady and God does exist.
I believe in God and I worship God through the Catholic Church. I don't support Sean Brady.

I don't like Tony. He is half of the problem most times. But I don't like the axe grinders ganging up on him either.
We've flogged the debates to death on religion and Catholicism and doctrine. We go around in circles. I'm not prepared to discuss? I've discussed more on the topic for the Catholic/God side than anyone else.
Your quote is very conveniently used. I like it. I respect it and I agree with it. I disagree with the bully tactics. I'm not saying it's you personally but collectively there is a fair few lads firing the same old questions at Tony. Axes ground again...

[theskull1]

Asking questions IS bullying 

[foxcommander]

Asking questions IS bullying 

Is the role of EVERY christian not to stand up and defend your faith? This being the case, why is TF the only one doing the defending out of the 8 people sad to see Sean Brady go?

I would deem the above to be a form of bullying.

[T Fearon]

Mostly the questions cannot be answered and if they could then there wouldn't be a debate,it wouldn't by a faith issue (where one trusts his instincts but cannot prove if he or she is right ), it would simply be the formality of accepting fact.

Abuse I don't mind,and wouldn't be at all comfortable having some people on this board taking a liking to me,but I am bemused by how and why someone who does profess to believe is ridiculed incessantly.Surely if those who don't believe were confident in their non belief they wouldn't be exercised at all by believers.

[Myles Na G.]

Simply none of us know if it's true or not.Back in the day,the Church placed the emphasis on fear to save souls,nowadays it's the more compassionate approach.

If you believe and live a good clean life,you have no need to fear the afterlife.

I don't believe, I live a life which is ordinary, and I do not fear the afterlife (though being a coward, I sometimes worry about the manner of how I get there). Only religious people fear the afterlife, which is odd, as they're forever banging on about the joys of heaven and God's great mercy. 

[T Fearon]

If you don't believe in an afterlife,and the two distinctly opposite potential destinations,why would you fear it?

Also there is nothing wrong with a faith motivated by a healthy fear,as it is the prime motivator in this life.