Miscellanea Agnostica

Just when you thought the R.C. Church couldn’t have reached a new low in depravity — for instance, they stole newborns from “wayward” mothers in Australia, and in Spain, and probably lots of other places — the (UK) Telegraph reveals the Church managed, back in the 50s, to have had boys mutilated because they were “homosexual” (WebCite cached article):

Evidence of the castrations has emerged amid controversy that it was not included in the findings of an official investigation into sexual abuse within the church last year.

The NRC Handelsblad newspaper identified Henk Heithuis who was castrated in 1956, while a minor, after reporting priests to the police for abusing him in a Catholic boarding home.

This particular form of abuse was apparently not included in an abuse report released a few months ago. The claim is that there was no way to trace the allegations, however, the real reason is that the report’s writers were trying to cover up government participation:

Evidence emerged on Monday that government inspectors were aware that minors were being castrated while in Catholic-run psychiatric institutions.

Minutes of meetings held in the 1950s show that inspectors were present when castrations were discussed. The documents also reveal that the Catholic staff did not think parents needed to be involved.

There are also allegations that Vic Marijnen, a former Dutch Prime Minister, who died in 1975, was linked to the case.

In 1956, Mr Marijnen was the chairman of the Gelderland children’s home where Mr Heithuis and other children were abused. He intervened to have prison sentences dropped against several priests convicted of abusing children.

The involvement of former prime minister Marijnen — even though he’s long since deceased — certainly might cast a shadow on the Dutch government, so it’s natural the report may have avoided this matter.

It’s amazing how the R.C. Church continues to lament its lack of influence on occidental society, and even pitches fits when it feels it’s being disrespected … but clearly the Church tore up and burned its “respect” card long ago. It no longer deserves anyone’s deference or respect. The sooner society understands this, the better off we’ll all be.

Oh, and once again, I have to ask all the lay Catholics out there who may read this (and since I’ve heard from some of you, I know you’re out there): When the hell do you plan to get the fuck off your sorry, lazy little asses and do something about the horrific monstrosity that is your own Church? Only you can change it. Either you have the courage to force it to change, or you don’t. But since you refuse to try, I can only assume you approve of this abusive behavior.

Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons.

Hat tip: Mark at Skeptics & Heretics Forum on Delphi Forums.

Tags: castrati, castration, catholic child abuse, catholic child abuse scandal, catholic church, catholic clerical abuse scandal, catholic scandal, child abuse, christian, Christianity, christians, clerical child abuse, clerical child abuse scandal, dutch, dutch catholic church, gay, gays, gelderland, henk heithuis, holland, holy see, homophobia, homophobic, homosexual, homosexuals, mutilation, netherlands, priestly pedophilia, roman catholic, roman catholic church, vatican, vatican city, vic marijnen

President Obama announced his latest choice for the US Supreme Court; it’s Solicitor General Elena Kagan [WebCite cached article]. The Religious Right — along with the rest of the country’s conservative faction — is going nuts about it. But the R.R.’s objection is not based on her qualifications or lack thereof. They object to her based on what they assume (not what they know) about her sexuality. Religion Dispatches covers some of the R.R.’s whining and bellyaching:

Focus on the Family, which previously signaled it would not support gay nominees because they lack the necessary “character” and “moral rectitude,” today opposes Kagan because of her “her emotional and legal commitment to the LGBT agenda.” And the American Family Association demands that the media ask Kagan if she’s a lesbian, because “no lesbian is qualified to sit on the Supreme Court.”

The problem with all of this — aside from the fact that these people seem to think that any gay person is too deficient ever to have any kind of federal office in the first place, which is a ridiculous position — is that it’s not even known whether or not Kagan is gay! A blogger recently suggested she was, and CBS News foolishly relayed this unfounded claim as fact; the White House, however, says this is untrue, and it cannot safely be assumed that Kagan is gay. (The blogger who started the rumor is Ben Domenech, who was a Bush Junior operative. Needless to say, his credibility on the matter is very thin, if not nonexistent.)

At any rate, the Religious Right continues to denounce Kagan as a lesbian and whines about her nomination to the Supreme Court based on that … but they have no idea if she really is a lesbian in the first place.

This wouldn’t be the first time the R.R. has stamped and fumed childishly — and sanctimoniously — about something, without knowing the facts of the matter. And one can safely assume it won’t be the last. More’s the pity.

At any rate, Ms Kagan’s sexual orientation has nothing to do with whether or not she can serve as a Supreme Court Justice. I for one do not care whether she’s gay or not.

Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons.

Tags: anti-gay, barack obama, childish, christian right, elena kagan, gay, harvard law school, homophobe, homophobes, homophobia, homophobic, homosexual, immature, immaturity, juvenile, lesbian, lgbt, nomination, Religion, religious, religious right, scotus, solicitor general, supreme court, supreme court nomination, us supreme court, white house