Posted on 05/23/2016 12:51:50 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
MANILA (Reuters) - Philippine President-elect Rodrigo Duterte said he will defy the Roman Catholic Church and seek to impose a three-child policy, putting him on a new collision course with the bishops a day after he called them "sons of whores".
The southern mayor has yet to be declared the May 9 poll winner, but an unofficial vote count by an election commission-accredited watchdog showed him ahead over his four rivals, three of whom conceded defeat. Duterte assumes office on June 30.
Duterte's often outrageous comments have won him huge support and his tirades about killing criminals and a joke about a murdered rape victim do not appear to have dented his popularity in the largely Catholic country....
(Excerpt) Read more at ca.news.yahoo.com ...
I did, and of course no news articles came up. Perhaps, since you brought up the charge, you can point us to at just one.
You try Español?
If you can find even a newspaper article in Spanish to support your allegation, I’ll gladly read it. Thanks.
There are plenty of internet articles of this happening in Thailand, France, and most recently Ireland.
I’m not going to dig for a 1980’s newspaper article.
Believe what you want.
It doesn't make sense on the face of it. If the nuns were being used sexually, there would be no reason to abort their babies and then kill the nuns themselves! If --- per the classic "Maria Monk" libel --- the convent was the moral equivalent of a bordello, you certainly don't kill your whores.
Second, the idea of aborted "unborn babies' skeletons" is highly questionable. Babies in utero don't show significant ossification of their cartilage structure until mid-pregnancy. On a week 20 ultrasound, you're just beginning to able to see those bones -- they’re finally visible.
The vast majority of abortions --- like, 95+ percent --- are procured before week 20. The murdered babies' remains will not have mineralized bones, and the soft tissues would macerate, liquefy and decay away rapidly.
There was a blood libel like this against nuns in Ireland just a year or two ago. After the sisters' reputations were dragged through the mud by the assassin press, what finally emerged was that the skeletal remains were of orphanage children who had died of infectious diseases. This was from the days before antibiotics (i.e. from the mid-19th-century through WWII) when infectious diseases periodically decimated infant and early childhood populations in Ireland and elsewhere.
BTW, the death rate in the Catholic orphanages was lower than that of the surrounding counties in Western Ireland, because the nuns, despite terrible poverty, were doing a heroically good job of saving the orphans' lives.
And yeah, if you want, I can document that. It all came out right here on the various posts and links of Free Republic.
That’s pretty much what I thought you’d end up saying. So what we have left is vile allegation without a shed of proof. That tells me all I need to know. Thanks again.
This was before the internet.
Black & White newspaper in Spanish about a convent/monastary that was being demolished and oops they found the bodies of both nuns and babies. Perhaps pregnant nuns?
I don’t remember.
There’s plenty of documented cases of it happening elsewhere, and you can call it libel if you wish.
As much that is out there on pedophile priests, I’m surprised you’d call this a “vile allegation”.
If you ever lived in a Latin American nation, you’d know this type of story of par for the course. Believe what you want.
Yes, you are correct: Since you are unable to provide hard documentation for any of it, libel is the only thing you could call it.
I am ashamed to see this kind of overt defamation crap on Free Republic.
I’m ashamed of the folks who like to cover up abusers of women and children.
I love it when people who have been exposed as hateful liars try to divert the subject away from themselves. It’s cute.
LOL!
Speaking of diverting from the subject....now that’s cute.
Me, too. But in the instance we’ve been talking about, this is not the case.
You made a terrible accusation about the Catholic Church and then claim to be too lazy to look it up? The burden of proof is on you. Either retract your claim or be labeled as the liar you almost certainly are.
I’m not doing homework for you or anybody else.
I read what I read and I’d believe that reputable newspaper over any American Catholic who’s ignorant about the abuse their “church” has wreaked on humanity - deal with it!
Label me whatever you want. I laugh at your labels.
The burden of proof is on you to back up your libelous claim.
I read what I read and I’d believe that reputable newspaper...
This is exactly what someone who got caught in a lie would say.
...over any American Catholic who’s ignorant about the abuse their “church” has wreaked on humanity - deal with it!
This, on the other hand, is exactly what a bigot would say!
Label me whatever you want. I laugh at your labels.
Laugh all you want, you have now proven yourself to be both a liar and a bigot. That's going to leave a mark on everything you post on this website. Thank you for outing yourself, undermining everything you post here will be much easier in the future!
“The burden of proof is on you to back up your libelous claim”
Says who? You? Wrong!
“This is exactly what someone who got caught in a lie would say.”
I didn’t lie.
“This, on the other hand, is exactly what a bigot would say!”
Oh dear! I’m a “bigot” now. Hysterical!
“Laugh all you want, you have now proven yourself to be both a liar and a bigot. That’s going to leave a mark on everything you post on this website. Thank you for outing yourself, undermining everything you post here will be much easier in the future!”
Ignore me then! I’m not going to lose sleep over your thoughts or opinions.
The burden of proof is, and has always been, on whomever makes the assertion.
“This is exactly what someone who got caught in a lie would say.” I didn’t lie.
You were challenged on your outrageous and libelous claim and you refused to back it up or retract it. You are logically, therefore, a liar.
“This, on the other hand, is exactly what a bigot would say!” Oh dear! I’m a “bigot” now. Hysterical!
The religious hatred you expressed throughout this thread and your willingness to disparage someone in your post #36 on the basis of the religious faith you assert they have demonstrates your definitional bigotry.
Ignore me then! I’m not going to lose sleep over your thoughts or opinions.
I have no intention of ignoring you. Until you retract your statements or back them up, your reputation as a liar and a bigot will proceed you on this website.
No it hasn’t. I won’t retract anything and stand by my statement.
Call me whatever childish names you wish.
I could really give a damn about my “reputation” among Catholics on FR. So keep trolling...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.