Catholic priests believes in more stupidity

"Many Catholic priests take a flexible approach to celibacy, tolerated by church leaders, and some believe sex with children or men does not count, a former Melbourne priest said on Wednesday."

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/national/child-sex-abuse-link-to-celibacy-20130123-2d7ch.html#ixzz2ItULwubd


 


 


Let's just throw these kiddie fiddlers in gaol. I don't care if they think it's right by their religion. Using their own stupid logic, throwing them in gaol isn't violating their religious right it's merely throwing out trash:)

Message 1 of 100
Latest reply
99 REPLIES 99

Catholic priests believes in more stupidity

I was sent a DO NOT KNOCK sticker by my power company last week. It only covers against sales people though.


I have opted not to display it.

Message 61 of 100
Latest reply

Catholic priests believes in more stupidity

 


Nope! Sorry! Unless the law has changed, ANYONE has access to YOUR front door in daylight hours - and you can put up as many signs as you want it doesn't matter. Having said that MOST sales men / women will respect a sign that says eg 'no hawkers please' or something similar. As far as religious callers (JWs), I know for a fact that you can ask them to put you on THEIR 'do not call' list and they will not call. I was on their list when we lived in Sydney - they never called.


[/quote]


 


Not if you have BEWARE OF ATHEIST DOG

_________________________________________________________

You can't please all the people all the time, so now I just please myself


Message 62 of 100
Latest reply

Catholic priests believes in more stupidity

**meep**
Community Member

I have always found Atheists to be lovely, tolerant people.

Message 63 of 100
Latest reply

Catholic priests believes in more stupidity

"Beware of Athiest Dog"?....lmao...never really asked 'em.  They don't discriminate though....no strangers get past them...Religious or otherwise. lol


 


BTW, though it's an extreme example there is a law that entitles land owners to refuse entry to anyone including Govt. agencies without express permission.  It's Trespass after that point. Permission of Entry is implied only until the landowner removes permission.


 


It's a complicated law that applies more to Govts. trying to take over other peoples lands, or remove them from it (like in the Coal Seam Gas example & The Castle..lol), but it also applies in general to basic rights of land ownership & right to withdraw consent of entry.  Here's a link that explains it a lot better = it's Common Law 'Deed in Fee Simple'. 


 


http://www.johnston-independent.com/property_rights.html.


 


I'm not an expert, but a group of people in my region are exercising Deed in Fee Simple & just like Darryl Kerrigan, taking their case to the High Court of Aust. to be tested under Constitutional Law.  Anyone entering their land without express permission can be charged with Trespass - including religious hawkers.


 


I believe landowners in the Coal Seam Gas debate are also possibly intending to fall back on this law if State Govts. move to override their right of ownership for the sake of Commercial interests.  They would be within their rights to refuse entry for the purpose of Coal Seam Gas Exploration for instance.


 


After All - ....It's the Constitution, It's Mabo, It's THE VIBE....lol - Happy Australia Day


 


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJuXIq7OazQ

Message 64 of 100
Latest reply

Catholic priests believes in more stupidity

""Beware of Athiest Dog"?....lmao...never really asked 'em.  They don't discriminate though....no strangers get past them...Religious or otherwise. lol"


 


and if your dog(s) bite anyone or even just knock them over - while in transit between your front gate and your front door - YOU could be sued! It's the same if someone trips over your kid's toys, or falls in a hole or damages themselves in any way - that's why Insurance. I have had to look into this as I have large dogs. That's why I am supposed  to have my back yard fenced off and keep the dogs behind that fence.


 


And, if you display a "Beware of the Dog" or similar sign you are ADMITTING that your dogs are savage and likely to attack someone - so you are even MORE in the wrong.


 


 

Message 65 of 100
Latest reply

Catholic priests believes in more stupidity

**meep**
Community Member

and if your dog(s) bite anyone or even just knock them over - while in transit between your front gate and your front door - YOU could be sued!


 


 


 


Yes, you are even responsible for a licensed tradesperson.   Its worth familiarising yourself with what your responsibilities are.


 


 


 


And example:


 


 


A HOME owner has been ordered to pay $70,000 in compensation to the widow of an electrician who died after working in his roof.


 


The decision, handed down in the District Court would surprise many property owners ignorant of their responsibilities, a legal expert has told the Herald.


 


Allan Harley had been working on a terrace in Darlington in October 2004 when he was electrocuted after coming into contact with an exposed live wire from a previously used solar hot water heater.


 


His wife, Fiona Giovenco, sued the owner of the home, Geoffrey John Dick, and a plumber, Paul Thomas Stephens, who had been employed by Mr Dick in 2001 to decommission the old system and replace it with a gas water heater.


 


Last week Judge Leonard Levy determined the level of liability for each man after the parties agreed Ms Giovenco be awarded $350,000 in damages.


 


Judge Levy found Mr Dick liable for 20 per cent of the damages because he ''was aware and ought to have been aware'' that a live supply of electricity remained connected to the old hot water system.


 


Professor Peter Cane from the Australian National University said the judgment had followed the general legal principle that property owners bear certain responsibilities for people's safety while on their premises. However he said many people would have ''no idea that they would be responsible in those circumstances''.


 


Judge Levy found Mr Stephens liable for 80 per cent of the damages. It had been ''reasonably foreseeable'' to both men that the electrocution could have occurred and therefore each had breached their duty of care to Mr Harley, Judge Levy found




Message 66 of 100
Latest reply

Catholic priests believes in more stupidity

How on earth did we get from Pedophile priests to dogs biting people????


 


😮

Message 67 of 100
Latest reply

Catholic priests believes in more stupidity

 


Well that might have been the case prior to the Civil Liability Act being changed, but unless my dog causes whole person impairment over 15%, no-one can sue anyone.


 


Same could be said if you entered my premises uninvited, fell over and broke your leg.  What negligence would I possibly have in that if you weren't invited onto the property in the first place?  Any self respecting insurer would wipe the floor with such a claim.


 


Furthermore, if the dog is behind closed gates and someone fails to consider the likelihood of being bitten if they enter uninvited, then a 'civil' court would no doubt find that they caused their own injury by failing to consider the obvious risk.


 


Insurance companies don't pay out civil liability claims lightly...the plaintiff would need to prove negligence on my part, which of course there wouldn't be if I'm just minding my own business.  They'd also need to be 15% WPI or it's game over.


 


When it comes to Trespass, I can erect a sign saying that entry is by permission only.  Anyone Can = It's a constitutional right.

Message 68 of 100
Latest reply

Catholic priests believes in more stupidity


How on earth did we get from Pedophile priests to dogs biting people????


 


😮



 


Via the connection of religious types & then religious types door knocking etc....lol.  Who cares, it's an interesting debate & nobody's fighting.


 

Message 69 of 100
Latest reply

Catholic priests believes in more stupidity

interesting transition cuepie

Message 70 of 100
Latest reply