Cardinal Tagle urges people not to revenge on molester priests!

[redemption32]

If people misread or misunderstand him, then it's his own fault because he wasn't being clear. You can't tell whether he is for or against legal action based on what he said because he left it hanging. I don't know why people are so pissed that people misunderstood him, geez, you guys don't know what he means either because he didn't say anything. Yes, he made a statement that says nothing. Does that make you people feel smart or what?

Woot woot! I agree with this guy. Well said sir.

[SPRINGFIELD_XD_40]

If people misread or misunderstand him, then it's his own fault because he wasn't being clear. You can't tell whether he is for or against legal action based on what he said because he left it hanging. I don't know why people are so pissed that people misunderstood him, geez, you guys don't know what he means either because he didn't say anything. Yes, he made a statement that says nothing. Does that make you people feel smart or what?

Unless you read the ENTIRE ARTICLE .... it will never be a MISUNDERSTANDING in behalf of the cardinal.

It does not at all make me feel smart . That is reality , ang ga sige ug ratrat this and that makes them people who abused their freedom of speech. What it makes though is di magpataka ug yawit specially if ang tumong is MOCKERY or HATE hiding in a sheeps clothing in the form of CRITICISM or for that matter , CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM kuno .

Read the entire article .... it is likely to be appreciated rather than raise eyebrows compared to what the TS titled the thread and copy pasted statements that some are even non existing.

[Joseph Ratzinger]

Well, Pope Benedict XVI when he was still with the CDF urged JPII to set up a special investigation on the case of Hans Hermann Cardinal Groër who allegedly abused young monks but some Curia guys persuaded JPII not to push through with it for it might lead to the media exaggerating the whole story (which is sometimes the case) and everything just gets blown out of proportion. In fairness to Ratzinger, he did something. This guy was one misunderstood Pope.

OT but somewhat related.

[<SMILE>]

Uhhhh.. Ok.. I don't really know what I can take away from that. Hehe
You should really avoid cutting your sentences midway and continuing at the next line.

Smile! Click!

Did I,
is anyone exempted?
not mentioned in the rules of law,
How can it be hidden if all the evidences are there,
what would be the influence, he will go to heaven because he was able
to hide a heinous crime, oh come on, logic please....

[monroy]

Unless you read the ENTIRE ARTICLE .... it will never be a MISUNDERSTANDING in behalf of the cardinal.

It does not at all make me feel smart . That is reality , ang ga sige ug ratrat this and that makes them people who abused their freedom of speech. What it makes though is di magpataka ug yawit specially if ang tumong is MOCKERY or HATE hiding in a sheeps clothing in the form of CRITICISM or for that matter , CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM kuno .

Read the entire article .... it is likely to be appreciated rather than raise eyebrows compared to what the TS titled the thread and copy pasted statements that some are even non existing.

Are you sure it's not you who is reading things into his statement and making assumptions about the posters here? I don't know why you presume people didn't read the whole article, it's not that much longer than what the OP posted here. It's less than a page long. Is it because they had a different interpretation than you?

The fact that there are differences in opinion regarding what he says proves that his statements were ambiguous. Clear statements aren't open to interpretation.

By the way you cannot care for the victim and the criminal. That is like saying you can say you care for both the murderer and the murdered victim. This is one instance where you actually do have to pick sides, that's if you have principles...

[SPRINGFIELD_XD_40]

Are you sure it's not you who is reading things into his statement and making assumptions about the posters here? I don't know why you presume people didn't read the whole article, it's not that much longer than what the OP posted here. It's less than a page long. Is it because they had a different interpretation than you?

I have basis why I have statements like that .

In the case now .... did you read the ENTIRE ARTICLE and di lang first page , first post ? Kay if you did , I would not know why you ended up saying that he kept us hanging and it is not the posters fault.

The fact that there are differences in opinion regarding what he says proves that his statements were ambiguous. Clear statements aren't open to interpretation.

Unless you cant see an opinion designed as a form of mockery / breeds hate / ignorance then I am with you. Otherwise , it does not take a rocket scientist to reconcile the ENTIRE ARTICLE and the thread title / statements copy and pasted by the TS.

By the way you cannot care for the victim and the criminal. That is like saying you can say you care for both the murderer and the murdered victim. This is one instance where you actually do have to pick sides, that's if you have principles...

You have to pick sides but you made it sound so wicked by using the term MURDERER . In the case of the issue , we are talking here about *** OFFENDERS na pwerting daghanang ALLEGED pa . Prove that first na GUILTY sila then we will not take care of them.

Again .... if you read the entire article , show me where he left us hanging unless the writer of the article left you hanging kana if gi basa nimo ang tibuok.

[monroy]

The penalties for murder and rape under the laws are the same, so I think attributing wicked intention to my analogy is uncalled for.

Since you say these are still unproven allegations, I do believe that as a society we can care for the victim and the accused by prosecuting the accused in a court of law and letting the laws of the land punish or set him free. You don't care for the accused and the victim by transferring the offender to far away location so as to frustrate the course of justice.

If by article, you mean the article by GMA news, then yes I and I believe everyone else here has read it. It takes less than 3 minutes to read the whole thing. But you'll probably say, no we mustn't have read it because if we did we would agree with you 100%. In other words, in order to prove we read the article, we must agree with you. Isn't that circular logic?

[Joseph Ratzinger]

Bro, Cardinal Tagle never said that the accused will not have his day in court. SNAP would not have endorsed him as one of the two Cardinals they preferred to become Pope if he was protecting abusers. SNAP is a group representing the victims that were abused by priests. Here's the article on why they picked him: Abuse victims' group names preferred picks for new pope - CNN.com

I have said this the third time already. hahaha..

[SPRINGFIELD_XD_40]

The penalties for murder and rape under the laws are the same, so I think attributing wicked intention to my analogy is uncalled for.

True but I based my presumptions on your MURDERER and MURDER VICTIM which commonsense wise tell's us that someone was murdered and we have the murderer unless you left me hanging (no pun intended ) that you are talking about a murderer na ALLEGED pa. The issue here is about a victim of a *** OFFENDER and ALLEGED *** OFFENDER , pwerting dakoa sa kalahian between your murderer and murder victim.

Since you say these are still unproven allegations, I do believe that as a society we can care for the victim and the accused by prosecuting the accused in a court of law and letting the laws of the land punish or set him free. You don't care for the accused and the victim by transferring the offender to far away location so as to frustrate the course of justice.

Dont take that route . It doesnt work . Focus on the INVESTIGATION and AUTHORITY who conducts it. Unless ang INVESTIGATOR and ang AUTHORITY kay mismo ang simbahan then we will be in the same page. Pero dili man .... naa man KORTE , naa man LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES regardless of unsa na siya na nasod.

If by article, you mean the article by GMA news, then yes I and I believe everyone else here has read it. It takes less than 3 minutes to read the whole thing. But you'll probably say, no we mustn't have read it because if we did we would agree with you 100%. In other words, in order to prove we read the article, we must agree with you. Isn't that circular logic?

Very wrong of your analogy Monroy. It does not at all take a rocket scientist to analyze it , it does not at all take crossword puzzle expert to complete it , it does not take a very smart man to comrehend it .

Simply read it . Compare it with the thread title and the statements of the TS . Now this time kay ni basa man gyud diay ka since its less than half a page and about 3 minutes to read .... RECONCILE the STATEMENTS of the majority of the POSTERS specially ang mga NEGATIVE ONES and see for yourself asa siya mo reconcile . Sa ENTIRE ARTICLE ba or sa SELECTED / NON EXISTENT STATEMENTS and THREAD TITLE .

From there .... tell me kinsay nag basa ug kinsay wala .

[SPRINGFIELD_XD_40]

I have said my piece here .

Like what REDEMPTION said .... cycle game na ni siya , different players .

To everyone , specially sa mga hilig mo persecute , mga Pontio Pilato , mga switiks , mga haters , mga ignorante ug uban pa ..... continue what you do best and what defines you. Afterall , this is iSTORYA.net lols .

@ MONROY .... say your last piece .... it was nice exchanging something with you and the same goes to REDEMPTION32 , peace mga bai .