Christianity's moral premises are simply a reflection of human nature's moral premises. Or are you suggesting that only Christian societies, now and historically, have tge capacity for compassion, pity and charity?
I think there WAS a great deal of ignorance for a long time about the nature of child abuse and preditory Paedophiles, certainly as late as the 1980's. People believed for a long time that these people could be treated, or cured. As for what the Popes have said, time and again in his papacy, Pope Benedict spoke out against the scourge of child sexual abuse by Roman Catholic priests, using words that would have been scarcely imaginable by his predecessors. It was, he said, "evil," "gravely immoral," "a terrifying sign of the times." He spoke of the "deep shame" and "humiliation" the scandal had brought on the Catholic Church. He apologized to victims. As Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, he served as head of the church's doctrinal office, where he insisted on centralizing all handling of sexual abuse by clergy. For that alone, he deserves credit, stopping Bishops from hiding these Priests. Did he do enough? Possibly not. Did he do nothing? Only in the minds of those with another agenda, which has little to do with the protection of children or the truth and a lot to do with having a stick to beat up Christianity with.
Earlier I was just trying to bring a bit of brevity to a very serious topic but I'm with you Wakeyred. Even though I am more of an agnostic, I have seen the decline in moral standards/ethics over many years and some of that I believe can be related to the rejection of the various religions thus generally leaving the masses without a good set of ethics/morals to work/live within. Most societies indoctrinate their young, but as a parent it surely is your job to put in the appropriate guidance. If your society is tolerant enough it will then allow people to make up their own mind as they get older and hopefully they will also be tolerant of other values and beliefs. Sadly some grow up in a "dog eat dog" environment, so is there any wonder they behave like they do.
Cheers for that Wakey and I bow to your obvious superior knowledge on the subject. I must admit I do not take an active interest in the workings of the church but was only commenting on what knowledge I have on learning from TV news reports. The latest being the top Catholic priest in Scotland who openly admitted his inappropriate behaviour towards young priests. BTW I sincerely hope your last paragraph was not directed at me as I can honestly say I may have a point of view but certainly no agenda to discredit religion.
What Im saying is that before Christianity came along, the old Gods people worshipped, could not, and did not, inspire the building of hospitals and alm houses, or make feeding the hungry and clothing the poor or foster any coherent concept of a human dignity intrinsic to every soul.
For some reason I'm reminded of this [video=youtube;ExWfh6sGyso]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExWfh6sGyso[/video]
thats a bit like saying why are there televisions outside Scotland. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Logie_Baird
No it isn't. You're claiming that the christian religion gives people the conscience to build hospitals not that they invented them and everyone else copied. If muslims do not believe what christianity says and have not been influenced by it then why did they develop the conscience to build hospitals? Because its **** all to do with religion.
Actually, its exactly what Im saying, hospitals, such that they were, before Christianity were for treating troops injured in battle. The idea that ordinary people could and should be treated with compassion and practical help (outside of your own family) came with a Christian belief in the teachings of Jesus.
I think you're changing history some what there. Hospitals pre-date the birth of Christ by several hundred years in many different cultures. And let's be right here, universal health care in this country is down to the Clement Attlee Labour government in the 1940s and particularly Aneurin Bevan who was not a religious man.
Pretty much all serious historians who've studied the period agree that Jesus existed, care to show me arguments to the contrary from a serious source?