Modern-Day Noah Opens Doors Of Ark Creation. Holy fucking sheep shit, you can’t make this shit up yourself.


Modern-Day Noah Opens Doors Of Ark Creation



Sky NewsBy Robert Nisbet, Europe Correspondent | Sky News – Sun, Jul 29, 2012

A faithful reproduction of Noah’s ark, using the dimensions in The Bible, has just opened to the public in The Netherlands.
Deborah Venema-Huibers shows off her father’s recreation of Noah’s Ark.

It was constructed by the Dutch creationist and millionaire building contractor Johan Huibers, after he dreamt that Holland would be flooded once again.

He used the ancient measurement of the cubit – the length of a man’s arm from the elbow to the fingertips – to build the craft according to Biblical proportions.

In Genesis the ark is described as being 300 cubits long, 50 cubits wide, and 30 cubits high so the mammoth effort took him and his team of five just over four years to finish.

Using Mr Huiber’s arm, the craft, which is moored in the southern Netherlands town of Dordrecht, is just over 450 feet in length, dwarfing buildings along the waterfront.

He has filled it with a plastic menagerie of animals – as well as a few species of live birds – to recreate the story of Noah for paying visitors and to make The Bible more ‘touchable’.

Deborah Venema-Huibers, manager of the Ark, told Sky News that they had to abandon plans to sail the ark to the London Olympics after they were asked to make the wooden boat safer for visitors.

She said: “We would like to carry three thousand people on the boat (so) you can’t say: ‘We’ll leave it like that’. You have (to clear) everything with the fire department, as it is all wood. It took such a long time that we had to skip the Olympics.”

The boat was constructed by welding the metal hulls of several old barges together and then using Scandinavian pine for the skin.

The Bible says Noah used ‘gopher wood’ when he built the original, but scholars disagree on what that is, so Mr Huibers used ‘creative licence’, both with the material and the design.

Mrs Huibers says they are being contacted by dozens of people worried about the Mayan prophecy of the end of the world in December this year.

“They are concerned, and they ask: ‘Is there a flood coming again? Is the world going to be destroyed again? Can we stay here and board, and can we book a room?’

“But of course we tell them, the real safety is not here. This is not a rescue boat. It’s a museum.”


Church Official in Philadelphia Gets Prison in Abuse Case. Finally, the people who protected these monsters are held accountable. Mind you, this is the first one, so basically, the vast majority of them got away with thousands of crimes of child rape.


Church Official in Philadelphia Gets Prison in Abuse Case


Published: July 24, 2012 417 Comments

PHILADELPHIA — Msgr. William J. Lynn, the first Roman Catholic Church official in the United States to be convicted of covering up sexual abuses by priests under his supervision, was sentenced Tuesday to three to six years in prison.

Matt Rourke/Associated Press

Monsignor William J. Lynn

Readers’ Comments

“Cover-ups of serious crimes by church officials, universities and corporations will never stop until the consequences outweigh the benefits.”

alansky, Marin County, CA

“You knew full well what was right, Monsignor Lynn, but you chose wrong,” Judge M. Teresa Sarmina of Common Pleas Court said as she imposed the sentence, which was just short of the maximum of three and a half to seven years. Monsignor Lynn must serve at least three years before he is eligible for parole.

Monsignor Lynn, 61, was found guilty on June 22 of child endangerment after a three-month trial that revealed efforts over decades by the Philadelphia archdiocese to play down accusations of child sexual abuse and avoid scandal. He was acquitted of conspiracy and a second child endangerment charge.

Monsignor Lynn served as secretary for clergy for the 1.5 million-member archdiocese from 1992 to 2004, recommending priest assignments and investigating abuse complaints. During the trial, prosecutors presented evidence that he had shielded predatory priests, sometimes transferring them to unwary parishes, and lied to the public to avoid bad publicity and lawsuits.

The conviction of a senior official, followed by a prison sentence, has reverberated among Catholic officials around the country, church experts said.

“I think this is going to send a very strong signal to every bishop and everybody who worked for a bishop that if they don’t do the right thing, they may go to jail,” said the Rev. Thomas J. Reese, a senior fellow at the Woodstock Theological Center at Georgetown University. “They can’t just say ‘the bishop made me do it.’ That’s not going to be an excuse that holds up in court.”

In a three-minute statement before sentencing, Monsignor Lynn, dressed in a black clerical shirt and white collar, said: “I have been a priest for 36 years, and I have done the best I can. I have always tried to help people.”

Turning toward relatives of an abuse victim in the courtroom, he said, “I hope someday that you will accept my apology.”

But he did not comment on the broader accusations that he put children at risk by repeatedly protecting “monsters in clerical garb,” as Judge Sarmina described it at the hearing.

The sentence was a victory for the Philadelphia district attorney, R. Seth Williams, who said outside the courtroom, “Many people say that the maximum still would not have been enough.”

Monsignor Lynn’s lawyer, Thomas Bergstrom, called the sentence “unbalanced.” Last week, the defense argued that a long prison sentence would be “merely cruel and unusual.”

Prosecutors argued that the gravity of Monsignor Lynn’s crime — giving known sexual predators continued access to children, causing lifelong anguish and damage to some — was “off the charts.”

Monsignor Lynn’s lawyers said they would appeal the conviction, saying that the child endangerment law at the time did not apply to supervisors and that the judge erred in allowing testimony about accusations that were beyond the statute of limitations.

In a statement Tuesday, the Archdiocese of Philadelphia said that its procedures for protecting children had improved significantly since “the events some 10 years ago that were at the center of this trial.”

It acknowledged “legitimate anger in the broad community toward any incident or enabling of sexual abuse.” But it also described the sentence as overly harsh, saying “fair-minded people will question the severity.”

“We hope that when this punishment is objectively reviewed, it will be adjusted,” it said.

After the sentencing, Ann Casey, a friend of Monsignor Lynn for 36 years, said she believed he was a scapegoat and a victim of his intense faith in the archdiocese’s leaders. “It was his vow of obedience to the church that landed him this morning in jail,” she said.

During the trial, Monsignor Lynn’s lawyers argued that he had followed the instructions of Cardinal Anthony J. Bevilacqua, who was the archbishop of Philadelphia from 1988 to 2003 and who died in January.

Monsignor Lynn’s conviction was for lax oversight of one former priest, Edward V. Avery, who spent six months in a church psychiatric center in 1993 after an abuse episode. Doctors said he should be kept away from children. But Monsignor Lynn sent him to live in a rectory and did not warn parish officials.

In 1999, Mr. Avery engaged in oral sex with a 10-year-old altar boy. He pleaded guilty to the assault just before Monsignor Lynn’s trial and was sentenced to two and a half to five years in prison.


Jon Hurdle reported from Philadelphia, and Erik Eckholm from New York.

Circumcision ruling divides German public


The Irish Times – Saturday, July 21, 2012

Circumcision ruling divides German public


WORLD VIEW: The death of a child after a circumcision has sparked a controversy about religious freedom

IT IS NOT often you see a rabbi in the Bundestag or the chancellor Angela Merkel warning her backbenchers not to make Germany a “laughing stock” of itself.

But that was the scene in the German parliament on Thursday.

Members of parliament had been recalled from their holidays to debate and vote on emergency assistance for Spanish banks. At the last minute, though, another pressing matter found its way on to the agenda.

A majority of MPs backed a resolution that “the Bundestag views the circumcision of male children, socially accepted worldwide, as not comparable to damaging and unconscionable infringement of a child’s right to physical integrity such as female genital mutilation, which the Bundestag condemns”.

For the rabbi and others watching from the public gallery, the resolution threw up dozens of questions, chief among which was: how did we get here – and in Germany of all places?

Germany is home to about four million Muslims and 120,000 Jews. Official figures show 3,000 circumcisions are performed annually among registered doctors, although the real figure is believed to be almost twice that.

Since May 7th, however, religious circumcisions in the Cologne municipal area have been in legal limbo following a ruling by a regional court in the case of a four-year-old Muslim boy who died from complications following a circumcision.

That circumcision took place on November 4th last in the practice of a 62-year-old Cologne doctor who specialises in the procedure. As in thousands of previous cases, this one went off without any complications, he said later.

Two days later, the boy’s mother was asked to bring him back to the practice for a check- up. Two hours before the appointment, however, neighbours heard the woman screaming in Arabic: “My son is bleeding.” The boy was rushed to hospital where the mother, reportedly from Iraq and with little German, was unable to explain the details of the circumcision two days previously.

Medical records show the doctors assumed the boy had undergone a botched home circumcision “with a scissors, without anaesthetic”, at which point the wheels of Germany’s legal system began to turn.

Police investigated and a state prosecutor eventually charged the responsible doctor with “injuring another person with a dangerous instrument” – a scalpel.

The prosecutor lost the case and the doctor was acquitted in the first two instances – a later external appraisal found the circumcision “faultless” and the level of after-bleeding normal.

In the third instance, though, Cologne regional court ruled that a child’s constitutional right to physical integrity had precedence over the right to freedom of religious expression. Even when parents consented, a circumcision could, the court ruled, be considered a criminal act of bodily injury.

Although the ruling is applicable to greater Cologne only, the shock waves spread across the country and around the world, while doctors specialising in circumcisions, including at Berlin’s 250-year-old Jewish hospital, have suspended the practice until the legal situation is clarified.

The ruling has become a matter of urgency for Germany’s Jewish community, given their practice of circumcising boys eight days after birth.

That was reflected in a statement by European rabbis meeting in Berlin last week that the ruling was an attack on their religious identity that “calls into question the future existence of Jewish life in Germany”. Hours later, the federal government promised legislation by the autumn to allow circumcisions to be performed under correct medical procedures.

Thursday’s Bundestag vote was a symbolic stop-gap measure until a permanent resolution is reached; but rather than calm things down it provoked a divisive reaction that indicates a legal and moral minefield ahead.

Jewish and Muslim groups welcomed the gesture. The German Judges Association backed the Bundestag vote and urged a swift action to permit circumcision. The Green parliamentary party declined to support the resolution en bloc.

The Cologne ruling has been widely criticised in the German media and hotly debated in legal circles. In Berlin’s political scene, the widespread view is that German history does not allow it the luxury of taking an avant garde position on matters of religious belief, particularly involving an issue so central to the Jewish faith.

The German population appears split. A poll by YouGov for the DPA news agency found 45 per cent of Germans favour a legal ban on circumcision of boys, while 42 per cent opposed a ban and 13 per cent were undecided.

Now the discussion has moved on to how a secular majority should respond to practices it finds alien.

One side argues that it is the sign of a mature and enlightened society to view circumcision without consent as a practice at odds with German secular values. Some have gone so far as to describe it as a religious anachronism comparable to exorcism.

The other side argues that a society’s maturity can be measured by the defence of the rights and beliefs of minority (religious) beliefs and practices one does not necessarily share.

Legal observers say it is unlikely, although not impossible, that other regional courts will follow the Cologne ruling. Even if legislation comes in the autumn, the issue may well land before the constitutional court for a definitive ruling.