The Magdalene Laundries in Ireland, also known as Magdalene asylums, were institutions...

>No one else thinks these actions were completely justified?

This is the edgiest thing I've read on Veeky Forums. And you make fun of fedoras for being "edgy"...

Kinda hard to cover up murder if the remains can be examined.

You're hyperbolizing, these institutions were a place where disgraced women could go for security and find belonging. It gave them an alternative option to prostitution or other degrading professions. Obviously they were very strict.

>very strict
As in prisons

theyre literally just slightly better thab famine-era workhouses specifically for whores, crazies and criminals.

>No one else thinks these actions were completely justified

It wasn't justified. Many women were simply single mothers, not even prostitutes. Even if they had been prostitutes, it wouldn't have been justified.

The women were kept as slaves: they were overworked, they were not paid, they were not allowed to leave the asylum, they were physically punished for infractions, and many had their children taken away from them and sold to childless couples wanting to adopt.

I'm not even mad that you attempt to justify it: honestly, it's just disappointing, that people would defend an outdated relic of an institution and its inherently false message despite it perpetrating something like this that very much destroyed people's lives for no real reason.

>these institutions were a place where disgraced women could go for security and find belonging

Nobody went voluntarily. The women were locked up in said institutions against their will.

the Catholic Church is directly implicated in the fall of the Roman Empire and then was almost totally responsible for a Thousand years of Dark Ages and the deaths of 10's of millions.
More recently it enabled the escapes of thousands of Nazi war criminals and continued screwing, buggering and disposing of the bodies of thousands of children.

Basically they had a home for mentally ill homeless women, many of the women died of diseases because Ireland was very poor at the time and no one could afford proper healthcare.

IRELAND IS NOT FUCKING SOVIET UKRAINE
we were poor but not that poor
and its no excuse for the disgraceful abuse that occured to innocent women who weren't allowed to leave
and btw: the catholic church was and is one of the wealthiest institutions in ireland.

You can deny all you want

youtube.com/watch?v=nWKuGqtWDow

Most of the women had extreme mental illnesses, they were very vulnerable and the Church provided a strict, safe environment for them. Please don't hyperbolize.

Calm down, we can all agree the Catholic Church committed many atrocities and covered up many more, but they hardly brought about the fall of Rome (in fact, they tried very hard to restore the Roman Empire), or killed "10's of millions"

I don't know how much clergy helped Nazis escaped, but quite a few were often killed by Nazis, and Hitler's policy toward Catholics was pretty negative. And even Mussolini, who tried to get on their good side, ended up clashing with them when they said he had no authority to apprehend people in the Vatican State (a state he endowed them with).

>Most of the women had extreme mental illnesses

No they didn't. The overwhelming majority were single mothers...

Who will stand up for all the thousands on children who were abused.

Irish Catholic here, the laundries and abuse scandals broke the back of the church as a moral authority here. It's a huge embarrassment and literally no one defends it

I had never heard of this. Even during my most fedora years I didn't think the Church was this evil this recently. I assumed the more recent abuse scandals were mostly isolated incidents.

How is this not talked about more openly?

Everyone in Ireland knows this. One of the most successful films domestically in Ireland deals with this, The Magdalene Sisters

Because the RCC has been more steadily pandering to liberalism, which makes the media their friend.

>And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand: And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand?

So happy I'm Orthodox. We've had our fair share of corruption, but it's almost entirely been financial stuff.

Literally the entire christian faith is a corruption

What do you mean?

The human race is corrupt

Which sucks because in reality they provided a safe place for mentally ill homeless women. Yea it was strict, but it's better than life on the streets.

>So happy I'm Orthodox

Being an irrelevant and corrupt ethnic club?

I'm a convert and I hardly find the Church to be an ethnic club.

I think the RCC has made too much of an effort to be "relevant" and it has lead them to pander to modernism.

>So happy I'm Orthodox. We've had our fair share of corruption, but it's almost entirely been financial stuff.

No, the Orthodox Church has had its share of abuses. It's simply that they are less known and frankly, smaller. Not for lack of trying, however.

-Orthodox churches generally kept blood libels up as an actual piece of church history, rather than folk accusations. This led to various infamous Jewish pogroms in the 19th and 20th century that contributed to the lack of support for White forces in the Russian Civil War.
-Persecution of Old Believers in Russia, with some old believers being murdered, many more facing persecution, and thousands fleeing Russia for Siberia or the New World.
-The Orthodox persecution of the Hellenic religion (the 'pagan' worship of the Olympian Pantheon) during the late Roman Empire and early Byzantine Imperial periods, leading to the destruction of Hellenic temples, statues and artefacts.
-The support of the Orthodox establishment for the 1967 Greek military coup and subsequent nondemocratic governments

These pogroms weren't actually perpetuated by the Church, they weren't like the Inquisition.

Paganism was a state religion at the time (with the Roman Emperor the supreme priest), all the temples were state owned and managed. It was pretty senseless, but it's also not comparable to, say, Roman persecution of Christians.

As far as the coup goes, there were plenty of people in the Church on both sides of the monarchy vs. democracy issue for decades before then.

>there were plenty of people in the Church on both sides of the monarchy vs. democracy issue for decades before then.
This includes the clergy, by the way, right up to Patriarchs of Greece.

>These pogroms weren't actually perpetuated by the Church, they weren't like the Inquisition.

But the Orthodox church had a role in them. A main role.

he Russian Orthodox Church canonized Gavriil Belostoksky in 1820, long after the Catholic church ended informal canonization of blood libel figures. Additionally, Greek Orthodox clergy agitated for the attacks on the Jewish community in Rhodes, which were prompted by accusations that a disappeared Christian girl had been ritually murdered by Jews there.

Also, Orthodox areas in Eastern Europe tended to be quite antisemitic, especially during the late 19th/early 20th centuries, where they generally were notably more persecution-y than other areas. It also bears mentioning that Orthodox clergy stirred up anger and bigotry at Jewish communities, leading to pogroms, especially during the 1880s, when clergy - and others - liked to blame the Jews for the assassination of the Tsar and during the Russian Civil War, when clergy on the side of the Whites encouraged anti-semitic riots because they believed the Jews had been the origin of the Communist Reds.

>Roman persecution of Christians.

The Roman "persecution" of Christians was overstated. Christians in large part deliberately performed acts in order to get themselves martyred. It became such a large problem that eventually, the Church establishment had to convene several councils to shut these people (Donatists) down.

>there were plenty of people in the Church on both sides of the monarchy vs. democracy issue for decades before then.

The Church is not and never has been a democracy. The Greek Orthodox - and most if not all Orthodox Churches, for that matter - have always been known for their reactionary viewpoints and siding with nondemocratic governments.

>Gavriil Belostoksky
The pogroms didn't start until the 19th Century, they started as reprisals for Gregory V of Constantinople's body around, which made them look like Turkish collaborators.

>. It also bears mentioning that Orthodox clergy stirred up anger and bigotry at Jewish communities
They targeted Judaizers more, which were a serious problem throughout the 19th Century

>Christians in large part
Don't be ridiculous. Sure, some did, but Christians were going to absolutely get persecuted no matter what because they refused to sacrifice to the Caesar, which was basically like an oath of fealty. There was an exception allowed for Jews on that and so Romans left early Christians mostly alone, but once Christians started converting gentiles, mass persecution was inevitable.

>The Church is not and never has been a democracy. The Greek Orthodox - and most if not all Orthodox Churches, for that matter - have always been known for their reactionary viewpoints and siding with nondemocratic governments.
When the alternative is communism, like in Russia, sure.

In this case, in Greece, many clergy sided with democracy, Meletius IV of Constantinople was removed as Patriarch of Greece by the government for being against the royalists (though he later when on to become the Ecumenical Patriarch).

they started as reprisals for *Jews dragging

>they started as reprisals for Gregory V of Constantinople's body around, which made them look like Turkish collaborators.

There is no evidence whatsoever that the Jews even dragged the Patriarch's body around. This was most likely a manifestation of the blood libel: it is only mentioned by Greek Christians, but not by Ottoman sources.

The pogroms that broke out in Greece and Oddesa only used the Patriarch's death as an excuse, anyways: there was already underlying tension since the Jews were resented for their business activities (that, mind you, they were forced into because Christians prohibited usury).

>They targeted Judaizers more, which were a serious problem throughout the 19th Century

And you think that, somehow, the fact that they were 'Judaizers' makes it justifiable?

>Sure, some did, but Christians were going to absolutely get persecuted no matter what because they refused to sacrifice to the Caesar, which was basically like an oath of fealty.

Persecution was greatly exaggerated. Roman authorities were hesitant to persecute Christians. There was no real comprehensive persecution until the time of Diocletian, and that only affected the area that Diocletian ruled as Augustus: it did not affect the entirety of the Western Empire nor the Levant and Aegyptus/Africa.

The supposed "persecution" bears the mark of being an invented tradition. To be sure, there was some persecution: however, the scope of it was greatly exaggerated so as to create an "us vs. them"-based identity.

>When the alternative is communism...

And one could argue that the turn to Communism was fueled by the stifling autocratic Tsarist regime that the Church helped in perpetuating.

>blood libel
Blood libel is true. The Jews did do this and it's been proven multiple times.

>pogroms
The so called "pogroms" were peasant uprisings against a brutal and unjust tyrannical class.

Don't argue with Constantine using logic. That ship sailed a long time ago.

>Slave labour, imprisonment and mental and physical abuse are justified because some kids had sex and weren't allowed use a condom
Christcucks everyone.

>50 million pounds in reparations to ""descendants"" of people that died over a century ago
>the people didn't even know they were ""owed"" money until they heard of this
Rofl why is Ireland so left wing? Rand Paul should give them a visit.

the fuck? why rand?

Because he's an economic libertarian, lower taxes, more private industries.