Warsaw's silent march in support of 5th Commandment - Thou shalt not kill

Not necessarily. But if you want get into stats, there's loads of information out there from reputable sources regarding the EU which is really more relevant when discussing Poland. Also bear in mind that domestic violence has existed ever since men and women began living together in whatever form and that in the USA or Ireland or Poland of fifty years ago when people generally got married, there were plenty of women knocked about by violent husbands. Being married made no difference. Anyway this tragic case from Poland has less to do with domestic violence and is more along the lines of a crime of passion. It's about hate,rage, vengeance etc and as other posters have pointed out, you are using it in a very callous manner to give you an excuse to discuss one of your, let's call it, areas of interest.

Actually, it seems that the murdered was at least in part motivated by money, as she looted the flat before setting it on fire. Also, it seems that earlier in the day the two women had both been selling candles outside Brodno cemetery and had argued there, probably about money. The theory is that Paulina L (the victim) had told Magda M (the murderer) that she was saving money to pay for her son's christening and her daughter's first communion and that is how Magda M knew there would be money to steal in the flat.


It's utterly pathetic that somebody's only interests in life are sneering, looking down on people less fortunate than himself and utterly hating people who are less cowardly than him.


You really do have to wonder how somebody's life can go so badly wrong that they are so utterly consumed with hatred.

Please prove with your Eurostats that there is exactly the same amount of violence amongst married couples as shackers-up.


So the poor are excused from behaving decently and are free to act liek animals. Knowing your "anything goes as long as it's libertine" philosophy of life, you probably believe that the better-to-do are also excused from being decent. Feel free.There's no law against believing such crap.

Now let's see which loud-mouthed Brit Bully first springs to your defence?

Yep.


And this from a devout Catholic. It actually beggars belief.

Really, he should have entitled the thread something along the lines of " Most domestic violence cases occur in the homes of the unmarried ", because that is what he really wants to discuss. The poor victims are completely secondary, and he has barely mentioned them.


Why should Atch have to prove anything? You are the one making the allegations, and it is up to you to be able to back up your claims, not others.

I don't think Polo does want to discuss that: he's been repeatedly asked to provide any sources which support his claims that "Opponents of domestic violence should bear in mind that most cases involve shack-up households rather than married couples" and "Police alerted by neighbours to loud boisterous vebral and physical altercations will tell you that informal shackers-up are the source of most of the problems." but for some reason he declines to post any. I wonder why that might be. Could it be that he realises he's gone down yet another of the paths where he makes laughable claims and then has reality pointed out to him and everybody else.


They are just another vehicle for him to abuse while sneering and dripping hatred, contempt and an entirely misplaced sense of superiority.

The point that I'm making is that once upon a time when marriage was the norm, there was still domestic violence. It's not necessarily associated with an unmarried state. You're the one who started this, so it's up to you to provide the proof that backs up your claim. You can't use America as an example. You would need corroborating evidence from a number of countries in order to have a case. You're constantly attacking others for presenting anecdotal evidence and then you do exactly the same thing yourself with the 'everybody knows' 'ask any policeman' routine. Not on I'm afraid. Put your money where your very big mouth is.

The other point Polonius is that stats only tell partof a story. You have to look at other factors apart from the married or unmarried state of the couples and then correlate the results to get a more accurate picture . Apart from their socio-economic group there's factors such as whether there are other issues like alcohol or substance abuse, a history of mental health problems, money worries, a bereavement in the family or other stress factors. Anger management and stress are issues for people of all social classes, educational levels etc. As you said yourself domestic violence can occur in a stable, prosperous family not just amongst the poor and disadvantaged.

Because there is no evidence of course, and he knows it. This is just his opinion.
I could equally say " Most Catholics are bitter, full of hate, and decidedly unchristian in their outlook ", that of course doesn't make it true, and I would fully expect to be asked to prove my claims by giving examples if i ever wrote something like that.


Yes, it is only the others who have commented on the thread that have actually thought about and mentioned the victims. Disgusting.

One also needs to look at the way that relationships change. That change affects the results one sees. For example, unmarried relationships which include domestic violence are less likely to lead to marriage than unmarried relationships where there is no domestic violence (because most people don't want to be married to somebody who is violent towards them). Also, marriages where there is domestic violence are more likely to end in divorce (because most people don't want to stay married to somebody who is violent towards them); however, the violence is unlikely to stop after the divorce, but it will then be recorded as violence in an unmarried relationship.


It is not true that most Catholics are bitter, full of hate, and decidedly unchristian in their outlook (quite the reverse really); however it is clearly true that some self-professed Catholics are bitter, full of hate, and so decidedly unchristian in their outlook that they appear to be trying to follow the exact opposite of the teachings of Jesus Christ, as evidence of that fact one only needs to point to the posts of Polo.

It's not that surprising. Many people only found religion in a serious way after their old political masters went away.

"A silent march under the slogan "Fifth Commandment - Thou shalt not kill"

Is that in fact a true translation or is the word ' murder ' more correct . There is a real difference .

Of course not, which is the point I was trying to make, and thankfully most people here realise that, but by saying the terrible things he does, he's not doing the Catholic faith any favours at all. Some newcomers to the forum , if they know little about Catholicism, might take his views as those of being a typical Catholic, when I'm sure the vast majority of Catholics would look at the topic of this thread, and feel nothing but compassion for the victims. It's a great shame that Polonius appears not to.

Taking all those factors into consideration my hunch is that children are better off and are exposed to less domestic violence living in a non-dysfunctional family with their own married parents. What is your hunch about that?

But there are tons of dysfunctional families with married parents. Married parents does not necessarily equal a happy home. Anyway to be honest I'm fed up of this discussion. It's very unsavoury because what you're doing is using the deaths of those little children (how could you Polonius really??) and their unfortunate mother as an excuse to attack unmarried couples. You'd be better off going down to the church to light a candle for each of those lost lives and say a prayer for those left behind to cope in the aftermath. I don't want to be involved in this exchange any longer. It's just not right.

Don't be silly Po3. These are obviously people to whom life has said a great big no. People with more to deal with than they are able.

Yes, but even more in unmarried cohabitations, fatherless homes, unwed mothers and boyfriends, etc. That comparison is the key. And all available studies and stats show that children in dysfunctional settings suffer more, witness more domestic violence, do poorer in school adn have mroe frequent run-ins with the law those from fully parented households. Your reaction will doubtless be "yes, but fully parented households also experience violence, substance abuse, drunken rages, etc." They do indeed, but on average LESS, and in this case LESS IS BETTER THAN MORE! It's that simple.

And your point is what exactly? That you disapprove of something? Total misanthropy.

I notice that all you've done is pass (unpleasant) judgements on that tragic family and make insinuations about the way people live, without actually saying anything positive at all.

Shame on you.

I don't understand what is a point of that march? It will change nothing, influence no one, maybe those show partaken in this event are going to feel better about themselves.

Towards bigots like yourself.

Positive are faithful loving spouses selflessly devoted to their youngsters, concerned about their proper upbringing, education, physical development and spiritual life, teaching them the importance of disinterested altruism for its own sake. Such behaviour should be lauded and propagated because multiplied millions of times over it helps create the ethical consensus on which to build a decent, safe, wholesome and healthy society. The antithesis -- selfish, fly-by-night instant gratification, selfish, here & now hedonism -- does not build but destroys individuals, families and the very fabric of society, creating chaos and confusion.

You still haven't said anything positive at all, just that you don't like one thing, but like another.

Basically grumbling while saying nothing about the unfortunate family in question.

And of course sniping at a disadvantaged family about which you know nothing except the contents of media reports.

What have you done to support and console that family? Have you sent them a generous przekaz pieniężny from your post office to help tide them over in their bereavement? More likely than not you have limtied yourself to more smart-alecky trolling (doesn't cost a thing!) and shedding a crocodile tear or two.

Given that a) you're the person who decided to start a thread on an internet forum, spreading their personal tragedy across the internet and accusing them of:





I rather think that's incumbent on you.Since you seem to know so much about that family and their tragedy.

One also wonders how one might


given that the single mother and both her children sadly died.

But if there are any surviving kids and if there's been a fund set up directly to provide for those children's education, I'll be more than happy to send a


of $100 too, though the onus is on you (being less trustworthy) to provide proof of payment. If there isn't, I'll be equally happy to match a similar donation from you to a charity I'm peripherally involved with that helps young single mothers complete their education without being dependent on a family or a male for support.

Po3, you really do come across on here as bitter, twisted, unfulfilled, inherently evil, spiritually malevolent and generally all-round nasty. I very much hope the reality is not that bad. Really.

That occurrence was merely an example of what frequently occurs in such circles. You come across as a person not content to wallow in your own perversity. Just becuase you were dealt that particularly sad hand of cards, you seem to want to get even (but with whom since you don't believe in God?!) by foisting the toxins of unrestrained "anything goes" debauchery and disintegration on the rest of society.

How do you know what 'circles' that poor dead family were in?


Yet I suspect I'm a far happier person than yourself.


Why not try to be open, positive and decent rather than


in such misery that you have to pass judgement on dead children.

Very very sad.

This thread is disguisting and Polonius seems very hateful person. To use such tragedy as an excuse to post such awful, blanket and ridiculous statements is simply unspeakable. For all Polonius talk about promoting certain lifestyle I never saw a thread when someone used a murder in a marriage to say marriages are wrong. That kind of sick propaganda seems unique to Polonius on here.

Quite. Because murders in marriage, although they can also occur, are far rarer than in fly-by-night liaisons. The same us true of domestic violence not leading to homicide. There seems no lack of people on PF ready to attack windmills in defence of promicuous hook-up and shack-up lifestyles.

One can't help but wonder whether that is strictly an abstarct, intellectual reaction on their part or do they themselves actually engage in such shameless debauchery?

Who cares, Po3, who cares.

Haven't you insulted this dead family enough?

Now run along and reflect on the appalling lack of respect you've shown for these victims of a terrible crime. It's almost as if you're pretending to blame them for their own tragic deaths and saying they wouldn't have been murdered if the lady and her partner had a bit of gold on their fingers.

Disgusting.

Do you have a source for that, or is it just another of the 'EU plans to microchip all Polish babies' style bits of rubbish your fevered imagination comes up with and you then ignore all requests for you to support your rubbish as you instead move on to your next sneering display of hatred, bitterness and envy?


One doesn't need to wonder much at all about why you're so utterly consumed with hatred, bitterness and envy.

Why your respond doesn't suprise me? Because the level of spitefulness you show towards ppl who live differently than your imagined 'proper' way is so high that right now I wouldn't be suprised even if you said they deserved to die.

There are absolutely normal, healthy and loving informal couples as well as there are dysfunctional ones. The same with married couples. Getting married doesn't protect you from violence.

I'm really happy that in today world I don't have to live by the rules of some old, bitter man

Abuse and infidelity
University of Chicago sociologist Linda Waite [86] found that "16 percent of cohabiting women reported that arguments with their partners became physical during the past year, while only 5 percent of married women had similar experiences." Waite's surveys also demonstrated that 20 percent of cohabiting women reported having secondary sex partners, compared to only 4 percent of married women.

There are tonnes of such evidence online. Yes, married couples have problems, but as the above study has shown shackers-up WERE MORE THEN THREE TIMES AS LIKELY TO EXPERIENCE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE. Married women also break their vow of fidelity, but LIVE-IN LOVERS ARE FIVE TIMES LESS FAITHFUL TO THEIR PARTNERS.

In your view, which setting is better to raise children in?

But what do the pro-debauchery faction care about studies, facts, figures and statistics. Their slogan is PROMISCUITY FIRST AND FOREMOST and they will keep mouthing it until they're blue in the face!!