View Full Version : oh no the molester church is in trouble again
and this time it goes right to the top. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8587082.stm)
given the systematic denial of what was certainly widespread abuse, it's a wonder anyone can have respect for the church anymore.
kinda surprising that al quada has not used the church as an example of western degradation in one of their video or audio messages.... seems like a pretty powerful symbol they could tap - the institutional homosexual rape of young boys... yikes...
ResearchMonkey
3/25/10, 12:38pm
Maybe it's time for a strongly worded letter?
the in-house exorcist there at the Vat says the Devil is on the loose up in there.:eek6:
I think he's late to the party myself.
ResearchMonkey
3/25/10, 04:51pm
Funny that it bothers you in the church but you don't care that pro-NAMBLA Kevin Jennings is the safe schools czar.
irony.
Seriously.....WTF?
yep
http://abcnews.go.com/Travel/chief-exorcist-rev-gabriele-amorth-devil-vatican/story?id=10073040
Funny that it bothers you in the church but you don't care that pro-NAMBLA Kevin Jennings is the safe schools czar.
irony.
...and that is certainly the truth according to the far right blogosphere.
well i think it's great. those people need to have their voices heard. so they can gain power, and come and bugger you're children.
ResearchMonkey
3/25/10, 07:22pm
If by "far right blogosphere" you mean his GLSEN organization then yes, its the truth.
Would you like to read Kevin's "little black book" (http://www.massresistance.info/downloads/LittleBlackBook.pdf) for children?
Just what every kid should learn in school..
http://img91.imageshack.us/img91/6667/page2425.jpg
Nothing quite like feeling of someones hand up your ass.
and bugger you're children.
Where is pedantic man?
If by "far right blogosphere" you mean his GLSEN organization then yes, its the truth.
Would you like to read Kevin's "little black book" (http://www.massresistance.info/downloads/LittleBlackBook.pdf) for children?
hey, i've been to a couple of the bars listed in that book! the eagle is right by this really cool restaurant on tremont where i had an antelope chop in a lobster demiglasse that just blew my nutsack right off.
so the book is for children? really, like the ones that are old enough to get into the bars that are listed? what? oh, wait, that's just you WANTING IT TO BE FOR KIDDIES so you can condemn it. but really it's for younger gay men to help them stay safe (or safer) in exploring their sexuality.
why the fuck do you care what gay men do with one another?
of course none of this has anything to do with the original topic. and i had no idea this kevin guy even existed prior to your spewage. but it's quite interesting that you're so hot to trot on what's going on with his shit. moth to the stinking flame(r), heh?
*Not horribly surprised about the cover-up*
Funny that it bothers you in the church but you don't care that pro-NAMBLA Kevin Jennings is the safe schools czar.
irony.
Dude... wtf are you talking about? Or do you even check what you type? is this some random BS you make up and just type out to see what people will come back with? Seriously... you're dropping your cred on this board.
"Victims say Fr Murphy - who died in 1998 - assaulted boys while hearing their confessions, in his office, his car, at his mother's house and in their dormitory beds.
He was quietly moved to the Diocese of Superior in northern Wisconsin in 1974, where he spent his last 24 years working freely with children in parishes and schools, according to one lawsuit. "
Seriously fucked up shit right here.
Edit... more "fucked up shit"...
"The Rev Peter Hullermann had been accused of abusing boys when the now Pope approved his 1980 transfer to Munich to receive psychological treatment for paedophilia.
The disgraced priest was convicted in 1986 of abusing a youth, but stayed within the Church for another two decades. "
ResearchMonkey
3/26/10, 05:49pm
Dude... wtf are you talking about? Or do you even check what you type? is this some random BS you make up and just type out to see what people will come back with? Seriously... you're dropping your cred on this board.I'm sorry Val, I sometimes forgot we have moonbats here. I'll spell it out more clearly.
Some guy, who died 10 years ago, molested a shit-load of children that are now in their 40's-60's. Likely some others later. Some old geezer, who is now the boss, didn't do to much about it except trying to get him specialized treatment once.
Church, a social institution, has many choices involved like whether or not you want to attend, then which one. Of course your children are your responsibility and because someone has some social position doesn't mean you should trust them. And again, the fucker died a decade ago.
As compared to Kevin Jennings the current "Safe Schools Czar" who is currently in charge of keeping the children of America safe in schools. Kevin Jennings as a teacher, a mandated reporter of child abuse, choose to encourage man-boy relationships between his students and gay men rather than reporting as mandated by law. Kevin Jennings was the leader of a group who passed out those flyers above to 12yo's along with "fisting kits." Kevin Jennings is a militant faggot hell bent on influencing children to explore faggotry making the predatory habits of NAMBLA an easier game.
So, my point was the outrage of dead guy and a guy who heads a socially optional church --vs-- A living person who is a head national public policy maker in our schools with a more direct history of pedophilia is actively working to encourage a captive audience of children to submit to deviant behaviors.
A parent has 100% control over their involvement with a church whereas as a parent has very limited control over a public school. Schools can operate without your knowledge or consent, enforced by the power of government.
So, I'd say you 'prolly just don't like churches in general while you blissfully and ignorantly turn a blind eye on whats happening right now, today, in our government. Don't get me wrong here; I think child molesters should be be shot in the head.
I'm far more concerned about millions of today's children then a handful of nearly deads.
I hope that helps.
http://img8.imageshack.us/img8/1921/ohhugemanatee500x500t.jpg
I'm sorry Val, I sometimes forgot we have moonbats here. I'll spell it out more clearly.
<snippety snip>
As compared to Kevin Jennings the current "Safe Schools Czar" who is currently in charge of keeping the children of America safe in schools. Kevin Jennings as a teacher, a mandated reporter of child abuse, choose to encourage man-boy relationships between his students and gay men rather than reporting as mandated by law. Kevin Jennings was the leader of a group who passed out those flyers above to 12yo's along with "fisting kits." Kevin Jennings is a militant faggot hell bent on influencing children to explore faggotry making the predatory habits of NAMBLA an easier game.
<snippety snip>
I hope that helps.
Help? Not much... because I'm trying to make the connection between Kevin Jennings and NAMBLA and I can't, based on what you wrote. Your going to have to spell that one out for me with links to resources. Maybe I'll understand you then.
Kevin Jennings has openly said he supported NAMBLA.
Have you not heard this?
I think there's a youtube about it.
It's not just hearsay.
I hope that helps.
Dude, be careful....next thing you know you'll be on the "reported list."
ResearchMonkey
3/26/10, 07:35pm
If using little kids as hand puppets doesn't connect enough dots for you I'm not sure I can help you to understand.
Kevin Jennings has openly said he supported NAMBLA.
Have you not heard this?
I think there's a youtube about it.
It's not just hearsay.
Post it, cat. It's not like you to make a statement without backing it up.
If using little kids as hand puppets doesn't connect enough dots for you I'm not sure I can help you to understand.
Find it. Post it. Otherwise, you're just feeding a lie. Here's my support...
SMEAR: Jennings advocated for or supports NAMBLA (http://mediamatters.org/research/200912150012#5)
SMEAR: Jennings advocated for or supports NAMBLA
REALITY: Jennings once praised Hay for his pioneering gay civil rights work. Right-wing media sources including The Washington Examiner, The Fox Nation, The Washington Times, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and Karl Rove, have linked Jennings to the North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) based on a 1997 speech in which Jennings praised gay rights activist Harry Hay. But like many obituaries written about Hay upon his death in 2002, Jennings was touting Hay as a gay civil rights pioneer for his role in helping start "the first ongoing gay rights groups in America" in 1948, and Jennings' comments had nothing to do with NAMBLA.
You see, moonbat? That's how it works.
BTW, did you know that former Prez. GW Bush was accused of sexually assaulting a 10 year old boy? It was hushed away and the boy's parents paid off by the Bush family. It's all true. He's been a pedophile since puberty.
Dude, be careful....next thing you know you'll be on the "reported list."
I reported your trolling. You were following me around the forums with your personal attacks. Why you are so obsessed with me is something I still do not understand. Reporting your behavior was the right thing to do, for you and for this board.
Almost every member of this message board would like to have a more inviting, friendlier atmosphere on OTC. I'm one of them. People are turned off by the petty bickering, trolling and attacks. If I can help to make it a better place then I'll do that. :headbng2:
If using little kids as hand puppets doesn't connect enough dots for you I'm not sure I can help you to understand.
Here's another one, moonbat...
SMEAR: Jennings "urged" student to "further the relationship" with "older man ... forcing his way" on him and to "keep quiet" (http://mediamatters.org/research/200912150012#5)
SMEAR: Jennings "urged" student to "further the relationship" with "older man ... forcing his way" on him and to "keep quiet"
REALITY: No evidence supports these claims. WorldNetDaily, in at least four separate articles, falsely claimed that Jennings "counseled a 15-year-old student to keep quiet about being seduced by an older man." Likewise, Limbaugh accused Jennings of having "encouraged" and "facilitated the relationship," and claimed that he "urged" the "15-year-old" to "further the relationship" with "older man ... forcing his way" on him. In fact, nothing in Jennings' 2000 speech for the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network, his 1994 book, or the student's own statement in any way suggests that the student told Jennings that someone was "forcing his way on" him or that Jennings "urged" the student to "further the relationship," nor do they support the claim that Jennings told the student to "keep quiet."
If I can help to make it a better place then I'll do that. :headbng2:
What makes you think that comment was directed at "you?" :rolleyes: Talk about NPD......
And FYI, other than the public pompous proclamation of a week or so ago.....I had absolutely no idea the you reported me. ;) Perhaps when a real personal attack (like the ones you're well-known for) was compared to the perceived abuse that you reported, it was laughed off. :shrug:
Post it, cat. It's not like you to make a statement without backing it up.
How about this one... or would you prefer a different source?
(I might be about to find a direct link, but I don't know if he has his own site somewhere...yet)
I can dig some more if need be.
http://americansfortruth.com/news/kevin-jennings-1997-transcript-promoting-homosexuality-in-schools-glsen-good-for-kids.html
yeah, i'm sure 'americans for truth about homosexuality' is gonna provide a real objective view of this, cato. how do you even come across this shit?
maybe next you could refer to some theories race by alfred rosenberg as authoritative?
How about this one... or would you prefer a different source?
(I might be about to find a direct link, but I don't know if he has his own site somewhere...yet)
I can dig some more if need be.
http://americansfortruth.com/news/kevin-jennings-1997-transcript-promoting-homosexuality-in-schools-glsen-good-for-kids.html
Americans for Truth is to homosexuality as Nazis are to Judaism.
I thought the attack was on Jennings not Harry Hay. Which is it? If this is about Harry Hay, then yes I agree that the support he gave to allow NAMBLA to participate in GLBT events was not a good thing. To my knowledge NAMBLA does not contain the relationship to men over 18 and in my opinion that goes over the line.
However, Harry Hay was a longtime, tireless advocate for the GLBT community and should get credit where credit is due.
http://img202.imageshack.us/img202/1451/sat1e.jpg
Harry Hay
Obama appointee lauded NAMBLA figure (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Obama-appointee-lauded-NAMBLA-figure-63115112.html)
But failure to report what appeared to be a case of statuatory rape of a child may be the least of Jennings' worries. Lori Roman of Regular Folks United points to statements by Jennings a decade or more ago when he praised Harry Hay of the North American Association for Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA), which promotes the legalization of sexual abuse of young boys by older men.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5eVhgCnV58
SMEAR: Jennings failed to report "statutory rape" of student (http://mediamatters.org/research/200912150012#3)
SMEAR: Jennings failed to report "statutory rape" of student
REALITY: Student was at least 16 -- the legal age of consent -- when he spoke to Jennings. Numerous right-wing and Fox News media figures advanced the falsehood that Jennings, in the words of Fox News host Bill Hemmer, knew of a "statutory rape" and "never reported it," based on Jennings' past statements about advice he gave to a student who told him about his relationship with an older man when Jennings was a high school teacher in the late 1980s. In fact, a 2004 letter from Jennings' attorney, as well as a statement from the former student and his Massachusetts driver's license definitively show that he was at least 16 -- the legal age of consent in Massachusetts -- when he approached Jennings.
SMEAR: Jennings "urged" student to "further the relationship" with "older man ... forcing his way" on him and to "keep quiet"
REALITY: No evidence supports these claims. WorldNetDaily, in at least four separate articles, falsely claimed that Jennings "counseled a 15-year-old student to keep quiet about being seduced by an older man." Likewise, Limbaugh accused Jennings of having "encouraged" and "facilitated the relationship," and claimed that he "urged" the "15-year-old" to "further the relationship" with "older man ... forcing his way" on him. In fact, nothing in Jennings' 2000 speech for the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network, his 1994 book, or the student's own statement in any way suggests that the student told Jennings that someone was "forcing his way on" him or that Jennings "urged" the student to "further the relationship," nor do they support the claim that Jennings told the student to "keep quiet."
This thread has traveled quite a ways off from it's original subject: Off Topic Central. :lol:
Media Matters = Democrat-aligned, biased watchdog group = not a credible source.
Americans for Truth is to homosexuality as Nazis are to Judaism.
oh
ok, i'll keep digging then.
oh
ok, i'll keep digging then.
It's not necessary, cat... we're way off topic now. :) I don't even plan to respond to the change in subject anymore in this thread.
If Jennings isn't your man then I understand. There are a lot of people who have a problem with homosexuality.
. how do you even come across this shit?
google is one source.
I'm in the process of seeing if I can get the audio
It's not necessary, cat... we're way off topic now. :) I don't even plan to respond to the change in subject anymore in this thread.
If Jennings isn't your man then I understand. There are a lot of people who have a problem with homosexuality.
I'm for Real truth, where ever it may lay.
If the story is false, it need be exposed. If not, that need be told too.
I'm objective atm. I just want to know if there really Is a tape, and if It is real now.
ResearchMonkey
3/27/10, 06:54pm
Read Jennings book.
Read Jennings book.
You know anybody that'll send me a copy.?
I don't think I want to spend money on it.
ResearchMonkey
3/27/10, 07:09pm
I'll ask the wife but she may have already passed it on.
Satan is a Catholic (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LKg4HLsu5gE)
72 virgins (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1D-oN5Ybb9s)
ResearchMonkey
3/28/10, 12:47am
You know anybody that'll send me a copy.Sorry cato, the wife passed it to the vice principal at the school a few months ago.
Who gives a flyin’ yip about a vice-principal
I’m mean seriously!?!
Seriously....you and your troublemaking ways!!
ResearchMonkey
3/28/10, 04:34am
shaddup and get in the boxcar winks!
It’s actually really nice in here, you should try it!
That's ok RM.
I'm not sure I'd have made it very far into the reading anyway.
I'm for Real truth, where ever it may lay.
If the story is false, it need be exposed. If not, that need be told too.
I'm objective atm. I just want to know if there really Is a tape, and if It is real now.
That's why I respect you, cat. (And I know others do also.) Your politics may not be the same path as others but you seem to accept that there will be differences without taking those differences as a personally.
:cocktail:
well, there's opinion, and then there's hard facts backed by evidence.
I don't go along with 'bearing false witness', and so when evidence is
in question, it need be followed up on.....if I've presented it.
I value my credibility....unless I'm making it pretty well know that I'm just bullshittin'. :D
I've never been to that site. It was just the first the google pulled in my search,
but now it's got me curious, mostly as to ....
If the claim isn't true, why wouldn't that guy sue for defamation.?
I'm going to continue to pursue trying to get the audio.
well, there's opinion, and then there's hard facts backed by evidence.
I don't go along with 'bearing false witness', and so when evidence is
in question, it need be followed up on.....if I've presented it.
I value my credibility....unless I'm making it pretty well know that I'm just bullshittin'. :D
I've never been to that site. It was just the first the google pulled in my search,
but now it's got me curious, mostly as to ....
If the claim isn't true, why wouldn't that guy sue for defamation.?
I'm going to continue to pursue trying to get the audio.
I hear ya. :cocktail: I've tried to do the same thing. If it's wrong it's wrong no matter what. And I've said so, even in this thread (though it was quite off topic).
With that said, I'll try to steer this back on topic.
With regards to the church and the pedophile priests, I understand where the church's point of view is...
they are about forgiveness. So if a priest sticks his wiener into a 14 year old kid then the church is looking to practice what it preaches (no pun intended) by forgiving the priest. But what to do with him? Leave him there? Or send him away?
Sending him away clears up the problem in the parish the priest found his victim(s)... at least from the church's point of view. Some priests were sent away for special treatment for pedophilia but were released to victimize kids again.
Was it wrong? I'd have to say without a doubt: yes it was wrong!
It seems to me that the church was only interested in promoting itself rather than purging it's own sins and wrongs.
and this time it goes right to the top. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8587082.stm)
given the systematic denial of what was certainly widespread abuse, it's a wonder anyone can have respect for the church anymore.
kinda surprising that al quada has not used the church as an example of western degradation in one of their video or audio messages.... seems like a pretty powerful symbol they could tap - the institutional homosexual rape of young boys... yikes...
The following is an interesting perspective from an atheist...
Monday 29 March 2010
Why humanists shouldn’t join in this Catholic-bashing
The reaction to the paedophile priest scandal is as guilty of scaremongering, illiberalism and elitism as the Catholic Church has ever been.
Brendan O’Neill
With all the newspaper headlines about predatory paedophiles in smocks, terrified altar boys and cover-ups by officials at the Vatican, it is hard to think of anything worse right now than a sexually abusive priest. Yet today’s reaction to those allegations of sexual abuse is also deeply problematic. For it is a reaction informed more by prejudice and illiberalism than by anything resembling a principled secularism, and one which also threatens to harm individuals, families, society and liberty.
When considering the problem of child sexual abuse by Catholic priests, it is important to distinguish between the incidents themselves, some of which were of course horrific, and the way in which those incidents are understood in today’s political and cultural climate. The acts of sexual abuse themselves were no doubt a product of various problematic factors: the Catholic Church’s culture of celibacy, its strange views on sex, the fact that in some institutions priests were given ultimate authority over young boys and girls. But the way in which those acts are understood today – as supremely damaging to individuals and the inevitable consequence (http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/johann-hari/johann-hari-the-pope-the-prophet-and-the-religious-support-for-evil-1923656.html) of people ‘deciding it is a good thing to abandon any commitment to fact and instead act on faith’ – is powerfully informed by two problematic contemporary trends: the backward cult of victimhood and the dominant ‘new atheist’ prejudice against any institution with strong beliefs.
With all the current claims about Pope Benedict XVI himself being involved in a cover-up of child abuse by an American priest and a German priest, and newspaper reports using terms like ‘stuff of nightmares’, the ‘stench of evil’, and ‘systematic rape and torture’, anyone who tries to inject a bit of perspective into this debate is unlikely to be thanked. But perspective is what we need. Someone has to point out that for all the problems with the Catholic Church’s doctrines and style of organisation – and I experienced some of those problems, having been raised a Catholic before becoming an atheist at 17 – the fact is that sexual abuse by priests is a relatively rare phenomenon.
Even in Ireland, whose image as a craic-loving nation has been replaced by the far-worse idea that it was actually a nation of priest rape, incidents of sexual abuse by priests were fairly rare. The Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse (http://www.childabusecommission.ie/), which was launched by the Irish government in 1999 and delivered its report last year, intensively invited Irish-born people around the world to report on incidents of abuse in Irish religious-educational reform schools, where the majority of clerical abuse is said to have occurred, between the period 1914 to 1999. For that 85-year period, 253 claims of sexual abuse were made by males and 128 by females. It is important – surely? – to note that these are claims of sexual abuse rather than proven incidents, since the vast majority of them did not go to trial.
The number of sexual abuse claims in these institutions fell for the more recent period: for males, there were 88 claims from the pre-1960s, 119 from 1960 to 1969, 37 from 1970 to 1979, and nine from 1980 to 1989. The alleged sexual-abuse incidents ranged in seriousness from boys being ‘questioned and interrogated about their sexual activity’ to being raped: there were 68 claims of anal rape in reform institutions for boys from 1914 to 1999. Not all of the sexual abuse was carried out by priests. Around 65 per cent of the claims pertain to religious workers, and 35 per cent to lay staff, care workers, and fellow pupils.
Of course, one incident of child sexual abuse by a priest is one too many. But given the findings of Ireland’s investigation into abuse in religious-educational institutions, is there really a justification for talking about (http://www.slate.com/id/2247861/) a ‘clinging and systematic evil that is beyond the power of exorcism to dispel’? As Ireland is redefined as a country in recovery from child sexual abuse, and the ‘scandal of child rape’ spreads further through Europe into Germany and Italy, it might be unfashionable to say the following but it is true nonetheless: very, very small numbers of children in the care or teaching of the Catholic Church in Europe in recent decades were sexually abused, but very, very many of them actually received a decent standard of education.
The discussion of a relatively rare phenomenon as a ‘great evil’ of our age shows that child abuse in Catholic churches has been turned into a morality tale – about the dangers of belief and of hierarchical institutions and the need for more state and other forms of intervention into religious institutions and even religious families. The first contemporary trend that has turned incidences of sexual abuse into a powerful symbol of evil is the cult of the victim, where today individuals are invited not only to reveal every misfortune that has befallen them – which of course is a sensible thing to do if you have been raped – but also to define themselves by those misfortunes, to look upon themselves as the end-products of having being emotionally, physically or sexually abused. This is why very public revelations of Catholic abuse started in America and Ireland before more recently spreading to other parts of Western Europe: because the politics of victimhood, the cult of revelation and redefinition of the self as survivor, is more pronounced and developed in America and Ireland than it is in continental Europe.
In Ireland, for example, the state has explicitly invited its citizens to redefine themselves as victims of authority rather than as active agents capable of moving on and making choices. The Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse discusses at length the ‘debilitating’ impact that abuse can have on individuals, to the extent that many of Ireland’s social problems – including unemployment, poverty, drug abuse and heavy drinking – are now discussed as the products of Ireland’s earlier era of abuse rather than as failings of the contemporary social system.
This, I believe, is why claims of sexual abuse in Ireland’s religious-educational institutions were so much higher for the period of 1960 to 1969 (nearly half of all claims of sexual abuse against boys during the period of 1914 to 1989 were made for that decade). It is not because priests suddenly became more abusive in the 1960s than they had been in the far harsher Ireland of the 1940s and 50s, but because the people who attended the institutions during that period were in many ways the main targets of the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse. They would have been in their mid-40s to mid-50s when the commission began in 1999 and many of them had suffered long-term unemployment, health problems, and other disappointments. Reporting their misfortunes to the commission offered them the chance, not only of getting financial compensation, but also of validating their difficult life experiences as a consequence of their having been abused. In a grotesquely convenient marriage, the state redefined social problems as consequences of Catholic abuse and the individual redefined himself as a sufferer from low self-esteem who did not bear full responsibility for the course of his adult life. In such a climate, not only are incidents of abuse by priests more likely to surface, but they are also more likely to be heavily politicised, turned from undoubtedly distressing and possibly criminal acts into modern-day examples of evil capable of distorting society itself. Thus did the contemporary cult of victimhood ensure that Catholic abuse was blown out of proportion.
The second contemporary trend that has elevated something quite rare into a social disaster is the rise of the ‘new atheism’. Now the dominant liberal outlook of our age – in particular in the media outlets that have most keenly focused on the Catholic abuse scandals: the New York Times, the Irish Times, and the UK Guardian – the new atheism differs from the atheism of earlier free-thinking humanists in that its main aim is not to enlighten, but to scaremonger about the impact of religion on society. For these thinkers and opinion-formers, the drip-drip of revelations of abuse in Catholic institutions offers an opportunity to demonise the religious as backward and people who possess strong beliefs as suspect.
Many contemporary opinion-formers are not concerned with getting to the truth of how widespread Catholic sexual abuse was, or what were the specific circumstances in which it occurred; rather they want to milk incidents of abuse and make them into an indictment of religion itself. They frequently flit between discussing priests who abuse children and the profound stupidity of people who believe in God. One commentator wildly refers (http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/johann-hari/johann-hari-the-pope-the-prophet-and-the-religious-support-for-evil-1923656.html) to the Vatican’s ‘international criminal conspiracy to protect child-rapists’ and says most ordinary Catholics turn a blind eye to this because ‘people behave in bizarre ways when they decide it is a good thing to abandon any commitment to fact and instead act on faith’.
Richard Dawkins, author of The God Delusion, unwittingly reveals what draws the new atheists towards the Catholic-abuse story: their belief that religion is itself a form of abuse. ‘Odious as the physical abuse of children by priests undoubtedly is, I suspect that it may do them less lasting damage than the mental abuse of bringing them up Catholic in the first place’, he argues (http://richarddawkins.net/articleComments,118,Religions-Real-Child-Abuse,Richard-Dawkins,page2). He admits that physical abuse by priests is rare, but only to flag up what he sees as a more serious form of abuse: ‘Only a minority of priests abuse the bodies of the children in their care. But how many priests abuse their minds?’ In this spectacularly crude critique of religion, no moral distinction is made between being educated by a priest and raped by one – indeed, the former is considered worse than the latter, since as one Observer columnist recently darkly warned (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/feb/28/catherine-bennett-faith-schools): ‘We have no idea what children are being taught in those classrooms…’
If ‘bringing a child up Catholic’ is itself abuse, there can only be one solution: external authorities must protect children not only from religious institutions but from their own religious parents, too. One new atheist has proposed an age of consent (http://freethinker.co.uk/2009/07/03/let%E2%80%99s-have-an-age-of-consent-for-religion/) for joining a religion: 14. In an Oxford Amnesty Lecture (http://www.humphrey.org.uk/papers/1998WhatShallWeTell.pdf) popular amongst new atheists, a liberal academic argued that children ‘have a human right not to have their minds crippled by exposure to other people’s bad ideas’, and parents ‘have no god-given licence to enculturate their children in whatever ways they personally choose’. Here, a simplistic leap is made from protecting children from paedophile priests to protecting them from their own parents, since in the new-atheist view strong beliefs and freedom of religion – which, yes, includes the freedom of parents to bring up their children as they see fit – are the real problem. They exaggerate the extent of Catholic sexual abuse in order to strengthen their prejudicial arguments.
Whatever you think of the Catholic Church, you should be concerned about today’s abuse-obsession. Events of the (sometimes distant) past which nobody can change are being used to justify dangerous trends in the present. A new kind of society is being solidified on the back of exposing abusive priests, one in which scaremongering supersedes facts, where people redefine themselves as permanently damaged victims, where freedom of thought is problematised, and where parents are considered suspect for not adhering to the superior values of the atheistic elite. Seriously, radical humanists should fight back against this.
Brendan O’Neill is editor of spiked. Visit his personal website here (http://brendanoneill.co.uk/).
Source (http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/site/printable/8360/)
Ah, but the media just loves dirty laundry (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHEP4HIzk1I).
it's not liberalism, elitism, and scaremongering that made the church place many abusive priests back into positions where they could rape again.
no, this is not things being blown out of proportion, which is a big part of this asshole's argument. try telling some of the hundreds or perhaps thousands of victims that this is all just blown out of proportion.
so, if today's "abuse obsession" STOPS the abuse of children that 40 years ago would have simply gone on, at the occasional inconvenience of a wrongly-accused adult, then i think i can live with that.
right. this is all just blown out of proportion. that's why people keep coming forward. (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=125380037)
it amazes me how you can chase every conspiracy theory in the universe about the US government yet you'll never question papal infallibility.
Yup...I'm sure the church didn't mean it. Why would they hide child abuse? They were just being forgiving..turning the other cheek..yeah, that's it. Besides .. er ... confession is protected speech. The priest receiving confession isn't allowed to ... report a crime.
Gimme ten Hail Mary's and sin no more!! See you next week.
ResearchMonkey
3/31/10, 12:06pm
As if someone else is responsible for your children;s safety and welfare.
The following is an interesting perspective from an atheist...
Source (http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/site/printable/8360/)
Ah, but the media just loves dirty laundry (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHEP4HIzk1I).
Media sells "dirty laundry". It's their business. Good news doesn't sell. Conflict and bad news sells. That's the nature of their business.
I agree with most of what the author says. I think people tend to get a mob mentality and this sort of thing gets out of control. The number of priests that have abused children are in the minority. But the worst was not the action of the minority of priests, the worst was the cover up by the Catholic Church as well as putting these priest back into a parish where they had direct contact with children.
The Catholic Church has done a lot of good in the past that should not be dismissed. Catholic charities have been responsible for helping the poor and sick for many years. However, there have also been past abuses dating back centuries other than the pedophile priests.
I don't feel like I've jumped on the bad wagon with the mob against the Catholic Church but they need to change their ways. It would have been much better to have "forgiven" the priests and sent them off into the mountains to spend the rest of their priesthood away from children.
As if someone else is responsible for your children;s safety and welfare.
right. it's irresponsible parenting that made those priests rape kids. and i'm sure the parents were all perfectly aware of what was going on, and chose to do nothing.
ResearchMonkey
3/31/10, 01:53pm
Being stupid is not an excuse for letting your kids get molested by anyone. What we know about pedos today is fairly extensive. It's not that hard to spot abuse if you know your kid. It's YOUR responsibility to protect your child in all cases. That would include who you allow access to your child. The world is a dangerous place and you cannot change that fact.
As it is, you would be impressed with just how many people keep quiet or do nothing about their kids being molested. Embrace your Diversity.
ResearchMonkey
3/31/10, 02:06pm
I'm not saynig that its OK that priest have pedo in their ranks or that its good that they covered it up more than a few times. I'm not surprised, its the catholic church with a long history of fucked up shit. Grave corruption is inherent in any institution as large as the CC. Much like government.
I'm going to guess you get hard with the notion it reflects poorly on all who might embrace God. -- It doesn't, really.
I'm not saynig that its OK that priest have pedo in their ranks or that its good that they covered it up more than a few times. I'm not surprised, its the catholic church with a long history of fucked up shit. Grave corruption is inherent in any institution as large as the CC. Much like government.
right, and 20, 30, or 40 years ago when such things were far less known or acknowledged, we still should blame the parents for trusting the temporary welfare of their children to the motherfucking representatives of god on earth.
I'm going to guess you get hard with the notion it reflects poorly on all who might embrace God. -- It doesn't, really.
gee, no shit? well thanks for helping to pull me out of the cradle, pops.
but, seriously, don't you think most adults can separate opinions about morally corrupt bureaucracies and those about spirituality?
oh, right.
Being stupid is not an excuse for letting your kids get molested by anyone. What we know about pedos today is fairly extensive. It's not that hard to spot abuse if you know your kid. It's YOUR responsibility to protect your child in all cases. That would include who you allow access to your child. The world is a dangerous place and you cannot change that fact.
As it is, you would be impressed with just how many people keep quiet or do nothing about their kids being molested. Embrace your Diversity.
Not sure what "diversity" has to do with molestation... but... moving on. :shrug:
I agree with knowing your kid(s) and recognizing when something bad has already happened to them. Changes in appetite, behavior, moodiness, etc are all symptoms that they have been molested. But how do you protect them from someone you have been raised to trust: the man with the collar. How do you prevent the molestation if you trust the man who you have been raised to trust?
We're ignoring the main problem: that the Catholic Church had knowledge of the molestations and chose to cover up or ignore rather than face the problem and act. Child sexual abuse is a crime.
I'm not saynig that its OK that priest have pedo in their ranks or that its good that they covered it up more than a few times. I'm not surprised, its the catholic church with a long history of fucked up shit. Grave corruption is inherent in any institution as large as the CC. Much like government.
I'm going to guess you get hard with the notion it reflects poorly on all who might embrace God. -- It doesn't, really.
No, it's sad. As I said before, the Catholic Church has done many good things for many people. But they can't keep protecting pedophile priests. It undermines any good they are trying to accomplish.
ResearchMonkey
3/31/10, 03:34pm
http://img260.imageshack.us/img260/9343/12394810110.gif
well that clarifies everything.
I don't even know WTF that is. Is that some random pic or is that supposed to be related to this thread. I have no idea.
i think he's trying to make some clever insinuation about the church and the klan. it's not working.
fuckin' okies....
ResearchMonkey
3/31/10, 05:45pm
http://img249.imageshack.us/img249/7802/p406066ar.jpg
Odd, I was certain you would know exactly what you're looking at.
Not in black. I thought they only dressed in white.
Thanks for the education... I think. :dizzy:
ResearchMonkey
3/31/10, 06:39pm
http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/1585/nazarenossanesteban.jpg
I'm not clear on who "they" is. Can you clarify for me?
ResearchMonkey
4/01/10, 12:25am
The problem of clergy abuse has been known to Rome well before then. The 1917 code of canon law criminalized sexual abuse of minors. Five years later, the Vatican penned a document outlining detailed procedures for handling such cases. In 1962, that document was updated and has been used in many of the lawsuits by victims against U.S. diocese and the Vatican itself.
Foxxy (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,590230,00.html?test=latestnews)
You really got to enforce that shit man, its just like immigration and bad shit happens if you don't keep that shit capped off.
So there you have it, kids get molested becuase you don't enforce immigration laws.
I'm not clear on who "they" is. Can you clarify for me?
That's what I was asking you earlier. Can you clarify it for me?
http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/1585/nazarenossanesteban.jpg
I'm not clear on who "they" is. Can you clarify for me?
I saw this in Seville... has to do with Easter or summat. It's been a while..but it's quite shocking to see it for the first time.
Jebus! You don't show someone from the South a picture of a hooded, white-cloaked person and not expect their hair to be raised. :eek:
Thanks for clarifying and explaining the penitent procession, Bish. I am relieved.
KKK symbols (http://www.adl.org/hate_symbols/groups_kkk.asp)
http://cache1.asset-cache.net/xc/80335460.jpg?v=1&c=IWSAsset&k=2&d=77BFBA49EF8789215ABF3343C02EA548A59CFECEE14A474F 8002FFC03DA838B6202063A82B56A60BE30A760B0D811297
More penitence in Sevilla
http://thereisnosininmybody.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/easter_kids_517213a.jpg
I like this site for their photographic New Stories...
http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2009/04/holy_week.html
ResearchMonkey
4/01/10, 05:04pm
You'll never guess whats going on in Asia.
http://img181.imageshack.us/img181/4213/168730985889400b7ad8.jpg
ResearchMonkey
4/01/10, 05:10pm
Jebus! You don't show someone from the South a picture of a hooded, white-cloaked person and not expect their hair to be raised. :eek:
Thanks for clarifying and explaining the penitent procession, Bish. I am relieved.
KKK symbols (http://www.adl.org/hate_symbols/groups_kkk.asp)Yeah its confusing sometimes. Just recently a congress critter was convinced the Tennessee State flag a white supremest flag out for a lynching at the US Capitol.
They should be happy the place didn't capsize.
Indo-Aryans. I've already read of the history of India. :D
The svastika (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika)
next time my argument is exposed as worthless, i'm gonna start posting a bunch of pictures.
next time my argument is exposed as worthless, i'm gonna start posting a bunch of pictures.
Oooooh... do you take requests for pictures? Pictures of puppies and kittens, please. :D
Example of kitteh awesomeness site (http://icanhascheezburger.com/)
ResearchMonkey
4/01/10, 05:35pm
next time my argument is exposed as worthless, i'm gonna start posting a bunch of pictures.I hope you have a lot of pictures.
You too, RM... you seem to like to post pics (damn glad I'm not on dialup anymore). Here's a great place to choose some kitteh awesomeness pics (http://icanhascheezburger.com/). :D
The world would be a better place with more pictures of kittens and puppies. Aaaahhhhhhhh
ResearchMonkey
4/01/10, 07:50pm
What a unique website, thanks val. I have a small collection of imagery myself.
http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/2492/lemonpartya.jpg
OK, back on topic. :)
Recognizing the problem, facing the problem and publicly apologizing for the crimes of these pedophile priests is a good first start.
Please read the article for the full story, but here is the major points which I found to be useful.
German archbishop says church failed abuse victims (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100402/ap_on_re_eu/eu_church_abuse)
BERLIN – The head of Germany's Roman Catholic bishops said in an unusually forthright Good Friday statement that the church in the pope's homeland failed to help victims of clerical sex abuse because it wanted to protect its reputation.
...
Clerics have neglected helping abuse victims by a "wrongly intended desire to protect the church's reputation," Archbishop Robert Zollitsch of Freiburg said on the day that Christians commemorate the crucifixion of Jesus Christ.
The news about sexual and physical abuse of children by priests and other employees leaves the church with "sadness, horror and shame," he said.
....
There is a lot more and I encourage you to read it.
I hope that this is one step toward healing for the victims as well as one step toward an internal change in handling pedophile priests in the Catholic Church.
ResearchMonkey
4/02/10, 02:41pm
I think I saw something about the CC is looking at booting pedos and giving them them cops. I dunno, I was on the phone with my wife when I scanned by it.
Maybe they are adjusting to the times.
I think I saw something about the CC is looking at booting pedos and giving them them cops. I dunno, I was on the phone with my wife when I scanned by it.
Maybe they are adjusting to the times.
That would be another step toward acknowledging the problem and protecting victims.
I don't think they should completely turn their backs on the pedophile priests. If they talk the talk they should walk the walk. Let the priests serve their time for the crime and if they still want be priests when they come out into society, find a remote location to send them to where they will never have contact with children.
ResearchMonkey
4/02/10, 03:22pm
If sexual identity is an immutable trait, I think they should go midevil on the pedos. Clean the gene poole, drain the swamp..
why does it always have to be uni-dimensional?
savages...
ResearchMonkey
4/02/10, 03:39pm
Isn't that what liberalism is all about? nuetering inequality.
no, it's not. but feel free to keep sketching cartoons.
ResearchMonkey
4/02/10, 04:10pm
Thank you for the permission oh wise one.
just make sure you get your chores done. don't forget to breed.
I like to practice breeding............. often. ;)
ResearchMonkey
4/02/10, 05:16pm
Like with men? :shrug:
Like with men? :shrug:
Ummmm... yeah, with one (G). What did you think? :confused:
ResearchMonkey
4/02/10, 06:37pm
I wasn't sure, I thought I would ask.
http://img225.imageshack.us/img225/1020/dutchboy.jpg
Not sure where you got that idea. I've always presented myself as married to a guy. Are you perhaps mixing me up with Cerise? I know we're the two females on this board that post often, but I can't tell you which team she plays on. I don't get any vibe, either way, from her over such things.
ResearchMonkey
4/04/10, 01:32pm
mea culpa val, mea culpa.
Why doesn't the vatty reopen up a castration dungeon, they already have the facility's.
mea culpa val, mea culpa.
Why doesn't the vatty reopen up a castration dungeon, they already have the facility's.
Eewww... I think those days are over. *GASP!*
I read a book on the Spanish Inquisition from a historian. It was very informative. I had no idea that there were other inquisition groups in Europe (and eventually, the Americas) going on. The only one that was successful was the Spanish Inquisition, mainly because if you were accused they got to take all your belongings, property and money and toss your family out on the street while you were "interrogated" (with The Rack, or Water Boarding, or other such "interrogation" techniques). They just got wealthier and more powerful over the centuries.
:(
This is sad...
Future pope stalled pedophile case (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100409/ap_on_re_us/us_pope_church_abuse)
Defrock and excommunicate'em....then toss'em to the police.
Are you perhaps mixing me up with Cerise?
So, because I stand up for what is right you are implying that I may have some Xtra testosterone??
That's SEXIST!
It could be considered HATESPEECH!
I read a book on the ....
?
i know, i know, more than a bumpersticker can be challenging!
So, because I stand up for what is right you are implying that I may have some Xtra testosterone??
That's SEXIST!
It could be considered HATESPEECH!
Not even in Canada.
*Actually, Cerise..what she said is that RM might've mixed you and her up because you're seemingly the only two active women on OTC right now.
Well, they don't call him "Research Monkey" for nothing, you know.....;)
i doubt there was much confusion between cerise and val. the differences are vast.
yeah one of em is as dumb as a bag of hammers!
i doubt there was much confusion between cerise and val. the differences are vast.
Thanks for the compliment. :)
BeardofPants
4/13/10, 12:31am
*smacks winkster upside the head
The Pope and the press
Father Raymond J. de Souza, National Post
Published: Thursday, April 08, 2010
Pope Benedict XVI was falsely accused two weeks ago by The New York Times. That same false charge was repeated and amplified in the National Post. The facts are now in, and even the Times has corrected itself by rewriting the story. Two weeks later, however, and despite its flaws, the story is reverberating around the world. Indeed, without the Times' accusations, the sexual abuse story would not have dominated Holy Week as it did.
On March 25, the Times set off a worldwide firestorm with a front page story that made an incendiary accusation: "Top Vatican officials -- including the future Pope Benedict XVI--did not defrock a priest who molested as many as 200 deaf boys, even though several American bishops repeatedly warned them that failure to act on the matter could embarrass the church, according to church files newly unearthed as part of a lawsuit."
Falsehood upon falsehood -- four errors in the first paragraph. First, the case to defrock Father Lawrence Murphy was approved by the "top Vatican officials," was never stopped by anyone in Rome and was ongoing when Murphy died. Second, Cardinal Ratzinger, the future Pope Benedict, is not shown in the documents to have taken any decisions in this case. Third, the real villain, aside from Murphy himself, was the compromised former Archbishop of Milwaukee, Rembert Weakland, who had sat on the case for 20 years. Fourth, the files were not "newly unearthed"; a general chronology had been released by the Archdiocese of Milwaukee years ago, and the documents were released by the archdiocese itself.
The New York Times was guilty of egregiously shoddy reporting -- or worse -- on a story of global implications.
While the case was not new -- the priest died in 1998 -- the charge landed on front pages around the world, including the National Post, because the Pope was supposedly involved. Within days we learned that the Times was false on the facts, suspect in the sources and reckless in the reporting. All of which the paper had to implicitly concede a week later in an extraordinary rewrite by the same author. So what happened? Were the reporter, Laurie Goodstein, and her editors merely careless, genuinely duped or willing collaborators in an orchestrated smear?
The story did not get the extra scrutiny it deserved. The documents on which the story was based did not support the newsworthy charge against the Pope. After the National Post repeated the charges on our front page on March 26, I read all the documents, posted at the Times web-site. I wrote a point-by-point rebuttal, which was immediately linked to all over the world and played a contributing role in exposing the Times story. (It can be found now at fatherdesouza.ca)For those who knew this file, the sources used screamed out for greater scrutiny. The first was Jeffrey Anderson, who gave the documents to Goodstein, a longtime reporter on Vatican affairs who covers the religion beat. Anderson is the most prolific contingency-fee lawyer in suing the
Church, from which he has made tens of millions. He has current civil suits pending against the Vatican. It is in his direct financial interest to promote the public perception of complicity by the Pope. That alone should have prompted Goodstein to examine what the documents showed and to inquire of others whether there were other relevant documents that he did not give her. Instead, her story accepted fully the Anderson spin.
Read more: Source (http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/columnists/story.html?id=1af21fbf-e188-440d-8615-8c2deaae096b&p=1#ixzz0kxWTlMwa)
No offense, but that's an opinion piece. Not news. Less credible since the author is, himself, a priest...
"Father Raymond J. de Souza"
I understand the anger from the writer and we should not forget that these few pedophiles do not make up the entire priesthood of the Catholic Church. There is still good that is being done by clergy for the poor around the world, though I do not support or approve of the doctrine of this religion. I can not dismiss the good with what I consider to be the false promises of their faith. Don't throw the baby out with the bath water.
..
http://www.otcentral.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=7183&stc=1&d=1271274091
No offense, but that's an opinion piece. Not news. Less credible since the author is, himself, a priest...
"Father Raymond J. de Souza"
well, when you consider that the catholic church has always been and always will be infallible :erm:, it's not really just an opinion piece, now is it?
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.