[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
The ones that are found guilty should be dragged in the streets and shot.
And people wonder why I turn away from organized religion so heavily…[/quote]
Amen to that! 
Sorry, I had to say that.
Actually, putting them in prison and letting the cons get at them would be better. “Hey, how do YOU feel being the weaker person, being abused by some one stronger?”
[quote]vroom wrote:
Hmm, looks like there is a strong association between religion and pedophelia.
That’s it, I’m assuming anyone who is blatantly religious is molesting children.[/quote]
I know you’re trying to be humorous, but its not working. Even as a joke, this is a pretty insulting post.
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
It sounds better tham to admit that living in unnatural celibacy leads to such tragedies.
[/quote]
I happen to agree with this. Sex is a human biological function that borders on a need. It isn’t something we simply like to do. It is something we feel compelled to do. To pretend as if you can shut that off is ridiculous and why these issues seem to pop up so much in the Catholic church.
[quote]vroom wrote:
Hmm, looks like there is a strong association between religion and pedophelia.
That’s it, I’m assuming anyone who is blatantly religious is molesting children.[/quote]
With the weekly dose of the eating human flesh and drinking of blood, and great traditions of dismembering of the dead or nearly dead, inquisitions, crusades and what not, child molesting should be the least of your paranoias.
[quote]As my FULL post stated–the act has nothing to do with religion. The reaction of the church leadership was/is deplorable.
Pedophilia is not based in religion.
Pedophilia has nothing to do with organized religion.
I don’t mind cutting and pasting, but to pull stuff deliberately out of context with regards to the entire post is not appropriate and leads these discussions astray. I believe anyone without an axe to grind with me personally could read my entire post and see my intent. [/quote]
FFS. I simply don’t think you can excuse the religion if the leadership of the religion weren’t taking appropriate actions.
You want to clearly divide them, I don’t, where’s the axe?
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
I know you’re trying to be humorous, but its not working. Even as a joke, this is a pretty insulting post.
[/quote]
Who said I was joking? Is it any more insulting than the other wild correlations that are being made?
[quote]Professor X wrote:
I happen to agree with this. Sex is a human biological function that borders on a need. It isn’t something we simply like to do. It is something we feel compelled to do. To pretend as if you can shut that off is ridiculous and why these issues seem to pop up so much in the Catholic church.
[/quote]
Especially in the whimsical nature it is applied as well. Were it a decree from God or the words of Christ that priests not marry you might filter out some of the ‘less devout’, but the fact that it’s just the church and in relatively recent history makes it seem capricious. Maybe somebody should do something about this. Maybe put together a list of complaints…say 95 of them…?
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Schwarzfahrer wrote:
It sounds better tham to admit that living in unnatural celibacy leads to such tragedies.
I happen to agree with this. Sex is a human biological function that borders on a need. It isn’t something we simply like to do. It is something we feel compelled to do. To pretend as if you can shut that off is ridiculous and why these issues seem to pop up so much in the Catholic church.
[/quote]
And once you have set up an organization that represses sexuality that organization will start to draw people into it which had problems dealing with their sexuality in the first place.
Suddenly they turn from sexually inadequate to morally superior…
[quote]lucasa wrote:
Professor X wrote:
I happen to agree with this. Sex is a human biological function that borders on a need. It isn’t something we simply like to do. It is something we feel compelled to do. To pretend as if you can shut that off is ridiculous and why these issues seem to pop up so much in the Catholic church.
Especially in the whimsical nature it is applied as well. Were it a decree from God or the words of Christ that priests not marry you might filter out some of the ‘less devout’, but the fact that it’s just the church and in relatively recent history makes it seem capricious. Maybe somebody should do something about this. Maybe put together a list of complaints…say 95 of them…?[/quote]
Hey, we could nail them on church doors!
That should teach them soething!
[quote]doogie wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
The priesthood has long been a place gay men trying to hide from their sexuality have taken refuge.
The overwhelming majority of the sexual abuse by priests has been committed against boys.
They are gay and they are pederests.
To deny that they are gay is moronic.
It is a homosexual act.
A man having sex with an underage girl is a heterosexual act.
Why do so many people want to hide from these simple facts?
Why would diddling a little girl with no secondary sex characteristics be a “heterosexual act”?
Diddling kids is not a homosexual or heterosexual act. It’s pedophilia. Just like fucking a male goat isn’t a homosexual act of beastiality.
[/quote]
Sex between 2 males (of the same species) is homosexual.
Sex between a male and a female is heterosexual.
Age does not change this.
Most of these acts are with kids that have hit puberty. They are not 6 year olds. They are often teenagers that are fully capable of reproduction.
[quote]orion wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Schwarzfahrer wrote:
It sounds better tham to admit that living in unnatural celibacy leads to such tragedies.
I happen to agree with this. Sex is a human biological function that borders on a need. It isn’t something we simply like to do. It is something we feel compelled to do. To pretend as if you can shut that off is ridiculous and why these issues seem to pop up so much in the Catholic church.
And once you have set up an organization that represses sexuality that organization will start to draw people into it which had problems dealing with their sexuality in the first place.
Suddenly they turn from sexually inadequate to morally superior…
[/quote]
I agree completely. I don’t understand how the Catholic church doesn’t see that they help invite this aborration by the sheer nature of their own arrogance. Where in the bible does it say that they should not have sex?
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Sex between 2 males (of the same species) is homosexual.
Sex between a male and a female is heterosexual.
Age does not change this.
Most of these acts are with kids that have hit puberty. They are not 6 year olds. They are often teenagers that are fully capable of reproduction.
[/quote]
This isn’t altogether true. From Psychology Today,
As you can see, the very definition involves PREPUBESCANT children, not teenagers who have gone through puberty. It fails to be pedophilia after that point because the attraction is to “innocence” thus blurring the lines of hetero-homosexuality.
From Edwards, Douglas J. (2004). Mental Health’s Cold Shoulder Treatment of Pedophilia in Behavioral Health Management, May-June. :
This means those trying to point the finger at homosexuals instead of realizing that pedophilia is its OWN sexual orientation are possibly misguided and incorrect.
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
We have discussed these issues in Germany long ago.
To claim that the molesters-in-robes were homosexuals is stupid and ignorant.
They simply had no “access” to young girls.
Yet, the catholic church officially stated the problems are only about homos.
It sounds better tham to admit that living in unnatural celibacy leads to such tragedies.
[/quote]
Four out of five cases are homosexual in nature. Here is an example of one that is not.
Top U.S. Bishop Accused of Sex Abuse
From Associated Press
March 09, 2006 5:36 AM EST
SPOKANE, Wash. - A woman has accused the president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops of sexually abusing her more than four decades ago when she was a child.
Bishop William Skylstad issued a statement Wednesday categorically denying the accusation, saying he has not violated the vow of celibacy he took 47 years ago.
The claim was filed against the Roman Catholic Diocese of Spokane on Dec. 27 by a woman who said she was under the age of 18 when Skylstad sexually abused her at St. Patrick’s Parish and at Gonzaga University from December 1961 to December 1964.
The woman’s claim was first reported Wednesday by the Spokesman-Review newspaper of Spokane.
Skylstad, 70, was a student at Gonzaga University from 1962-1966 and taught mathematics to students at Mater Cleri Seminary at Colbert, north of Spokane.
The diocese is one of three in the nation that filed for bankruptcy protection to deal with claims of sexual abuse by clergy. Skylstad last month offered to settle with 75 victims for $45.7 million.
The woman’s claim was filed as a result of the bankruptcy “proof of claims” process, the diocese said.
Victims of clergy sexual abuse have until Friday to file claims. Greg Arpin, an attorney representing the diocese, said there were a total of 135 claims as of Wednesday morning, including the original 75 who would be covered by the settlement.
It is unclear under the reforms that American bishops adopted in 2002 for responding to abuse claims whether Skylstad should temporarily step down while his case is being investigated.
The policy requires Catholic officials to determine whether there is “sufficient evidence” supporting the allegations against a cleric before they take him out of public ministry while a full review is conducted under Vatican oversight.
In its statement, the diocese said protocols for dealing with sex abuse allegations were being followed, and that Archbishop Pietro Sambi, the Vatican’s Apostolic Nuncio to the United States in Washington, D.C., had been notified of the claim.
Stephen Rubino, a lawyer hired by the woman’s legal team, said he knows little about the filing but was asked to verify her claim. He said a bankruptcy court’s confidentiality order limits what he can say about the claim.
“We have a minimum three months of work before any conclusions can be made regarding anything,” Rubino said by telephone from Philadelphia. “This is complicated by the fact that she is overseas. It is complicated by records that are 45 years old and scattered across the country. And it is complicated by the emotional issues this woman is facing.”
David Clohessy, national director for Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, said the woman’s allegation should be taken seriously, despite Skylstad’s denial.
“I think, given the horrific history, virtually every allegation should be treated seriously and investigated promptly,” he said by phone from St. Louis.
To claim that priests have no access to girls so they turn to boys is ignorant.
My family is Catholic. My late uncle was a priest. My aunt is a nun. My father was headed for the seminary. I know what I am talking about.
The priesthood has many homosexuals that are trying to escape their homosexuality.
I wouldn’t put a “celibate” straight man in a position of authority over 14 year old girls without any supervision otherwise you may have trouble.
Why does the Catholic Church put “celibate” gay men in this position with boys?
The sooner the problem is recognized the sooner it can be fixed.
This does not mean eliminating men that are attracted to men from the priesthood.
This means making sure they are not put in a position where they can abuse their authority and force sex on teenage boys.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
…
I agree completely. I don’t understand how the Catholic church doesn’t see that they help invite this aborration by the sheer nature of their own arrogance. Where in the bible does it say that they should not have sex?[/quote]
This is very true. The vow of celibacy keeps away many good people and attracts many people that have a hard time with their own sexuality.
The Catholic Church didn’t want priests getting married and having kids because they didn’t like the idea of priests passing down church property to his heirs (among other reasons).
The sooner the Catholic Church allows married men to become priests the better off they will be.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Sex between 2 males (of the same species) is homosexual.
Sex between a male and a female is heterosexual.
Age does not change this.
Most of these acts are with kids that have hit puberty. They are not 6 year olds. They are often teenagers that are fully capable of reproduction.
This isn’t altogether true. From Psychology Today,
Pedophilia falls under the general category of paraphilias, ?abnormal or unnatural attraction.? Pedophilia is defined as the act or fantasy of engaging in sexual activity with prepubertal children as the preferred or exclusive method of achieving sexual excitement. Pedophiles vary as to how well they can relate to adults of the opposite sex (usually pedophiles are males, who may be attracted to males, females or both).
As you can see, the very definition involves PREPUBESCANT children, not teenagers who have gone through puberty. It fails to be pedophilia after that point because the attraction is to “innocence” thus blurring the lines of hetero-homosexuality.
From Edwards, Douglas J. (2004). Mental Health’s Cold Shoulder Treatment of Pedophilia in Behavioral Health Management, May-June. :
Dr. Fred S. Berlin asserts sexual attraction to children to be a sexual orientation in itself. This is at odds with the current popular acceptance of the term sexual orientation as meaning attraction to the opposite sex, the same sex, or both
This means those trying to point the finger at homosexuals instead of realizing that pedophilia is its OWN sexual orientation are possibly misguided and incorrect.[/quote]
I am not arguing about the definition of pedophilia.
I am discussing the specifics of the Catholic Church.
Priests aren’t playing with 6 year olds. They are getting the 14 year olds (for the most part).
There is a big difference in the causes for abusing a young kid and a teenager.
Having sex with a teenager can often be due to normal sexual attraction combined with poor judgement.
Having sex with a 6 year old is not due to normal sexual attraction.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
As you can see, the very definition involves PREPUBESCANT children, not teenagers who have gone through puberty. It fails to be pedophilia after that point because the attraction is to “innocence” thus blurring the lines of hetero-homosexuality.[/quote]
Yes, but this topic is related to the Catholic Church. And according to their studies:
“Two new reports may help the world see the reality behind the media-created illusion. The reports were commissioned by the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, who asked the National Review Board, a panel of Catholic lay people, to investigate the abuse crisis. The National Review Board study includes information on molestation claims from 1950 to 2002. There is also a companion study about the nature of the problem, conducted by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York. Recent news stories on the topic are available at AP.org, Reuters, Wavy.com, the Baltimore Sun, the San Antonio Express-News, and other news outlets. For details on the studies, see the information at the Website for the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.”
And part of those conclusions are…
“… only 5.8% of victims were under age 7; 16% percent were between ages 8-10; and over 78% were ages 11-17. Of course, there were men ages 18 and older who were also exploited, but that is too old for child molestation and beyond the scope of these studies.”
Read the report AGAIN. These are homosexual Priests acting out their sick fantasies on on kids in the 11 to 17 age group for the most part.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
I am not arguing about the definition of pedophilia.
I am discussing the specifics of the Catholic Church.
Priests aren’t playing with 6 year olds. They are getting the 14 year olds (for the most part).
There is a big difference in the causes for abusing a young kid and a teenager.
Having sex with a teenager can often be due to normal sexual attraction combined with poor judgement.
Having sex with a 6 year old is not due to normal sexual attraction.
[/quote]
Understood. It just seemed above that people were relating these actions to Pedophilia. I think this is primarily the cause of supressing sexual desires and then trying to cover up every expression of them as if they didn’t happen. If this is happening on a grand scale like this, someone needs to bring it all to light and changes need to be made. People also need to realize the differences between the Catholic chruch and other denominations of Christianity. They are not all in the same.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
vroom wrote:
Hmm, looks like there is a strong association between religion and pedophelia.
That’s it, I’m assuming anyone who is blatantly religious is molesting children.
Later in this thread, Vroom say he is not joking. So, guys, anyone who is religious is now deemed by Vroom to be a pedophile.[/quote]
This reveals so much about your character.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
The ones that are found guilty should be dragged in the streets and shot.
And people wonder why I turn away from organized religion so heavily…
Amen to that! Sorry, I had to say that.
Actually, putting them in prison and letting the cons get at them would be better. “Hey, how do YOU feel being the weaker person, being abused by some one stronger?”
[/quote]
I don’t know if it happens elsewhere, but I have heard of inmates stabbing thses guys when they get to jail, on principle.
They may all be crooks, but they don’t like child molesters. Even criminals seem to have more morals than these “priests”
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
The ones that are found guilty should be dragged in the streets and shot.
And people wonder why I turn away from organized religion so heavily…[/quote]
102 priests have committed this crime since 1940. Countless others who are not priests or religious have done the same thing since then. Great logic for turning away from organized religion.
[quote]btm62 wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
The ones that are found guilty should be dragged in the streets and shot.
And people wonder why I turn away from organized religion so heavily…
102 priests have committed this crime since 1940. Countless others who are not priests or religious have done the same thing since then. Great logic for turning away from organized religion.
[/quote]
Very true. That is simply a reason to lose faith in humanity.