 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Catholic come all-ye
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Greg F. Date: 14 Apr 10 - 12:34 PM Jim: See 13 Apr 10 - 11:31 AM, Below |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Jim Carroll Date: 14 Apr 10 - 03:10 PM Gotcha! "I'd like to see the evidence that the Roman Catholic Clergy has a numerical superiority in pederasts over any other religious denomination or for that matter the population at large." Here in Ireland - absolutely - Ireland is a Catholic country (the jury is out on how long that will remain the case) and the church has just been found guilty of carrying out and covering up horrific crimes against children under its influence. Of course I can't prove Catholic dominance in the 'pederast stakes' elsewhere, but I would have thought that anywhere where the church held the power that it once had here and in other Catholic countries, it would have had no hesitation in abusing those powers - simply because it could. Do you have evidence that other churches have been able to best the RC record - if so, let's hear them? Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: akenaton Date: 14 Apr 10 - 03:45 PM Here is an elephant. It is very like the elephant that all posters to both current threads on sexual abuse of young people have been ignoring. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Joe Offer Date: 14 Apr 10 - 05:17 PM Jim, you seem so reasonable and analytical on most topics - but on this one, you come out with a shotgun. I'd like to see a rational discussion of this topic, but all you can do is blast away with your blanket condemnations. Nobody is trying to deny any of the allegations that have been made with some evidence, but it would be refreshing to see some balance and proportion in the discussion. The Murphy and Ryan Reports are indeed a serious and factual condemnation of the abuse in the Irish industrial schools and reformatories. These institutions, which were operated for the Irish government by religious brothers and nuns, did appear to have a culture of abuse. I have no question that this was extreme wrongdoing, and reparations must be made and those who committed crimes must be punished. HOWEVER, this situation took place in a correctional system, and correctional systems have problems that are not necessarily a reflection of the wider community. Were these institutions operated by the entire Catholic Church and were all priests and nuns involved in the operation of these institutions? Certainly not. A very small percentage of the priests and nuns of Ireland worked in these institutions, and the rest were most probably unaware of the situation - it's rare that normal citizens have much awareness of what goes on in their penal institutions. In many countries, priests and nuns serve as agents for penal reform because they visit such institutions as chaplains and witness and report abuses. In the Irish system, priests and nuns and brothers were the staff - so there were no visiting chaplains to discover and report problems. I do not deny that things went horribly wrong in these institutions, and those responsible should be punished and the victims compensated. You look at the problem, find out who was responsible, and deal with the problem. And it does seem to me that in these institutions, abuse was the rule, not the exception to the rule. Most of the abuse consisted of corporal punishment and a draconian system of discipline. This system allowed sexual abuse to exist under the cover of a discipline system that did not allow questioning, but it does not appear from the reports that sexual abuse was anywhere near universal. Look at the facts, and deal with the problem. Local Irish parishes were quite another situation, and we are only beginning to learn the extent of the problem of sexual abuse in parish churches. It does appear that there was an organized effort on the part of several successive Archbishops of Dublin and Primates of Ireland (Armagh), to cover up all information about sexual abuse in the Catholic Church (to protect the Church from "scandal"; and this secrecy allowed child molesters to operate quite freely. The attempt to protect the Church from scandal has involved it in a far greater scandal, one of unimaginable proportion - I think we will find this scandal was worst in Ireland, because the attitudes and discipline of the Catholic Church in Ireland are far more severe than they are in the Catholic Church anywhere else in the world. Still, I have many friends who are Irish-born priests and nuns, and they tell quite a different story about growing up Catholic in Ireland. Most of the Irish-born priests I know are about my age, in their 60s, and they came to the United States from 1960-75. The nuns are older, age 65-85, and came to the U.S. from 1950-70 - all are members of an American branch of the Sisters of Mercy. Since this has been such a hot topic here for so long, I questioned many of them about what it was like to grow up Catholic in Ireland. They all had experiences similar to mine - mostly positive, some negative, no contact with molesters (although some had heard rumors of sexual abuse incidents). Somebody told me that Irish priests and nuns came from the middle class, and that the abuse targeted only the lower class in Ireland - but the Irish-born priests and nuns I know, did not generally come from the upper classes. Mind you, the nuns are currently not disposed toward having a good opinion of the Catholic Church these days, because the Vatican is currently conducting an investigation of women religious in the US, and the nuns are livid about it. I haven't seen data on the extent of the physical and sexual abuse of children in the Catholic Church in Ireland. It appears that the problem was widespread, but certainly not universal. From what I've seen, I would guess that the number of priests in Ireland who are guilty of abuse, will be less than ten percent. That's still a huge number, but certainly not enough to justify Jim Carroll's statement, "the real mystery is why the Catholic Church is allowed anywhere near children given the atrocities committed by the clergy." You're not going to control crime with an hysterical approach. You have to deal with it realistically and rationally. I'm afraid I have to say that several people here have nothing to offer the discussion but hysteria. Too bad. -Joe- Ed T asks this about a qote from me:
Ed: Where is the proof of all that? Ed, the best data I've found is at http://www.bishop-accountability.org/. Their approach is far harsher then mine, and they include priests on their lists that have not been proved to be molesters - but their data will give you an idea of the numbers involved. From all that I've read on this crisis, it appears that five percent is about the number of priest-molesters in the U.S. I suspect it will be higher in Ireland and other "Catholic" countries, and lower where Catholics are a minority. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Smokey. Date: 14 Apr 10 - 06:09 PM If my local school or child minding service were to advertise the fact that only five (or ten) percent of their staff were known child abusers, what should I do? It's not rocket science. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Paul Burke Date: 14 Apr 10 - 06:11 PM HOWEVER, this situation took place in a correctional system The Industrial Schools were orphanages, and orphans don't need corrected. Joe, stop trying to defend the indefensible. Defend the ordinary Catholics, who didn't know this was going on. Point out that abuse was rife in all child care whether religious (of any sect) or secular until recently- and is CERTAINLY still going on. Defend the majority bof decent folks in the priesthood- but recognise that they were all too often silent about what they knew. But DON'T defend the hierarchy- who had the power to stop it at any time, and demeaned and indeed criminalised not only themselves but YOU- the Catholic rank and file- by failing to use their powers when one word could have stopped unimaginable suffering, and delivered the criminals to justice. They've failed you and the children, and better that a millstone etc. We see a high ranking cardinal squirming to avoid institutional responsibility again today- it's all the fault of the gays. If he isn't busted to the ranks by next Tuesday (don't hold your breath), you'll know where Nazinger's priorities lie, and lie, and lie. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Bill D Date: 14 Apr 10 - 06:41 PM I agree with Smokey... 5% is one out of 20... that could mean odds of a problem in almost every diocese. Granting that the 5% can mean more in some places and none at all in many, it will still take a huge effort to both find current problems and guard against future problems....and this is apart from the effort to regain public confidence. Decades of denial won't be undone in months. It is sad, no matter what one's view of religion in general is. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: GUEST,mg Date: 14 Apr 10 - 06:59 PM Let's see...we can blame the media, the gays, the Jews (twas done by an elderly retired cardinal I think), not the Beatles, the nuns are getting too uppity. Anyone else? mg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Jim Carroll Date: 14 Apr 10 - 07:53 PM "Jim, you seem so reasonable and analytical on most topics - but on this one, you come out with a shotgun. I'd like to see a rational discussion of this topic, but all you can do is blast away with your blanket condemnations." Joe, Please look at what happened and is still happening here. Over at the very least fifty years members of the church systematically and without check brutalised and raped children in their care. This behaviour, (only when it leaked to the outside world) was dealt with with secrecy by the church, despite the fact that the clergy involved had commited criminal acts. The officers of the church bullied the victims and their families into silence. The priests involved were moved on to continue their abuse. It transpires that many leading churchmen were part of the cover-up, yet, the few who have eventually resigned did so reluctantly and with extremely bad grace. While expressing 'sadness' at no time has the church leadership taken responsibility for the crimes committed under the cover of the church. A couple of weeks ago a group of victims stood up in church to protest the presece of a clergman who was involved in the cover-ups - they were booed and barracked out of the church by the congregation. If this didn't happen, please tell me where I have got it wrong. I find all this utterly and completely outrageous - what is unreasonable about that? What, of what I have just written, did not happen? You did not answer my earlier question; (if I have missed it, please point your answer out) if this had taken place within the education system, what would your reaction be? I grew up in non-catholic England where the power of the church was much less than it is here in Ireland - even so, as the child of an excommunicated Catholic father (for opposing fascism in Spain), I was fully aware from an early age of the fear invoked by the church and the clergy. I saw that fear in my mother and in my Irish relatives when I visited them here and in the UK. I have no wish to see the church disappear - I have associated with older Irish Catholics enough to know the important part it played in their lives. But I never again want to see it attain the hold over peoples minds and lives that it once had. In the light of past events is that unreasonable? Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Joe Offer Date: 14 Apr 10 - 08:17 PM Where do I get my five percent number? www.bishop.accountability.org (click) has a data page that gives pretty good information. The overall number they give is 5.1 percent of US priests were accused of child molestation, but some dioceses had ten percent. Jim, I know that politicians commit political suicide in the United States if they oppose the spending of money to punish criminals. It's a favorite tactic of failed politicians, to hit hard on crime because nobody can dare oppose them. But the fact of the matter is that crime is not the only issue that confronts us, and crime is irrelevant to most of us, most of the time. The crime that took place in the Catholic Church is a horrible thing - but it does not justify your irrational blanket condemnations. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Smokey. Date: 14 Apr 10 - 08:56 PM If one in twenty priests are abusers, how can the other nineteen reasonably expect to be trusted? That isn't condemnation, it's common sense. The abusers have committed a crime, at least a moral one, against their church and fellow clergy as well as their victims so far as I can see. The rotten apples were left in the barrel too long. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Greg F. Date: 14 Apr 10 - 08:57 PM Of course I can't prove Catholic dominance in the 'pederast stakes' elsewhere... Well, then, Jim,me boy - you can't and haven't answered my questions. So give it up. Next contestant??? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Joe Offer Date: 15 Apr 10 - 03:09 AM Smokey, if you could look at the criminal records of the people around you, you will find that one in twenty has committed some sort of crime that you would consider horrible. So, do you go through life not trusting the people around you, since one in twenty is a criminal? Yes, it is certainly a reason to be watchful - but certainly not a valid reason for abandoning human trust. Jim Carroll asks: You did not answer my earlier question; (if I have missed it, please point your answer out) if this had taken place within the education system, what would your reaction be? Well, gee, Jim, I don't know how it is around you, but I DO know that abuse and molestation takes place all the time in the U.S. educational system. In the past year in my area, there have been several cases of child molestation reported in public schools, and not one in Catholic institutions. Does this mean that Catholic church here is squeaky-clean? Certainly not - but I do think the Catholic Church in the U.S. has done a lot to clean up its mess and make it difficult for child molesters to continue committing their crimes in the Church. I think maybe your main fallacy is that you see the Catholic Church as monolithic, with a uniform and rigid discipline. If such were the case, then any incident of child abuse or molestation would indeed be a sure sign of failure of the entire church. But the Church isn't monolithic, and its discipline is far from rigid. The Catholic Church encompasses a far broader spectrum of thought and discipline than almost any institution I can think of. Think of it: Mary Garvey and I are both Catholics in good standing - but we rarely agree on anything, especially on religious issues (although I like and respect her, and I hope she has the same attitude about me). I think I could argue that crime is an unfortunate side effect of freedom. I do oppose crime, especially crimes against children; but I also think there needs to be some moderation in our efforts to control crime, so that we do not destroy our own freedom in the process. And believe me, I couldn't be a Catholic if I didn't think I had the freedom to think and act as I see fit. Many people see religious creeds merely as authority systems. I'm sorry to disappoint them, but "authority" and "obedience" are not in my religious vocabulary. The Catholic tradition is an extremely important part of the essence of my life - but I see no obligation to obey ANY religious authority other than my own conscience. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Jim Carroll Date: 15 Apr 10 - 03:33 AM "Next contestant??? " Oh please! Don't scamper away with your tail between your legs. You asked for proof that the Catholic Church has more pederasts than any other religious denomination - I say it has in Ireland and give you the evidence of the Ryan and Murphy reports and ask you to name one other oganisation that can be shown to have more. I add that it probably has where the church has any influence. Where have I not answered your question and where have you answered mine? Fact - the Catholic Church in Ireland, and, as it is now emerging, in other countries where it has influence, harboured one of the most successful and well-organised paedophile rings ever. Not only were clergymen allowed to rape ands sexually and physically assault children for decades, but, if their 'little weaknesses' (the sexual ones - the beatings were taken as suitable forms of 'correction') came to public attention, they were protected by the silence of their fellow-clergymen and superiors and passed through the system to other locations, where they continued 'the good work'. Their victims and families were sworn to secrecy by a church that was well used to using spiritual blackmail and political influence. When these facts were placed before the present head of the church, his response was that the interests of the church and the welfare of the abusive priests had to be taken into consideration - and he did nothing. His response from the beginning of the exposures has been to keep it an 'in-house' matter rather than report these crimes to the authorities. If you can show me that none of this happened, or can name one other organisation, secular or sacred, who ran, or was in a position to run such an organisation and behave like this, you have your victory and are welcome to it. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Jim Carroll Date: 15 Apr 10 - 05:59 AM "Well, gee, Jim, I don't know how it is around you" Child molestation take place everywhere, but not habitually in one institution and not on the scale it has in the church. I ask again - I will clarify in order that you don't try and dodge the question again If widespread sexual abuse had taken place in schools throuhghout the education system and if the collegues of the abusers had ignored what was happening, the school authorities had hidden and not reported them to the appropriate authorities and had pressurised the pupils and parents into signing a pledge of silence, and then moved the offending teachers on to other posts where they were free to continue that abuse - what do you feel should happen to ALL the guilty parties, abusers and accomplices? A straight answer would be appreciated please. The monolithic side of the question is explicity in the fact that the abuse wasd endemic and fully accepted throughout the church - from pries to pope (not forgetting the abused altar-boys). Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Greg F. Date: 15 Apr 10 - 09:59 AM Jim, the Roman Catholic Church establishment is a bit larger than just Ireland, last time I looked. If you can't read and understand my questions, then there's no point in any further attempts at engagement with you. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Jim Carroll Date: 15 Apr 10 - 11:06 AM "If you can't read and understand my questions, then there's no point in any further attempts at engagement with you." I understand your question perfectly and have answered it on the evidence gathered so far. Based on the evidence available, there is no organisation anywhere with a record of child abuse to match that of the Catholic Church. To date, where the Catholic Church has been investigated in the matter of child abuse, it has been found guilty to a horrific extent. I have little doubt that if those investigations are extended, as seems likely that similar abuses will be uncovered elsewhere - it appears to go with the territory. Similar accusations have been made in Cyprus, Germany, Switzerland and Canada, though no full-scale investigations have yet taken place in these countries. Now perhaps you would like to provide us with other denominations, or secular bodies for that matter, where child abuse is as endemic as it has been discovered to be in the Catholic Church. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Greg F. Date: 15 Apr 10 - 11:29 AM Based on the evidence available, there is no organisation anywhere with a record of child abuse to match that of the Catholic Church. Evidence to support this assertion, please. Especially RE: the other organisations. Also, please cite the evidence that shows what the incidence of child abuse is for the world at large. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Ebbie Date: 15 Apr 10 - 11:34 AM It just occurred to me that it is possible that the Catholic church, as an institution, may be stuck a few generations back where fathers used to be. Let's see if I can say that better: Not long ago at all, historically speaking, the head male of a household was the one who made the rules and saw to it that they were carried out. Not only was his own wife subject to his whims and opinions but the children were considered by him - and by law - to be his. It is only very recently, historically speaking, that the teen years have been recognized as a discrete stage of life with separate and distinct needs. Children historically have been considered powerless and their only function, really, was to serve. I'm not sure where I'm going with this but my point is that the Church, as head of the Family, may have got into the mindset of seeing the people as powerless and expendable. 'Expendable' is not the word I want- can anyone help me out with this? :) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Jim Carroll Date: 15 Apr 10 - 12:42 PM "Also, please cite the evidence that shows what the incidence of child abuse is for the world at large." Now you appear to be on the run - we both know there isn't such evidence and we have to base our knowlege on what has been gathered at the present time. I've shown you mine, based on recently and officially gathered evidence on one institution - The Catholic Church - now you show me yours. We have direct evidence that long term abuse over a long period took place at least over - that is our knowledge to date, unless you are able to top it The Catholic Church is hands down winner in the child abuse stakes - something to be proud of no doubt! The rest is bullshit wiggle. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Ed T Date: 15 Apr 10 - 01:49 PM A RC follower recently told me that because of recent RC reforms that "a child is less likely to be abused by a Catholic priest then abused by the members of almost any other profession. Comment: Maybe so, but,is it not a little too late? As to the "ofen" RC quoted" 5 percent RC priest child sex abuse figure,(I have also seen this # suspiciously quoted as finely as 5.1%) compared to a higher percentage liklihood of a child being sexually abused in the general population. Is this the best aspiration that the RC church can offer that "if you were one of us,(and possibly abused), you were less worse off than the general folks abused in society?" Kind of like saying "I beat my wife less often than my skuzzy beer slugging neighbour." (BTW, considering the #s of priests in the world...then add on the ones who got away with it without being reported or found out...and considering sexual abuse reporting is low, and possibly even lower in the RC church (with the stigma).., that's a lot of kinky priests) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Ed T Date: 15 Apr 10 - 01:55 PM We all know how one can play the statistics game to lesson offensive actions in a defense argument. But, on the statistic, the estimates of prevalence of child abuse includes abuse by immediate and extended family members, which account for the overwhelming majority of child sex abuse cases. If you were to remove family members from the equation and only look at children who were sexually abused by non-family trusted professionals...many who have broad contact with children... one may find that the prevalence of abuse by catholic priests may in fact be disproportionate to the amount of contact they have with children. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Greg F. Date: 15 Apr 10 - 02:08 PM ...we both know there isn't such evidence ... Q.E.D. Thanks for the admission, Jim. Now you can shut the fu$k up. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Ed T Date: 15 Apr 10 - 02:08 PM Anyone know much about this fellow? a href="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article7054181.ece">http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article7054181.ece |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Joe Offer Date: 15 Apr 10 - 02:49 PM Jim Carroll says:
As for Ed T playing statistics games - Ed, take a look at the data sheet I linked to at bishop-accountability.org. Note the information supporting the 5.1% figure: The U.S. bishops have reported receiving allegations of abuse by 5,600 priests in 1950-2008, or 5.1% of the 109,694 U.S. priests active since 1950. Many incidents of child molestation go unreported, although I think the recent publicity had changed that tendency. Still, it does appear that a good proportion of the incidents are reported by the victims many years after the incident, after the victim has become an adult; and many, many incidents are NEVER. Therefore, it is well-nigh impossible impossible to collect completely accurate statistics of incidents. Still, the 5.1% number reflects the number of molesters who have been accused of even one incident - not those who have been convicted, and not limited to accusations that have been proved to be credible. I'm sure a few priests slipped through the cracks undetected. Note the chart in #3 (Year abuse began) on the data page - the highest incidence of molestations appears to be in the period 1968-1983, and the number drops dramatically after 1990. I think the post-1990 number will rise significantly as victims get old enough to want to report these crimes, but my guess is that the number will not be anywhere near the 1968-1983 rate. I'm guessing that overall, the number of U.S. priests who molested was somewhere between five and ten percent. And let me make it clear that I think that is outrageous and disgraceful, a deep mark of shame on the Catholic Church. Don't try to put words in my mouth and and attempt to make it appear that I think otherwise. I am outraged at this scandal, and I am outraged at the bishops who did nothing to stop it - and I am outraged at the pope and the bishops for a hell of a lot of other things....birth control, anti-homosexuality, repression of nuns, refusal to ordain women, misuse of funds, mollycoddling hateful ultra-conservatives, and on and on and on. A good third of the people, priests, and bishops in the Catholic Church are a real pain in the ass to me. They worship authoritarianism and pietism and small-mindedness and fear and prejudice and misogyny and anti-intellectualism and ultra-capitalism and a sheaf of other things that I think are absolutely contrary to the gentle, generous teachings of Jesus Christ. But I've found a home with the other two-thirds. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Jim Carroll Date: 15 Apr 10 - 03:14 PM "Q.E.D...." As things stand at present the Catholic Church is the proven leader in the rape and physical abuse of children, just as, as things stand at present, Mount Everest is the highest on the planet. It may be that in some uspecified time in the future and in some far distant land, a higher mountain might be discovered, but until that time Everest goes on record as the highest, just as the Catholic Church goes on record as the Mount Everest of institutional abuse. What is this all about? You started off by hinting that the reported abuse in Ireland may not have happened - you dropped that one quickly enough. Now, it appears, you are hinting that the abuse that went on is less reprehensible because somewhere, sometime it MIGHT turn out that there will be cases of greater institutional abuse discovered. Your attempts to divert the attention away from the abuses that have been committed and/or tolerated by (obviously) your church is a form of abuse in itself. The Catholic Church not only sheltered, ignored and/or assisted child rapists, but, while doing so, they condemned and attempted to control the sexual behaviour of the laity, threatening them with eternal damnation and torture if they indulged in sex out of marriage, same-sex laisons, or even if they practiced sex for anything other than reproduction. All this makes them hypocrites as well as serial abusers. So "shut the fu$k up" up yourself now that your arguments have been reduced to vaccuuous invective. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Smokey. Date: 15 Apr 10 - 04:03 PM Smokey, if you could look at the criminal records of the people around you, you will find that one in twenty has committed some sort of crime that you would consider horrible. So, do you go through life not trusting the people around you, since one in twenty is a criminal? Yes, it is certainly a reason to be watchful - but certainly not a valid reason for abandoning human trust. Joe, I was talking specifically about priests committing certain crimes in certain situations. To try and equate that with all people, all crimes, and in all situations is plain nonsense. I was certainly not advocating the abandoning of human trust. I merely asked how the innocent priests could now be expected to be trusted with children. Do you honestly think people should trust priests with their children knowing (or thinking) there is a 1 in 20 chance they will be abused? I, for one, care about mine infinitely more than that, and there is no way I would take that chance. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Donuel Date: 15 Apr 10 - 04:22 PM Truth will set you free. Thats why the confessional is a sound concept. So far, Pope Benedict has made it perfectly clear that lying is preferable to telling the truth, and that protecting your business is paramount to all other concerns, including the health and safety of children. This is contrary to truth setting you free. How will this be reconciled by Ratzinger the man and Benedict the Pope? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: mousethief Date: 15 Apr 10 - 04:48 PM If you find some little independent Baptist church whose pastor is a child abuser then you have an institution where 100% of the clergy is involved in child abuse. That's way worse than the Catholic Church. The difference is in the size of the institution. The RCC gets the most press because it's very very big. That doesn't prove it's the worst, except for some bizarre definition of "worst" where sheer numbers, rather than percents, are all that matters. If .001% of people eating at McDonald's report getting sick, but 66% of people eating at Mack's Chicken Shack, where would you rather go eat? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Greg F. Date: 15 Apr 10 - 05:03 PM the Catholic Church is the proven leader in the rape and physical abuse of children No, Jimmie-boy, as you yourself have admitted, this is NOT proven. When (and if) you can do so, get back in touch. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Joe Offer Date: 15 Apr 10 - 06:55 PM Jim Carroll says: You started off by hinting that the reported abuse in Ireland may not have happened - you dropped that one quickly enough. What????You have to be absolutely out of your mind, Jim. I did no such thing. That is absolutely, totally, incontrovertibly irrational. Respectfully submitted, -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Joe Offer Date: 15 Apr 10 - 07:05 PM OK, Smokey- Let's talk your percentages. Yes, if five percent of priests were molesters, that would be a big risk for children. In most cases in recent years, the molester-priests have been removed from ministry as soon as there is an accusation; and they are not returned to ministry if the accusation is found to be credible. They are not allowed to serve a complete career. That means that the number of active priests who are child molesters, is far smaller. That number is skewed by the fact that priests leave the priesthood for a number of other reasons, but the current practice is to remove child molester priests from active ministry immediately upon receipt of an accusation. Same goes for any crime. When people are convicted of crimes, they are put in jail and removed from society, thereby eliminating the risk until they are returned to society (with the often-unfounded hope that they have learned their lesson and will not commit the crime again). -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: GUEST,mg Date: 15 Apr 10 - 07:07 PM Here is a cardinal telling the bishops not to report priests to police. http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSLDE63E2H420100415 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Smokey. Date: 15 Apr 10 - 07:27 PM They aren't my percentages Joe, you said 5% - I was using your figures, although you've clarified them further since then. I think it might well be more than that, but what would be your guess at the percentage if 5% is incorrect? And what percentage of those known priest/abusers have been actually locked up before they could offend further? Removing them from ministry doesn't necessarily stop them from being abusers. Also, we can only count the ones who have been discovered, there are bound to be more. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Joe Offer Date: 15 Apr 10 - 07:46 PM Smokey, I think the lesson is that child molesters are drawn to situations where they can have time alone with children. They found a haven in the Boy Scouts until the Scouts instituted a "two-deep" leadership policy. It's not that the Boy Scouts were bad - it's that molesters found a place to operate there. And it took a long time and a lot of incidents and some attempt at denial before the Boy Scouts found a workable solution. It's not that the Catholic Church wants child molestation to happen - that would make no sense whatsoever. It's true that the Catholic Church did not have adequate safeguards in place. Much of that has changed, but the possibility of child molestation still exists wherever there are children in the company of adults. There are no sure-fire ways to prevent crime. All we can do is take reasonable precautions. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Smokey. Date: 15 Apr 10 - 08:48 PM I fear we may differ somewhat on what constitutes 'reasonable precautions', but I more or less agree with you. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Jim Carroll Date: 16 Apr 10 - 03:01 AM "The situation you cite in Ireland - (if factual) Joe, "You have to be absolutely out of your mind, Jim." My remarks were aimed at our defensive abuse-apologist Greg F, not you. I know your position on the church and, while I don't agree with it, I accept it comes with some experience. Our friend here, on the other hand, seems to be trying to get the church off the hook by looking for other, worse, abusers (and not finding them, apparently). Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie Date: 16 Apr 10 - 03:36 AM I take it the moderator who removed my posts (after I had a couple agreeing with my sentiments) is a catholic then? No matter, denial is what allowed buggering of children to carry on for such a long time in the first place.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Joe Offer Date: 16 Apr 10 - 05:33 AM Hi, Willie- I'm the senior moderator, and I can see deleted posts; and no posts have been deleted from this thread at all. Sometimes, posted messages don't "take," usually because of a disagreement between your browser and Mudcat's software. I often suggest that when you type a long message, take a moment to highlight [CTRL-A] and copy [CTRL-C] the message, and then check to make sure the message posted. If it didn't, paste [CTRL-V] the text into a message box and try again. If it still doesn't post, paste it into a word-processing document and save it until the Mudcat software is in a better mood. We delete messages only for certain reasons: direct personal attack on another Mudcatter, Spam, outright racism, and anonymous posts and posts with deceptive poster names. You always post under the same name and you don't attack people, so you have little to worry about (other than computer glitches). -Joe- (I'm Catholic, but nobody removed your posts) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Jim Carroll Date: 16 Apr 10 - 05:48 AM An acknowledgement that I wasn't referring to you would be appreciated Joe, Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Joe Offer Date: 16 Apr 10 - 06:05 AM Ooops. Sorry, Jim. I didn't see your message. I'm glad it wasn't me you were accusing of denying abuse. I would have told you about it 35 years ago, which is when I first became aware of it. Sorry I yelled at you. I thought I was being accused of dishonesty, and I've always taken great pride in being scrupulously honest. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Greg F. Date: 16 Apr 10 - 08:41 AM Jimmie, you're at it again - facts not in evidence. I'n no apologist for child abuse, nor have I said anywhere that it is not a horrific crime. However, there are more than a little hysteria & hyperbole unsubstantiated claims re: the degree to which the Roman Catholic priesthood is concerned, vis a vis the rest of the world's population. It would be nice to put this problem in perspective & base things on factual evidence before one starts running one's mouth. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Ed T Date: 16 Apr 10 - 09:11 AM As to "playing the statistics games"...sometimes it is how the the stats are collected....sometimes it is how the information is grouped together, and other information and confounding elements excluded....sometimes it is how the statistics are used to prove a point (like comparing one thing to a somewhat or totally different thing)...and sometimes the games involve the conclusions made...many times without actual logical analysis. That's what "the statistics game" often represents. To me, comparing reports of sexual abuse in an institution to reports of sexual abuse in the general population is self serving is not a reasonable comparison and to me is misleading..and I suggest possibly even intentionally misleading. Comparing sexual abuse in other institutions may be more logical, if confounding factors are noted. In the RC case, the 5 percent figure....which may be the best that one has....but is unlikely accurate is illogically compared with general sexual abuse figures. The reason is a very huge percentage of sexual abuse reports are in a home relationship or associated with dating type activities. When this is taken out of the figures, and it is limited to other similar institutions, I suspect the comparison would be much less positive...likely why few, who wish to make a point, take this route. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Jim Carroll Date: 16 Apr 10 - 11:33 AM "Jimmie, you're at it again - facts not in evidence." Don't you just know when they're against the ropes when they start calling you 'Jimmie' (I spell mine with a 'y' BTW) And yes - you are being an apologist for child abuse by watering it down with irrelvant sidetracks. The facts of the involvement of the priests and their superiors need "hysteria & hyperbole" like Frankenstein needs another bolt though his neck - their behavior speaks for itself - so why look for worse abuses to compare it to? Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Bill D Date: 16 Apr 10 - 12:20 PM The pope has made 'remarks' about abuse, but "The main U.S. victims group immediately dismissed his comments," |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Ed T Date: 16 Apr 10 - 12:25 PM An article from not too long ago: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/sep/28/sex-abuse-religion-vatican "The Vatican has lashed out at criticism over its handling of its paedophilia crisis by saying the Catholic church was "busy cleaning its own house" and that the problems with clerical sex abuse in other churches were as big, if not bigger." (note the reference to between 1.5% and 5%) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: GUEST,mg Date: 16 Apr 10 - 12:43 PM Why does the pope all of a sudden become pope of all Christians? Has he in the past referred to Catholics or Christians when doing his papal duties? Catholics tend to refer to themselves as Catholics, at least in my neck of the woods. I think his latest pronouncement about how Christians must repent must be compared to his previous words..does he routinely say Christians instead of Catholics? Many denominations of Christians or non-demoninationals do not accept his papal authority. if he has consistently referred to Christians rather than Catholics, OK. If all of a sudden he is trying to be weasily, then not OK. mg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Bill D Date: 16 Apr 10 - 01:36 PM Main Entry: Cath·o·lic Pronunciation: \ˈkath-lik, ˈka-thə-\ Function: noun Date: 15th century 1 : a person who belongs to the universal Christian church ----------------------------------------------------------- Always in the background is the idea that all Christians SHOULD be 'catholic'... the Catholic church considers there to be an unbroken line of succession from Jesus thru St. Peter down to the present....(never mind the strange conglomeration of alternate Popes in the Middle AGES) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) Date: 16 Apr 10 - 02:11 PM "the Catholic church considers there to be" Mmm, history is always writ by those who conquered? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic come all-ye From: Bill D Date: 16 Apr 10 - 02:30 PM "..history is always writ by those who conquered?" Kinda... And it is merely a historical accident that Jesus won over Ahura Mazda (Mithraism)in Rome. What there was of the Bible was read/transmitted in 'dockyards' Greek, and Mithra was ahead until Constantine was converted and decreed that Jesus was his choice. (If I remember correctly, there were 3 popes at one time back when power was being juggled.) |