Guest Peeves Posted January 6, 2012 Report Posted January 6, 2012 http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20120104/lahey-bishop-child-pornography-120104/ This religious figure, as all religious figures must be held to a higher moral expectation than a layman given his position and authority. To grant him bail for such an immoral act is unacceptable, He should serve the full sentence prescribed fort the offense. Individuals that seek and obtain such materials encourage the abuse of more children to provide their perversion. " Disgraced Roman Catholic Bishop Raymond Lahey was sentenced to 15 months in prison Wednesday for importing child pornography, but was released on probation within hours. Lahey pleaded guilty to the child pornography charge back in May and surrendered himself into immediate custody while awaiting sentencing. Since Lahey committed his crime in 2009, Ontario Court Justice Kent Kirkland said the 71-year-old bishop was entitled to receive double credit for time served awaiting sentencing. And with close to eight months already in jail, Lahey was free to go from the court." Quote
dre Posted January 6, 2012 Report Posted January 6, 2012 http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20120104/lahey-bishop-child-pornography-120104/ This religious figure, as all religious figures must be held to a higher moral expectation than a layman given his position and authority. To grant him bail for such an immoral act is unacceptable, He should serve the full sentence prescribed fort the offense. Individuals that seek and obtain such materials encourage the abuse of more children to provide their perversion. " Disgraced Roman Catholic Bishop Raymond Lahey was sentenced to 15 months in prison Wednesday for importing child pornography, but was released on probation within hours. Lahey pleaded guilty to the child pornography charge back in May and surrendered himself into immediate custody while awaiting sentencing. Since Lahey committed his crime in 2009, Ontario Court Justice Kent Kirkland said the 71-year-old bishop was entitled to receive double credit for time served awaiting sentencing. And with close to eight months already in jail, Lahey was free to go from the court." This religious figure, as all religious figures must be held to a higher moral expectation than a layman given his position and authority. Actually I dont see any reason why one would hold a religious figure to a higher moral expectation than a postal worker, or a farmer. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
prairiechickin Posted January 7, 2012 Report Posted January 7, 2012 Actually I dont see any reason why one would hold a religious figure to a higher moral expectation than a postal worker, or a farmer. Considering they themselves constantly trumpet thier roles as moral guardians of society, I think we can hold them to a higher standard. Not to mention that they hold positions of great trust in society, especially among their own congregations. Wasn't this clown the Bishop of Antigonish, and wasn't that region recently awash in allegations of clergy abusing children? Quote
Guest Peeves Posted January 7, 2012 Report Posted January 7, 2012 Actually I dont see any reason why one would hold a religious figure to a higher moral expectation than a postal worker, or a farmer. Well think about it. Who preaches morality? Who has opportunity to influence moral codes? Who hears the confessions of sinners? Who is indeed held as the 'epitome' of religious virtues? If a religious leader isn't expected to higher moral principles who is? I expect a cop to be held to a higher ethical (behavior) standard. I expect a doctor to be more thorough medically than a nurse or a layman. Certainly all are human and fallible, but, a Rabbi, priest or any holy man best be held to a higher standard and expectation, one they preach to their flock. Quote
Guest Peeves Posted January 7, 2012 Report Posted January 7, 2012 Considering they themselves constantly trumpet thier roles as moral guardians of society, I think we can hold them to a higher standard. Not to mention that they hold positions of great trust in society, especially among their own congregations. Wasn't this clown the Bishop of Antigonish, and wasn't that region recently awash in allegations of clergy abusing children? Well put. Quote
Scotty Posted January 8, 2012 Report Posted January 8, 2012 Considering they themselves constantly trumpet thier roles as moral guardians of society, I think we can hold them to a higher standard. This begs the question, if a criminal hold himself to a very low standard should we hold them to lower standards and give them weaker sentences? Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
jacee Posted January 8, 2012 Report Posted January 8, 2012 I think he should be incarcerated forever, the scum sucking pig! However, it isn't for the court to hold him to higher standards: that's for the church ... to make sure he NEVER reoffends, and to withdraw him from any contact with children. His credibility as a spiritual advisor he has destroyed all by himself. Quote
prairiechickin Posted January 8, 2012 Report Posted January 8, 2012 This begs the question, if a criminal hold himself to a very low standard should we hold them to lower standards and give them weaker sentences? As a rule we do when it comes to white collar crimes. Quote
eyeball Posted January 9, 2012 Report Posted January 9, 2012 (edited) However, it isn't for the court to hold him to higher standards: that's for the church ... Wouldn't that be like encouraging the Mafia to police itself? Personally, I never let my kids anywhere near a church when they were were growing up. Of course I was also concerned about people diddling with their minds. Edited January 9, 2012 by eyeball Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Scotty Posted January 9, 2012 Report Posted January 9, 2012 I think he should be incarcerated forever, the scum sucking pig! Because he downloaded some pictures? Really? Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
Scotty Posted January 9, 2012 Report Posted January 9, 2012 As a rule we do when it comes to white collar crimes. The general reason why white collar criminals get lower sentences is because up until they're caught they generally led exemplary lives, held down jobs, etc. Most street crimes by contrast, are committed by people with no gainful employment and previous criminal records. Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
Melanie_ Posted January 10, 2012 Report Posted January 10, 2012 Because he downloaded some pictures? Really? He didn't download "some pictures", he downloaded pictures of children being sexually assaulted. He did this because he got his jollies from looking at images of children being raped. He created a demand for further sexual attacks on children, as those who like to look at this stuff are always looking for more. He also contributed to their continued victimization, as those images will always be out there, so those children never know in their day to day lives if they are interacting with someone who has seen them be abused, and enjoyed watching it. Don't try to minimize his role in the abuse of these children. People who download child porn are complicit in the abuse, and should be held accountable. Quote For to be free is not merely to cast off one's chains, but to live in a way that respects and enhances the freedom of others. Nelson Mandela
Moonlight Graham Posted January 10, 2012 Report Posted January 10, 2012 LOL @ time served. Quote "All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain Partisanship is a disease of the intellect.
Guest Peeves Posted January 11, 2012 Report Posted January 11, 2012 He didn't download "some pictures", he downloaded pictures of children being sexually assaulted. He did this because he got his jollies from looking at images of children being raped. He created a demand for further sexual attacks on children, as those who like to look at this stuff are always looking for more. He also contributed to their continued victimization, as those images will always be out there, so those children never know in their day to day lives if they are interacting with someone who has seen them be abused, and enjoyed watching it. Don't try to minimize his role in the abuse of these children. People who download child porn are complicit in the abuse, and should be held accountable. Touché. Quote
Scotty Posted January 11, 2012 Report Posted January 11, 2012 He didn't download "some pictures", he downloaded pictures of children being sexually assaulted. He did this because he got his jollies from looking at images of children being raped. But he can't help what arouses him, no more than anyone else can. You are judging his morality based on factors beyond his control. He created a demand for further sexual attacks on children, That's simply nonsense. People aren't molesting children because they can put the pictures on the internet. They're molesting children because they're sexually attracted to them and don't have either the necessary self-control or the care about the harm they cause to not do anything about it. As I said earlier, eliminating pictures entirely, eliminating the internet entirely, is not going to do anything to stop sexual assaults on children. He also contributed to their continued victimization, as those images will always be out there, so those children never know in their day to day lives if they are interacting with someone who has seen them be abused, and enjoyed watching it. I grant you the possibility, but the fact he looked at a picture of someone naked does not make him a participant in the abuse, no matter how far you want to stretch it. That's especially so given the majority of the children in child porn pictures are probably middle aged by now. Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
dre Posted January 12, 2012 Report Posted January 12, 2012 But he can't help what arouses him, no more than anyone else can. You are judging his morality based on factors beyond his control. That's simply nonsense. People aren't molesting children because they can put the pictures on the internet. They're molesting children because they're sexually attracted to them and don't have either the necessary self-control or the care about the harm they cause to not do anything about it. As I said earlier, eliminating pictures entirely, eliminating the internet entirely, is not going to do anything to stop sexual assaults on children. I grant you the possibility, but the fact he looked at a picture of someone naked does not make him a participant in the abuse, no matter how far you want to stretch it. That's especially so given the majority of the children in child porn pictures are probably middle aged by now. Actually theres an industry of sorts around child porn, and yes... demand dies encourage supply. And yes... people film these acts for the purpose of making money on the internet. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
fellowtraveller Posted January 13, 2012 Report Posted January 13, 2012 Actually I dont see any reason why one would hold a religious figure to a higher moral expectation than a postal worker, or a farmer. Moral, schmoral, who cares about that bunk with these perverts? The law does hold persons in a position of authority to a higher standard in many cases involving sex. A priest would get slammed for stautory rape for diddling a 15 year old, but a 16 fellow student having sex with another student would get nothing. But this guy was not having sex, so his sentence should be the same as any other creep since his position of authority had no impact on the nature of the crime. Quote The government should do something.
prairiechickin Posted January 14, 2012 Report Posted January 14, 2012 But this guy was not having sex, so his sentence should be the same as any other creep since his position of authority had no impact on the nature of the crime. I'm not so sure. As Bishop, was he not in charge of a number of priests in the Antigonish Diocese that have recently been exposed as pedophiles? How many 'individual' cases does it take before we can conclude that this sort of thing is systemic within the Catholic Church? I don't recall such scandals within the Anglican Church, or the Pentecostals, or any other religeon other than certain branches of the Mormon Church. But there seems to be no end to the scandals within the Catholic Church in many different countries. Are these just a few bad apples, or is there something more insideous here? Quote
Scotty Posted January 14, 2012 Report Posted January 14, 2012 Actually theres an industry of sorts around child porn, No, there actually isn't. and yes... demand dies encourage supply. And yes... people film these acts for the purpose of making money on the internet. It'd be more profitable and less dangerous to run cocaine from South America to Miami. You'd probably last a lot longer, too. I recall reading something a while back about the number of 'child porn' web sites. There seemed an awful lot, but then the article went on to point out the actual lifespan of any of them was a matter of days, and that most were simply repeats of the ones shut down. Ie, a web site keeps getting shut down and pops up again later, only to be shut down again, and again and again. How do you make money at that? How do you get credit card processors? The idea is counter intuitive and illogical. BTW, a friend of mine runs some porn sites. These are only literary porn, ie, written porn, but he's constantly having issues with his credit card processor, so has to be very careful about what he puts up there, and even what the covers show lest they drop him. One complaint, and one review can lose you your credit card processor and suddenly you can't make sales. It's happened to him on several occasions. Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
Scotty Posted January 14, 2012 Report Posted January 14, 2012 I don't recall such scandals within the Anglican Church, or the Pentecostals, or any other religeon other than certain branches of the Mormon Church. But there seems to be no end to the scandals within the Catholic Church in many different countries. Are these just a few bad apples, or is there something more insideous here? Maybe it's just that you haven't heard of it. In fact, as far as I know, the Catholic church is no more likely to be subjected to such complaints than any other religious institution. My research of cases over the past 20 years indicates no evidence whatever that Catholic or other celibate clergy are any more likely to be involved in misconduct or abuse than clergy of any other denomination -- or indeed, than nonclergy. However determined news media may be to see this affair as a crisis of celibacy, the charge is just unsupported. Literally every denomination and faith tradition has its share of abuse cases, and some of the worst involve non-Catholics. Every mainline Protestant denomination has had scandals aplenty, as have Pentecostals, Mormons, Jehovah´s Witnesses, Jews, Buddhists, Hare Krishnas -- and the list goes on. One Canadian Anglican (Episcopal) diocese is currently on the verge of bankruptcy as a result of massive lawsuits caused by decades of systematic abuse, yet the Anglican church does not demand celibacy of its clergy. Zenit Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
prairiechickin Posted January 14, 2012 Report Posted January 14, 2012 I have no hard data at my fingertips here, but I suspect your source is doing some pretty selective culling of stats and outright denial. I'm just trying to think of all the scandals involving pedophiles in the past ten years or so, and by far the bulk of them involved Catholic priests, which is why I posted what I did earlier. To say other religeons have just as many cases beggers belief. Yes, the Anglicans were/are forced to the edge of bancruptcy over scandals in residential schools, both sexual and physical. And yes, Warren Jeffs and his band of merry miscreants were fond of child brides in a splinter Mormon sect. And even Boy Scouts of America have been tarnished with this brush recently, so we know it happens in a multitude of organizations. But scandals in Antigonish, Newfoundland, Boston, Ireland and France --and that's just off the top of my head -- all involved Catholic priests to the point that I'm wondering if its not just a few bad apples, but rather systemic to the religeon. Quote
Scotty Posted January 14, 2012 Report Posted January 14, 2012 I have no hard data at my fingertips here, but I suspect your source is doing some pretty selective culling of stats and outright denial. I'm just trying to think of all the scandals involving pedophiles in the past ten years or so, and by far the bulk of them involved Catholic priests, which is why I posted what I did earlier. To say other religeons have just as many cases beggers belief. Yes, the Anglicans were/are forced to the edge of bancruptcy over scandals in residential schools, both sexual and physical. And yes, Warren Jeffs and his band of merry miscreants were fond of child brides in a splinter Mormon sect. And even Boy Scouts of America have been tarnished with this brush recently, so we know it happens in a multitude of organizations. But scandals in Antigonish, Newfoundland, Boston, Ireland and France --and that's just off the top of my head -- all involved Catholic priests to the point that I'm wondering if its not just a few bad apples, but rather systemic to the religeon. Well, there's this, from Wikipedia In the spring of 2002, the Christian Science Monitor reported on the results of national surveys by Christian Ministry Resources and concluded: “Despite headlines focusing on the priest pedophile problem in the Roman Catholic Church, most American churches being hit with child sexual-abuse allegations are Protestant, and most of the alleged abusers are not clergy or staff, but church volunteers.”[155] Some commentators, such as journalist Jon Dougherty, have argued that media coverage of the issue has been excessive, given that the same problems plague other institutions, such as the US public school system, with much greater frequency.[156][157][158] Tom Hoopes, then National Catholic Register executive editor, observed: "during the first half of 2002, the 61 largest newspapers in California ran nearly 2,000 stories about sexual abuse in Catholic institutions, mostly concerning past allegations. During the same period, those newspapers ran four stories about the federal government’s discovery of the much larger — and ongoing — abuse scandal in public schools."[159] George Weigel, the Chair of Catholic Studies at the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, District of Columbia, noted: "In the United States alone, there are reportedly some 39 million victims of childhood sexual abuse... According to other recent studies, 2 percent of sex abuse offenders were Catholic priests—a phenomenon that spiked between the mid-1960s and the mid-1980s but seems to have virtually disappeared... [Yet] the sexual abuse story in the global media is almost entirely a Catholic story, in which the Catholic Church is portrayed as the epicenter of the sexual abuse of the young."[ Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
prairiechickin Posted January 14, 2012 Report Posted January 14, 2012 You're citing Catholics and wikipedia as proof that the entire Catholic scandal is a product of the media? Well, I'm convinced. Quote
prairiechickin Posted January 14, 2012 Report Posted January 14, 2012 Just for the hell of it, I googled Catholic Priest Scandal and got 1,190,000 hits. Yep, its all a product of the media's imagination. Quote
jacee Posted January 14, 2012 Report Posted January 14, 2012 But he can't help what arouses him, no more than anyone else can. You are judging his morality based on factors beyond his control. Then he'd better be locked up to prevent lifelong damage to children's lives. http://www.prevent-abuse-now.com/stats.htm#Impact That's simply nonsense. People aren't molesting children because they can put the pictures on the internet. They're molesting children because they're sexually attracted to them and don't have either the necessary self-control or the care about the harm they cause to not do anything about it. As I said earlier, eliminating pictures entirely, eliminating the internet entirely, is not going to do anything to stop sexual assaults on children. Pictures of children being sexually assaulted are pictures of crimes and of victims. Those viewing them are criminals. You aren't deceiving anyone here, and don't deceive yourself: There is NOTHING that is not criminal about sex with children. I grant you the possibility, but the fact he looked at a picture of someone naked does not make him a participant in the abuse, no matter how far you want to stretch it. That's especially so given the majority of the children in child porn pictures are probably middle aged by now. If a woman is raped pictures of the rape are posted publicly, how many years have to go by before it no longer bothers her? Is it ok to view pics of a child's sexual assault once the child victim reaches the age of majority? Is that your claim? Would you enjoy sharing pics of yourself being sexually assaulted as a child? Should you have to tolerate them being in circulation? Are you reconsidering your statements at all? Viewing child porn is NOT a victimless crime, and it is a crime. Quote
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.