guyser Posted January 17, 2012 Report Share Posted January 17, 2012 Did the Baptists do that too? Probably not, they were too busy trying to stop people from dancing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fellowtraveller Posted January 17, 2012 Report Share Posted January 17, 2012 Probably not, they were too busy trying to stop people from dancing. Why do Baptists never have sex standing up? They do not want God to think they are dancing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted January 17, 2012 Report Share Posted January 17, 2012 WE have every right to opine about your certainly indefensible position. Oh hardly indefensible. Especially against a group whose entire argument consists of "pedophiles are bad people!" No research, no cites, not even an effort to consider the point of a broad law which targets both pedophiles and ordinary people, and which does so for no discernible reason other than disapproval of their sexual fantasies. No evidence that the porn law has had the slightest impact or will ever have the slightest impact on the amount of actual child abuse. No evidence that the child porn law is necessary, or that the destruction of some sad men downloading pictures in their basement helps society in the slightest or makes children the slightest bit safer. Whether it's victim-less or not is clear to most.Please demonstrate how something is clear to those who have no knowledge whatsoever about a thing other than they don't like it? The children's rights are ignored. They may be drugged,intoxicated, threatened, they certainly suffer. So regardless your position they are victims. Some experts think cild porn leads to more child molesting. Really? Name them. I haven't read one academic study which actually says any such thing. There are a lot of 'activists' out there working on behalf of children who will produce any kind of numbers you like, but none of them have any scientific validity. So if you wish to maintain what I consider an indefensible position, expect to be lectured it come with the territory. When my position is based on logic and fact and yours is based entirely on emotion, don't expect me to take your moralizing seriously. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted January 17, 2012 Report Share Posted January 17, 2012 (edited) I see, You are countering the irrefutable fact that many Catholic clergy have been packed off to jail for sex crimes versus allegations of sex crimes by others posted on a bizarre pro Catholic website? Nice work if you are trying to convince pre schoolers. Pre schoolers have more open minds than bigots of your sort. Bizarre pro-catholic website? You said you never heard of non-Catholic clergy involved and I gave you a cite listing an awful lot of such happenings. I did not at any point attempt to deny there had been a lot of Catholic priests involved in underage sex and molestation. But Catholics are, after all, as the cite points out, the largest, and most hierarchical of Christian congregations, and so it's far easier to track such things. If you want to hate Catholics, there's not much I can do about it, but there is NO EVIDENCE that the Catholic clergy abused underage people with any more frequency than happened in the general population. And the great majority of that abuse appeared to involve gay priests and underage youths, not pedophiles with small children. The Bishop was clearly of that type, though he never apparently actually went on to engage his sexual interests with actual youths. Edited January 17, 2012 by Scotty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fellowtraveller Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 I did not at any point attempt to deny there had been a lot of Catholic priests involved in underage sex and molestation.And finding some bizarre website isn't enough.Here is your assignment: compare stats of convicted Catholic clergy with stats of convicted non-Catholic clergy, and post a percentage relative to the size of their representation in religion in Canada. Or just cut to the chase: your boys are profoundly, systematically sick, and the Church hierarchy is rotten to the core not just for their actions before the world wide revelations of misdeeds, but for the corporate coverup which is ongoing. We both know the survival of the Catholic Corporation is at stake and you are welcome to defend it in whatever way you see fit. Just don't expect others to have your level of 'faith'.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prairiechickin Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 Here is your assignment: compare stats of convicted Catholic clergy with stats of convicted non-Catholic clergy, and post a percentage relative to the size of their representation in religion in Canada. I'm sure the Vatican has already crunched the numbers and they can be found at www.wedon'tscrewanymorekidsthanthoseotherguys.com/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 (edited) And finding some bizarre website isn't enough. Why do I have a feeling that any web site which even had a Catholic contributor would be dismissed by you as 'bizarre'? Here is your assignment: compare stats of convicted Catholic clergy with stats of convicted non-Catholic clergy, and post a percentage relative to the size of their representation in religion in Canada. I think you have a profound lack of understanding of how discussions and debates work. You say Catholic clergy are more prone to abusing children than anyone else. But you post no evidence whatsoever to support this theory. I say they're not, and post evidence to that effect. Now you insist I engage in a research project to provide more evidence to counter your theory? At which point you will no-doubt pronounce on the validity of that evidence. Uhm, no. Or just cut to the chase: your boys are profoundly, systematically sick, and the Church hierarchy is rotten to the core not just for their actions before the world wide revelations of misdeeds, but for the corporate coverup which is ongoing. Yes, bigots don't need evidence to support their theories, and are prone to dismiss any evidence which counters it anyway. From my reading, the abuse (mostly of adolescent boys and youths) mainly happened between the '60s and '80s, was mostly carried out by homosexual priests, and has all-but disappeared today, given new psychological screening of seminary applicants and rules of behaviour within the Church. Just don't expect others to have your level of 'faith'.. I'm pretty much an agnostic, to be honest. Thus I don't have faith one way or another. I rely on actually looking into things and deciding my decision based on the facts as I find them. I think it's your anti-Catholic bigotry that is operating on faith. Edited January 18, 2012 by Scotty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted January 19, 2012 Report Share Posted January 19, 2012 From my reading, the abuse (mostly of adolescent boys and youths) mainly happened between the '60s and '80s, was mostly carried out by homosexual priests, and has all-but disappeared today, given new psychological screening of seminary applicants and rules of behaviour within the Church. cite?Would you accept the Catholic church's word on this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Peeves Posted January 20, 2012 Report Share Posted January 20, 2012 cite? Would you accept the Catholic church's word on this? Only in the vernacular Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.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.