Archive

Vatican declares that homosexuality is responsible for pedophilia in the Church

  • Footwedge
    derek bomar wrote:
    Footwedge wrote:
    derek bomar wrote: again, my point isn't that it's not happening in other religions (the act, not the cover-up), it's that those in charge of the Church have now been linked to the cover-up and the Church's general stance of "nothing to see here"..."we did nothing wrong"...bs is what is pissing me off, along with millions of other Catholics. If other religions recently have had leaders be complicit in the cover-up of child molesters, shame on them, and shame on the media for not reporting it...however, I am (was?) Catholic, so this particular set of events is relevant to me and to millions of others. The Catholic Church is huge, and just like with OSU or ND getting a lot of press during college football season, you have to know that media coverage (good or bad) kind of comes with the territory. That said, you can't blame this on the media. Even if they aren't reporting on other religions (if it's happening in the same leadership roles and per capita instances), does that make the decisions made by the leaders of the RCC ok? Hell no it doesn't.
    And what I've highlighted from your post is utter bullshit. Like I told the other poster, the Catholic church has been very public in their remorse. Repeatedly. Good Gawd.
    no they have not. The Pope himself and his leaders have said he's done nothing wrong. He did.
    The pope has denied involvement in a cover up. As I stated above, 55% of Catholics believe that he did participate in a cover up. That is why many Catholics are presently leaving, especially in Ireland and Germany.

    So far, there is nothing that has been published proving any wrong doing by Radzinger.

    What I'm saying, the Chuirch has repeatedly accepted responsiblity for the priest abuse scandal. Over and over and over and over and over again.
  • Footwedge
    derek bomar wrote: Taken straight from the first line: The Vatican insisted Saturday that Pope Benedict XVI had done nothing wrong

    http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2010/04/vatican-defends-pope-benedicts-response-to-oakland-sexual-abuse-case.html
    As I just stated..There is no proof that he has done anything wrong.
  • I Wear Pants
    He didn't molest anyone did he?
  • derek bomar
    Footwedge wrote:
    derek bomar wrote: Taken straight from the first line: The Vatican insisted Saturday that Pope Benedict XVI had done nothing wrong

    http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2010/04/vatican-defends-pope-benedicts-response-to-oakland-sexual-abuse-case.html
    As I just stated..There is no proof that he has done anything wrong.
    What proof do you want? There are letters with his signature on them ... really what do you want as proof?
  • derek bomar
    I Wear Pants wrote: He didn't molest anyone did he?
    By that logic if I was a pimp of under-age child hookers, I shouldn't be arrested, since ya know, I didn't actually hump them
  • Footwedge
    derek bomar wrote:
    Footwedge wrote:
    derek bomar wrote: again, my point isn't that it's not happening in other religions (the act, not the cover-up), it's that those in charge of the Church have now been linked to the cover-up and the Church's general stance of "nothing to see here"..."we did nothing wrong"...bs is what is pissing me off, along with millions of other Catholics. If other religions recently have had leaders be complicit in the cover-up of child molesters, shame on them, and shame on the media for not reporting it...however, I am (was?) Catholic, so this particular set of events is relevant to me and to millions of others. The Catholic Church is huge, and just like with OSU or ND getting a lot of press during college football season, you have to know that media coverage (good or bad) kind of comes with the territory. That said, you can't blame this on the media. Even if they aren't reporting on other religions (if it's happening in the same leadership roles and per capita instances), does that make the decisions made by the leaders of the RCC ok? Hell no it doesn't.
    And what I've highlighted from your post is utter bullshit. Like I told the other poster, the Catholic church has been very public in their remorse. Repeatedly. Good Gawd.
    no they have not. The Pope himself and Church leaders have said he's done nothing wrong. He did.
    He may in fact be in the wrong. But as of now, neither you nor anyone else can prove that he was involved in a cover up of any kind. Why is it so hard for you to understand this?

    The NY Times published an article regarding a he said he said situation. Nothing has been proven...and least not yet.

    Ben Roethlesberger was accused of sexual assault. How did that turn out?

    Let the facts come out before you jump to conclusions. As of now, the Pope is not guilty of anything. That could change.
  • Footwedge
    derek bomar wrote:
    Footwedge wrote:
    derek bomar wrote: Taken straight from the first line: The Vatican insisted Saturday that Pope Benedict XVI had done nothing wrong

    http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2010/04/vatican-defends-pope-benedicts-response-to-oakland-sexual-abuse-case.html
    As I just stated..There is no proof that he has done anything wrong.
    What proof do you want? There are letters with his signature on them ... really what do you want as proof?
    I am done debating the subject with you. You really have a preconceived vision on the events here. All that is "there" is a he said he said argument. That's it.

    There is no fuggin proof that the pope was involved in the cover up.
  • derek bomar
    Footwedge wrote:
    derek bomar wrote:
    Footwedge wrote:
    derek bomar wrote: Taken straight from the first line: The Vatican insisted Saturday that Pope Benedict XVI had done nothing wrong

    http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2010/04/vatican-defends-pope-benedicts-response-to-oakland-sexual-abuse-case.html
    As I just stated..There is no proof that he has done anything wrong.
    What proof do you want? There are letters with his signature on them ... really what do you want as proof?
    I am done debating the subject with you. You really have a preconceived vision on the events here. All that is "there" is a he said he said argument. That's it.

    There is no fuggin proof that the pope was involved in the cover up.
    umm...not really dude. But if you say so...

    he needed to "study" the Kiesle case more before coming to a decision...if that's what you want to call it while a now conviced pedo still has contact with children for years after asking to be removed...

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/09/pope-benedict-stalled-chi_n_532073.html

    and that's just one instance...the one about the deaf kids in Wisconsin is sickening...

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/mar/25/pope-us-priest-children-abuse

    The now Pope knew he had done what he was accused of, but still let him live out the rest of his life as a priest. How is that a "he said he said"?
  • derek bomar
    And for arguments sake, let's say that he really was acting in what he thought were the best interests of the kids, and not the priests, why can't he/the vatican come out now and say they were wrong instead of defending what he did when he was a Cardinal? Anyone with half a brain can see this shit is gross, and he failed to act in a way any one of us would have. Yet he's the one we're supposed to consider infallible. Ya fucking right. This guy needs canned.
  • Footwedge
    Bomar...if you want to play the google game..I am as good as anybody. I have read the reports that you have posted from ultra liberal websites that are hell bent in bringing down the RCC...and by nature are anti Christianity and anti religion.

    What these articles present are not poof that the pope sent pedophile priests back into parishes to continue abusing kids.
  • derek bomar
    Footwedge wrote: Bomar...if you want to play the google game..I am as good as anybody. I have read the reports that you have posted from ultra liberal websites that are hell bent in bringing down the RCC...and by nature are anti Christianity and anti religion.

    What these articles present are not poof that the pope sent pedophile priests back into parishes to continue abusing kids.
    your new nickname is "a river in Egypt"
  • Footwedge
    derek bomar wrote:
    Footwedge wrote: Bomar...if you want to play the google game..I am as good as anybody. I have read the reports that you have posted from ultra liberal websites that are hell bent in bringing down the RCC...and by nature are anti Christianity and anti religion.

    What these articles present are not poof that the pope sent pedophile priests back into parishes to continue abusing kids.
    your new nickname is "a river in Egypt"
    I'm cool with that. I've had "nicknames" far worse than that. :D
  • j_crazy
    the Catholic church is fucked IMO.
  • Footwedge
    Almost as bad the Presbyterians, right?
  • Sykotyk
    Once religion is organized it becomes corrupt.

    The church has no answer to homosexuality or pedophilia, etc. So, they do what they only know how to do. Pretend it's God punishing you, and through prayer you'll be saved.

    Why is it when a religious person has computer problems, prayer is never seen as a viable option?

    Sykotyk
  • I Wear Pants
    Footwedge wrote: Almost as bad the Presbyterians, right?
    I lol'd.
  • Swamp Fox
    Absence makes the heart grow fonder perhaps, but celibacy is an unatural lifestyle that creates the problem. Everyone needs a sexual outlet and celibacy causes some people to seek their outlet by any means they can.
  • dwccrew
    FairwoodKing wrote:
    I Wear Pants wrote:
    FairwoodKing wrote: Every time I think the leaders of the Catholic Church can’t become bigger assholes, they pull something like this. Yesterday a top Vatican spokesman proclaimed that pedophilia in the Church is the result of homosexuality:

    http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/video/sexual-abuse-occurs-10356388

    But as the ABC News report also stated, competent psychologists agree that most pedophiles are straight. I know from my own first-hand experience from being gay that very few gay men are interested in children. Blaming the whole gay world for a few bad apples is totally inappropriate. Yet that’s the way the spokesman’s words came out.

    The Vatican will do anything in its power to avoid responsibility for this scandal. First they blamed the media, now they’re blaming us. I wish they would get their shit together.
    I know from my own first-hand experience from being straight that very few straight men are interested in children.

    See how that works?
    It doesn't work very well. The vast majority of pedophiles are straight, even though they constitute a relatively small percentage of heterosexual men.

    My complaint with the Vatican statement is that he made it sound like the whole gay world was responsible for their problem. That simply is not true.
    Can you substantiate with some imperical evidence that pedophiles are predominantly heterosexual? I don't know if I believe that to be true.
    FairwoodKing wrote:
    Footwedge wrote:
    FairwoodKing wrote: Every time I think the leaders of the Catholic Church can’t become bigger assholes, they pull something like this. Yesterday a top Vatican spokesman proclaimed that pedophilia in the Church is the result of homosexuality:

    http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/video/sexual-abuse-occurs-10356388

    But as the ABC News report also stated, competent psychologists agree that most pedophiles are straight. I know from my own first-hand experience from being gay that very few gay men are interested in children. Blaming the whole gay world for a few bad apples is totally inappropriate. Yet that’s the way the spokesman’s words came out.

    The Vatican will do anything in its power to avoid responsibility for this scandal. First they blamed the media, now they’re blaming us. I wish they would get their shit together.
    Not all pedophiles or hebephiles are homosexuals. But there are many more homesexual pedopholes/hebephiles than heterosexual pedo/hebephiles percentage wise. I've seen it listed as anywhere from a 3 to 1 ratio to a 10-1 ratio. To say that there are more heterosexual pedophiles than homosexuals pedophiles needs clarification, given that only about 2 to 5 percent of the poulation are homosexual.

    So, the Vatican should clarify their claim. They should not blame the pedophile situation as simply being a homosexual problem.
    Thank you. You said it better than I did.
    Actually, he said it opposite of how you said it. He claims that pedophiles are more often homosexual, a claim that you deny.
  • Footwedge
    ^^^DDCrew. I was wondering about his reply as well. The original statement that he made was true. More hetero people are pedophile than homo. But given the fact that the gay community encompasses only about 2.5 to 4 percent of the overall population, he's not really stating much.

    Since I've been reading a lot about the RCC scandal, I have come across a couple different studies showing that homosexual pedophiles outnumber hetero pedophiles at a 3 to 1 ratio per capita...or per ratio. Another study had it as high as a 10 to 1 ratio per capita,

    Put yet another way. If the overall popilation sample size consisted of 1000 heterosexual men, then roughly 60 of them would be pedophiles.

    And if one was to take a sample size of 1000 homosexuals, there would be at the very least 180 pedophiles at the lower end, and as many as 600 pedophiles in the other study I read.
  • BoatShoes
    I'm not so sure who these priests are molesting has much to do with the inherent sexual preference/orientation to which the priests prescribe. I mean, when you're 25 year old red blooded man and you've never busted a nut because of some oath to a being you feel is there in your heart but your underlying human biology doesn't give a shit about at that point...I imagine they'd stick their junk in anything warm with a beating heart.

    And, perhaps there's just more young impressionable boys (like alter boys) around male priests than young girls.

    I mean damn...if I go month a bj from a tranny with a decent face can start to sound not too shabby ;) I can't imagine being a priest.
  • Con_Alma
    Footwedge wrote:
    Con_Alma wrote: I always thought the issue existed with the members of the Catholic Church and their disappointment with the Vatican on how it's handled.
    There are plenty of Catholics that are pissed about how things were handled. I am one of them. In addition, in a recent Gallop poll, more than 55% of Catholics believe that Pope Ratzinger participated in pedophile coverups.

    This is why church members in European countries such as Germany and Ireland are leaving in droves.

    For what it's worth, my family is now attending a Baptist Church...and will continue to do so until either the pope is absolved, or he resigns fron his position.
    Maybe I am misunderstanding your follow up comment but I think we said the same thing.

    What a difference you and your family moved towards. It seems to me there's a big difference in culture and liturgy between the Baptist and Catholic Churches.
  • Footwedge
    Con_Alma wrote:
    Footwedge wrote:
    Con_Alma wrote: I always thought the issue existed with the members of the Catholic Church and their disappointment with the Vatican on how it's handled.
    There are plenty of Catholics that are pissed about how things were handled. I am one of them. In addition, in a recent Gallop poll, more than 55% of Catholics believe that Pope Ratzinger participated in pedophile coverups.

    This is why church members in European countries such as Germany and Ireland are leaving in droves.

    For what it's worth, my family is now attending a Baptist Church...and will continue to do so until either the pope is absolved, or he resigns fron his position.
    Maybe I am misunderstanding your follow up comment but I think we said the same thing.

    What a difference you and your family moved towards. It seems to me there's a big difference in culture and liturgy between the Baptist and Catholic Churches.
    I admit to not knowing much regarding the history nor the culture of the Baptists. Obviously, I know who John the Baptist was.

    I went to my first service last week. My wife and daughter had gone there for about a month. Whew...talk about night and day!!.. They had a drummer with the whole package, 2 accoustical guitars and a bass guitar. Music was going on for better than half the service. The only thing missin were the doobies being passed around and John Belushi doing back flips down the center aisle...LOL.
  • I Wear Pants
    I wouldn't be able to take that.

    Church should be church as far as I'm concerned. Not a theater performance.
  • Writerbuckeye
    I Wear Pants wrote: I wouldn't be able to take that.

    Church should be church as far as I'm concerned. Not a theater performance.
    You can't get more theatrical than a Roman Catholic service, what with all the pomp, circumstance and different raiments. It's part of the ritual and mystique that has been a part of the Catholic Church for centuries.
  • Bigred1995
    This video makes this whole conversation very interesting!!!