K
kalt
Guest
Since a very old thread on this topic was brought out of moth balls today, I thought I would post my standard response to the nonthinking people who blame pedophelia on celibacy.
It takes a little patience, but they finally get it.
A nonthinker will claim that priests molest children because they’re “not allowed to have sex”.
I ask them why, if the priest is going to break his voluntary vow of celibacy, would he choose a child instead of an adult woman.
They say that the children are vulnerable and easily manipulated, so the priests won’t get caught. I point out that there are oodles of women who throw themselves at priests. I also point out that there are many homosexual men that the priests could have sex with. There is no need to manipulate anyone. And, there’s a much higher risk of “being told on” by young boy who is raped than an adult male or female who is a willing partner. Also, the consequences of raping a child vs having sex w/ a woman???
They then say that it’s the lack of sex that drives them to be interested in the children.
So I ask them, then, if they were not allowed to have sex for some reason, and if children were the only people around, would they become sexually interested in young children.
They always look horrified. Celibacy, when it comes to them, would never make them molest a child.
They finally realize that celibacy isn’t the cause of child molestation. They finally realize that priests have other choices if they’re going to break their vow.
If celibacy wouldn’t cause these nonthinkers to molest children, even when only children are available to break the celibacy with, how much less then, is the vow of celibacy a reason for priests, who have other choices, to molest children?
They get it. They don’t like getting it, and they won’t admit it, but they get it.
It takes a little patience, but they finally get it.
A nonthinker will claim that priests molest children because they’re “not allowed to have sex”.
I ask them why, if the priest is going to break his voluntary vow of celibacy, would he choose a child instead of an adult woman.
They say that the children are vulnerable and easily manipulated, so the priests won’t get caught. I point out that there are oodles of women who throw themselves at priests. I also point out that there are many homosexual men that the priests could have sex with. There is no need to manipulate anyone. And, there’s a much higher risk of “being told on” by young boy who is raped than an adult male or female who is a willing partner. Also, the consequences of raping a child vs having sex w/ a woman???
They then say that it’s the lack of sex that drives them to be interested in the children.
So I ask them, then, if they were not allowed to have sex for some reason, and if children were the only people around, would they become sexually interested in young children.
They always look horrified. Celibacy, when it comes to them, would never make them molest a child.
They finally realize that celibacy isn’t the cause of child molestation. They finally realize that priests have other choices if they’re going to break their vow.
If celibacy wouldn’t cause these nonthinkers to molest children, even when only children are available to break the celibacy with, how much less then, is the vow of celibacy a reason for priests, who have other choices, to molest children?
They get it. They don’t like getting it, and they won’t admit it, but they get it.