California AG Probing Priestly Abuse... will it ever end?

[Tis_Bearself]

the abuse was textbook homosexual activity

Abuse of minors is not “textbook homosexual activity” any more than it’s “textbook heterosexual activity” when an adult has sex with a minor of opposite gender.

Normal people prefer to have sex with consenting adults, whether it’s same-sex consenting adults or opposite-sex consenting adults.

Any sexual abuse, including that of a minor, is a crime of power, not a crime of sex.

 

[twf]

I generally agree, but it can be a fine line. For example, until relatively recently (within the last 10-15 years tops) it was legal for an adult to have sex with a 14 year old in Canada. Former PM Harper’s conservative government raised the age of consent to 16- against strong opposition in some corners. Going back farther, how many kings and lords of old took very young teen brides? Not justifying it at all. It’s gross. But it’s been widely acceptable in some times and places.

 

[ZMystiCat]

88% of the abuse cases involve an adult male and a teenage boy (or older) and that isn’t homosexuality??

Where are you getting the 88% number? I haven’t read through the whole report, certainly not to count, but I can’t find a source online and the closest I have is this from the report:

Most of the victims were boys; but there were girls too. Some were teens; many were prepubescent.

That seems to imply it is much lower than 88%.

Regardless, even 88% still shows a good number of cases had nothing to do with homosexuality. That still makes the consistent factor in this abuse of power, not homosexuality.

But even beyond that, what’s the point of making this a “gay problem”? The last I checked, no one is proposing that we care less about sexual abuse if the perpetrator was LGBT. As far as those outside the church are concerned, trying to make this a “gay problem” is just driven by homophobia and an attempt to deflect the problem of a gross abuse of power.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

But it’s been widely acceptable in some times and places.

It was “widely acceptable” in the past because people’s lifespan was a lot shorter, many died before they hit age 40, and most people, with a few exceptions for wealthy or privileged, finished their schooling (if any) by age 14-16. In those days women also did not have careers other than wife to a man who was supposed to support and care for her in return for her bearing as many offspring as possible. Girls were married off young, and it was expected to be a marriage, not just a man preying on a girl. Teenage males were also expected to be functioning as grown men by about age 15-16 and in fact many of them were the “man of the house” because their father had died.

We judge sexual abuse by what the law is now, not by what was going on 100 years ago in a different time. If Canada was being backwards about it, then it’s good that Canada fixed that, because life is different now and society doesn’t expect 14, 15 and 16 year olds to function as adults.

It’s also not a “fine line” in most countries because the law very clearly spells out age limits and any exceptions (such as “Romeo and Juliet” laws where a teenage girl is dating a guy 2 years older).

 

[Start]

Is this new abuse or just old news that’s being regurgitated?

 

[AZ42]

I agree with you that the criminals need to be punished. However, you should not leave the Church. These people are merely (evil) members of the Church, not the Church itself. I doubt they care one bit about the Church, they merely use to further themselves. They are not the Church.

 

[AlNg]

For the same reasons it was prevalent in society at large in roughly the same percentages.

But should a Roman Catholic priest be held to a higher standard than the average Joe in the street? After all, the Roman Catholic priest is another Christ.

 

[AlNg]

88% of the abuse cases involve an adult male and a teenage boy (or older) and that isn’t homosexuality??

Assuming those statistics are accurate, it seems like it to me. In the news recently, there was reported a case in Florida of two Roman Catholic priests having sex in a car in full view of children nearby.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Having sex with a consenting adult in public is not child sexual abuse. It is public lewdness and indecency, as it is not targeting children specifically - adults can also see.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Romantic Catholic priests ARE being held to a higher standard. I haven’t seen 500 media articles and a federal investigation into the dads and stepdads in the town where I live who molest their children. We normally only hear about that when the child either grows up and writes a memoir/ feature story, or when the child commits some act of violence on themself or others.

 

[AlNg]

it is not targeting children specifically - adults can also see.

According to the news reports from Florida, children were in the area and were able to view the Roman Catholic priests having homosexual sex. There was no effort to hide their homosexual activities from children who were present. IMHO, this is not a good thing for Roman Catholic priests to put on display in front of children. These things can have a damaging and upsetting effect on children more so than on adults. For example, it can result in a distorted view of sex and an increase in sexual promiscuity later on.

 

[joeybaggz]

Abuse of minors is not “textbook homosexual activity”

See the term “chicken hawk.”

 

[joeybaggz]

Where are you getting the 88% number? I haven’t read through the whole report, certainly not to count, but I can’t find a source online and the closest I have is this from the report:

A fact printed earlier in the discussion (I believe on this forum or possibly in an official defense of the church) stated that only 18% of abuse was with prepubescent boys. The rest was with post pubescent young men and women. I do admit my math is off, though. I mistakenly posted 88% when I should have used a calculator. 82% is correct.

 

[joeybaggz]

But even beyond that, what’s the point of making this a “gay problem”? The last I checked, no one is proposing that we care less about sexual abuse if the perpetrator was LGBT. As far as those outside the church are concerned, trying to make this a “gay problem” is just driven by homophobia and an attempt to deflect the problem of a gross abuse of power.

A gay problem. The abuse, no. The admission of men with pronounced homosexual tendencies to seminaries, yes. It does matter.

 

[joeybaggz]

Assuming those statistics are accurate, it seems like it to me. In the news recently, there was reported a case in Florida of two Roman Catholic priests having sex in a car in full view of children nearby.
[/quote]

True, I read that too. And an above post corrected my mistake at 88%. I should have stated 82%. As to adult homosexuality in the priesthood, do you really want to classify that as “abuse” as in the current situation/climate? I would rather think that is simple sin, or a violation of their vows, and not abuse of another.

 

[Start]

Power is a more acceptable scapegoat.

 

[Start]

This is in California not Pennsylvania.

 

[ZMystiCat]

A fact printed earlier in the discussion (I believe on this forum or possibly in an official defense of the church)

As far as I can tell, you’re the only one in this thread assigning hard numbers like 18%, 88%, or 82%.

The highest figure I can manage to find is this LifeSite News article. It mentions a study from 2004 that estimated that 81% of abuse victims were male and that 78% of those males were post-pubescent, which would put the total percentage around 63%, only one percentage point higher than LifeSite’s calculations on the PA grand jury report. That still leaves almost 40% of victims as pre-pubescent and/or female.

Furthermore, the article itself is both weird and imprecise. They seem to treat the whole of adolescence, whether male or female, as pederasty, which in general specifically references an adult male and pubescent or adolescent male. Women aren’t included, but the use the term regardless. They also are not making distinctions between hebephilia, targeting the 11-14 age range, and ephebophilia, targeting the 15-19 range, both of which are covered under pederasty when the adult is male and the younger person is male. As a result, I’m willing to bet that the actual percentage of adolescent males is even lower than 62%.

So even accounting for LifeSite News’ numbers, which I’d consider to be a very friendly source for what you’re claiming, it still appears even more that this is a matter of abuse of power and enablement of that abuse, not homosexuality.

The admission of men with pronounced homosexual tendencies to seminaries, yes

So you, at best, get rid of 63% of the problem, and that’s assume that all of these men would be open about their struggle with SSA. That is still, at minimum, 47% of cases that are going completely unaddressed by the move. That’s not addressing the problem. That’s going after an easy scapegoat.