Fr. Pavone on the use of graphic images of abortion

[seekerz]

And the preschool child in question would see these images without their parents around because they are where? Solo at the Mall? Picking up a burger at McDonald’s?

Another stupid question.

How about riding the school bus?

By the way, stupid is such a relative term

 

[boppaid]

THIS WILL NOT TURN INTO A DISCUSSION OF FATHER PAVONE’S INTEGRITY. IF IT DOES I WILL DO MY BEST TO MAKE SURE THIS THREAD IS SHUT DOWN.

Yikes. Simma down. Seriously, calm down and stop shouting so you can reread what I said. I’m sure you’ll see I wasn’t questioning Fr. Provone’s integrity. I said:

"I’m sorry, but aren’t priests sinners as well? Of course I’mnot saying he is sinning in this instance, but to say the reason he is not accurately portraying the evidence is because he is a priest, well that seems silly. I’ve seen priests do things wrong all the time.

That said, I do believe he is accurately portraying the evidence which he team collected. But isn’t that antedoctal evidence?"

I was simply stating, (And read this carefully) that priests are sinners,a nd stating that just because someone is a priest he must be right is not accurate. All priests sin. I was speaking about priests in general, not specifically Fr. Provone. THEN, I did address Fr. Provone specifically, when I said “That said, I do believe he is accurately portraying the evidence which he team collected. But isn’t that antedoctal evidence” How in the WORLD did you get that I was questioning his integrity when I said I do believe him??

 

[Philothea53]

Allow me to put it very simply to you: stop making false accusations against me, that’s not what this forum is for.

Someone not mentioning the occurrence of something cannot be offered as proof the the thing never happened and stating this fact does not in any way cast aspersions on the honesty of said someone. Do you tell everyone in your life everything that has ever happened to you? I think not. Does that make you dishonest? I think not.

seekerz - what then was your purpose in saying what you did? It was very clear to even the most casual observer that you were questioning Fr. Pavone’s integrity as if he would omit information purposely to deceive. Maybe you didn’t really mean it that way…
I guess we have to take your word for it.

 

[boppaid]

Nope, meant it was stupid question. Simple. Stupid.

Okay.

 

[Philothea53]

How about riding the school bus?

By the way, stupid is such a relative term

And some relate more than others.

 

[seekerz]

THIS WILL NOT TURN INTO A DISCUSSION OF FATHER PAVONE’S INTEGRITY. IF IT DOES I WILL DO MY BEST TO MAKE SURE THIS THREAD IS SHUT DOWN.

Can we take a deep breath and define anecdotal? I’m sure it has nothing to do with honesty or lack thereof.

 

[boppaid]

And the preschool child in question would see these images without their parents around because they are where? Solo at the Mall? Picking up a burger at McDonald’s?

Another stupid question.

Why is this a stupid question? Do you never let your children out of your sight? Preschoolers can be with their class on a field trip, with grandparents, with friends, with aunts and uncles, with their teachers…there are all sort of places a preschooler could be. I am baffled at how this, too, is a stupid question. You are quick to dismiss questions as stupid when you don’t feel like answering them.

 

[Philothea53]

Yikes. Simma down. Seriously, calm down and stop shouting so you can reread what I said. I’m sure you’ll see I wasn’t questioning Fr. Provone’s integrity. I said:

"I’m sorry, but aren’t priests sinners as well? Of course I’mnot saying he is sinning in this instance, but to say the reason he is not accurately portraying the evidence is because he is a priest, well that seems silly. I’ve seen priests do things wrong all the time.

That said, I do believe he is accurately portraying the evidence which he team collected. But isn’t that antedoctal evidence?"

I was simply stating, (And read this carefully) that priests are sinners,a nd stating that just because someone is a priest he must be right is not accurate. All priests sin. I was speaking about priests in general, not specifically Fr. Provone. THEN, I did address Fr. Provone specifically, when I said “That said, I do believe he is accurately portraying the evidence which he team collected. But isn’t that antedoctal evidence” How in the WORLD did you get that I was questioning his integrity when I said I do believe him??

You are talking out both sides of your mouth at one time. If you were not questioning Fr. Pavone’s integrity there was absolutely no reason for you to post it and put the thought into anyone’s mind. Then you have the gall to repeat it and further define it. Shame on you.

I will shout even louder if this particular part of this thread doesn’t STOP in a real hurry.

 

[Philothea53]

Why is this a stupid question? Do you never let your children out of your sight? Preschoolers can be with their class on a field trip, with grandparents, with friends, with aunts and uncles, with their teachers…there are all sort of places a preschooler could be. I am baffled at how this, too, is a stupid question. You are quick to dismiss questions as stupid when you don’t feel like answering them.

No, I dismiss questions I see as stupid.

 

[boppaid]

Karen has presented herself as a fairly well-educated person who is able to hold her own - even if I vehemently disagree with her. I think it is rather insulting for you to think for a minute that Karen doesn’t know that Catholic Priests are celibate. Might she have been going for sarcasm? Hmmmmm.

(Are you trying to nit-pick? Not very good at it, are you?)

Not good at nit-picking now, am I? I’m so disappointed! I’ve always wanted to be agood nit-picker! :cry (Okay, that was a sarcastic joke, lest you think I was serious. )

I was responding to this:

Guess what? You just got yourself some homework. Email the good father and ask him yourself. Let us know how he replies to you. We will be praying that his reply has some effect on your heart. May your eyes too be blessed

And, if Ani truly believed that Karen didn’t know (as the above quote certainly insinuates) that priests could marry, then the charitable thing to do would have been to explain it to her. So, either that statement was meant to be uncharitable or nit-picky. You choose. I was responding to the above quote that Karen didn’t know. Now, when you say, "I think it is rather insulting for you to think for a minute that Karen doesn’t know that Catholic Priests are celibate. " are you talking to me or to the poster I originally responded to?

 

[boppaid]

You are talking out both sides of your mouth at one time. If you were not questioning Fr. Pavone’s integrity there was absolutely no reason for you to post it and put the thought into anyone’s mind. Then you have the gall to repeat it and further define it. Shame on you.

I will shout even louder if this particular part of this thread doesn’t STOP in a real hurry.

You really do need to calm down for your own sake. Your yelling and shouting doesn’t bother me, but it’s not healthy to be so upset about this. I was NOT questioning Fr. Provone’s integrity…I was questioning the statement that JUST BECAUSE HE IS A PRIEST he must not be sinning. I was simply pointing out a reminder that ALL priests sin.

 

[seekerz]

seekerz - what then was your purpose in saying what you did? It was very clear to even the most casual observer that you were questioning Fr. Pavone’s integrity as if he would omit information purposely to deceive. Maybe you didn’t really mean it that way…
I guess we have to take your word for it.

I guess you do have to take my word for it.

My point lies several posts above somewhere in the #730’s , if you’re inclined to go that far back.

 

[boppaid]

No, I dismiss questions I see as stupid.

I just gave you many examples of how a preschool might not be with their parents ina vehicle. Now that you realize it is not, indeed, a stupid question, could you answer it?

 

[Ani_Ibi]

seekerz:

Allow me to put it very simply to you: stop making false accusations against me, that’s not what this forum is for.

Strawman.

 

[Philothea53]

Not good at nit-picking now, am I? I’m so disappointed! I’ve always wanted to be agood nit-picker! :cry (Okay, that was a sarcastic joke, lest you think I was serious. )

I was responding to this:



And, if Ani truly believed that Karen didn’t know (as the above quote certainly insinuates) that priests could marry, then the charitable thing to do would have been to explain it to her. So, either that statement was meant to be uncharitable or nit-picky. You choose. I was responding to the above quote that Karen didn’t know. Now, when you say, "I think it is rather insulting for you to think for a minute that Karen doesn’t know that Catholic Priests are celibate. " are you talking to me or to the poster I originally responded to?

I was responding to you. That is why I quoted what you said. Ani told Karen to contact Fr. Pavone directly. I believe she did it so that Fr. Pavone could educate her on how he feels about being a Father and what that entails in light of his Priesthood. I’m pretty certain there wasn’t any desire to be uncharitable but instead to give Karen the opportunity to get the answer straight from the person in question as he is best able to answer questions about himself.

 

[KarenNC]

Karen has presented herself as a fairly well-educated person who is able to hold her own - even if I vehemently disagree with her. I think it is rather insulting for you to think for a minute that Karen doesn’t know that Catholic Priests are celibate. Might she have been going for sarcasm? Hmmmmm.

Actually, thanks for the defense, but yes, I do know that Catholic priests are not allowed to marry. The question was not sarcastic, but rather to illustrate a point.

The point is that it is a bit lopsided to expect everyone to take one’s word and only one’s word about the necessity of using these images in indiscriminate ways which is based on the characteristic of personal experience with using the signs, but then outright reject another’s word about the usage being inappropriate for young children which is based on the characteristic of personal experience with young children.

 

[Philothea53]

I just gave you many examples of how a preschool might not be with their parents ina vehicle. Now that you realize it is not, indeed, a stupid question, could you answer it?

It seems to me that your question assumes that when a preschool child is left in the care of other adults that those adults would be incapable of calming and reassuring a child who was bothered about something they saw. I don’t see it. Your question makes no sense to me because I never once would have dreamed of leaving my children in the care of anyone who could not care for them properly and that would include calming and reassuring when needed.

 

[Ani_Ibi]

…Ani told Karen to contact Fr. Pavone directly. I believe she did it so that Fr. Pavone could educate her on how he feels about being a Father and what that entails in light of his Priesthood. I’m pretty certain there wasn’t any desire to be uncharitable but instead to give Karen the opportunity to get the answer straight from the person in question as he is best able to answer questions about himself.

Since providing information on children, ages, and so on is personal information, I am not in a position to speak for Fr Pavone. Therefore, if Karen wants her question answered, she should ask Fr Pavone directly. Ask him how many children he has.

Now I must add that Fr Pavone is a very very busy man. So if he doesn’t answer such a question … ahem… I hope no one will be surprised.

 

[seekerz]

You are talking out both sides of your mouth at one time. If you were not questioning Fr. Pavone’s integrity there was absolutely no reason for you to post it and put the thought into anyone’s mind. Then you have the gall to repeat it and further define it. Shame on you.

I will shout even louder if this particular part of this thread doesn’t STOP in a real hurry.

Calm down and exhale deeply. Anecdotal is a term used in statistical parlance to describe evidence that is obtained informally (i.e. not using rigorous scientific techniques).

While it is not viewed as scientific evidence in the strict sense, there is nothing in any definition I’ve seen that implies that anecdotal equates to untrue. This type of evidence is usually not regarded by scientists as the kind to base sound decisions on. This still does not mean that anecdotal = untrue.

I thought we were all on the same plane here regarding scientific evidence since I do believe there have been repeated calls for “peer-reviewed studies” proving that viewing abortion pics is harmful to small children.

Shame on who was that again?

 

[Philothea53]

Actually, thanks for the defense, but yes, I do know that Catholic priests are not allowed to marry. The question was not sarcastic, but rather to illustrate a point.

The point is that it is a bit lopsided to expect everyone to take one’s word and only one’s word about the necessity of using these images in indiscriminate ways which is based on the characteristic of personal experience with using the signs, but then outright reject another’s word about the usage being inappropriate for young children which is based on the characteristic of personal experience with young children.

In the case of Father Pavone we have so much more than his word alone (which BTW is worth the world). He has been in this ministry for a long time and as a Priest would not continue, nor be allowed to continue, if he wasn’t showing any success. Just because he doesn’t post a diary and a blow-by-blow account of his every activity doesn’t negate the fact that what he has posted is true and accurate. He has posted what he feels is necessary to educate, not to defend himself, but the lives of the innocents.