Gay cover-up must end

[sweetethiopia]

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on two news stories released today by the Associated Press:

One of the AP stories on priestly sexual abuse admits that “The overwhelming majority of the victims were adolescents. That means very few guilty priests were pedophiles, a term mental health professionals reserve for those who target pre-pubescent children.” Fine. But then it says something which is positively remarkable: “Even though about 80 percent of victims were boys, the John Jay researchers and other experts on sex offenders say it does not mean the perpetrators were gay.” So what would they be? Heterosexual?

The AP article relied on the extraordinary remark by Margaret Smith, a professor who worked on the John Jay study. She said that while Donohue “quoted the study’s data correctly,” I nonetheless “drew an unwarranted conclusion.” What? That most of the molesters have been gay? Here is what she said: “The majority of the abusive acts were homosexual in nature. That participation in homosexual acts is not the same as sexual identity as a gay man.” So if two men sodomize each other, no one really knows if this qualifies as gay sex. Now I must admit that when I was studying for my doctorate in sociology at NYU, they never taught me such logic.

Both AP stories say the reason why there were so many male victims is because the priests did not have access to girls as altar servers. Nonsense. There have been girl altar servers in some U.S. dioceses since 1983, and almost everywhere since 1994. The statistics actually show that the more priests have access to girls, the less likely it is for girls to be abused.

Here’s the tally. As reported in 2004, between 1950 and 2002, 81 percent of the victims were male; in 2005, it stayed the same; in 2006, it dropped to 80 percent; in 2007, it climbed to 82 percent; in 2008, it jumped to 84 percent; and in 2009, it stayed at 84 percent.

In other words, even though priests have less access to males, homosexual priests are molesting them at a higher rate. It’s time to end the gay cover-up once and for all.

catholicleague.org/release.php?id=1821

 

[irishpatrick]

The fact is straight men are NOT turned-on by other males. Period. They just are not.

 

[rossum]

“Even though about 80 percent of victims were boys, the John Jay researchers and other experts on sex offenders say it does not mean the perpetrators were gay.” So what would they be? Heterosexual?

The term is hebephile or ephebophile. Sexual attraction to underage but post-pubescent adolescents.

rossum

 

[irishpatrick]

The term is hebephile or ephebophile. Sexual attraction to underage but post-pubescent adolescents.

rossum

In that process one cannot change their innate attractions, Straight men do not wake-up one day and say “ooh, that man over their sure looks great, or ooh that teenage high school guy looks great.” For the vast majority of males, sexual atraction is set in near concrete and is very close to unmovable. Those are facts that must be considered in all this.

 

[JimG]

This has puzzled me from the outset. The abuse was primarily homosexual predation upon young boys, and yet this is hardly ever mentioned. We’ve never seen headlines about a pederasty crisis or a homosexual molestation crisis. Even the Virtus training plays down the actual numbers or never mentions them, ignoring the elephant in the room.

 

[tr1strev]

This has puzzled me from the outset. The abuse was primarily homosexual predation upon young boys, and yet this is hardly ever mentioned. We’ve never seen headlines about a pederasty crisis or a homosexual molestation crisis. Even the Virtus training plays down the actual numbers or never mentions them, ignoring the elephant in the room.

This puzzles you? What do you think is the primary political leanings of the vast majority of news agencies doing the reporting? Their agenda is crystal clear.

 

[Mark77]

**Media bias exposed again!
**
**Being a Catholic is evil in their eyes, being gay is to be applauded.
**
**If these self proclaimed “reporters” (most are actually just mouth pieces for the propaganda spewed by the “progressives”) actually used the factual evidence that 80% of those abused were adolescent males, they would have to be honest & conclude that the problem is primarily with gay priests.

If they concluded publicly that the problem is caused primarily by gay priests sexually abusing adolescents & the Church’s favorable treatment of those gay priests, then they are not following in line with the acceptable group think that the Catholic Church is “homophobic” & hates gays…**

Sancta Maria, Mater Dei, Ora Pro Nobis Peccatoribus!

mark

 

[chris4638]

The Church needs PR help. Rather than the ongoing media attacks against the Church I’d much rather begin to read more about how,

A. Homosexual predators have been and continue to be removed from active ministries and positions of authority, including some current prelates (is this not happening because there continue to be homosexuals in leadership positions of the Church?). The excuse of not wanting a “witch hunt” could certainly be valid, but after a few years it begins to sound like either a rationalization or some clergy protecting their own.

B. Seminaries have been and continue to be reformed including proper psychological profiling of candidates for the priesthood.

C. Clergy who advocate for “homosexual rights” such as marriage and adoption, and supporting groups like DIGNITY, Call to Action, New Ways Ministry will not be tolerated. These groups openly oppose Catholic teaching and if Sr. Jeannine Gramick, Fr. Robert Nugent and their ilk want to continue in these endeavors let them do so outside the confines of the Catholic Church. Laicization and denial of Holy Communion should be evaluated more closely for dissident individuals.

D. Pastoral ministry to homosexual persons and their families is offered through programs like COURAGE and Encourage. Many struggle with this disorder and we need to offer both concrete and spiritual support.

These actions have and continue to happen - let’s hear more about it.

I realize the Church is loathe the publicize these types of actions but the time has come to fight fire with fire. Naturally Church dissidents and the MSM will howl, but the Church has cannot be accused of not tolerating dissent. Tolerating practicing homosexuals for decades has created the crisis. She needs to be purged of filth, a word so aptly used by Pope Benedict. Even though the liberals don’t want to hear it, let’s at least let the faithful know more what steps are being taken to help rectify past mistakes.

Bottom line: 1 - Remove active homosexuals and, 2 - don’t let any more into the priesthood.

If you don’t want to believe in and adhere to teachings of the Catholic Church you are free to do so. We will continue to pray for your souls and conversion.

 

[paxomatic]

**Media bias exposed again!
**
**Being a Catholic is evil in their eyes, being gay is to be applauded.
**
**If these self proclaimed “reporters” (most are actually just mouth pieces for the propaganda spewed by the “progressives”) actually used the factual evidence that 80% of those abused were adolescent males, they would have to be honest & conclude that the problem is primarily with gay priests.

If they concluded publicly that the problem is caused primarily by gay priests sexually abusing adolescents & the Church’s favorable treatment of those gay priests, then they are not following in line with the acceptable group think that the Catholic Church is “homophobic” & hates gays…**

Sancta Maria, Mater Dei, Ora Pro Nobis Peccatoribus!

mark

Excellent point. Most of the people I interact with on a daily basis live off headlines and do not look any further. Those that do look further still only see what they want. The media has certainly made people appear more stupid.

 

[manualman]

I think everybody in the Church has been VERY reluctant to shine a light on the fact that 80%+ of the abuse cases were homosexual in nature for GOOD reasons. It is a steep and well-greased slope from pointing out this fact to concluding that gays are naturally inclined to abuse teenage kids. The evidence in the John Jay report does not and cannot support this notion (since abuser priests are NOT a representative sample of the homosexual population!). Sensationalist reporting being what it is plus human nature loving to find a scapegoat together WOULD make an inevitable result: gay bashing.

For all the anti-catholic bias out there, let’s admit that it’s vanishing rare for a priest of outspoken catholic layman to be beaten, chained to a pickup truck and dragged to death. Unheard of, actually (in modern America, anyways). Not so unheard of for gay guys. The church must be VERY careful not to give ammunition to the old and (thankfully) now unpopular sin of physical violence against gays. Satan would love nothing better than to revive both gay bashing and lay the blame for it at the door of the Catholic Church!

What SHOULD the Church do in response to the John Jay data? Exactly what they’ve done. Quietly change the seminary admittance criteria to ensure that homosexuals aren’t ordained to the priesthood and do a Vatican visitation of all seminaries to look for potential problems there that may have enabled this to go on far too long. Low key, out of the spotlight. No gay bashing, just action. On record, and in public reaffirm that we are ALL sinners and that violence or unjust discrimination against homosexuals (note that is different than certain JUST forms of discrimination) is itself the sin of casting the first stone…

I do think the partsof VIRTUS where they explicitly said that the youngest are the most at risk was a bit stupid. They SHOULD be emphasizing the opposite: don’t presume that your teenage boy is too old to be at risk!

 

[WestonGrant]

I think everybody in the Church has been VERY reluctant to shine a light on the fact that 80%+ of the abuse cases were homosexual in nature for GOOD reasons. It is a steep and well-greased slope from pointing out this fact to concluding that gays are naturally inclined to abuse teenage kids.

wnd.com/index.php?pageId=13722

physiciansforlife.org/content/view/657/2/

The doctors cite the Journal of Homosexuality in demonstrating an overlap between the homosexual activist movement and the promoters of pedophilia. Moreover, the paper references studies showing that while “the number of homosexuals in essentially all surveys is less than 3%,” “the percentage of homosexuals among pedophiles is 25%.” It concludes: “Therefore, the prevalence of pedophilia among homosexuals is about 10-25 times higher than one would expect if the proportion of pedophiles were evenly distributed within the (hetero- and homosexual) populations.”

lifesitenews.com/ldn/2005/feb/05021709.html

 

[Catherine_S]

This has puzzled me from the outset. The abuse was primarily homosexual predation upon young boys, and yet this is hardly ever mentioned. We’ve never seen headlines about a pederasty crisis or** a homosexual molestation crisis.** Even the Virtus training plays down the actual numbers or never mentions them,** ignoring the elephant in the room**.

Bingo!
One is not suppose to make these connections :nope:!
How would this kind of insight effect the homosexual agenda? For many years,* homosexual activists have been busy changing* the laws on** sexual orientation by putting forward a massive** public-relations campaign specifically designed to spread** misinformation** that would** change** the social acceptance of homosexuality!!

 

[JimG]

The homosexual predation of young boys by priests seems to have at least one ‘good’ side effect: it put an abrupt halt to what had in secular society been an increasing push to accept such things as the “man-boy” love advocated by organizations like NAMBLA.

See How Pedophilia Lost Its Cool, by Mary Eberstadt, in the December 2009 issue of First Things magazine.

 

[csuliman]

I will repeat this:

Being a homosexual is NOT a sin. How can something you are born with be a sin. The only argument that makes sense is to say that homosexual acts are sinful- i.e. acting on your homosexual nature (even though I disagree with this). So there is no reason to throw homosexuals out of the Church.

The idea that it is the homosexuals who are the basis of the rape and molestation of children is completely absurd. Homosexuals are no more likely to be sexual criminals than are heterosexuals.

 

[Catherine_S]

Pediatricians Warn Educators: ‘Pro-Gay’ Attitude toward Gender Confusion Damages Children
GAINESVILLE, Florida, April 7, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The American College of Pediatricians has cautioned educators about the management of students experiencing same-sex attraction or exhibiting symptoms of gender confusion, saying that** a pro**-homosexuality attitude could disrupt a natural uncertainty in youth for the worse.
“As pediatricians*, our primary** interest is in the health andwell-being of children and youth,” Dr. Den Trumbull, Vice President of the College explains. “We are increasingly concerned that in too many instances,** misinformation** or incorrect assumptions are guiding well-intentioned educators to adopt policies that are actually harmful to those youth dealing with sexual confusion.”*
These concerns are outlined in a letter and *fact sheet *sent by College president Thomas Benton, MD, to all 14,800 school district superintendents in the U.S.* *
Dr. Benton also alerts them to a new web resource, FactsAboutYouth.com, which was created by a coalition of health professionals* to provide factual information to educators, parents, and students about sexual development**.*

 

[Catherine_S]

I will repeat this:

Being a homosexual is NOT a sin. How can something you are born with be a sin. The only argument that makes sense is to say that homosexual acts are sinful- i.e. acting on your homosexual nature (even though I disagree with this). So there is no reason to throw homosexuals out of the Church.

*You are correct, homosexuality is *not a sin! The practice of it is a sin! To date there is no evidence that one is born with same sex attraction or homosexuality.

For example,* many people sincerely** believe that scientific research has produced conclusive evidence that homosexuality is a genetically inherited condition, determined before birth, and cannot be changed. In fact, no such evidence exists.** Several studies have been promoted in the media as providing the “proof**,” but when one reads these studies, one discovers the authors do not even claim to have presented such proof. There is no verifiable evidence that same-sex attraction is genetically determined**. If same-sex attraction were genetically determined, identical twins would always have the same sexual attraction pattern. Numerous studies of twins** have shown that this is not the case**. And there are numerous studies documenting change of sexual attraction pattern (see Homosexuality and Hope, available at** www.cathmed.org**). *
http://www.narth.com/docs/catholic.html

 

[manualman]

I will repeat this:

1. Being a homosexual is NOT a sin. How can something you are born with be a sin. 2. The only argument that makes sense is to say that homosexual acts are sinful- i.e. acting on your homosexual nature (even though I disagree with this).
2. So there is no reason to throw homosexuals out of the Church.
3. The idea that it is the homosexuals who are the basis of the rape and molestation of children is completely absurd. Homosexuals are no more likely to be sexual criminals than are heterosexuals.

There’s a lot to unpack in this statement, so I numbered it for clarity.

1. Temptation themselves are never sinful. Even Jesus was tempted (biblical). It wasn’t sin because he resisted the temptation. It’s a pretty big leap of faith to state that some people are ‘born’ homosexual. Honest scientists must admit that the evidence is still partial and confusing. It appears to be a combination of certain genetic predispositions AND environmental influences together. Kind of like alcoholism.
2. Partially agreed. It only becomes sinful if it is acted on. But the inclination itself is disordered. It may not be completely conquerable in this lifetime, but it’s not something to be celebrated, nor is it something to be castigated for. Again, like alcoholism, we CAN develop a societal attitude that respects the person who suffers from the inclination without encouraging him to indulge in it.
3. Agreed. Just like you don’t throw an alcoholic out of your family. Sometimes tough love is necessary when the alcoholic is actively engaged in self-destructive behavior. But when he’s on the wagon, you give only support, not more unproductive judgement. But the WORST thing you can do for a recovering alcoholic or chaste person with a SSA (same sex attraction) is to encourage them to act out on their inclinations, to “be who they are.”
4. This is a tough one. I think it’s pretty clear that homosexuality is not a homogenous population. The majority of those with an SSA are otherwise well adjusted normal people and I agree that they pose no more risk of being abusers than anybody else. But there is undeniably a large subculture within homosexuality that delights in sexual deviancy and degeneration. A much bigger subculture than the deviant population among heteros. It’s not a coincidence. I think there is a certain subset of homosexual psychology that is much more prone to abuse than “normal” homosexuals. The science of the thing is so politicized that it will be years before the truth comes out, but the 80%+ of priest abuse victims being teen boys is undeniably a neon warning sign. This is REALLY tricky. It’s NOT fair to say that a gay guy is more likely to be an abuser than a hetero guy. But you also need to look at the facts. Needs more time and honest study.

 

[markeverett49]

IF the problem is gay priests and bishops, then the Vatican has MORE to answer for than if it is simply a problem of a small number of predator priests (and a large number of their non-predator enablers) because there are tens of thousands of gay priests. The bishop who accepted me into the Church when I converted was gay (Symons, who soon after resigned in disgrace), the bishop who sent me to seminary (O’Connell) was gay (-and he too resigned in disgrace); my first and second vocation directors were gay and sexually active (with other priests too, which disturbed me greatly) but so far as I know, they never molested anyone. Most of the priests I was housed with on pastoral assignments were gay. About half the guys in my seminary were gay. If it is a mistake to ordain gay men to the priesthood, then the Vatican has a lot to answer for becasuse this has been going on for a long time, and as some of the abuse cases go back a long way, it can’t be blamed on “Vatican II liberalization,” either.

 

[manygift1spirit]

There’s a lot to unpack in this statement, so I numbered it for clarity.

1. Temptation themselves are never sinful. Even Jesus was tempted (biblical). It wasn’t sin because he resisted the temptation. It’s a pretty big leap of faith to state that some people are ‘born’ homosexual. Honest scientists must admit that the evidence is still partial and confusing. It appears to be a combination of certain genetic predispositions AND environmental influences together. Kind of like alcoholism.
2. Partially agreed. It only becomes sinful if it is acted on. But the inclination itself is disordered. It may not be completely conquerable in this lifetime, but it’s not something to be celebrated, nor is it something to be castigated for. Again, like alcoholism, we CAN develop a societal attitude that respects the person who suffers from the inclination without encouraging him to indulge in it.
3. Agreed. Just like you don’t throw an alcoholic out of your family. Sometimes tough love is necessary when the alcoholic is actively engaged in self-destructive behavior. But when he’s on the wagon, you give only support, not more unproductive judgement. But the WORST thing you can do for a recovering alcoholic or chaste person with a SSA (same sex attraction) is to encourage them to act out on their inclinations, to “be who they are.”
4. This is a tough one. I think it’s pretty clear that homosexuality is not a homogenous population. The majority of those with an SSA are otherwise well adjusted normal people and I agree that they pose no more risk of being abusers than anybody else. But there is undeniably a large subculture within homosexuality that delights in sexual deviancy and degeneration. A much bigger subculture than the deviant population among heteros. It’s not a coincidence. I think there is a certain subset of homosexual psychology that is much more prone to abuse than “normal” homosexuals. The science of the thing is so politicized that it will be years before the truth comes out, but the 80%+ of priest abuse victims being teen boys is undeniably a neon warning sign. This is REALLY tricky. It’s NOT fair to say that a gay guy is more likely to be an abuser than a hetero guy. But you also need to look at the facts. Needs more time and honest study.

I want to commend this post for being very well informed and eminently reasonable, and yet without sweeping real uncertainties and difficulties under the rug.

 

[Prof_K]

There’s a lot to unpack in this statement, so I numbered it for clarity.

1. Temptation themselves are never sinful. Even Jesus was tempted (biblical). It wasn’t sin because he resisted the temptation. It’s a pretty big leap of faith to state that some people are ‘born’ homosexual. Honest scientists must admit that the evidence is still partial and confusing. It appears to be a combination of certain genetic predispositions AND environmental influences together. Kind of like alcoholism.
2. Partially agreed. It only becomes sinful if it is acted on. But the inclination itself is disordered. It may not be completely conquerable in this lifetime, but it’s not something to be celebrated, nor is it something to be castigated for. Again, like alcoholism, we CAN develop a societal attitude that respects the person who suffers from the inclination without encouraging him to indulge in it.
3. Agreed. Just like you don’t throw an alcoholic out of your family. Sometimes tough love is necessary when the alcoholic is actively engaged in self-destructive behavior. But when he’s on the wagon, you give only support, not more unproductive judgement. But the WORST thing you can do for a recovering alcoholic or chaste person with a SSA (same sex attraction) is to encourage them to act out on their inclinations, to “be who they are.”
4. This is a tough one. I think it’s pretty clear that homosexuality is not a homogenous population. The majority of those with an SSA are otherwise well adjusted normal people and I agree that they pose no more risk of being abusers than anybody else. But there is undeniably a large subculture within homosexuality that delights in sexual deviancy and degeneration. A much bigger subculture than the deviant population among heteros. It’s not a coincidence. I think there is a certain subset of homosexual psychology that is much more prone to abuse than “normal” homosexuals. The science of the thing is so politicized that it will be years before the truth comes out, but the 80%+ of priest abuse victims being teen boys is undeniably a neon warning sign. This is REALLY tricky. It’s NOT fair to say that a gay guy is more likely to be an abuser than a hetero guy. But you also need to look at the facts. Needs more time and honest study.

These are a well-ordered and well-reasoned responses to the initial politicallly correct, standard response. What makes the data difficult to deal with is that there are multiple level of analysis problems, thus the statistics can be use in multiple ways. For example, some will point out that overall girls are twice as likely to be victims of pedophelia and thus suggest that heterosexual orientation must be more common among child abusers. However, because less than 5% of the adult male population is homosexual, likely more like 1% (the 2000 US census placed it at 2-3%), if male sexual abuse victims actually account for 33% of the cases, then clearly those with homosexual orientations are still more likely to commit such abuse. Thus to draw any conclusions of RC Priest one would have to know more about the orientation of priests prior to entering orders. While this is unknowable both common sense and most people’s personal experience suggest that not more than 50% of priests have a homosexual orientation. Thus, if more than half the victims are male, then it is a disproporionately, but an exclusively, gay problem.