Juan Barros case: Chile sex abuse letter contradicts Pope over 'cover-up'

[Maximilian75]

thanks, moral relativism.

 

[BlackFriar]

What comparable damage do homosexual relationships cause…esp committed ones?

 

[JanSobieskiIII]

There is no comparable damage. I wasn’t saying there was, just that the tactics to establish legitimacy are the same.

 

[BlackFriar]

You really believe pedarists will be successful because the issues are the same?

 

[JanSobieskiIII]

I don’t know if they will or not, but they’re using a strategy which has worked once is all I was saying. I would like to think that the insanity that is moral relativism and the cultural degradation in the United States can have the pendulum start swinging the other direction before it gets to that point.

 

[BlackFriar]

Thats quite a leap youve made there from a same sex relationship to raising kids, to unhealthy raising kids to adult opponents of such relationships being unfairly abused…

You do realise this sounds non-sequitorial and circular dont you?

Ultimately you are asserting any conduct significant numbers of people dont like can be condemned on the basis of consequences…especially if these people I challenge/abuse then challenge/abuse me back. Because their abuse just proves they are weird disordered people…even if I have nothing else to hold against them.

I think you just defined unjustified prejudice.

And as for kids being raised by a single gender parent…please look around you and see all the single moms and dads and even grandmothers doing the same. We tolerate such “disorders” do we not in an imperfect world.
I think your arguments are taking paths to nowhere.

 

[BlackFriar]

It is not insanity just because I do not have the skills to distinguish things that are not at all the same…as you fairly obviously do think. It is fairly superficial to understand the two sexual issues that concern you as remotely the same in that regard so far as secular society as a whole is concerned.

 

[NuclearReceptor]

And as for kids being raised by a single gender parent…please look around you and see all the single moms and dads and even grandmothers doing the same. We tolerate such “disorders” do we not in an imperfect world.

That is not an ideal situation and is a result of unfortunate circumstances, not something to aspire to or have a goal towards. Furthermore, those situations are not “disorders”.

There is no need to bring in single-parent households to justify same-sex relationships and adoption of children.

 

[BlackFriar]

Furthermore, those situations are not “disorders”.

You are mistaken.
If we are going to start playing “disorder” game re SS relationships we need to play it to the hilt.
Clearly single parent families are a form of disorder according to Church Moral theology. But so what, in a fallen world disorder is everywhere.

There is no need to bring in single-parent households to justify same-sex relationships and adoption of children.

You have completely missed the point.
I asked the poster to advise what the grave disorders of SS relationships are compared to pedarists.

Adoption of children is incidental to such relationships, its a non sequitor, a different issue. (And exactly why such would be significantly worse than heterosexual statistics re abuse of adopted or step children is unclear - apart from wishful thinking).
In fact his main objection is that such relationships are bad because they deny his belief and he feels abused!

In other words he cannot demonstrate negatives comparable to the effects of pedarasty on children.

 

[NuclearReceptor]

Even if we were to accept that loose definition of “disorder” as being anything less than perfectly ideal, there is no justification for same-sex adoption. That’s like saying there are people who have broken their arms through accidents (which would be a “disorder” according to your definition), so it’s OK to purposefully place a healthy arm in a cast or even get a hammer and break it on purpose.

People live with the “disorder” of broken limbs, so what’s the big deal?

 

[BlackFriar]

CJ your arguments are incoherent and all over the place.
You are unable to show that homosexual relationships are in any way comparable to pederasty re predictable negative outcomes - nor worse than the disorders associated with heterosexual relationships…which are just as predictably “disordrered” these ways which you do not stigamtise in the same way.

I find it curious that you persist in comparing SS relationships with married families when in fact many couples are not interested in being parents but just being left alone to get on with their lives as a couple.

So when you can come back with evidence of their more than evil ways rather than your cherry picked “children s1ay…” stories perhaps we can have a more objective and rational conversation.

 

[BlackFriar]

The issue is what are the significant evil consequences of SS couples over pedarists.
All I am hearing is that some are as disordered as heterosexual relationships - and even then only when it comes to adopting children.

Hardly comparable to the consequences of pedarist “relationships”.

When you can point to something substantial and widespread applicable to all SS relationships do come back and we can discuss further.

 

[TheAmazingGrace]

Not helpful, and unrelated to the topic at hand.

 

[TheAmazingGrace]

What does any of that have to do with the Pope dismissing this person’s letter?

 

[NuclearReceptor]

Homosexual relationships are intrinsically against God’s creation and order. Try placing children in that environment where father/mother roles are purposefully obfuscated.

You’re comparing murder to acid attack. Both are bad. One is worse, sure.

But just because murder is worse doesn’t mean acid attacks shouldn’t be condemned.

If you’re arguing from a secular standpoint that “there’s no harm”, then there’s really nothing more to discuss (in this Catholic forum).

 

[JanSobieskiIII]

In other words he cannot demonstrate negatives comparable to the effects of pedarasty on children.

That wasn’t the point I was making. I was simply stating that gays used the same tactics currently being employed in an attempt to normalize pedophilia, and that it was successful for gays and may be successful for pedophiles if current trends continue. Stop putting words in my mouth.

 

[BlackFriar]

Your words were:

The thing that truly worries me is that there are some groups pushing for the recognition of pedophilia as a sexual orientation rather than a severe disorder.

This demonstrates an inability to prudentially judge matters in themselves outside of the phrase “grave disorder”. Divorce is also a grave disorder that is now normalised, as is remarriage.
Do you crusade against those persons also…yet the Church tolerates such things and even says it is the best choice in some situations.

Of course you are going to get pushback if you go around crusading against such things. And then you fear that pedarasty will go the same way also because it is also gravely disordered and we clearly live in an age of moral relativism.

Please, you do not seem to possess the tools needed to discern the considerables differences between these different disorders. If you are called a bigot, as you say, it is hardly surprising. Condemning something totally simply because its a “grave disorder” goes nowhere intelligent or reasonable.

And no, pedarasty will never be normalised as its consequences are clearly too great.
As for committed SS relationships…you have been unable to demonstrate any significant negatives that toleration brings…apart from your own displeasure.

That some cannot see the difference is perhaps itself the disorder of homophobia

 

[JanSobieskiIII]

As for committed SS relationships…you have been unable to demonstrate any significant negatives that toleration brings

I haven’t made this claim to begin with. Try taking a course in reading comprehension if you’re going to participate.

 

[BlackFriar]

Then what is the basis for your fears pedarasty will be normalised?

If you say you have $10 in your hands with 4 in one hand…I naturally conclude you have 6 in the other.
You are right, you didnt actually say that.

 

[JanSobieskiIII]

To clarify, I said I was concerned because there are groups pushing for it, not afraid. The difference is subtle but in this situation I think it’s important. I don’t think it will actually happen, but, they are using a tactic that took something once completely illicit and taboo and have now made it completely mainstream over the course of about 40 years. If, and that is a huge if, the public buys into the narrative that it isn’t a disorder (as they’ve done with SS couples, though the damages between the two are incomparable) then they may be successful. I have found articles from places like the New York Times, Huffington Post, and a few others that although not explicitly advocating for acceptance of pedophiles were blatantly trying to soften people’s opinion on them being a risk, and inherently not right.

I do hope that the public sees through this, and lashes back against any attempt normalize such an abhorrent mind set. The tactic has worked once though, so it just remains to be seen if it’s results will be duplicated or just be a one off occurrence.