SNAP Psychiatrist Sent to Prison

  • Thread starter Thread starter 1holycatholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
1

1holycatholic

Guest
SNAP Psychiatrist Sent to Prison
Dr. Steve Taylor, a Louisiana psychiatrist who has worked with the Survivors Network for those Abused by Priests (SNAP), has been sentenced to two years in prison for possession of child pornography.

The news drew the following response from Catholic League president Bill Donohue:

"How many more morally debased psychiatrists are working with SNAP? Did SNAP leaders know about the leisure-time activities of Dr. Taylor? When did they know and what did they do about it? It’s time we learned the truth. What we know already is nauseating.
…
 
Let’s see if SNAP is as “transparent” and “open” as they claim everyone else should be…
 
How many more morally debased psychiatrists are working with SNAP?

Very true. And to follow this logic, since some Catholic Priests, including a Fr. Maciel, are disgusting pedophiles, one must ask how many more morally debased Priests (or Bishops?) are working right now in the Church?

Well, its a logical question, no?
 
sojo said:
How many more morally debased psychiatrists are working with SNAP?

Very true. And to follow this logic, since some Catholic Priests, including a Fr. Maciel, are disgusting pedophiles, one must ask how many more morally debased Priests (or Bishops?) are working right now in the Church?

Well, its a logical question, no?
Click to expand...
Well everybody, including the Church, has already asked this question over and over. Did you read of all the effort and measures that the Church has been working on?
 
Yes, thank you, I’ve followed it all quite closely. And after all the publicity, when our own Bishop decided to not act quickly on a well documented and self-confessed Priest abuser from Mexico saying, “well, I needed to contact the church attorney first, and I figured there was no 24/7 hotline for child abuse” (hello??? what world do you live in?), I did call him on it. I was infuriated that with all the publicity about the “new” church rules on how to handle abuse, this Bishop just made an “oopsie”.

Turns out the local priest took the time so generously given my the Bishop to escape to Mexico and he has yet to be found. The parish is furious, the family is beyond fury and the media had another heyday with the Catholic church.

So all the publicity, all the new guidelines, all the new norms - and bishops still blow it and abusers still get away with it.

To be fair, I got a nice letter in return (and not a form letter) expressing sorrow for how it turned out, and then we all got a pastoral letter of apology. And he promised to follow the norms in the future. And now he knows that both the Police Department and Child Protective Services have 24 hour hotlines (snort… like this guy didn’t know that?)

But my main point was the LOGIC is the same. If all SNAP psychiatrists are to be distrusted because of one, than it follows that all priests are to be distrusted because of one.

Heaven forbid there should be an organization to help people abused by priests. Yeah, it brings bad stuff to light, but that is exactly where bad stuff needs to be brought to be healed.

Nasty, hate-filled rants that if one priest at SNAP was a pedophile (and granted, we don’t know that yet - it is an accusation and not a proven fact), that there MUST be more… well it is as ignorant as saying that because one priest is an pedophile, there must be plenty more - indeed, it seems to be a trend.

Honestly - not every priest is a pedophile. And not every member of SNAP is a pedophile. Take it down a notch. Just like the famous Father we are all interested in right now - the mods want us to wait for real facts before we go off half-cocked. It’s the Christian thing to do.
 
sojo said:
Yes, thank you, I’ve followed it all quite closely. And after all the publicity, when our own Bishop decided to not act quickly on a well documented and self-confessed Priest abuser from Mexico saying, “well, I needed to contact the church attorney first, and I figured there was no 24/7 hotline for child abuse” (hello??? what world do you live in?), I did call him on it. I was infuriated that with all the publicity about the “new” church rules on how to handle abuse, this Bishop just made an “oopsie”.

Turns out the local priest took the time so generously given my the Bishop to escape to Mexico and he has yet to be found. The parish is furious, the family is beyond fury and the media had another heyday with the Catholic church.

So all the publicity, all the new guidelines, all the new norms - and bishops still blow it and abusers still get away with it.

To be fair, I got a nice letter in return (and not a form letter) expressing sorrow for how it turned out, and then we all got a pastoral letter of apology. And he promised to follow the norms in the future. And now he knows that both the Police Department and Child Protective Services have 24 hour hotlines (snort… like this guy didn’t know that?)

But my main point was the LOGIC is the same. If all SNAP psychiatrists are to be distrusted because of one, than it follows that all priests are to be distrusted because of one.

Heaven forbid there should be an organization to help people abused by priests. Yeah, it brings bad stuff to light, but that is exactly where bad stuff needs to be brought to be healed.

Nasty, hate-filled rants that if one priest at SNAP was a pedophile (and granted, we don’t know that yet - it is an accusation and not a proven fact), that there MUST be more… well it is as ignorant as saying that because one priest is an pedophile, there must be plenty more - indeed, it seems to be a trend.

Honestly - not every priest is a pedophile. And not every member of SNAP is a pedophile. Take it down a notch. Just like the famous Father we are all interested in right now - the mods want us to wait for real facts before we go off half-cocked. It’s the Christian thing to do.
Click to expand...
I did not see anywhere that someone implied that every member of SNAP is a pedophile. However, I saw more then once statements implying that all the priests are pedophiles. My thinking is that pedophiles hide in the most diverse environments and that SNAP must have the intellectual honesty of doing some inner search.

It is good that the Church is at an already lower rate than the average, it is also good that the rate will keep going down with the appropriate measures. However, we also have to acknowledge that this things will probably keep happening even with all the measures in place. We are dealing with human beings bent on doing wrong while at the same time other human beings are bent on being charitable, it is not surprise that the first group will try to take advantage of the second.

I understand that you are hurt by what you witnessed and I would be too. Keep being vigilant as all the Catholics should be. That is what I do in my parish, I stay involved.
 
sojo said:
But my main point was the LOGIC is the same. If all SNAP psychiatrists are to be distrusted because of one, than it follows that all priests are to be distrusted because of one.

Heaven forbid there should be an organization to help people abused by priests. Yeah, it brings bad stuff to light, but that is exactly where bad stuff needs to be brought to be healed.

Nasty, hate-filled rants that if one priest at SNAP was a pedophile (and granted, we don’t know that yet - it is an accusation and not a proven fact), that there MUST be more… well it is as ignorant as saying that because one priest is an pedophile, there must be plenty more - indeed, it seems to be a trend.

Honestly - not every priest is a pedophile. And not every member of SNAP is a pedophile. Take it down a notch. Just like the famous Father we are all interested in right now - the mods want us to wait for real facts before we go off half-cocked. It’s the Christian thing to do.
Click to expand...
I think the point passed you by. SNAP’s rhetoric implies that since a cleric is found to be an abuser then every cleric is an abuser or at least an an accomplice. SNAP doesn’t exist to help the abused as much as it exists to exploit the sexual abuse scandal in a secular attempt to force doctrinal change on the Church. They’ve got the sympathies of other dissident groups like Voice of the Faithful that attack the clergy in order to push their agenda: Lenten healing for Boston.
 
1holycatholic said:
I think the point passed you by. SNAP’s rhetoric implies that since a cleric is found to be an abuser then every cleric is an abuser or at least an an accomplice. SNAP doesn’t exist to help the abused as much as it exists to exploit the sexual abuse scandal in a secular attempt to force doctrinal change on the Church. They’ve got the sympathies of other dissident groups like Voice of the Faithful that attack the clergy in order to push their agenda: Lenten healing for Boston.
Click to expand...
This is a bit of a hot button topic for me, because I see such massive hypocrisy in the media respecting the issue, even more than usual (which is saying a lot). There is no real evidence that any other group is getting this kind of scrutiny except the Church, though child abuse is clearly rampant everywhere. But nobody seems to care about those victims. And so many “let’s overthrow Catholicism from within” groups jump all over this to push some agenda that has nothing to do with anything- women priests or something.

Sojo, I respect your experience and your justified anger, but at the same time know that much of what is going on with respect to this issue just has nothing to do with real concern for sex abuse victims, and everything to do with hating the Church, or with good old money. Notice how it all started as the Church started speaking out more clearly and forcefully regarding abortion, homosexuality and sexual immorality. It all boils down to the culture wars, and the other side is happy to play dirty pool.

God Bless,
Joan
 
Just to note quickly, I went to SNAP’s website and I see no reference to this psychiatrist.

Wondering if they intend to cover this up.

Hmmm… :rolleyes:

Joan
 
markomalley said:
Irony doesn’t even begin to describe this situation…
Click to expand...
I like the irony of this just as well.
In 2003, speaking for SNAP clients, he argued that the confidentiality of the confessional seal should not be respected by the law. In a contemptuous statement against the Catholic Church, he voiced his objections to a unanimous decision by the Louisiana House Committee on the Administration of Criminal Justice protecting the confidential communication of priests, ministers, rabbis and other clergy members. He said at the time that the seal has to be broken because “We have faces now.”

If breaking the priest-penitent privilege is something you support, will you now support turning over the patient records of Dr. Taylor?
Click to expand...
So, I guess Dr. Taylor and SNAP will be turning over all their patient records to investigators? 😃
 
It’s funny how teachings of “forgiveness” and “hate the sin, love the sinner” and “turn the other cheek” are thrown around in justification of the church scandal, but they are quickly forgotten now.

None of us have the right to talk about “irony” or anything of the sort after what happened in our church.
 
Rascalking said:
None of us have the right to talk about “irony” or anything of the sort after what happened in our church.
Click to expand...
Sure I do. I was not involved in any way in what happened in back in the sixties, seventies and eighties in the Catholic Church, as is the case with most priests. Yet I had to hear all the anticatholic rherotic, exaggerations and lies from groups like SNAP. I surely have the right to comment that they are receiving their comeupance. You sow the wind, then you inherit the whirlwind.
 
Rascalking said:
It’s funny how teachings of “forgiveness” and “hate the sin, love the sinner” and “turn the other cheek” are thrown around in justification of the church scandal, but they are quickly forgotten now.

None of us have the right to talk about “irony” or anything of the sort after what happened in our church.
Click to expand...
Hi Rascalking,

I think you fail to make a distinction here between uncharity and fair public discourse. This is an organization, not a person first of all. Secondly, we all have a right to be critical of the behaviors that are public and that have public consequences, like those of the people who run SNAP. They could potentially have done the Church a great deal of good because there is a very legitimate issue here, but they chose instead to make it a war against the Church herself. At least, that is what I am seeing and I have a right to express my opinion about that, and to defend the Church.

We are also well within our rights to call a spade a spade, and to point out that SNAP is not applying the standards it holds up for the Church to its own organization, at least not so far. Again, a fair part of public discourse.

By these standards, how could anyone criticize Planned Parenthood, PFLAG or some similar group? How can Christians participate effectively in the public square?

God Bless,
Joan

p.s. I again went to SNAP’s website today. They have two posts that were just put up today. I didn’t find anything addressing the issue of this SNAP psychiatrist.
 
Joan1969 said:
Hi Rascalking,

I think you fail to make a distinction here between uncharity and fair public discourse. This is an organization, not a person first of all. Secondly, we all have a right to be critical of the behaviors that are public and that have public consequences, like those of the people who run SNAP. They could potentially have done the Church a great deal of good because there is a very legitimate issue here, but they chose instead to make it a war against the Church herself. At least, that is what I am seeing and I have a right to express my opinion about that, and to defend the Church.

We are also well within our rights to call a spade a spade, and to point out that SNAP is not applying the standards it holds up for the Church to its own organization, at least not so far. Again, a fair part of public discourse.

By these standards, how could anyone criticize Planned Parenthood, PFLAG or some similar group? How can Christians participate effectively in the public square?

God Bless,
Joan

p.s. I again went to SNAP’s website today. They have two posts that were just put up today. I didn’t find anything addressing the issue of this SNAP psychiatrist.
Click to expand...
Hi Joan.

Thank you for your polite response. I appreciate it more than I can explain. So often people on websites are rude/snotty, or downright mean. Yours was NONE of that. Thanks again.

I don’t have any love for this group, SNAP. I think they’re annoying pests.I despise Planned Parenthood, and I have honestly no idea what PFLAG is.

However, when a member of the those groups falls to sexual sin, I stand by what I said-no Catholic has the right to say, “Look! They have problems! They’re guilty of sin! Hee hee! They complained about us, now look at them!”

Um, The Church-which I am a proud member and I love deeply-has our own problems with sexual abuse. It’s beyond hypocritical to criticize a group because of that.

Criticize the group for what they believe, not for the mistakes and private failings of who is in it.
 
Rascalking said:
Hi Joan.

Thank you for your polite response. I appreciate it more than I can explain. So often people on websites are rude/snotty, or downright mean. Yours was NONE of that. Thanks again.

I don’t have any love for this group, SNAP. I think they’re annoying pests.I despise Planned Parenthood, and I have honestly no idea what PFLAG is.

However, when a member of the those groups falls to sexual sin, I stand by what I said-no Catholic has the right to say, “Look! They have problems! They’re guilty of sin! Hee hee! They complained about us, now look at them!”

Um, The Church-which I am a proud member and I love deeply-has our own problems with sexual abuse. It’s beyond hypocritical to criticize a group because of that.

Criticize the group for what they believe, not for the mistakes and private failings of who is in it.
Click to expand...
Hi Rascalking,

Thanks for the compliments. I think you and I both share the same ideas about being polite.

PFLAG is a pro-homosexuality group. I gave them and PP as examples of organizations that might deserve direct and blunt criticism. I think SNAP also qualifies, as do public figures who put themselves in positions of special influence in society and are so more subject to remarks about their behaviors and statments. And that goes double for those who appear to demonstrate agression against a certain group, as many believe that SNAP has done.

I agree that it is un-Christian to gloat about the child-porn problems of the psychiatrist involved. But it is fair to say that SNAP is not being consistent with respect to their own public figure. They should be the first to publicize the issue considering their expectations of transparency from the Church. I not only looked at their web site, but I even did a search there and did not find anything. If anyone knows differently and can correct me, I am perfectly open to that. Perhaps they will make a statemtent in time.

We’ll see.

God Bless,
Joan
 
Just to let everyone know, in an effort to be totally fair to SNAP, I went to their website today to see if they might have a statement. They have commented on plenty of cases, but not this one in particular.

I’ll say again that this seems like they just don’t want to address it. It will be interesting to see what sort of sentence the psychologist receives, and if SNAP will have anything to say if he gets a light sentence.

God Bless,
Joan
 
To follow up again, I would encourage anyone interested to go to Catholic League’s web site to read up on their latest about this individual. It sounds like he has quite a history, and his associations with SNAP are very strong.

God Bless,
Joan
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top