Study: Homosexuality, celibacy didn't cause abuse

[irishpatrick]

I do understand where you’re coming from.

That from a Catholic perspective (especially a Traditional Catholic perspective) rejecting legitimate authority is about the worst thing you can do.

But I do not agree with it.

For one thing embracing that point of view means that ‘I was only following orders’ becomes a legitimate justification for virtually anything (as long as the orders come from a legitimate authority).

Questioning authority is one thing–teaching people to obey authority outright no matter what, is quite another thing. Leaders and authority figures are human and make mistakes…but there is an order to things.

 

[irishpatrick]

Yes, the Baby Boomers did reject the authority and traditions of their parents.
And one of the ways that they did that was by supporting the Civil Rights movement and by fighting segregation (which had a great deal of tradition and cultural capital behind it, especially in the South).

The Baby Boomers made the term racist an insult and racism itself (at least of the overt kind) taboo. That is a major achievement and something to be proud of.

Its also an accomplishment no previous American generation can claim.

I never said the Boomers did nothing good–I will grant the civil rights movement was mostly good (though many negatives have also come out of that as well). I am taking a macro, not micro, view of the Boomer generation.

 

[irishpatrick]

Sometimes going against parents teachings are good. Many went against their parents ideologies of racism and sexism. Don’t forget; they also made rock music popular. You can’t fault them for that.

My dad told me that while he was in high school, the students still had a strong belief in God, even though they were boomers. They were just frustrated with the current system and wanted change.

How? It was just a music festival. Granted, it didn’t go as expected, but I would have loved to have been around back then and see Hendrix perform



Going against society is not going against the church. Sometimes we need a change.

And God bless them for saving democracy and bringing down the tyrants

I believe that the Boomers are thankful for their parents’ service.

I do believe that’s every generation since the industrial revolution

Everyone goes through rebellious stages against their parents. If the Boomers didn’t think that parents meant anything, they wouldn’t try to be good parents to their kids. Regarding tradition, the culture back then was not good. Racism and sexism were prevalent back when the Boomers were born and they rebelled against that culture. They did not go against God Have some? Yeah, every generation has people who have, but saying that the whole generation did is ludicrous

Not going to respond to every point…no need. There is much we could discuss in terms of racism, civil rights, sexism, etc…and I could point out many bad things that came about because of the Boomer generation in those areas. Yet, as I said previously, I am taking a marco, not micro, view of the Boomers and as the large group they are they managed to bring incredible damage to the USA–we can only hope it can be healed by our young today. Boomers were truly Sodom and Gomorah-esque in many ways, along with breaking new negative impact ground in so many ways that it is truly shocking to me.

BTW–I am a Boomer and I have not always felt this way. It takes time and perspective to see what damage has been done.

 

[valentino]

who was it that payed the $2 million for this study?What do they possibly think there going to find ?These like thousands of other studies are just a waste of time and money.

 

[Gift_from_God]

You have to keep something in mind when having discussions like this.

Which is that, as far as many conservatives/traditionalists are concerned, any amount of corruption, inequality, and oppression is better than rejecting tradition (or worse, traditional authority).

While I believe there are great aspects about conservatism, part of conservatism is the resist for change, so I think you’re right

 

[irishpatrick]

You have to keep something in mind when having discussions like this.

Which is that, as far as many conservatives/traditionalists are concerned, any amount of corruption, inequality, and oppression is better than rejecting tradition (or worse, traditional authority).

That is simply false. Conservatives by their very nature want to conserve the good, not the bad.

 

[JHow]

I admit to being sidetracked by a discussion of Boomers, too, but how does this (boomer vs. conservative) relate to the topic the Causes and Contexts study?

 

[irishpatrick]

I admit to being sidetracked by a discussion of Boomers, too, but how does this (boomer vs. conservative) relate to the topic the Causes and Contexts study?

Well, from my pov the Boomer generation did contribute–not sure how the conservatives did though.

 

[bellasbane]

The very title of the report is problematic: “Causes and Context…” - it should read “Correlates and Context…” - It would never pass a peer review unless that was corrected.

The authors should have known better, they admit the data they used is correlational, retrospective and incomplete – Shame on them for this title. :tsktsk:

 

[JHow]

I have read only a little of the report so far, but its clear the system of schools is (or was) very differently organized than it is here.

 

[JHow]

The very title of the report is problematic: “Causes and Context…” - it should read “Correlates and Context…” - It would never pass a peer review unless that was corrected.

The authors should have known better, they admit the data they used is correlational, retrospective and incomplete – Shame on them for this title. :tsktsk:

I haven’t finished reading it yet, but I am already annoyed with the stylistic choice to put the word “crisis” in quotes throughout the text. If the sexual scandals cannot be characterized as a “crisis”, then what can be?

 

[ChristIsTheWay]

who was it that payed the $2 million for this study?What do they possibly think there going to find ?These like thousands of other studies are just a waste of time and money.

I think it was the bishops that funded the study. I’ve noted that reactions from liberals are complaints that the study did not address the real problem: celibacy, male-only priesthood, and misogyny, while conservatives claim that the study did not address the real problem: homosexual priests. Overall, I’d prefer to hear what other social scientists say after they have reviewed the study.

 

[JHow]

I think it was the bishops that funded the study. I’ve noted that reactions from liberals are complaints that the study did not address the real problem: celibacy, male-only priesthood, and misogyny, while conservatives claim that the study did not address the real problem: homosexual priests. Overall, I’d prefer to hear what other social scientists say after they have reviewed the study.

Why don’t you read it yourself and form an opinion? What science I have read in the the report so far has largely been in the service of proving points that few people challenge (e.g., that abuse cases rose from the 50’s to the 80’s and then declined sharply again). Yay for the lagged time-series analysis!

 

[AngryAtheist8]

I never said the Boomers did nothing good–I will grant the civil rights movement was mostly good (though many negatives have also come out of that as well). I am taking a macro, not micro, view of the Boomer generation.

It sounds more like your getting misty-eyed about the past.
But romantcizing the past tells us nothing (or at least nothing real) about the present.

 

[AngryAtheist8]

That is simply false. Conservatives by their very nature want to conserve the good, not the bad.

I laughed out loud when I read your post.

DId Conservatives in the antebellum Southern U.S. want to conserve good?
Did Conservative Communists in Russia during the 1980s want to conserve good?
Do Conservative clerics in the Islamic Republic of Iran today want to conserve good?

I think that there’s only one answer an intellectually honest and humane person could give, and it doesn’t begin with the letter Y.

 

[ChristIsTheWay]

Why don’t you read it yourself and form an opinion? What science I have read in the the report so far has largely been in the service of proving points that few people challenge (e.g., that abuse cases rose from the 50’s to the 80’s and then declined sharply again). Yay for the lagged time-series analysis!

I did read it myself and I did form my own opinion. I just don’t consider my opinions infallible or worth much to anyone.

 

[irishpatrick]

It sounds more like your getting misty-eyed about the past.
But romantcizing the past tells us nothing (or at least nothing real) about the present.

I blast the Boomer generation and somehow I am romanticizing the past? Do you realize the Boomer generatin began in 1946?

 

[irishpatrick]

I laughed out loud when I read your post.

DId Conservatives in the antebellum Southern U.S. want to conserve good?
Did Conservative Communists in Russia during the 1980s want to conserve good?
Do Conservative clerics in the Islamic Republic of Iran today want to conserve good?

I think that there’s only one answer an intellectually honest and humane person could give, and it doesn’t begin with the letter Y.

The definition or nature of things is often contrary to what people do. For example, many, many Catholics support abortion, yet abortion is defined by the faith as an intrinsic evil that cannot be supported by Catholics under ANY circumstances…yet Catholics ignore that clear teaching and support abortion in large numbers (and they still call themselves "Catholic). Likewise, many people who claim to be conservatives are not at all conservative–they just want to wear the label for some reason of their own choosing.

 

[valentino]

The temptation to look at the nude body is present in all of us.And I would venture to say 99% of us have sinned in this manner at some point in our lives.Probably these religious have led much purer lives than most of us.These priests are humans and are vulnerable(maybe more so)than the average individual.Nobody is excusing their behavior.This study was a useless piece of information which the bishops felt necessary to allow to satisfy the public’s interest.These priest simply gave into the temptations of the flesh to satisfy a sexual desire.If there were adults available they would have satisfied the desires that way.These priests aren’t some kind of freaks its just that the children are available and are easy prey and they might be able to hide their own weaknesses.They are welll aware of what society expects of them.Often these expectations are just too high.Many priests are truelly saints and are able to resist temptations that most of us could never resist.But some fail.They shouldn/t be look on as monsters and join the priesthood to get access to children.Its just a crazy idea that publicity seekers would like to pass to the public to make a big story.

 

[djeter]

These priest simply gave into the temptations of the flesh to satisfy a sexual desire.If there were adults available they would have satisfied the desires that way.These priests aren’t some kind of freaks its just that the children are available and are easy prey and they might be able to hide their own weaknesses.

What a freaky, bizarre post. Adults WERE available but as homosexuals they overwhelmingly chose young boys – the very stuff of gay fantasies. What is so difficult to apprehend about that?

“The overwhelming majority of abuse cases was homosexual molestation. According to press reports, confirmed by the studies of reputable scholars, the most prominent form of clergy sexual abuse in recent decades has involved homosexual priests abusing teenage boys and young men.

It took editors, television personalities, and radio talk-show hosts approximately two and a half months to recognize what print reporters had, in fact, been uncovering for months: namely, that the overwhelming majority of cases of abuse did not involve prepubescent children, but rather teenage boys and young men, often in school or seminary settings. While clinical distinctions (“Fixated ephebophilia,” “regressed” or “stunted” homosexuality) may be helpful for purposes of professional study and therapy, normal English describes such abuse as homosexual molestation.”

Purveyors of gay culture prefer to call what happened as “pedophilia” but the dirty truth cited below shows otherwise. Weigel has written elsewhere:

Pedophile priests – in the classic sense of men who habitually abuse prepubescent children – are not the majority of cleric sexual abusers; they are, in fact, a small minority of malfeasant clergy, although they are arguably the most loathsome form of the clerical sexual predator. That the shorthand of “pedophilia crisis” was being used …months after even gay activists were conceding that the overwhelming majority of the abuses reported involved homosexual men molesting teenage boys or young males suggested that the moniker “pedophilia crisis” served agendas other than factual accuracy. Were the crisis of clerical sexual abuse to be described accurately – as a crisis whose principle manifestation was homosexual molestation – other questions about gay culture might well be raised.

Now this report intends to blur the distinctions of the previous for obvious PC reasons. You, my friend, blow it out to further, almost impossible, distortions. Your handlers must be very happy.

dj