E
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
P
Palladio
Guest
Palladio;2643476:
But you are by accepting (again and again) the term at face value, then using it as you please.Im not using a cant term. Someone else stated that “gay culture” was to blame, all I am asking is how.
How did gay culture make a priest molest a child and make those higher up conceal the act?
It sounds like an attempt to divert the blame from where it should go and there doesnt seem to be any basis for that statement.
Whatever gay culture might be, it can do no good in the RCC.
K
KathleenElsie
Guest
On this one I must make a correction there are girls also NOW. When this abuse was a major problem there was a blanket “NO GIRLS RULE” as servers. It was also about this this time that the warnings of liberalization and modernization came out but were then rejected. And I can also say that there were girls available if the desire to abuse a young girl had been there.You’ve got to be kidding.
Girls can be altar servers and in many cases outnumber male altar servers (unfortunately.) So, female altar servers were just as vulnerable as male altar servers and they probably do outnumber male altar servers or at least match their numbers. To say these priests didn’t have as much access to altar girls as altar boys is absurd, no offense.
Your point about boys school isn’t a good point either: 1. Priests are present both in boy and girl Catholic schools; why were the boys schools targeted and not the girl schools then? 2. Not all Catholic schools are for just one sex 3. Most of the abuse did not happen in schools, and if it did that’s news to me because I never heard that before.
The same goes for boys homes. There are also girls homes and these priests had just as much access to them. BUT they specifically chose to go after the boys.
You seem to want to deny the link between pedophilia and homosexuality to such an extent that you ignore the obvious reality. These priests had as much access to girls that they did to boys. The vast majority of abuse was between adult men and boys. That’s NOT a coincidence! Again, if it was, common sense would say that roughly the same number of girls would have been abused, but that wasn’t the case. Boys were specifically targeted! You can try to spin this all you want, but the data speak for themselves.
Also, as I said before, there seems to be a good portion of active homosexual men who seem attracted to young boys. One obvious proof of this is the existence of NAMBLA.
THESE MEN CHOSE BOYS and the fact is that they chose to do an all male job (I can’t being myself to say they were doing GODS work). This is only further proof of the “same sex attraction and the existence of homosexuals in the seminaries”.
Also this was the same time that many of our present Bishops were in seminaries or the early stages of their priesthood. So we can’t blame them for what went on. Most of those that were responsible are now dead or frail. I can only pray that they returned to God and were truly sorry for their sins. I also believe that since MUCH WAS GIVEN to then MUCH IS EXPECTED in return and that GOD is a JUST GOD and I will leave the punishment of the wrongdoers to HIM.
B
bones_IV
Guest
Because it scandalizes people.If you aren’t Catholic (or in my case quit Cathlicism) you are automatically unqualified to say anything about the RCC. Folks here can’t handle thoughts that challenge their “truth”.
Nohome
E
Elric
Guest
Elric;2643705:
This isnt getting anywhere.But you are by accepting (again and again) the term at face value, then using it as you please.
Whatever gay culture might be, it can do no good in the RCC.
Im not really sure what point exactly you are trying to make and I am dont understand why exactly you are comming after me about this “gay culture” phrase, because I wasnt the one who brought it up. You would be better off asking them your questions about “gay culture”.
I am simply asking a question to a statement that was made. If I have used the term several times, its because I am asking the same question several times. My question isnt attacking anything and I dont understand how you could suggest that it is.
P
Palladio
Guest
Palladio;2643776:
Well, since you insist on using the term, what do you mean by it?This isnt getting anywhere.
Im not really sure what point exactly you are trying to make and I am dont understand why exactly you are comming after me about this “gay culture” phrase, because I wasnt the one who brought it up. You would be better off asking them your questions about “gay culture”.
I am simply asking a question to a statement that was made. If I have used the term several times, its because I am asking the same question several times. My question isnt attacking anything and I dont understand how you could suggest that it is.
N
Nohome
Guest
The RCC has provided enough scandal for itself, sort of silly to think that I can contribute to it.Because it scandalizes people.
Nohome
B
bones_IV
Guest
Jn 9:40 And some of the Pharisees, who were with him, heard: and they said unto him: Are we also blind? 41 Jesus said to them: If you were blind, you should not have sin: but now you say: We see. Your sin remaineth.The RCC has provided enough scandal for itself, sort of silly to think that I can contribute to it.
Nohome
Those who don’t think they need salvation are blind to themselves.
N
Nohome
Guest
A particularly spectacular lunar eclipse this morning, don’t you agree?Jn 9:40 And some of the Pharisees, who were with him, heard: and they said unto him: Are we also blind? 41 Jesus said to them: If you were blind, you should not have sin: but now you say: We see. Your sin remaineth.
Those who don’t think they need salvation are blind to themselves.
[Sorry, I can only counter wildly tangential comments with an equally tangential comment]
Nohome
E
Elric
Guest
It does seem that way.The RCC has provided enough scandal for itself, sort of silly to think that I can contribute to it.
Nohome
- Status
- Not open for further replies.