If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   Influential Catholic Priest: "Suppose you have a man having a nervous breakdown, and a youngster comes after him. A lot of the cases, the youngster - 14, 16, 18 - is the seducer"   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 277
    More: Sick, Father Benedict Groeschel, Catholic priest, sex crimes, National Catholic Register, Archdiocese of Philadelphia, Archdiocese of New York  
•       •       •

9796 clicks; posted to Main » on 30 Aug 2012 at 12:18 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



277 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-08-29 06:44:24 PM
Here's a gem from the article:

Benedict expressed a belief that most of these "relationships" are heterosexual in nature, and that historically sexual relationships between men and boys have not been thought of as crimes.

"If you go back 10 or 15 years ago with different sexual difficulties - except for rape or violence - it was very rarely brought as a civil crime. Nobody thought of it that way... And I'm inclined to think, on [a priest's] first offense, they should not go to jail because their intention was not committing a crime."


What. The. Fark?
 
2012-08-29 06:46:11 PM

Runs_With_Scissors_: Here's a gem from the article:

Benedict expressed a belief that most of these "relationships" are heterosexual in nature, and that historically sexual relationships between men and boys have not been thought of as crimes.

"If you go back 10 or 15 years ago with different sexual difficulties - except for rape or violence - it was very rarely brought as a civil crime. Nobody thought of it that way... And I'm inclined to think, on [a priest's] first offense, they should not go to jail because their intention was not committing a crime."

What. The. Fark?


Translation: "We used to Roger little boys all we liked and nobody ratted us out. I miss those days."
 
2012-08-29 06:49:12 PM
Crazy old fool. They should lock him up.
 
2012-08-29 06:50:35 PM
Sadly this is what many influential members of the Clergy, including the guy we now call Pope Benny actually believe, and it has been a major factor in their disgraceful response to the pedophilia scandal. To them many of these pedophile priests are holy innocents with no defense against these youngsters raised in a sex-obsessed secular culture. Therefore they just needed to be taken away from these evil tempters and say a few hail mary's and they'd be right as rain.

Yes it's insane, yes it fundamentally misunderstands the nigh-obsessive-compulsive way most pedophiles operate, but it let them not have to re-examine their views on priestly celibacy or sexuality, so they bought into it
 
2012-08-29 06:50:50 PM
Any Fark Christians here to speak out against this guy? No?
 
2012-08-29 06:55:00 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: Any Fark Christians here to speak out against this guy? No?


Would you settle for an agnostic saint?
 
2012-08-29 07:04:10 PM
In a recent interview with the National Catholic Register, Father Benedict Groeschel, of the conservative Franciscan Friars of the Renewal, said that teens act as seducers in some sexual abuse cases involving priests.

Something about Jesus in the desert, not giving into temptation, etc.
 
2012-08-29 07:06:16 PM

scottydoesntknow: In a recent interview with the National Catholic Register, Father Benedict Groeschel, of the conservative Franciscan Friars of the Renewal, said that teens act as seducers in some sexual abuse cases involving priests.

Something about Jesus in the desert, not giving into temptation, etc.


Apparently, the flesh is willing, but the spirit is weak
 
2012-08-29 07:12:59 PM

St_Francis_P: The My Little Pony Killer: Any Fark Christians here to speak out against this guy? No?

Would you settle for an agnostic saint?


Good enough for me. I'm just noting that this is a really good thread for the usual "I'm a Christian, but this guy totally disgusts me" crowd to make an appearance.
 
2012-08-29 07:17:07 PM

Godscrack: Crazy old fool. They should lock him up.


That might not be the punishment we think it is.

Exile him to the island of Lesbos instead.
 
2012-08-29 07:24:12 PM
criminal bastards
 
2012-08-29 07:43:41 PM

St_Francis_P: Runs_With_Scissors_: Here's a gem from the article:

Benedict expressed a belief that most of these "relationships" are heterosexual in nature, and that historically sexual relationships between men and boys have not been thought of as crimes.

"If you go back 10 or 15 years ago with different sexual difficulties - except for rape or violence - it was very rarely brought as a civil crime. Nobody thought of it that way... And I'm inclined to think, on [a priest's] first offense, they should not go to jail because their intention was not committing a crime."

What. The. Fark?

Translation: "We used to Roger little boys all we liked and nobody ratted us out. I miss those days."


Back in those days it wasn't legitimate rogering.
 
2012-08-29 07:53:17 PM
Pressed for clarification, the New York State-based religious leader explained that kids looking for father figures might be drawn to priests to fill a hole.

THEY DIDN'T MEAN LITERALLY!
 
2012-08-29 08:31:52 PM
Anybody else feeling kinda stompy and punchy right now?
 
2012-08-29 08:33:14 PM

fusillade762: St_Francis_P: Runs_With_Scissors_: Here's a gem from the article:

Benedict expressed a belief that most of these "relationships" are heterosexual in nature, and that historically sexual relationships between men and boys have not been thought of as crimes.

"If you go back 10 or 15 years ago with different sexual difficulties - except for rape or violence - it was very rarely brought as a civil crime. Nobody thought of it that way... And I'm inclined to think, on [a priest's] first offense, they should not go to jail because their intention was not committing a crime."

What. The. Fark?

Translation: "We used to Roger little boys all we liked and nobody ratted us out. I miss those days."

Back in those days it wasn't legitimate rogering.


But it was forceful.
 
2012-08-29 08:34:21 PM

St_Francis_P: Translation: "We used to Roger little boys all we liked and nobody ratted us out. I miss those days."


ethicalcomment.files.wordpress.com
 
2012-08-29 08:36:34 PM

Wall_of_Doodoo: Anybody else feeling kinda stompy and punchy right now?


More like stabby and shooty.
 
2012-08-29 08:38:41 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: Any Fark Christians here to speak out against this guy? No?


Come on, who couldn't trust this face? I'm going to see if there are any altar boy positions...err spots open for my nephew.

i.huffpost.com
 
2012-08-29 08:39:48 PM

Wall_of_Doodoo: Anybody else feeling kinda stompy and punchy right now?


Stompy, punchy, stabby, shooty, drowny, poisony, and electrocutey, actually. This is but one reason why I'm ever so glad I have nothing to do with the Catholic Church anymore.
 
2012-08-29 08:44:28 PM
"the New York State-based religious leader explained that kids looking for father figures might be drawn to priests to fill a hole."
 
2012-08-29 08:49:15 PM
Well, he'd fit in nicely in Kandahar. So to speak.

When I was 14, 16, 18, I couldn't seduce a drunken nymphomaniac even if I had a bucket of roofies handy.
 
2012-08-29 08:55:39 PM

Wall_of_Doodoo: Anybody else feeling kinda stompy and punchy right now?


This^

2wolves: Wall_of_Doodoo: Anybody else feeling kinda stompy and punchy right now?

More like stabby and shooty.


And This^

/trying to understand why the Catholic church is even tolerated in this country anymore
 
2012-08-29 08:58:30 PM

Coco LaFemme: Wall_of_Doodoo: Anybody else feeling kinda stompy and punchy right now?

Stompy, punchy, stabby, shooty, drowny, poisony, and electrocutey, actually. This is but one reason why I'm ever so glad I have nothing to do with the Catholic Church anymore.


I agree 100%, just choose words on a misdemeanor level due to the whole 'somebody may do this and most legal research begins with google' principle.

Slashies and such....
 
2012-08-29 09:05:07 PM
img32.imageshack.us
 
2012-08-29 09:08:51 PM
Forgive this
i794.photobucket.com
 
2012-08-29 09:11:31 PM

Benedict expressed a belief that most of these "relationships" are heterosexual in nature, and that historically sexual relationships between men and boys have not been thought of as crimes.

"If you go back 10 or 15 years ago with different sexual difficulties - except for rape or violence - it was very rarely brought as a civil crime. Nobody thought of it that way... And I'm inclined to think, on [a priest's] first offense, they should not go to jail because their intention was not committing a crime."


Times change, pal. We don't condone human slavery, or public floggings, or pubic dismemberment, vivisection or burning as executions any more either.

Perhaps we should, starting with pedophiles in the clergy.
 
2012-08-29 09:13:19 PM

Wall_of_Doodoo: Coco LaFemme: Wall_of_Doodoo: Anybody else feeling kinda stompy and punchy right now?

Stompy, punchy, stabby, shooty, drowny, poisony, and electrocutey, actually. This is but one reason why I'm ever so glad I have nothing to do with the Catholic Church anymore.

I agree 100%, just choose words on a misdemeanor level due to the whole 'somebody may do this and most legal research begins with google' principle.

Slashies and such....


Okay, how does stompy, punchy, stomppunchy and punchstompy sound?
 
2012-08-29 09:15:17 PM
I have two points to make.

1: Inappropriate seductive behavior from a youngster is almost always due to them having previously been sexually abused by someone. Keep in mind here i said inappropriate behavior - like making a run at a priest.

2: The ADULT in that situation is supposed to, you know, BE THE ADULT. Failing to do so is inexcusable.
 
2012-08-29 09:15:37 PM
That he-hag wouldn't be seduced in a Thai whorehose if his urethra were a broken ATM machine spewing 100 dollar bills and ice cream cones.
 
2012-08-29 09:18:36 PM

brap: That he-hag wouldn't be seduced in a Thai whorehose if his urethra were a broken ATM machine spewing 100 dollar bills and ice cream cones.


I know nothing about this thread is humorous, but you just put the visual in my head of a dick spitting out money and ice cream, and I broke out into a hearty guffaw.

Damn you.
 
2012-08-29 09:22:43 PM

brap: his urethra were a broken ATM machine spewing 100 dollar bills and ice cream cones.


I had a kidney stone the size of a small peppercorn once. I can only IMAGINE how much worse a full ice cream cone would hurt.
 
2012-08-29 09:35:39 PM

brap: That he-hag wouldn't be seduced in a Thai whorehose if his urethra were a broken ATM machine spewing 100 dollar bills and ice cream cones.


That was beautiful
 
2012-08-29 09:37:08 PM

Coco LaFemme: Wall_of_Doodoo: Anybody else feeling kinda stompy and punchy right now?

Stompy, punchy, stabby, shooty, drowny, poisony, and electrocutey, actually.


it.stlawu.edu

Come at me, bro.
 
2012-08-29 09:37:56 PM
Man, I hate atheists. They're so annoying, with all of their internet snark. How many people's feelings do they have to hurt before we start doing anything about them?
 
2012-08-29 09:40:00 PM

runujhkj: Man, I hate atheists. They're so annoying, with all of their internet snark.


img266.imageshack.us
 
2012-08-29 09:43:05 PM

Godscrack: runujhkj: Man, I hate atheists. They're so annoying, with all of their internet snark.

[img266.imageshack.us image 449x630]


If that guy in the sandwich board was a Catholic priest, that picture would look very different.
 
2012-08-29 09:44:49 PM
I can see a young man reaching out to a priest as a father figure, but I don't get where that turns into a sexual relationship with the kid seducing the priest.

Does this guy think that some kids look at a priest and think, "He has been like a father to me for the last couple of years, let me see if I can get him to f*ck me up the butt."

Usually the person that is doing the seducing has the most confidence since they are trying to convince the other party to do something they probably initially don't want to.
When a kid is looking for a father figure, confidence is one of the things that attracts them to another person, they are looking for the role model.
I have a very hard time seeing where an uncertain kid would be the one trying to get the sex in that relationship.
 
2012-08-29 09:48:50 PM

runujhkj: Man, I hate atheists. They're so annoying, with all of their internet snark. How many people's feelings do they have to hurt before we start doing anything about them?


Show us on the doll where the mean atheists touched you.
 
2012-08-29 09:49:49 PM
It takes a really damaged individual to stand there and declare, as a priest, that a 14 year old was seducing adults, thats why they committed what society calls child rape.

Apparently this priest considers raping children to be part of the Laws of God rather than the Laws of Men.
 
2012-08-29 09:50:26 PM

fusillade762: runujhkj: Man, I hate atheists. They're so annoying, with all of their internet snark. How many people's feelings do they have to hurt before we start doing anything about them?

Show us on the doll where the mean atheists touched you.

Sniff

It was awful! They- they made fun of me on the Internet! I don't know how I'll go on.
 
2012-08-29 09:55:23 PM
damn sexy kids
 
2012-08-29 10:06:50 PM

Asa Phelps: I have two points to make.

1: Inappropriate seductive behavior from a youngster is almost always due to them having previously been sexually abused by someone. Keep in mind here i said inappropriate behavior - like making a run at a priest.

2: The ADULT in that situation is supposed to, you know, BE THE ADULT. Failing to do so is inexcusable.


Same thing with teens and teachers.
YOU ARE THE ADULT
Act like one!
 
2012-08-29 10:12:48 PM

Slives: I can see a young man reaching out to a priest as a father figure, but I don't get where that turns into a sexual relationship with the kid seducing the priest.

Does this guy think that some kids look at a priest and think, "He has been like a father to me for the last couple of years, let me see if I can get him to f*ck me up the butt."

Usually the person that is doing the seducing has the most confidence since they are trying to convince the other party to do something they probably initially don't want to.
When a kid is looking for a father figure, confidence is one of the things that attracts them to another person, they are looking for the role model.
I have a very hard time seeing where an uncertain kid would be the one trying to get the sex in that relationship.


He's talking about them slutty teenaged girls, obviously. Enough to give anyone a "nervous breakdown."
 
2012-08-29 10:31:28 PM
Holy Fark - it was Groeschel?

This guy is way beyond "influential" - he's a Catholic mega-star. He's been on EWTN forever. Groeschel is to Catholics as Neill DeGrasse Tyson is to armchair astronomers. People trust him. They listen to him as an authoritative source of information. As friars go, he's a total badass.

And he's saying shiat like this. Kreist.

Oh - and: If you go back 10 or 15 years ago with different sexual difficulties - except for rape or violence - it was very rarely brought as a civil crime. Nobody thought of it that way.

Bullshiat. It's still illegal to have gay sex in many states. And it's ILLEGAL TO RAPE LITTLE BOYS EVERYWHERE, YOU GODDAMN F*CKWIT.
 
2012-08-29 10:38:53 PM
Dear Catholic Church:

STOP IMITATING THE F*CKING ANCIENT WORLD


4.bp.blogspot.com 


We have new standards now.
 
2012-08-29 11:26:14 PM

Asa Phelps: I have two points to make.

1: Inappropriate seductive behavior from a youngster is almost always due to them having previously been sexually abused by someone. Keep in mind here i said inappropriate behavior - like making a run at a priest.

2: The ADULT in that situation is supposed to, you know, BE THE ADULT. Failing to do so is inexcusable.


Yeah. I'm sure the victims aren't all wide-eyed innocents, but it doesn't matter whether the kid thinks it's okay. It's up to the adult to know that this is wrong and act accordingly.
 
2012-08-29 11:34:38 PM
Finally, we've found the one guy who will defend Jerry Sandusky.
 
2012-08-29 11:43:07 PM
brap rawks.
 
2012-08-29 11:56:54 PM
So, if it's OK to have sex with boys, then what changes when they become men?

Go ahead. Think on that one for a moment. It's OK to sodomize a boy, but not to have consensual relations with an equal and active partner?

This is some twisted up logic to try to defend the indefensible...
 
2012-08-30 12:06:48 AM

Chariset: Asa Phelps: I have two points to make.

1: Inappropriate seductive behavior from a youngster is almost always due to them having previously been sexually abused by someone. Keep in mind here i said inappropriate behavior - like making a run at a priest.

2: The ADULT in that situation is supposed to, you know, BE THE ADULT. Failing to do so is inexcusable.

Yeah. I'm sure the victims aren't all wide-eyed innocents, but it doesn't matter whether the kid thinks it's okay. It's up to the adult to know that this is wrong and act accordingly.


Exactly.

What goes through the minds of priests in these situations SHOULD be "Holy Fark, this kid's problems are way bigger than mine are. I've got to get this kid some got damn therapy. And call social services."

It's depressing, disgusting, and uncanny that when you hear about a kid pursuing an inappropriate relationship with an older person, it's almost always because they are farked up over something someone did to them.

Used to be almost every episode of that radio and then tv show that adam corolla did with dr. drew - some girl or guy would start sobbing about some farked up relationship, Dr. Drew would ask "Were you abused by someone earlier in your life?", and they would admit it. Every damn time. It's a farking red flag.
 
2012-08-30 12:15:19 AM

Benevolent Misanthrope: Holy Fark - it was Groeschel?

This guy is way beyond "influential" - he's a Catholic mega-star. He's been on EWTN forever. Groeschel is to Catholics as Neill DeGrasse Tyson is to armchair astronomers. People trust him. They listen to him as an authoritative source of information. As friars go, he's a total badass.

And he's saying shiat like this. Kreist.

Oh - and: If you go back 10 or 15 years ago with different sexual difficulties - except for rape or violence - it was very rarely brought as a civil crime. Nobody thought of it that way.

Bullshiat. It's still illegal to have gay sex in many states. And it's ILLEGAL TO RAPE LITTLE BOYS EVERYWHERE, YOU GODDAMN F*CKWIT.


This. I can't believe it's Groeschel. When I used to stay with my Mom she always had ewtn on. I liked this guy. You would listen to him and think OK here's a guy that gets it and is pretty cool. But this.....and in the actual interview in NCR he kind of half way defends Sandusky. WTF?!?!?!?!?
 
2012-08-30 12:22:52 AM
Ob:

thesignalinthenoise.files.wordpress.com
 
2012-08-30 12:24:19 AM
Here's the thing I don't get. Boy's penises are just so small. It doesn't seem like they'd be at all pleasurable from either the giving or receiving end.

Now, maybe it'd be different with 18 year olds whose bodies are much more developed, but at that point you're just going to have to admit that you're having a homosexual relationship and not an innocent sexual relationship between man and boy.
 
2012-08-30 12:26:30 AM
Penn State should be taking notes from Notre Dame.
 
mjg
2012-08-30 12:26:37 AM
images.tvrage.com

agrees
 
2012-08-30 12:27:09 AM
FTFA: In a recent interview with the National Catholic Register, Father Benedict Groeschel, of the conservative Franciscan Friars of the Renewal, said that teens act as seducers in some sexual abuse cases involving priests.

I think this guy must be lining himself up for the presidency of a NAMBLA chapter...
 
2012-08-30 12:27:42 AM

Asa Phelps: I have two points to make.

1: Inappropriate seductive behavior from a youngster is almost always due to them having previously been sexually abused by someone. Keep in mind here i said inappropriate behavior - like making a run at a priest.

2: The ADULT in that situation is supposed to, you know, BE THE ADULT. Failing to do so is inexcusable.


thread
 
2012-08-30 12:27:58 AM

Red Shirt Blues: Benevolent Misanthrope: Holy Fark - it was Groeschel?

This guy is way beyond "influential" - he's a Catholic mega-star. He's been on EWTN forever. Groeschel is to Catholics as Neill DeGrasse Tyson is to armchair astronomers. People trust him. They listen to him as an authoritative source of information. As friars go, he's a total badass.

And he's saying shiat like this. Kreist.

Oh - and: If you go back 10 or 15 years ago with different sexual difficulties - except for rape or violence - it was very rarely brought as a civil crime. Nobody thought of it that way.

Bullshiat. It's still illegal to have gay sex in many states. And it's ILLEGAL TO RAPE LITTLE BOYS EVERYWHERE, YOU GODDAMN F*CKWIT.

This. I can't believe it's Groeschel. When I used to stay with my Mom she always had ewtn on. I liked this guy. You would listen to him and think OK here's a guy that gets it and is pretty cool. But this.....and in the actual interview in NCR he kind of half way defends Sandusky. WTF?!?!?!?!?


New orders came down from the Lizard People. Guy's just trying to keep from getting eaten.
 
2012-08-30 12:28:43 AM
This may be true. Teens are horny and when I was thirteen or fourteen I didn't know why I should have to wait til I was 18 to have sex with adults. Nonetheless, the adult in that situation needs to be firm and say no. The kid may think he wants to have sex but he can't legally give consent, so the adult needs to be the mature one and stop anything from happening.
 
2012-08-30 12:28:52 AM
Teens are aggressors. That's fact.
It's up to adults to be adults and nip that shiat in the bud instead of succumbing.
That's also fact, and more important.
 
2012-08-30 12:30:00 AM
farm9.staticflickr.com
 
2012-08-30 12:30:05 AM
That sounds like such a stereotypical rationalization from a child/teen abuser that someone may want to look into this guy's past postings. That's a huge, blinking neon warning sign.
 
2012-08-30 12:30:14 AM

The My Little Pony Killer: Any Fark Christians here to speak out against this guy? No?


Even Jesus was betrayed by his own people, friend-o. The world is filled with ugly people, some hide behind politics, some shields and guns, and some behind a holy text. Christianity, Islam, paganism...they all have people that make the faith look bad. Is it right that the church hasn't taken a stronger stand against it? No, it's disgusting. But they don't represent all Christians, just like bin Laden didn't represent all Muslims.

/sad hearing about the abuse of children
//should there be a death penalty for it?
 
2012-08-30 12:30:32 AM
"If you go back 10 or 15 years ago with different sexual difficulties - except for rape or violence - it was very rarely brought as a civil crime. Nobody thought of it that way... And I'm inclined to think, on [a priest's] first offense, they should not go to jail because their intention was not committing a crime."

onfinite.com
 
2012-08-30 12:30:59 AM

namegoeshere: Pressed for clarification, the New York State-based religious leader explained that kids looking for father figures might be drawn to priests to fill a hole.

THEY DIDN'T MEAN LITERALLY!


Can't believe it took this long. Even my catholic mother would probably double take on that one.
 
2012-08-30 12:31:45 AM
From the original interview:

Part of your work here at Trinity has been working with priests involved in abuse, no?
A little bit, yes; but you know, in those cases, they have to leave. And some of them profoundly - profoundly - penitential, horrified. People have this picture in their minds of a person planning to - a psychopath. But that's not the case. Suppose you have a man having a nervous breakdown, and a youngster comes after him. A lot of the cases, the youngster - 14, 16, 18 - is the seducer.

Why would that be?
Well, it's not so hard to see - a kid looking for a father and didn't have his own - and they won't be planning to get into heavy-duty sex, but almost romantic, embracing, kissing, perhaps sleeping but not having intercourse or anything like that.
It's an understandable thing, and you know where you find it, among other clergy or important people; you look at teachers, attorneys, judges, social workers. Generally, if they get involved, it's heterosexually, and if it's a priest, he leaves and gets married - that's the usual thing - and gets a dispensation. A lot of priests leave quickly, get civilly married and then apply for the dispensation, which takes about three years.

But there are the relatively rare cases where a priest is involved in a homosexual way with a minor. I think the statistic I read recently in a secular psychology review was about 2%. Would that be true of other clergy? Would it be true of doctors, lawyers, coaches?

Here's this poor guy - [Penn State football coach Jerry] Sandusky - it went on for years. Interesting: Why didn't anyone say anything? Apparently, a number of kids knew about it and didn't break the ice. Well, you know, until recent years, people did not register in their minds that it was a crime. It was a moral failure, scandalous; but they didn't think of it in terms of legal things.

If you go back 10 or 15 years ago with different sexual difficulties - except for rape or violence - it was very rarely brought as a civil crime. Nobody thought of it that way. Sometimes statutory rape would be - but only if the girl pushed her case. Parents wouldn't touch it. People backed off, for years, on sexual cases. I'm not sure why.

I think perhaps part of the reason would be an embarrassment, that it brings the case out into the open, and the girl's name is there, or people will figure out what's there, or the youngster involved - you know, it's not put in the paper, but everybody knows; they're talking about it.

At this point, (when) any priest, any clergyman, any social worker, any teacher, any responsible person in society would become involved in a single sexual act - not necessarily intercourse - they're done.
And I'm inclined to think, on their first offense, they should not go to jail because their intention was not committing a crime.

That is right, he feels bad for Sandusky. WTF Catholics, WTF.
 
2012-08-30 12:32:07 AM
Not sure if blaming victim.
 
2012-08-30 12:32:27 AM

ExperianScaresCthulhu: Teens are aggressors. That's fact.
It's up to adults to be adults and nip that shiat in the bud instead of succumbing.
That's also fact, and more important.


I think that can mostly be managed by not putting yourself in a bad position.
 
2012-08-30 12:32:59 AM
A Priest and a Rabbi were, by coincidence, sitting next to each other on a long flight.

About an hour passes and not a single word was exchanged by the two men. Finally, the Priest turns to the Rabbi and says, "Rabbi, do you mind if I ask you a personal question"? The Rabbi said, "Of course, you may."

"I understand that many of you Jewish people, especially Rabbis, keep kosher and, as such, don't eat things like bacon or ham". The Rabbi acknowledged that. "Haven't you ever even tasted bacon or ham?", asked the Priest.

The Rabbi explained, "Many years ago, I was a visiting Rabbi in a small town in the middle of nowhere and found myself in a diner one Sunday morning. There was no one around so I ordered bacon and eggs. It was quite good but that was the only time that ever happened."

After some time, the Rabbi turned to the Priest and said, "Father, do you mind if you ask you a very personal question"? The Priest said OK.

"You Priests take an oath of celibacy, right"?, asked the Rabbi. "Why, yes", answered the Priest, wondering where this was going.

"Well, haven't you ever had sex since you've become as Priest"?, asked the Rabbi. The Priest looked about nervous, leaned toward the rabbi and answered very softly, "As a young parishioner I was approached by a troubled woman who was looking for my guidance. She was a beautiful, young woman and one thing led to another. So, yes, just once I had sex with a woman".

A few moments pass and the Rabbi leans over to the Priest and says, "A lot better than pork, isn't it?"
 
2012-08-30 12:34:31 AM
Pressed for clarification, the New York State-based religious leader explained that kids looking for father figures might be drawn to priests to fill a hole.

Oh I'm pretty sure it's the priests looking to fill a hole.

This guy is complete, utter scum. Sometimes I wish there were such thing as hell, so that sleaze like him could get a well deserved thrashing if they manage to avoid it in life.
 
2012-08-30 12:36:16 AM

brap: That he-hag wouldn't be seduced in a Thai whorehose if his urethra were a broken ATM machine spewing 100 dollar bills and ice cream cones.


Allow me to set aside this little bit of genius for totally uncredited use at appropriately hilarious time

//Thanks
 
2012-08-30 12:37:51 AM

Slives: Does this guy think that some kids look at a priest and think, "He has been like a father to me for the last couple of years, let me see if I can get him to f*ck me up the butt."


This is the much more likely scenario, though I'm saying this like I would say that getting struck by lightning is a much more likely scenario than winning the Powerball.

"This priest has really been cozying up to me lately, let me see if I can get a blowjob out of it."

It's a huge mistake to think every sexual relationship has to have penetration with the bigger person doing it. The studies on gays estimate about a third never do anal.
 
2012-08-30 12:38:05 AM
This gentleman has gone from Christian apologetics to pedophilia apologetics.
 
2012-08-30 12:39:44 AM
I would like to start a petition to have the RCC excommunicated from the Christian ideology. That "church" has given more negative PR to Christianity than Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson would if they were cast on "The Real World".
 
2012-08-30 12:39:57 AM
Will no one rid me of these troublesome priests?
2.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-08-30 12:40:17 AM

runujhkj: Man, I hate atheists. They're so annoying, with all of their internet snark. How many people's feelings do they have to hurt before we start doing anything about them?


I know, we're such intolerable bastards when we use critical thinking and reason to argue you into a corner.

And it's SO MUCH FUN watching the theists squirm and contort.
 
2012-08-30 12:40:21 AM
So he openly admitted that these "men of God" are so weak and fallible that they'll succumb to the "seductions" of underage boys (that right there sounds like a heaping bowlful of victim blaming). The best solution is get rid of those people and let the law take care of them.

Also wondering why he mention 18-year-olds, when they hit that age they're now full adults except in the matters of drinking and smoking, which means that (according to them) it's no longer accepted pederasty but unholy homosexuality.
 
2012-08-30 12:40:45 AM
This guy really honestly does worship Satan
 
2012-08-30 12:41:40 AM

Runs_With_Scissors_: Here's a gem from the article:

Benedict expressed a belief that most of these "relationships" are heterosexual in nature, and that historically sexual relationships between men and boys have not been thought of as crimes.

"If you go back 10 or 15 years ago with different sexual difficulties - except for rape or violence - it was very rarely brought as a civil crime. Nobody thought of it that way... And I'm inclined to think, on [a priest's] first offense, they should not go to jail because their intention was not committing a crime."

What. The. Fark?


media.jinni.com

MENS REA! My God, NO!
 
2012-08-30 12:42:10 AM

Godscrack: "the New York State-based religious leader explained that kids looking for father figures might be drawn to priests to fill a hole."

 
2012-08-30 12:43:24 AM
"Pressed for clarification, the New York State-based religious leader explained that kids looking for father figures might be drawn to priests to fill a hole."

If there's a hell, I'll be going to it. I had to laugh at that line.
 
2012-08-30 12:43:32 AM
i hope that twisted arse freak dies a horribly painful death. may the suffering be drawn out over a good long time.

I was born into the RC faith and force-fed every rite and ritual until I turned 18. That is a lot of damage to undo. It takes time. Now I'm old. I got better.

Outside of social obligations (weddings & funerals) I will never step foot into another RC church, and they will never see another penny from me.

I'm confident there is a shiatload of people like me across America & around the world who have lost their faith. People aren't as tolerant and forgiving as some may think. Enough is enough.

They molest children, protect men who molested children, lie to those who look to them for truths, and browbeat their faithful into giving up their hard-earned coin. They have twisted the minds of the masses for hundreds & hundreds of years. They are responsible for incredible amounts of deaths and suffering. Many of their leaders have been some of the most notorious characters in history. Their current #1 guy was a Nazi.

I have more respect for junkies, whores, used car salesmen and alcoholics than I do for the RC Church.
 
2012-08-30 12:46:08 AM

Agent Smiths Laugh: runujhkj: Man, I hate atheists. They're so annoying, with all of their internet snark. How many people's feelings do they have to hurt before we start doing anything about them?

I know, we're such intolerable bastards when we use critical thinking and reason to argue you into a corner.

And it's SO MUCH FUN watching the theists squirm and contort.


So, if Christopher Hitchens had done something particularly heinous while he lived, would that make you recieve communion?

Is that how it works for you.
 
2012-08-30 12:46:20 AM
If priests didn't want to be seduced, they shouldn't dress that way.
 
2012-08-30 12:48:19 AM

Agent Smiths Laugh: runujhkj: Man, I hate atheists. They're so annoying, with all of their internet snark. How many people's feelings do they have to hurt before we start doing anything about them?

I know, we're such intolerable bastards when we use critical thinking and reason to argue you into a corner.

And it's SO MUCH FUN watching the theists squirm and contort.


Almost as much fun as a priest finds in watching an altar boy squirm and contort, I'd imagine.
 
2012-08-30 12:48:56 AM

Tarheel_Madness: The My Little Pony Killer: Any Fark Christians here to speak out against this guy? No?

Even Jesus was betrayed by his own people, friend-o. The world is filled with ugly people, some hide behind politics, some shields and guns, and some behind a holy text. Christianity, Islam, paganism...they all have people that make the faith look bad. Is it right that the church hasn't taken a stronger stand against it? No, it's disgusting. But they don't represent all Christians, just like bin Laden didn't represent all Muslims.

/sad hearing about the abuse of children
//should there be a death penalty for it?


I am a recovered catholic who agrees with your sentiments. Most religious people I have known, and that's a lot, are well meaning. Demonstrably misguided but good hearted and well meaning.

///Sequestered prison island for life or death, either way. For any true child predator.
 
2012-08-30 12:49:07 AM
FTFA: "Well, it's not so hard to see - a kid looking for a father and didn't have his own - and they won't be planning to get into heavy-duty sex, but almost romantic, embracing, kissing, perhaps sleeping but not having intercourse or anything like that..."

dailypicksandflicks.com

/hot
 
2012-08-30 12:50:33 AM

notatrollorami: ///Sequestered prison island for life or death, either way. For any true child predator.


Congratulations on increasing the number of child murders. Why do you hate children?
 
2012-08-30 12:52:32 AM
i always liked catholic high school girls in trouble?
 
2012-08-30 12:53:23 AM
No one? Really? I guess I'll have to be the one to leave this here.
 
2012-08-30 12:53:37 AM

thelonearranger: FTFA: "Well, it's not so hard to see - a kid looking for a father and didn't have his own - and they won't be planning to get into heavy-duty sex, but almost romantic, embracing, kissing, perhaps sleeping but not having intercourse or anything like that..."

[dailypicksandflicks.com image 600x436]

/hot


Sorry, that wasn't from the article, it was from the actual interview:
http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/father-benedict-groeschel-reflec t s-on-25-years-of-the-franciscan-friars-of/
 
2012-08-30 12:54:06 AM
Sadly, this article reminded me of a word I learned in college and haven't used since, but perhaps it could be of use in this thread: catamite - a young boy kept for pleasure in in Roman-Greco times.
 
2012-08-30 12:55:33 AM

notatrollorami: Tarheel_Madness: The My Little Pony Killer: Any Fark Christians here to speak out against this guy? No?

Even Jesus was betrayed by his own people, friend-o. The world is filled with ugly people, some hide behind politics, some shields and guns, and some behind a holy text. Christianity, Islam, paganism...they all have people that make the faith look bad. Is it right that the church hasn't taken a stronger stand against it? No, it's disgusting. But they don't represent all Christians, just like bin Laden didn't represent all Muslims.

/sad hearing about the abuse of children
//should there be a death penalty for it?

I am a recovered catholic who agrees with your sentiments. Most religious people I have known, and that's a lot, are well meaning. Demonstrably misguided but good hearted and well meaning.

///Sequestered prison island for life or death, either way. For any true child predator.


Yeah, I can pretty much say THIS. Most religious people I know are truly decent and well meaning. They're open minded and not pushy. But I think that's because most people that I know and associate with are that way.

I think that there are certain crimes that should mean complete banishment from society forever (if such a thing were possible).
 
2012-08-30 12:58:41 AM

runujhkj: Agent Smiths Laugh: runujhkj: Man, I hate atheists. They're so annoying, with all of their internet snark. How many people's feelings do they have to hurt before we start doing anything about them?

I know, we're such intolerable bastards when we use critical thinking and reason to argue you into a corner.

And it's SO MUCH FUN watching the theists squirm and contort.

Almost as much fun as a priest finds in watching an altar boy squirm and contort, I'd imagine.


Not really, because committing a crime against a child is very far removed from being able to exercise superior logic in a debate.

dbubb: Agent Smiths Laugh: runujhkj: Man, I hate atheists. They're so annoying, with all of their internet snark. How many people's feelings do they have to hurt before we start doing anything about them?

I know, we're such intolerable bastards when we use critical thinking and reason to argue you into a corner.

And it's SO MUCH FUN watching the theists squirm and contort.

So, if Christopher Hitchens had done something particularly heinous while he lived, would that make you recieve communion?

Is that how it works for you.


Nope, I'd seek his prosecution for whatever crime it was he committed.

But see, that's part of the problem with theists. Too many of them presume that if we don't subscribe to their particular myth and all it includes, we must surely be unable to behave in any moral manner.

Well, I have news for you. I have a very strong moral compass that is in no way dependent on some "higher authority" to work. It works because it's simple. Very, very simple.

It is "Don't hurt other people."

The penalty for violating that principle is very simple as well.

"Or we hurt you."
 
2012-08-30 01:01:00 AM

The My Little Pony Killer: St_Francis_P: The My Little Pony Killer: Any Fark Christians here to speak out against this guy? No?

Would you settle for an agnostic saint?

Good enough for me. I'm just noting that this is a really good thread for the usual "I'm a Christian, but this guy totally disgusts me" crowd to make an appearance.


I adore you, I really do.. but when people do the whole " All Catholics do this" it's the same as throwing the "all blacks do this"
 
2012-08-30 01:04:33 AM

The My Little Pony Killer: Any Fark Christians here to speak out against this guy? No?


If anyone sincerely believes what this POS said and still wants to call themselves a Christian please stay away from me.
 
2012-08-30 01:05:35 AM
FTFA: Pressed for clarification, the New York State-based religious leader explained that kids looking for father figures might be drawn to priests to fill a hole.

O Rly?
 
2012-08-30 01:05:36 AM
It's true that inappropriate seduction is hard to resist.

Once, I met this cute little platinum blonde sheep. She was really after me, and... I probably shouldn't say anything else.
 
2012-08-30 01:05:38 AM

cookiefleck: I adore you, I really do.. but when people do the whole " All Catholics do this" it's the same as throwing the "all blacks do this"


You're right, because the ghetto gang bangers are just as influential and powerful in the black community as the Priests are to Catholics.
 
2012-08-30 01:05:45 AM

Omahawg: i always liked catholic high school girls in trouble?


Heh

/Samuel L. Bronkowitz... always admired his work
 
2012-08-30 01:07:02 AM
What a farking lunatic.
 
2012-08-30 01:07:14 AM

President Merkin Muffley: notatrollorami: ///Sequestered prison island for life or death, either way. For any true child predator.

Congratulations on increasing the number of child murders. Why do you hate children?


I understand the practical nature of that argument. It stands to reason that the worse the punishment for a given crime the greater the lengths a perpetrator will go to avoid getting caught. How then do we adjust the scales of justice? A night in the stockades with the townspeople jeering for kiddy diddling? Surely that would avoid any temptation the otherwise nice diddler might have to off the kid?

////Not actually a death penalty advocate because the system can't be trusted. Mostly I intended to express the notion that no child predator, if actually guilty, should ever have access to children again. Ever. First offense. It's an unchangeable predilection. But then I'm back to having to trust the system.

///Bad people on every side ruin everything for everyone.
 
2012-08-30 01:07:33 AM

Agent Smiths Laugh: runujhkj: Agent Smiths Laugh: runujhkj: Man, I hate atheists. They're so annoying, with all of their internet snark. How many people's feelings do they have to hurt before we start doing anything about them?

I know, we're such intolerable bastards when we use critical thinking and reason to argue you into a corner.

And it's SO MUCH FUN watching the theists squirm and contort.

Almost as much fun as a priest finds in watching an altar boy squirm and contort, I'd imagine.

Not really, because committing a crime against a child is very far removed from being able to exercise superior logic in a debate.

 

I dunno, when I argue with a theist and they actually argue themselves into a corner instead of just using one of the dozens of circular arguments they use, that can definitely elicit a sexual thrill.
 
2012-08-30 01:08:23 AM

Agent Smiths Laugh: But see, that's part of the problem with theists. Too many of them presume that if we don't subscribe to their particular myth and all it includes, we must surely be unable to behave in any moral manner.


This is by no means restricted to theists.

I've got no problem with what you've said - but I wonder if you're one of those atheists who doesn't understand the important role that religion has played in the development of moral codes and right/wrong understanding. Also, I believe that religion has played a very strong role in the development of science, contrary to what most people think/believe.
 
2012-08-30 01:08:26 AM

12349876: cookiefleck: I adore you, I really do.. but when people do the whole " All Catholics do this" it's the same as throwing the "all blacks do this"

You're right, because the ghetto gang bangers are just as influential and powerful in the black community as the Priests are to Catholics.


To some black folk, they are...
 
2012-08-30 01:08:48 AM
Admittedly, while this guy is disgusting as all fark, growing up a boy, I remember being distinctly resentful of there being no available girls on the market as every single goddamn last one of them were openly, -openly- hunting down older cock. either college age guys or in many cases full grown men.

not saying it's -right-, I'm just saying the guy kinda has a point that sometimes it's the jailbait that's the agressor.
 
2012-08-30 01:11:24 AM

cookiefleck: 12349876: cookiefleck: I adore you, I really do.. but when people do the whole " All Catholics do this" it's the same as throwing the "all blacks do this"

You're right, because the ghetto gang bangers are just as influential and powerful in the black community as the Priests are to Catholics.

To some black folk, they are...


You can be black and not give a shiat about the gang bangers. You can't be Catholic and not give a shiat about the Priests.
 
2012-08-30 01:14:16 AM
I've always said closet gays never know what's going to give them away; same goes for closet pedophiles apparently. 


/not equating gays with pedophiles, just closet cases
 
2012-08-30 01:14:29 AM
So, teens with odd-numbered ages aren't capable of seduction? Geez, this Catholic sh*t is hard to figure out...
 
2012-08-30 01:15:39 AM

Rreal: Admittedly, while this guy is disgusting as all fark, growing up a boy, I remember being distinctly resentful of there being no available girls on the market as every single goddamn last one of them were openly, -openly- hunting down older cock. either college age guys or in many cases full grown men.

not saying it's -right-, I'm just saying the guy kinda has a point that sometimes it's the jailbait that's the agressor.



Maybe work on being more mature? The reason lots of girls go running, screaming towards older men is because young guys like you are still into game playing
 
2012-08-30 01:17:37 AM
Subby's headline should read; Catholic Priest, you know the rest.
 
2012-08-30 01:18:20 AM
Wow...religious orders have wrecked history by hiding ancient manuscripts, etc. Now they ruin whatever legitimimacy thay may have by farking boys...damn...
 
2012-08-30 01:18:45 AM

dbubb: Agent Smiths Laugh: But see, that's part of the problem with theists. Too many of them presume that if we don't subscribe to their particular myth and all it includes, we must surely be unable to behave in any moral manner.

This is by no means restricted to theists.

I've got no problem with what you've said - but I wonder if you're one of those atheists who doesn't understand the important role that religion has played in the development of moral codes and right/wrong understanding. Also, I believe that religion has played a very strong role in the development of science, contrary to what most people think/believe.


We had moral codes long before we invented religions. Hell, social animals know better than to constantly attack and injure other members of the pack/pride/whatever ebcause they know they'll screw themselves over if they do.

And what kind of moral code can you get from a book full of stories of entire cities, countries, and the entire world being mercilessly slaughtered for the slightest of transgressions? One story is about fifty children being murdered by bears because they called an old man "Baldy" and the guy got mad and asked God to do something and God conjured bears out of thin air to kill the children. Less a moral code than a rule by fear and threat of death.
 
2012-08-30 01:22:04 AM
I've said it before.. all FARK atheists seem really miserable. Like their life goal is to prove someone wrong.
 
2012-08-30 01:23:10 AM

thelonearranger: FTFA: "Well, it's not so hard to see - a kid looking for a father and didn't have his own - and they won't be planning to get into heavy-duty sex, but almost romantic, embracing, kissing, perhaps sleeping but not having intercourse or anything like that..."

[dailypicksandflicks.com image 600x436]

/hot


Mike is cool, man. Don't bring him into this.
 
2012-08-30 01:25:45 AM

cookiefleck: I've said it before.. all FARK atheists seem really miserable. Like their life goal is to prove someone wrong.


We're not miserable because our life goal is to prove someone wrong. We're miserable because no matter how many times we prove people wrong, they stick their fingers in their ears and go "LALALAICAN'THEARYOU!".
 
2012-08-30 01:25:45 AM

Keizer_Ghidorah: dbubb: Agent Smiths Laugh: But see, that's part of the problem with theists. Too many of them presume that if we don't subscribe to their particular myth and all it includes, we must surely be unable to behave in any moral manner.

This is by no means restricted to theists.

I've got no problem with what you've said - but I wonder if you're one of those atheists who doesn't understand the important role that religion has played in the development of moral codes and right/wrong understanding. Also, I believe that religion has played a very strong role in the development of science, contrary to what most people think/believe.

We had moral codes long before we invented religions. Hell, social animals know better than to constantly attack and injure other members of the pack/pride/whatever ebcause they know they'll screw themselves over if they do.

And what kind of moral code can you get from a book full of stories of entire cities, countries, and the entire world being mercilessly slaughtered for the slightest of transgressions? One story is about fifty children being murdered by bears because they called an old man "Baldy" and the guy got mad and asked God to do something and God conjured bears out of thin air to kill the children. Less a moral code than a rule by fear and threat of death.


Is that really all there is in the Bible? Is Christianity the only religion?

I understand your point but I think that you're overlooking important points of the Christian faith, for which I don't want to be an apologist.
 
2012-08-30 01:25:55 AM
Catholic church owns/runs NAMBLA?
 
2012-08-30 01:27:16 AM
I think it's a good time to post this

warning for cluster f-bombs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHRDfut2Vx0
 
2012-08-30 01:27:23 AM

cookiefleck: I've said it before.. all FARK atheists seem really miserable. Like their life goal is to prove someone wrong.


If we really are that way, it's better than living in constant fear of angering a bipolar sky wizard and constantly telling everyone they're going to be tortured brutally for all eternity if they don't join the particular flavor of cult you belong to.
 
2012-08-30 01:27:48 AM
This is like the "She was asking for it she was dressed like a slut" defense. Well I guess in this case it is more of "He was asking for it he was dressed like an alter boy."
 
2012-08-30 01:29:27 AM

Arumat: cookiefleck: I've said it before.. all FARK atheists seem really miserable. Like their life goal is to prove someone wrong.

We're not miserable because our life goal is to prove someone wrong. We're miserable because no matter how many times we prove people wrong, they stick their fingers in their ears and go "LALALAICAN'THEARYOU!".


Is it your job to prove someone wrong? Seriously, you're doing the very thing you hate bout your interpretation of Christianity
 
2012-08-30 01:29:50 AM

notatrollorami: President Merkin Muffley: notatrollorami: ///Sequestered prison island for life or death, either way. For any true child predator.

Congratulations on increasing the number of child murders. Why do you hate children?

I understand the practical nature of that argument. It stands to reason that the worse the punishment for a given crime the greater the lengths a perpetrator will go to avoid getting caught. How then do we adjust the scales of justice? A night in the stockades with the townspeople jeering for kiddy diddling? Surely that would avoid any temptation the otherwise nice diddler might have to off the kid?

////Not actually a death penalty advocate because the system can't be trusted. Mostly I intended to express the notion that no child predator, if actually guilty, should ever have access to children again. Ever. First offense. It's an unchangeable predilection. But then I'm back to having to trust the system.

///Bad people on every side ruin everything for everyone.


It's a nice theory. Let me adjust it a little more for you:

Statistically, child molesters are likely to themselves have been the victims of molestation as children. That's one reason why they are so desperately hard to treat, even when they want help: Because the behavior has been set so early and deeply it takes years of dedicated therapy AND a genuine desire to change on the part of the predator. Not one or the other, but both.

So what we need to do is acknowledge this fact, first, and mandate intensive therapy for molesters who have indicated a real desire to change. Not optional or "They know the help is out there" but when they get caught they MUST have intensive, aggressive therapy, and probably while being incarcerated, It would need to be something between a mental hospital and a prison in that case. Follow that with monitored release over a period of years at least equal to the length of treatment.

The second thing that must be done is equally intensive and mandatory treatment for the victims. As children, they are more amenable to change, and yet right now, they get the same treatment as their offenders, ironically. "Let their parents take them home and get them help," knowing it is unlikely ever to happen. Instead, kids who are victims MUST receive treatment, on the public dime if necessary, and in their homes or a separate school location. This cannot be an option, or brushed aside with the idea that they're so young, they'll get over it. They won't, and a certain percentage will go on to commit the same kinds of crimes. (And the ones who don't offend will still carry the guilt and scars for the remainder of their lives)

Will this be difficult and costly? Yes. Will it infringe on the molesters' and victims' civil rights? Yes. Will it take many years to see results? Yes. But it is the ONLY thing that will stop child molesters short of execution and prevent future molesters from emerging. Otherwise, we will continue to replay the victimization/molestation cycle over and over again.
 
2012-08-30 01:31:39 AM

The My Little Pony Killer: Any Fark Christians here to speak out against this guy? No?


Well the quote in the article was bad enough, but when you read the whole interview that just comes across as horrible, creepy, and pedophilic. (Oh and did I mention lots of victim blaming?) Really the whole comment of sympathy for the pedophiles is just horrible.

As a Christian, yeah - fark him. Hell, even Jesus says fark him:

This is a direct quote from Luke 17:1-3: "Jesus said to his disciples: "Things that cause people to stumble are bound to come, but woe to anyone through whom they come. 2 It would be better for them to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around their neck than to cause one of these little ones to stumble. 3 So watch yourselves."



So yeah - even Jesus says fark that guy.
 
2012-08-30 01:33:21 AM

dbubb: Keizer_Ghidorah: dbubb: Agent Smiths Laugh: But see, that's part of the problem with theists. Too many of them presume that if we don't subscribe to their particular myth and all it includes, we must surely be unable to behave in any moral manner.

This is by no means restricted to theists.

I've got no problem with what you've said - but I wonder if you're one of those atheists who doesn't understand the important role that religion has played in the development of moral codes and right/wrong understanding. Also, I believe that religion has played a very strong role in the development of science, contrary to what most people think/believe.

We had moral codes long before we invented religions. Hell, social animals know better than to constantly attack and injure other members of the pack/pride/whatever ebcause they know they'll screw themselves over if they do.

And what kind of moral code can you get from a book full of stories of entire cities, countries, and the entire world being mercilessly slaughtered for the slightest of transgressions? One story is about fifty children being murdered by bears because they called an old man "Baldy" and the guy got mad and asked God to do something and God conjured bears out of thin air to kill the children. Less a moral code than a rule by fear and threat of death.

Is that really all there is in the Bible? Is Christianity the only religion?

I understand your point but I think that you're overlooking important points of the Christian faith, for which I don't want to be an apologist.


There's plenty in the Bible, most of which can be tossed out and the rest condensed to "Love and care for each other and don't be a dick". Makes it much easier to understand and much less able to be twisted and warped into a weapon against those you dislike.

We're talking about Catholics, not about Buddhists or the cult of Aphrodite, pay attention.

Like I said above, the most important part is "Love each other and don't be a dick". Stories of world-destroying floods, vengeful beings burning cities, blood sacrifices, and a future of overwhelming death and destruction aren't necessary to say "Love each other and don't be a dick".
 
2012-08-30 01:33:59 AM

cookiefleck: Rreal: Admittedly, while this guy is disgusting as all fark, growing up a boy, I remember being distinctly resentful of there being no available girls on the market as every single goddamn last one of them were openly, -openly- hunting down older cock. either college age guys or in many cases full grown men.

not saying it's -right-, I'm just saying the guy kinda has a point that sometimes it's the jailbait that's the agressor.


Maybe work on being more mature? The reason lots of girls go running, screaming towards older men is because young guys like you are still into game playing


dude, before you start flinging shiat like a monkey. this was twenty years ago, over half a lifetime ago, and I'm not a guy anymore
 
2012-08-30 01:34:59 AM
Tried to upload this earlier:

To Mr. Pedophile Apologist (Father Groeschel):

i209.photobucket.com
 
2012-08-30 01:35:09 AM

Keizer_Ghidorah: cookiefleck: I've said it before.. all FARK atheists seem really miserable. Like their life goal is to prove someone wrong.

If we really are that way, it's better than living in constant fear of angering a bipolar sky wizard and constantly telling everyone they're going to be tortured brutally for all eternity if they don't join the particular flavor of cult you belong to.


It would seem catholics are less fearful of that than most folks.. and as far as I know, no one has to be Catholic. So what gives?
 
2012-08-30 01:35:27 AM
"If you go back 10 or 15 years ago..."

He sounds like he's trying to (and failing at) making a reference to the Good Old Ways, as other people have mentioned above. Except "10-15 years" isn't *that* long ago. That would be 1997-2002. So he's saying that, possibly after 9/11 or there about, people were still cool with raping kids? That attitudes change wildly during Bush's term, for no reason?


Usually, when you reference the Good Old Ways, you actually reference something *old*, like at least longer than a generation or two. 50 or 100 year range, minimum.

Why, depending on the state the incidents occurred in, it could be recent enough that the statute of limitations might not have expired yet...
 
2012-08-30 01:35:42 AM

Keizer_Ghidorah: dbubb: Keizer_Ghidorah: dbubb: Agent Smiths Laugh: But see, that's part of the problem with theists. Too many of them presume that if we don't subscribe to their particular myth and all it includes, we must surely be unable to behave in any moral manner.

This is by no means restricted to theists.

I've got no problem with what you've said - but I wonder if you're one of those atheists who doesn't understand the important role that religion has played in the development of moral codes and right/wrong understanding. Also, I believe that religion has played a very strong role in the development of science, contrary to what most people think/believe.

We had moral codes long before we invented religions. Hell, social animals know better than to constantly attack and injure other members of the pack/pride/whatever ebcause they know they'll screw themselves over if they do.

And what kind of moral code can you get from a book full of stories of entire cities, countries, and the entire world being mercilessly slaughtered for the slightest of transgressions? One story is about fifty children being murdered by bears because they called an old man "Baldy" and the guy got mad and asked God to do something and God conjured bears out of thin air to kill the children. Less a moral code than a rule by fear and threat of death.

Is that really all there is in the Bible? Is Christianity the only religion?

I understand your point but I think that you're overlooking important points of the Christian faith, for which I don't want to be an apologist.

There's plenty in the Bible, most of which can be tossed out and the rest condensed to "Love and care for each other and don't be a dick". Makes it much easier to understand and much less able to be twisted and warped into a weapon against those you dislike.

We're talking about Catholics, not about Buddhists or the cult of Aphrodite, pay attention.

Like I said above, the most important part is "Love each other and don't be a dick". S ...


The term Theist has been thrown around here quite a bit - pay attention.

Why don't you go for just "be excellent to each other?" That has kind of a catchy ring to it.
 
2012-08-30 01:36:17 AM

cookiefleck: I've said it before.. all FARK atheists seem really miserable. Like their life goal is to prove someone wrong.


Sounds like you are pretty selective in who you talk to and base your opinions on. Something I've noticed about Fark is that like attracts like. The extremist assholes all end up arguing with each other, and characterizing the "other side" as being the (similar to themselves) assholes they choose to talk to.
 
2012-08-30 01:37:05 AM
The Church needs to find a way to eliminate all of the gays from their ranks. On the other hand if they were to embrace their gayness then they would no longer be committing rape, instead they would be said to be pursuing twinks.
 
2012-08-30 01:38:13 AM

dbubb: Agent Smiths Laugh: But see, that's part of the problem with theists. Too many of them presume that if we don't subscribe to their particular myth and all it includes, we must surely be unable to behave in any moral manner.

This is by no means restricted to theists.

I've got no problem with what you've said - but I wonder if you're one of those atheists who doesn't understand the important role that religion has played in the development of moral codes and right/wrong understanding. Also, I believe that religion has played a very strong role in the development of science, contrary to what most people think/believe.


Here's the thing. None of those moral codes couldn't have been created without all the supernatural trappings involved. There are all social constructs invented by man for man to create functional societies. Problem with religion is all the baggage that comes with it that has been used not to enforce moral codes, but to tyrannize people well beyond the boundaries of any simple morality. Granted that's not the only problem with it, but most of the problems in one way or another come back to creating excuses to wield unreasonable power over other people.

See, that's always been the core purpose of organized religion. Power. People who fail to see that are willfully obtuse, tragically naive, or just simply ignorant of history.

But since no moral code requires supernatural thinking to be valid and conducive to civilization, then why bother tacking on the useless and potentially abusive cargo?

And while religion certainly has ties to philosophy, and philosophy was certainly the beginning of scientific thought, it is no longer needed. Superstition might have seeded the roots of rational thinking as mankind first tried to comprehend the workings of nature, it was certainly our first adolescent attempt at doing so, but we've grown beyond it and have blossomed into the tree of science and reason which actually get results.

See, I won't deny that religion did serve a function, but I state clearly that we have better tools now, and it has become obsolete, so much so that it now serves all too often as an impediment to progress rather than a catalyst.

Take for instance stem cell research. A possible panacea of medical knowledge that could ultimately save inestimable lives. Held back and fought time and again by theistic thinking and sentiment.

I would ask you what's better, using the research to find cures for disease, or allowing a family member to die of a possibly curable disease because "It's god's will."
 
2012-08-30 01:40:01 AM
"Pressed for clarification, the New York State-based religious leader explained that kids looking for father figures might be drawn to priests to fill a hole."

Whaaaaaaat? Poor wording, dude. Poor... poor wording. Not THAT hole.
 
2012-08-30 01:41:10 AM

Gyrfalcon: notatrollorami: President Merkin Muffley: notatrollorami: ///Sequestered prison island for life or death, either way. For any true child predator.

Congratulations on increasing the number of child murders. Why do you hate children?

I understand the practical nature of that argument. It stands to reason that the worse the punishment for a given crime the greater the lengths a perpetrator will go to avoid getting caught. How then do we adjust the scales of justice? A night in the stockades with the townspeople jeering for kiddy diddling? Surely that would avoid any temptation the otherwise nice diddler might have to off the kid?

////Not actually a death penalty advocate because the system can't be trusted. Mostly I intended to express the notion that no child predator, if actually guilty, should ever have access to children again. Ever. First offense. It's an unchangeable predilection. But then I'm back to having to trust the system.

///Bad people on every side ruin everything for everyone.

It's a nice theory. Let me adjust it a little more for you:

Statistically, child molesters are likely to themselves have been the victims of molestation as children. That's one reason why they are so desperately hard to treat, even when they want help: Because the behavior has been set so early and deeply it takes years of dedicated therapy AND a genuine desire to change on the part of the predator. Not one or the other, but both.

So what we need to do is acknowledge this fact, first, and mandate intensive therapy for molesters who have indicated a real desire to change. Not optional or "They know the help is out there" but when they get caught they MUST have intensive, aggressive therapy, and probably while being incarcerated, It would need to be something between a mental hospital and a prison in that case. Follow that with monitored release over a period of years at least equal to the length of treatment.

The second thing that must be done is equally intensive and mandatory treatment for the victims. As children, they are more amenable to change, and yet right now, they get the same treatment as their offenders, ironically. "Let their parents take them home and get them help," knowing it is unlikely ever to happen. Instead, kids who are victims MUST receive treatment, on the public dime if necessary, and in their homes or a separate school location. This cannot be an option, or brushed aside with the idea that they're so young, they'll get over it. They won't, and a certain percentage will go on to commit the same kinds of crimes. (And the ones who don't offend will still carry the guilt and scars for the remainder of their lives)

Will this be difficult and costly? Yes. Will it infringe on the molesters' and victims' civil rights? Yes. Will it take many years to see results? Yes. But it is the ONLY thing that will stop child molesters short of execution and prevent future molesters from emerging. Otherwise, we will continue to replay the victimization/molestation cycle over and over again.


On the one hand I wish I wasn't generally pecking out posts on a phone in bed so I could take the time to write well developed, thoughtful, eloquent responses like yours.

On the other hand you do it for me and I get to read it in the nice soothing shade of sunrise pink you've been assigned.
 
2012-08-30 01:41:24 AM

dbubb: Agent Smiths Laugh: But see, that's part of the problem with theists. Too many of them presume that if we don't subscribe to their particular myth and all it includes, we must surely be unable to behave in any moral manner.

This is by no means restricted to theists.

I've got no problem with what you've said - but I wonder if you're one of those atheists who doesn't understand the important role that religion has played in the development of moral codes and right/wrong understanding. Also, I believe that religion has played a very strong role in the development of science, contrary to what most people think/believe.


While religion undoubtedly influenced the development of human morality, I posit that it was neither necessary nor sufficient for it. Admittedly, this is untestable without godlike powers, but the very fact that morality can be rationally justified without resorting to religion is sufficient for me.

Religion probably did made it easier to impress moral memes upon those who weren't prone to rational inquiry. A strong person could try the same thing ("This is morally right because I said so, and if you don't like it I will beat you to death with a rock"), but strong people can be killed by stronger ones, and they eventually die in any case. The concept of an.invincible, immortal arbiter of morality watching your every move and waiting to punish you in a manner invisible to the living is much more effective--provided that you can convince people that it exists (see the aforementioned rock argument). So religion probably did serve as a tool for evolving complex morality (evolution doesn't care whether a meme is actually true), but like most things in evolution, the price for that tool is death and suffering. C'est la vie.
 
2012-08-30 01:41:48 AM

jso2897: cookiefleck: I've said it before.. all FARK atheists seem really miserable. Like their life goal is to prove someone wrong.

Sounds like you are pretty selective in who you talk to and base your opinions on. Something I've noticed about Fark is that like attracts like. The extremist assholes all end up arguing with each other, and characterizing the "other side" as being the (similar to themselves) assholes they choose to talk to.


You being human and not the grand poobah of knowledge should also understand there's another side to faith.
 
2012-08-30 01:41:48 AM

The My Little Pony Killer: St_Francis_P: The My Little Pony Killer: Any Fark Christians here to speak out against this guy? No?

Would you settle for an agnostic saint?

Good enough for me. I'm just noting that this is a really good thread for the usual "I'm a Christian, but this guy totally disgusts me" crowd to make an appearance.


I'm an atheist, and I don't give a damn. In the first place it is possible that "[in a] lot of the cases, the youngster - 14, 16, 18 - is the seducer." I seduced a few older men when I was a teenager; they weren't Catholic priests but then I moved in a very non-Catholic world. And whatever grave hormonal disorders some Farkers might suffer from, most of us guys stopped being little boys before we got to be "14. 16, [or] 18."

Should priests be mindful of their vows and not partake with a sexually developed person of either sex, regardless of who's the seducer? Yes, of course: vows, like other promises, should be kept whever possible; if you don't mean to keep it or can't try very hard to then don't make the vow. But I'm not going to get very upset about "abuse" of somebody who in most of the world is old enough to get married and in most cases is mature enough to knock females up.

If it's okay for your average "14, 16, 18" year guy old to consensually fark a buxom "hottie" teacher then it's also okay for him to consensually get it on with a Catholic priest. Even if the priest is male too.
 
2012-08-30 01:42:58 AM
In other words, a typical republican.
 
2012-08-30 01:43:48 AM
If I were a girl, I would be throwing myself at priests. I dont see how what he said isnt true.
 
2012-08-30 01:44:58 AM

Agent Smiths Laugh: Agent Smiths Laugh


Ok, we're actually much closer than I first might have thougt.
 
2012-08-30 01:46:42 AM

cookiefleck: I've said it before.. all FARK atheists seem really miserable. Like their life goal is to prove someone wrong.


If and when theist's beliefs ceased having deleterious effects on atheists (and even other theists), I will have some sympathy for your argument. Even if that ever happened, though, many Fark atheists have some background in science and/or philosophy, and such folk are naturally inclined to seek truth (and, consequently, to correct falsehood).
 
2012-08-30 01:47:06 AM

runujhkj: Agent Smiths Laugh: runujhkj: Agent Smiths Laugh: runujhkj: Man, I hate atheists. They're so annoying, with all of their internet snark. How many people's feelings do they have to hurt before we start doing anything about them?

I know, we're such intolerable bastards when we use critical thinking and reason to argue you into a corner.

And it's SO MUCH FUN watching the theists squirm and contort.

Almost as much fun as a priest finds in watching an altar boy squirm and contort, I'd imagine.

Not really, because committing a crime against a child is very far removed from being able to exercise superior logic in a debate. 

I dunno, when I argue with a theist and they actually argue themselves into a corner instead of just using one of the dozens of circular arguments they use, that can definitely elicit a sexual thrill.


I...well...whatever floats your boat I guess. So long as the argument was consensual.

And sensual............(cough).......
 
2012-08-30 01:47:50 AM
namegoeshere:

Pressed for clarification, the New York State-based religious leader explained that kids looking for father figures might be drawn to priests to fill a hole.

THEY DIDN'T MEAN LITERALLY!


I'm sure some did.

"Moralistic" homophobes can be so silly.
 
2012-08-30 01:47:53 AM

cookiefleck: jso2897: cookiefleck: I've said it before.. all FARK atheists seem really miserable. Like their life goal is to prove someone wrong.

Sounds like you are pretty selective in who you talk to and base your opinions on. Something I've noticed about Fark is that like attracts like. The extremist assholes all end up arguing with each other, and characterizing the "other side" as being the (similar to themselves) assholes they choose to talk to.

You being human and not the grand poobah of knowledge should also understand there's another side to faith.


I have no opinions about what "sides" faith possesses. As far as I am concerned, you can believe whatever you want - and if you have the decency to keep it to yourself, and not try to force it on me, we'll get along famously.
 
2012-08-30 01:51:50 AM
You know, there is some fairly selective quoting going on -- the entire article is over here (http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/father-benedict-groeschel-reflec ts-on-25-years-of-the-franciscan-friars-of/).

Main points with regards to the subject:

* Groeschel is focusing on the weak pedophiles and pederasts, not all of them. Yes, a weak guy COULD be "seduced" by flirtation. It doesn't diminish his culpability, and it sounds like Groeschel is just trying to point out that most of the guys who COME to counseling appear to the be "weakly go after 'em" as opposed to grooming sorts.

* He seems to be more focused on priests who chase after -girls-, and I'm getting the impression (based on comments about the ones that leave and get married) he's talking more about the mid to late teen girls. This ties into the part about statuatory rape and "the girl" not pressing the case.

I'm not sure what he's saying that is objectionable -- he's showing sympathy for the guys who do evil things. The Sandusky comment seemed more about the fact that OTHER folks knew about it and did nothing to stop or help him get out of the addiction. He could have phrase this far better, but it was a small question as part of a larger conversation.

Nothing excuses molestors, but if you spend a chunk of time counseling molestors and working with them, you will tend to see their weak human side as well as the monster side. Loving even those who do great evil to us and others has always been part of Christianity.
 
2012-08-30 01:52:37 AM

astroturd: If I were a girl, I would be throwing myself at priests. I dont see how what he said isnt true.


I've tried. They just mutter something about Jezebel and then ask if I have a younger brother.
 
2012-08-30 01:53:34 AM
Whatever happened to "be good to others and good shall come back?"

Oh, right, karma. Sorry for being so bad at being a non-heathen.

Why not try stop being assholes to each other? That'd be nice.
 
2012-08-30 01:54:31 AM
Is this the thread about assholes?
 
2012-08-30 01:54:31 AM

JerkyMeat: In other words, a typical republican.

.
.

Like the Kennedy's?

Yes, NYC and the entire North East is such a bastion of conservatism. Derp on my friend.
 
2012-08-30 01:55:37 AM

Agent Smiths Laugh: Here's the thing. None of those moral codes couldn't have been created without all the supernatural trappings involved. There are all social constructs invented by man for man to create functional societies. Problem with religion is all the baggage that comes with it that has been used not to enforce moral codes, but to tyrannize people well beyond the boundaries of any simple morality. Granted that's not the only problem with it, but most of the problems in one way or another come back to creating excuses to wield unreasonable power over other people.

See, that's always been the core purpose of organized religion. Power. People who fail to see that are willfully obtuse, tragically naive, or just simply ignorant of history.

But since no moral code requires supernatural thinking to be valid and conducive to civilization, then why bother tacking on the useless and potentially abusive cargo?

And while religion certainly has ties to philosophy, and philosophy was certainly the beginning of scientific thought, it is no longer needed. Superstition might have seeded the roots of rational thinking as mankind first tried to comprehend the workings of nature, it was certainly our first adolescent attempt at doing so, but we've grown beyond it and have blossomed into the tree of science and reason which actually get results.

See, I won't deny that religion did serve a function, but I state clearly that we have better tools now, and it has become obsolete, so much so that it now serves all too often as an impediment to progress rather than a catalyst.

Take for instance stem cell research. A possible panacea of medical knowledge that could ultimately save inestimable lives. Held back and fought time and again by theistic thinking and sentiment.

I would ask you what's better, using the research to find cures for disease, or allowing a family member to die of a possibly curable disease because "It's god's will."


Nicely said.

Most of the laws in Leviticus actually make a great deal of sense IF you recall they were formalized among a nomadic people attempting to survive in a land of agricultural cultures. And among a warrior culture trying to survive amidst city-states that were much better armed and equipped than the nomads. For instance, nomads need to maximize their birth rate, because agricultural people can have more kids and raise more of them to adulthood--therefore, all sexual relations must be set up to increase the people in the tribe. Hence, no gay sex (no babies), no abortion (kills babies), men can have multiple wives but no adultery (lets one man keep several women pregnant all the time). A lot of the other laws are similar.

Today, of course, we don't need to do that; but as long as people read the Bible for its prose, we're going to keep having dumb arguments about abortion and homosexuality.
 
2012-08-30 01:56:34 AM

libranoelrose: Is this the thread about assholes?


Yes, goodness it is.
 
2012-08-30 01:57:41 AM

dbubb: Agent Smiths Laugh: Agent Smiths Laugh

Ok, we're actually much closer than I first might have thougt.


All's fair. Not like you could've known the contents of my mind until I said something.

jso2897: cookiefleck: jso2897: cookiefleck: I've said it before.. all FARK atheists seem really miserable. Like their life goal is to prove someone wrong.

Sounds like you are pretty selective in who you talk to and base your opinions on. Something I've noticed about Fark is that like attracts like. The extremist assholes all end up arguing with each other, and characterizing the "other side" as being the (similar to themselves) assholes they choose to talk to.

You being human and not the grand poobah of knowledge should also understand there's another side to faith.

I have no opinions about what "sides" faith possesses. As far as I am concerned, you can believe whatever you want - and if you have the decency to keep it to yourself, and not try to force it on me, we'll get along famously.


That is precisely, functionally, how I operate. I don't care, however, if they try to share their beliefs. It can be interesting to listen to sometimes. I just care if they try to force me to conform to them in whatever way.

I may think a religious person deluded and irrational, but as long as they do not harm others with it, they can have at it. Cross that line though, and I will react caustically.

It's not like I'm not deluded and irrational about some things. Hell, I like broccoli.

I just don't force others to eat it.
 
2012-08-30 01:59:14 AM

cookiefleck: libranoelrose: Is this the thread about assholes?

Yes, goodness it is.


I figured I could post that in either of the two blurry links I am seeing through the beer goggles and it would be correct. :P*
 
2012-08-30 02:00:52 AM
Abox:

I've always said closet gays never know what's going to give them away; same goes for closet pedophiles apparently. 


Pedophilia:

pedophilia (usually uncountable; plural pedophilias)

Noun:

1. Sexual or erotic feelings or desires directed by adults and late adolescents towards children; particularly, in psychiatry, a paraphilia consisting of a primary adult sexual attraction to prepubescent children. [from 20th c.]

2. Sexual acts committed by adults with prepubescent children.


Puberty:

Noun

puberty (uncountable)

1. the age at which a person is first capable of sexual reproduction


In this case it's the definition is easy to prove: have the "14, 16, 18" year old guy jerk off into a beaker, then put some of the ejaculate under a microscope and look for "tadpoles." If there are sperm swimming around then the priest cannot engage in pedophilia with him. (Unless the priest is the prepube, but I think canon law rules that out in the first place.)

It's easy to know what you're talking about once you know what the words you use mean.
 
2012-08-30 02:02:40 AM

namegoeshere: Pressed for clarification, the New York State-based religious leader explained that kids looking for father figures might be drawn to priests to fill a hole.

THEY DIDN'T MEAN LITERALLY!


Dear god. Hot tea in my nose and all over my laptop.
That was such a poor choice of words, or was it?
 
2012-08-30 02:02:47 AM

libranoelrose: cookiefleck: libranoelrose: Is this the thread about assholes?

Yes, goodness it is.

I figured I could post that in either of the two blurry links I am seeing through the beer goggles and it would be correct. :P*


Go to bed, sweetheart.
 
2012-08-30 02:06:19 AM

libranoelrose: Is this the thread about assholes?


Careful. There was a time that questions like that would summon Rugbyjock.

Gyrfalcon: Agent Smiths Laugh: Here's the thing. None of those moral codes couldn't have been created without all the supernatural trappings involved. There are all social constructs invented by man for man to create functional societies. Problem with religion is all the baggage that comes with it that has been used not to enforce moral codes, but to tyrannize people well beyond the boundaries of any simple morality. Granted that's not the only problem with it, but most of the problems in one way or another come back to creating excuses to wield unreasonable power over other people.

See, that's always been the core purpose of organized religion. Power. People who fail to see that are willfully obtuse, tragically naive, or just simply ignorant of history.

But since no moral code requires supernatural thinking to be valid and conducive to civilization, then why bother tacking on the useless and potentially abusive cargo?

And while religion certainly has ties to philosophy, and philosophy was certainly the beginning of scientific thought, it is no longer needed. Superstition might have seeded the roots of rational thinking as mankind first tried to comprehend the workings of nature, it was certainly our first adolescent attempt at doing so, but we've grown beyond it and have blossomed into the tree of science and reason which actually get results.

See, I won't deny that religion did serve a function, but I state clearly that we have better tools now, and it has become obsolete, so much so that it now serves all too often as an impediment to progress rather than a catalyst.

Take for instance stem cell research. A possible panacea of medical knowledge that could ultimately save inestimable lives. Held back and fought time and again by theistic thinking and sentiment.

I would ask you what's better, using the research to find cures for disease, or allowing a family member to die of a possibly curable disease because "It's god's will."

Nicely said.

Most of the laws in Leviticu ...


Thanks. In hindsight I would correct some poor composition in it, but I figure I got my point across regardless of shabby writing.

Besides, I'm drunk.
 
2012-08-30 02:08:32 AM

AbbeySomeone: namegoeshere: Pressed for clarification, the New York State-based religious leader explained that kids looking for father figures might be drawn to priests to fill a hole.

THEY DIDN'T MEAN LITERALLY!

Dear god. Hot tea in my nose and all over my laptop.
That was such a poor choice of words, or was it?


Ouch.

I almost have to think it was deliberate, or the most artful Freudian slip of the year.
 
2012-08-30 02:10:06 AM

The One True TheDavid: The My Little Pony Killer: St_Francis_P: The My Little Pony Killer: Any Fark Christians here to speak out against this guy? No?

Would you settle for an agnostic saint?

Good enough for me. I'm just noting that this is a really good thread for the usual "I'm a Christian, but this guy totally disgusts me" crowd to make an appearance.

I'm an atheist, and I don't give a damn. In the first place it is possible that "[in a] lot of the cases, the youngster - 14, 16, 18 - is the seducer." I seduced a few older men when I was a teenager; they weren't Catholic priests but then I moved in a very non-Catholic world. And whatever grave hormonal disorders some Farkers might suffer from, most of us guys stopped being little boys before we got to be "14. 16, [or] 18."

Should priests be mindful of their vows and not partake with a sexually developed person of either sex, regardless of who's the seducer? Yes, of course: vows, like other promises, should be kept whever possible; if you don't mean to keep it or can't try very hard to then don't make the vow. But I'm not going to get very upset about "abuse" of somebody who in most of the world is old enough to get married and in most cases is mature enough to knock females up.

If it's okay for your average "14, 16, 18" year guy old to consensually fark a buxom "hottie" teacher then it's also okay for him to consensually get it on with a Catholic priest. Even if the priest is male too.


While I agree with you about teenage boys being horny and capable of consent, a Priest is also capable of a tremendous mind f*cking as well. It does seem that most of the boys that are raped by these religious figures are 10 and under. That is a whole different ball game.
 
2012-08-30 02:15:53 AM
Heretic says what?

4.bp.blogspot.com

/God Inc. needs new management
 
2012-08-30 02:17:08 AM
One of PSUs old pedophiles, Lasaga, made this statement to the cops once they finally stopped hom and all his years of stalling in court and shenanigans to avoid prison had reached their end.

``I never understood until recently, after a year and a half of therapy, that my letting the child do what the child wanted to do was my desire to relive my own adolescence,''
 
2012-08-30 02:17:18 AM

Bocasio: Heretic says what?

[4.bp.blogspot.com image 400x225]

/God Inc. needs new management


BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD!
 
2012-08-30 02:19:40 AM
I. was. SO. hoping. this. would. be. a. stupid. exaggeration. by. subby.
But no, he really said that.
 
2012-08-30 02:20:03 AM
I don't know if it acceptable to plug a blog on fark, but....

the majority of a/theist tennis matches on Fark all have one thing in common and that is the old testament. The frustration i get from reading this fallacious banter has bothered me so much, I have actually put down my fly rod and biatched to nobody on the intertubes. So far, I have only attacked one side; there is more to come. Link
 
2012-08-30 02:22:45 AM

mikaloyd: One of PSUs old pedophiles, Lasaga, made this statement to the cops once they finally stopped hom and all his years of stalling in court and shenanigans to avoid prison had reached their end.

``I never understood until recently, after a year and a half of therapy, that my letting the child do what the child wanted to do was my desire to relive my own adolescence,''


Even that's a load of crap.

He was horny and he acted on it with a child. End of story.
 
2012-08-30 02:28:20 AM

cookiefleck: libranoelrose: cookiefleck: libranoelrose: Is this the thread about assholes?

Yes, goodness it is.

I figured I could post that in either of the two blurry links I am seeing through the beer goggles and it would be correct. :P*

Go to bed, sweetheart.


Hell no!

I just got off work a few hours ago!
 
2012-08-30 02:31:30 AM
The only reason the Catholic church gets away with this sort of thing is because the people who tithe enable it. Quit supporting and excusing their behavior, quit giving them money, and they'll correct the problem. I might be wrong about this, but I think they care more about money than they do farking little boys.

/"Can't have morality without church!" my ass
//If that's the case, I don't want your farking morality
 
2012-08-30 02:36:38 AM
Suppose you have a man having a nervous breakdown, and a youngster comes after him. A lot of the cases, the youngster - 14, 16, 18 - is the seducer.

Lord forbid the priest take the high road.
 
2012-08-30 02:48:15 AM
Kids come on to old guys all the time.

They're dangerous as f*ck, actually.

/just say no.
 
2012-08-30 02:54:18 AM

knightmike: Suppose you have a man having a nervous breakdown, and a youngster comes after him. A lot of the cases, the youngster - 14, 16, 18 - is the seducer.

Lord forbid the priest take the high road.


Spare the rod?
 
2012-08-30 02:54:43 AM
david_gaithersburg

Yes, because there are absolute NO republicans in NY or the northeast.
But that is beside the point. The point is most conservatives/GOPers have some nasty beast in the closet that they feed and nurture while they think no one is looking no matter where they happen to live. SO, basically, yes.
 
2012-08-30 02:54:54 AM

knightmike: Suppose you have a man having a nervous breakdown, and a youngster comes after him. A lot of the cases, the youngster - 14, 16, 18 - is the seducer.

Lord forbid the priest take the high road.


i think they prefer taking the dirt road
 
2012-08-30 03:09:19 AM
www.dezinfo.net 
Is/was he a member of the Archdiocesan Youth Commission?
 
2012-08-30 03:14:09 AM
Has anyone pointed out that his quotes could just as easily been said by a NAMBLA spokesman? That's profoundly creepy.

Like hearing Neil deGrassie Tyson talking about "legitimate rape".

Sounds like probable cause for an investigation to me...
 
2012-08-30 03:15:32 AM

cookiefleck: I've said it before.. all FARK atheists seem really miserable. Like their life goal is to prove someone wrong.


Tch. I'd say that was useless bait, but a ton of people bit.

Gyrfalcon: The second thing that must be done is equally intensive and mandatory treatment for the victims. As children, they are more amenable to change, and yet right now, they get the same treatment as their offenders, ironically. "Let their parents take them home and get them help," knowing it is unlikely ever to happen. Instead, kids who are victims MUST receive treatment, on the public dime if necessary, and in their homes or a separate school location. This cannot be an option, or brushed aside with the idea that they're so young, they'll get over it. They won't, and a certain percentage will go on to commit the same kinds of crimes. (And the ones who don't offend will still carry the guilt and scars for the remainder of their lives)


This (and everything around it) is FAR more interesting and productive. Is there much public discussion of treatment of victims right now? Beyond the old "color angry pictures at a shrink's office" type thing?
 
2012-08-30 03:22:42 AM

grinnel: I don't know if it acceptable to plug a blog on fark, but....

the majority of a/theist tennis matches on Fark all have one thing in common and that is the old testament. The frustration i get from reading this fallacious banter has bothered me so much, I have actually put down my fly rod and biatched to nobody on the intertubes. So far, I have only attacked one side; there is more to come. Link


I was with you up to this: "The theory of evolution is to all intents and purposes universally accepted."

I don't think something is (more or less) universally accepted when there are policy changes and challenges currently underway RIGHT NOW to promote an entirely different theory. I can accept the idea that quite a few Christians (and Catholics) think other than they speak. This happens all the time (which brings me to a bunch of great Russian jokes). But when one sees actual political effect, then I don't think you can fairly state that it doesn't count.
 
2012-08-30 03:31:55 AM
Well, this is swell.
Watched the RNC and now this.

It's definitely time to go to bed and let my mind recover from evil of this magnitude.
Thank you, and I did build that may GOD BLESS AMERICA!
 
2012-08-30 03:33:30 AM
I'm uncomfortable with pretending that such a thing is impossible. It probably has happened that way at least once. Problem is, in context it's victim blaming. The Catholic Church has had hundreds of these scandals, and most of the time they're by priests who are themselves repeat offenders.

I get circling the wagons and defending your own from the outside. But there comes a point when you have to acknowledge that your organization has deep-seated issues that demand a serious internal response. You can always tell when they're being half-hearted about it when all their public statements seem not to get why everyone is mad. Like this one.
 
2012-08-30 03:34:47 AM

Aidan:
I don't think something is (more or less) universally accepted when there are policy changes and challenges currently underway RIGHT NOW to promote an entirely different theory


Those aren't members of the real Group A, that's Group B.
 
2012-08-30 03:39:06 AM

scottydoesntknow: In a recent interview with the National Catholic Register, Father Benedict Groeschel, of the conservative Franciscan Friars of the Renewal, said that teens act as seducers in some sexual abuse cases involving priests.

Something about Jesus in the desert, not giving into temptation, etc.


I seem to recall in some other threads some links to articles about pedophilia that said a lot of pedophiles talk about teens (or even younger children) "seducing" them. A delusion that children you're sexually attracted to are sexually attracted to YOU and are trying to get you to have sex with them sees to be part of pedophilia.
 
2012-08-30 03:58:36 AM

cookiefleck: Arumat: cookiefleck: I've said it before.. all FARK atheists seem really miserable. Like their life goal is to prove someone wrong.

We're not miserable because our life goal is to prove someone wrong. We're miserable because no matter how many times we prove people wrong, they stick their fingers in their ears and go "LALALAICAN'THEARYOU!".

Is it your job to prove someone wrong? Seriously, you're doing the very thing you hate bout your interpretation of Christianity


I'll admit he was probably trolling, so this is the last thing I'll say on the matter.
If I'm walking along, and see someone waving a sign that says "1+2=4" and advocating that the law should reflect their belief, am I not morally obligated to show them that they are wrong? Or would it be better to allow them to push to get their law passed, allow the law to do whatever damage it will, and then go through all the annoyance of getting it repealed?
 
2012-08-30 04:10:50 AM

Agent Smiths Laugh: Thanks. In hindsight I would correct some poor composition in it, but I figure I got my point across regardless of shabby writing.

Besides, I'm drunk.


You are astonishingly coherent and literate for being drunk. In the non-drunk real world, what are you, a PhD in Theology or something?

Seriously. I'd hate to be the undergrad who crosses minds with you on a good day.
 
2012-08-30 04:22:12 AM
How could someone with a beard that cool be such a dumb arsehole?
 
2012-08-30 04:22:46 AM

Tarheel_Madness: The My Little Pony Killer: Any Fark Christians here to speak out against this guy? No?

Even Jesus was betrayed by his own people, friend-o. The world is filled with ugly people, some hide behind politics, some shields and guns, and some behind a holy text. Christianity, Islam, paganism...they all have people that make the faith look bad. Is it right that the church hasn't taken a stronger stand against it? No, it's disgusting. But they don't represent all Christians, just like bin Laden didn't represent all Muslims.

/sad hearing about the abuse of children
//should there be a death penalty for it?


Actually, I'm pretty sure the "mother church" advertises itself as the representative of all "true Christians".
 
2012-08-30 04:23:23 AM
Oh yeah, those hot priests. I bet the boys that don't get any are pleasuring themselves at night thinking about the sweet, sweet clergymen they saw during the day.

img1.fark.net, although with the right preparations.....

www.smbc-comics.com

Also, see: Link
 
2012-08-30 04:26:26 AM

Aidan: I don't think something is (more or less) universally accepted when there are policy changes and challenges currently underway RIGHT NOW to promote an entirely different theory


Can you point me in the direction of this new theory? I have not yet ben educated on such matters.
-Thanks
 
2012-08-30 04:27:53 AM

ciberido: scottydoesntknow: In a recent interview with the National Catholic Register, Father Benedict Groeschel, of the conservative Franciscan Friars of the Renewal, said that teens act as seducers in some sexual abuse cases involving priests.

Something about Jesus in the desert, not giving into temptation, etc.

I seem to recall in some other threads some links to articles about pedophilia that said a lot of pedophiles talk about teens (or even younger children) "seducing" them. A delusion that children you're sexually attracted to are sexually attracted to YOU and are trying to get you to have sex with them sees to be part of pedophilia.


This. I'm not sure if it's fantasy, rationalization, or something else. But I think someone who makes this claim should get life in prison - they are incapable either of resisting a child's "advances" or of seeing reality.
It's also pretty rare that someone will admit they used a kid as a sex toy, and the ones that do want to stay locked up.
 
2012-08-30 04:47:06 AM

JerkyMeat: david_gaithersburg

Yes, because there are absolute NO republicans in NY or the northeast.
But that is beside the point. The point is most conservatives/GOPers have some nasty beast in the closet that they feed and nurture while they think no one is looking no matter where they happen to live. SO, basically, yes.


When "people" post like this is it because they have lost their ability to quote, or are they just not able to use the quote function?
 
2012-08-30 04:49:41 AM
So, the priest is an Akin supporter?
 
2012-08-30 04:58:36 AM

Generation_D: Times change, pal. We don't condone human slavery, or public floggings, or pubic dismemberment, vivisection or burning as executions any more either.


I think we could make an exception for these guys
 
2012-08-30 05:05:58 AM
Here's a thread full of condemnations, furious calls for barbaric punishment, dogmatic claims, black-and-white attitudes, and herd thinking -- some of it the evident result of glossing over an entire page of text to find a line to justify it all. The people doing this are apparently atheists.

The interview itself is characterized by open-mindedness, reluctance to condemn, objectivity, forgoing of moral absolutes, and willingness to make concessions to human nature. This person is a Catholic priest.

It's quite a spectacle to see secular humanism transformed into the demon it was conceived to fight. Friedrich Nietzsche was right.
 
2012-08-30 05:10:57 AM
This headline reminded me that my new memory needs settings.
 
2012-08-30 05:24:11 AM
Lol FTA: "Fill a hole."

In Catholicism's defense, my Baptist children's minister is doin 20 for masturbating with kids.

In Christianity's defense,
 
2012-08-30 05:32:34 AM
This guys sounds like he really "gets it" and that the catholic church is on the road to recovery, by filling one hole at a time.
 
2012-08-30 05:35:43 AM

cookiefleck: Arumat: cookiefleck: I've said it before.. all FARK atheists seem really miserable. Like their life goal is to prove someone wrong.

We're not miserable because our life goal is to prove someone wrong. We're miserable because no matter how many times we prove people wrong, they stick their fingers in their ears and go "LALALAICAN'THEARYOU!".

Is it your job to prove someone wrong? Seriously, you're doing the very thing you hate bout your interpretation of Christianity


Both sides are bad so become Catholic?
 
2012-08-30 05:40:54 AM
Before I even read this thread, I'd like to offer this comment.

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA A AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGG GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
*inhale*
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU UUUUUUUUUUUUUUU
CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC
KKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK
KKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK


YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU!
 
2012-08-30 05:53:33 AM

Coco LaFemme: Wall_of_Doodoo: Anybody else feeling kinda stompy and punchy right now?

Stompy, punchy, stabby, shooty, drowny, poisony, and electrocutey, actually. This is but one reason why I'm ever so glad I have nothing to do with the Catholic Church anymore.


Reading the thread now. I'm sure you're all impressed.

But this. Had I any wits about me concerning such matters, I'd have said all the things Ms.Coco said.

I especially liked poisony.
 
2012-08-30 05:54:40 AM

The My Little Pony Killer: Any Fark Christians here to speak out against this guy? No?


Yo!

Sorry... running late. East Coast time, so I was sleeping.

WHAT THE FARK?

Uhm, someone needs to tell this genius that when Jesus said "love the children", he did not mean in that kind of manner.

/local Roman Catholic parish can't figure out why I stopped attending and donating time/money
//printing a copy of this article and returning it to them in my response
///found another parish, not RC, but good people who don't feel that their faith is the only option, or that it's a shield to justify their hypocrisy.
 
2012-08-30 06:00:53 AM

LewDux: "If you go back 10 or 15 years ago with different sexual difficulties - except for rape or violence - it was very rarely brought as a civil crime. Nobody thought of it that way... And I'm inclined to think, on [a priest's] first offense, they should not go to jail because their intention was not committing a crime."


Now I have you farkied as blue3 "bad painting restoration jesus says have a seat over there"

Thanks. I needed that.
 
2012-08-30 06:02:35 AM

Runs_With_Scissors_: Here's a gem from the article:

Benedict expressed a belief that most of these "relationships" are heterosexual in nature, and that historically sexual relationships between men and boys have not been thought of as crimes.

"If you go back 10 or 15 years ago with different sexual difficulties - except for rape or violence - it was very rarely brought as a civil crime. Nobody thought of it that way... And I'm inclined to think, on [a priest's] first offense, they should not go to jail because their intention was not committing a crime."

What. The. Fark?


/Yes, that's true, and it used to be true just a few decades ago that a man couldn't rape his wife, it was his right to take her whenever he wanted, Way to defend child buggery. Idiot.
 
2012-08-30 06:03:29 AM

Brontes: From the original interview:

Part of your work here at Trinity has been working with priests involved in abuse, no?
A little bit, yes; but you know, in those cases, they have to leave. And some of them profoundly - profoundly - penitential, horrified. People have this picture in their minds of a person planning to - a psychopath. But that's not the case. Suppose you have a man having a nervous breakdown, and a youngster comes after him. A lot of the cases, the youngster - 14, 16, 18 - is the seducer.

Why would that be?
Well, it's not so hard to see - a kid looking for a father and didn't have his own - and they won't be planning to get into heavy-duty sex, but almost romantic, embracing, kissing, perhaps sleeping but not having intercourse or anything like that.
It's an understandable thing, and you know where you find it, among other clergy or important people; you look at teachers, attorneys, judges, social workers. Generally, if they get involved, it's heterosexually, and if it's a priest, he leaves and gets married - that's the usual thing - and gets a dispensation. A lot of priests leave quickly, get civilly married and then apply for the dispensation, which takes about three years.

But there are the relatively rare cases where a priest is involved in a homosexual way with a minor. I think the statistic I read recently in a secular psychology review was about 2%. Would that be true of other clergy? Would it be true of doctors, lawyers, coaches?

Here's this poor guy - [Penn State football coach Jerry] Sandusky - it went on for years. Interesting: Why didn't anyone say anything? Apparently, a number of kids knew about it and didn't break the ice. Well, you know, until recent years, people did not register in their minds that it was a crime. It was a moral failure, scandalous; but they didn't think of it in terms of legal things.

If you go back 10 or 15 years ago with different sexual difficulties - except for rape or violence - it was very rarely brought as a civil crime. Nobody thought of it that way. Sometimes statutory rape would be - but only if the girl pushed her case. Parents wouldn't touch it. People backed off, for years, on sexual cases. I'm not sure why.

I think perhaps part of the reason would be an embarrassment, that it brings the case out into the open, and the girl's name is there, or people will figure out what's there, or the youngster involved - you know, it's not put in the paper, but everybody knows; they're talking about it.

At this point, (when) any priest, any clergyman, any social worker, any teacher, any responsible person in society would become involved in a single sexual act - not necessarily intercourse - they're done.
And I'm inclined to think, on their first offense, they should not go to jail because their intention was not committing a crime.

That is right, he feels bad for Sandusky. WTF Catholics, WTF.


Since you brought it up-

:'(

wtf?
 
2012-08-30 06:04:08 AM
Meaning I agree, Brontes
 
2012-08-30 06:11:50 AM
I guess we can call it even and just drop the whole thing.
 
2012-08-30 06:14:28 AM

Rreal: cookiefleck: Rreal: Admittedly, while this guy is disgusting as all fark, growing up a boy, I remember being distinctly resentful of there being no available girls on the market as every single goddamn last one of them were openly, -openly- hunting down older cock. either college age guys or in many cases full grown men.

not saying it's -right-, I'm just saying the guy kinda has a point that sometimes it's the jailbait that's the agressor.


Maybe work on being more mature? The reason lots of girls go running, screaming towards older men is because young guys like you are still into game playing

dude, before you start flinging shiat like a monkey. this was twenty years ago, over half a lifetime ago, and I'm not a guy anymore


Ooo! Projection. That's a new one.

/keep it in your pants unless they're adults is not really difficult, pedo apologist
 
2012-08-30 06:17:37 AM

jso2897: cookiefleck: I've said it before.. all FARK atheists seem really miserable. Like their life goal is to prove someone wrong.

Sounds like you are pretty selective in who you talk to and base your opinions on. Something I've noticed about Fark is that like attracts like. The extremist assholes all end up arguing with each other, and characterizing the "other side" as being the (similar to themselves) assholes they choose to talk to.


Ppfft.
Snicker.

And

{ohsnapjpg}

Ps- not atheist, but definitely not religious
 
2012-08-30 06:33:45 AM
Somehow the saying "keep farking that chicken" seems a little too apt.
 
2012-08-30 06:37:50 AM

Red Shirt Blues: When I used to stay with my Mom she always had ewtn on. I liked this guy. You would listen to him and think OK here's a guy that gets it and is pretty cool. But this.....and in the actual interview in NCR he kind of half way defends Sandusky. WTF?!?!?!?!?


My mother spends about half of her TV time watching ETWN. Any time I'm over there for any length of time I have to frequently step outside or something (I don't smoke), because the things I routinely hear from the talking heads on that channel disgust me...

Mostly because of those times I'd hear my mother parroting the same reprehensible screed.

My mom- most times- is a very nice lady, very kind. And that makes it very easy to see when she's been spending an afternoon in front of the warm glow of fire and brimstone. It's brainwashing, plain and simple. Most of my childhood we never had cable, so we never had access to the network. Ma was always a devoted Catholic of course (I quit at age twelve- for this, among other reasons), but her participation was at that time, mostly in church, mostly silent, and the most fire and brimstone talk she got was when Saint Thomas got a new, younger priest some time after I'd left.

Heck, she started attending a local monastery as an alternative when this new pastor signed on precisely because she didn't care for the tenor of his sermons.

I tell you now, of all the people I've seen idolized on that channel, very little surprises me when the skeletons inevitably come out of the closet. The only thing that mildly shocks me here was that Groeschel himself was the one to open the door to gleefully show us all what he has in his closet.

I guess the assumption here is that only the hardcore converts and devotees are watching, and they're already conditioned enough to accept this sort of sentiment as perfectly reasonable. I've heard my mother on the defense of the Church over the abuse scandal with sentiments like this. Something I find pretty alarming considering she herself was abused by her father at a very young age- if anyone should understand why this sort of talk is repugnant, it should be her.

And this is, again, why I have no trouble saying: it's brainwashing.

Red Shirt Blues: I can't believe it's Groeschel.


www.shescribes.com

I can.
 
2012-08-30 07:18:18 AM

Coco LaFemme: Wall_of_Doodoo: Anybody else feeling kinda stompy and punchy right now?

Stompy, punchy, stabby, shooty, drowny, poisony, and electrocutey, actually. This is but one reason why I'm ever so glad I have nothing to do with the Catholic Church anymore.


Same here. I'm not going back until Pope Palpatine is gone and all the child molester priests are too. I believe it would be a much greater sin to support a system of child molestation then to not go to church.
 
2012-08-30 07:20:25 AM
I haven't been to church in 17 years outside of weddings and baptisms, but I still can;t help being a bit ashamed of being catholic as a kid.
 
2012-08-30 07:21:08 AM
Why the hell should Christians have to say: This guy disgusts me.

I am not apologising for idiocy committed by women, by white people, or by gays. I am certainly not apologising for the lunatic rantings of some old child molester either.

If Christians have to apologise for the acts and idiocy of other 'so called' Christians, or of Muslims have to apologise for radical terrorists, or if Jews have to apologise for Israel, then by this logic, all men need to apologise for rape. All black people need to apologise for Robert Mugabe or whatever.

What else? All Russians need to apologise for the Soviet Union, all Americans need to apologise for Hiroshima.

And we could go on.

I do not need to apologise for my gender, my faith or my sexuality. It should be a given that a person does not agree or endorse or in any way participate in this sort of lunacy unless proven otherwise.

Jeez.

That said, I certainly agree all all and I do mean ALL organised religion can go and frock itself. Religion is a business, faith is a personal choice.
 
2012-08-30 07:25:02 AM

ShannonKW: Here's a thread full of condemnations, furious calls for barbaric punishment, dogmatic claims, black-and-white attitudes, and herd thinking -- some of it the evident result of glossing over an entire page of text to find a line to justify it all. The people doing this are apparently atheists.

The interview itself is characterized by open-mindedness, reluctance to condemn, objectivity, forgoing of moral absolutes, and willingness to make concessions to human nature. This person is a Catholic priest.

It's quite a spectacle to see secular humanism transformed into the demon it was conceived to fight. Friedrich Nietzsche was right.


No, the interview is the same Catholic BS covering for the crimes of their peers. The interview was basically, "Oh it's okay to use your position of power to abuse minors as long as you aren't literally farking them" and "We got away with it in the past. What's the big deal now?" And this is his reaction after repeated scandals and cover ups. This man is supposed to be a moral authority and yet he can't even condemn sexual molestation of minors by people in positions of power. No, he goes the other farking direction and blames the minors for seducing the adults.

Here's an example of a time to forgo moral absolutes: stealing food to feed your starving family
Here's an example of a time NOT to forgo moral absolutes: an authority figure molesting a child
 
2012-08-30 07:25:22 AM
If you tithe the catholic church, you support child rape. There is no getting away from it anymore.

All that shiat in your good book about actions over words should sink in at some point.
 
2012-08-30 07:35:23 AM

runujhkj: Godscrack: runujhkj: Man, I hate atheists. They're so annoying, with all of their internet snark.

[img266.imageshack.us image 449x630]

If that guy in the sandwich board was a Catholic priest, that picture would look very different.


If the boys on this picture were a sandwich, the catholic priest would be the mayonnaise.
 
2012-08-30 07:45:04 AM
..."Pressed for clarification, the New York State-based religious leader explained that kids looking for father figures might be drawn to priests to fill a hole."

Bad choice of words in more ways than one.
 
2012-08-30 07:52:43 AM

12349876: cookiefleck: I adore you, I really do.. but when people do the whole " All Catholics do this" it's the same as throwing the "all blacks do this"

You're right, because the ghetto gang bangers are just as influential and powerful in the black community as the Priests are to Catholics.


That wasn't addressing the assertion that you're making the same argument. He's right. All catholics aren't kid diddlers like those reprobates in Happy Vally. I have a aunt, a HILARIOUSLY Catholic aunt who has switched from tithing to donating building supplies to a hospital being renovated by her diocese. This is to insure that none of her cash is used in settlements. I think that you might be surprised at how profound the reaction to the boy touching has been within the catholic world.
 
2012-08-30 07:53:08 AM

Rain Fall: Why the hell should Christians have to say: This guy disgusts me.

I am not apologising for idiocy committed by women, by white people, or by gays. I am certainly not apologising for the lunatic rantings of some old child molester either.

If Christians have to apologise for the acts and idiocy of other 'so called' Christians, or of Muslims have to apologise for radical terrorists, or if Jews have to apologise for Israel, then by this logic, all men need to apologise for rape. All black people need to apologise for Robert Mugabe or whatever.

What else? All Russians need to apologise for the Soviet Union, all Americans need to apologise for Hiroshima.

And we could go on.

I do not need to apologise for my gender, my faith or my sexuality. It should be a given that a person does not agree or endorse or in any way participate in this sort of lunacy unless proven otherwise.

Jeez.

That said, I certainly agree all all and I do mean ALL organised religion can go and frock itself. Religion is a business, faith is a personal choice.


Except that the Catholic Church is a hierachical organization. If you choose to be catholic you kinda endorse what those higher up the chain are doing.

Hierachical, funny word. Hierarchical hierarchical hierarchical.
 
2012-08-30 07:53:41 AM

The My Little Pony Killer: Any Fark Christians here to speak out against this guy? No?


You might want to wait for more than five posts before assuming we aren't going to speak out against this. So this is me, a Christian, speaking out against this. Of course, since I'm not Catholic, it's pretty easy for me to speak out against these things. (Not that I don't speak out against hateful idiocy coming from Protestants, either.) What you really want is a Fark Catholic to speak out against this.
 
2012-08-30 09:03:50 AM
What the actual........this article gives me a massive, raging sad. For humanity.
 
2012-08-30 09:15:50 AM


What a naughty bit touching pedophile may look like:

i.huffpost.com
 
2012-08-30 09:17:27 AM

St_Francis_P: Translation: "We used to Roger little boys all we liked and nobody ratted us out. I miss those days."


Why back in MY day we would bugger two or three little boys before lunch and nobody ever said boo to us! And back then it was much harder because the boys were much faster. Of course we all had onions on our belts as it was the fashion at the time....
 
2012-08-30 09:18:10 AM

saymayne: Lol FTA: "Fill a hole."

In Catholicism's defense, my Baptist children's minister is doin 20 for masturbating with kids.

In Christianity's defense,


That's hardly a defense of catholicism.
 
2012-08-30 09:22:51 AM
I was going to make a post about how the church is better off simply allowing priests to get married the way other branches of christianity have done. However, given that what we're seeing here isn't a case of a priest caught farking a woman (or a dude, no judgement), but instead acting out on being a pedophile and another group of douchebags covering it up, I can't even suggest it with a straight face, since they won't be happy until society goes bonkers and somehow manages to approve of pedophilia, which won't happen.

/is starting to think his nordic ancestors had other reasons for raiding and burning churches way back in the day...
//"you sick sunnovabiatch, you came here and disrespected our religion, then you farked my five year old son! for that, you die!"
///Hard to disagree with that...
 
2012-08-30 09:24:58 AM
Is this really a surprise?!?!?!

To be a catholic priest you have to CHOOSE to live the rest of your life without sex of masturbation. My guess is that the selection criteria skews the results towards "creepy dudes" and away from "well adjusted and normal adults".
 
2012-08-30 09:28:06 AM
But it's those blasted independant nuns that are the real problem in the church, amirite? Woohoo! Over here! Nuns! Anyone? Hello.....?
 
2012-08-30 09:47:09 AM
Priests should be castrated into Eunuchs... just like the old days.

Problem solved.
 
2012-08-30 09:51:11 AM

SpectroBoy: Is this really a surprise?!?!?!

To be a catholic priest you have to CHOOSE to live the rest of your life without sex of masturbation. My guess is that the selection criteria skews the results towards "creepy dudes" and away from "well adjusted and normal adults".


I remember reading an interview with a convicted priest. For what it's worth, he was pretty candid about what he felt motivated him to do as he did. One of the things he'd cited was loneliness, specifically the desire to have a family (in Catholic churches, if you're the pastor, your flock is supposed to be your family and you're to have no other devotion to family but this).

Not saying any of this justifies this sort of behavior in anyone, but I think that- for most people- living like this over a long enough timeline twists them psychologically, and it's very possible this is one of the results of that forced lifestyle.

In a church which has a problem with a lack of priests, you'd think that relaxing the dogmatic requirements would seem advantageous for other reasons, but nope, can't change what's "written". That's just how the Roman Catholic Church Rolls. The chief reason not to expect any change is the Pope- not necessarily because he's a douchebag, or of questionable morals (though he may be both those things), but mostly because the Archbishops endorsed him specifically because they believed he wouldn't change anything during his term.

They got what they paid for there.
 
2012-08-30 09:51:42 AM

Nezorf: 2: The ADULT in that situation is supposed to, you know, BE THE ADULT. Failing to do so is inexcusable.


If the other is 18, aren't there two adults in the situation?
 
2012-08-30 09:51:59 AM
Jesuits can rationalize anything
 
2012-08-30 09:52:44 AM

neutronstar: Problem solved.


If you think that the desire to do this comes from between a person's legs, your thinking on the issue is as malformed as theirs.
 
2012-08-30 10:06:19 AM

saymayne: Lol FTA: "Fill a hole."

In Catholicism's defense, my Baptist children's minister is doin 20 for masturbating with kids.

In Christianity's defense,


There's a lot of defending needed if you keep painting with such a broad brush. How about in public school teacher's defense? Some of them have gotten with the kids, does that mean the whole education system needs defending?
 
2012-08-30 10:12:12 AM
historically sexual relationships between men and boys have not been thought of as crimes.

But consensual relationships between men is evil and wrong and destroys the fabric of society and the sanctity of marriage and brings down God's wrath and letting them get married violates your rights because it forces you to accept their heathen lifestyle and it must be stopped at all costs. Gotcha.
 
2012-08-30 10:14:36 AM

trappedspirit: saymayne: Lol FTA: "Fill a hole."

In Catholicism's defense, my Baptist children's minister is doin 20 for masturbating with kids.

In Christianity's defense,

There's a lot of defending needed if you keep painting with such a broad brush. How about in public school teacher's defense? Some of them have gotten with the kids, does that mean the whole education system needs defending?


That depends, do the superintendents of school districts have a knack for constantly shifting blame, hiding the perpetrators and failing to report the crimes?

Do they come out on nationally broadcast cable TV and have the audacity to say "gee, yanno, we were much better off when we could bugger boys indiscriminately," with a complete lack of irony or self-awareness?

Yes, there are redeemable aspects of the Catholic faith, and even, to some extent, the institution of the Roman Catholic Church itself which governs it, but there are also stark differences between institutions that have the wisdom to render up this sort of behavior to judgement by the proper authorities, and institutions which have a very well-established pattern of not only refusing to render their outliers up for justice, but refusing to recognize why this is wrong.

In other words, the problem with Catholicism as a whole is far more institutionalized, far more systemic, than it is with the public school system. The public school system doesn't have too many administrators who are complicit in these sorts of incidents...

...excepting Joe Paterno, I know.
 
2012-08-30 10:20:49 AM
Headline is semi-accurate.

Hell, I know boys who'll fark anything.

Anything
 
2012-08-30 10:20:53 AM

ExperianScaresCthulhu: Teens are aggressors. That's fact.
It's up to adults to be adults and nip that shiat in the bud instead of succumbing.
That's also fact, and more important.


dafuq
 
2012-08-30 10:36:56 AM

The One True TheDavid: The My Little Pony Killer: St_Francis_P: The My Little Pony Killer: Any Fark Christians here to speak out against this guy? No?

Would you settle for an agnostic saint?

Good enough for me. I'm just noting that this is a really good thread for the usual "I'm a Christian, but this guy totally disgusts me" crowd to make an appearance.

I'm an atheist, and I don't give a damn. In the first place it is possible that "[in a] lot of the cases, the youngster - 14, 16, 18 - is the seducer." I seduced a few older men when I was a teenager; they weren't Catholic priests but then I moved in a very non-Catholic world. And whatever grave hormonal disorders some Farkers might suffer from, most of us guys stopped being little boys before we got to be "14. 16, [or] 18."

Should priests be mindful of their vows and not partake with a sexually developed person of either sex, regardless of who's the seducer? Yes, of course: vows, like other promises, should be kept whever possible; if you don't mean to keep it or can't try very hard to then don't make the vow. But I'm not going to get very upset about "abuse" of somebody who in most of the world is old enough to get married and in most cases is mature enough to knock females up.

If it's okay for your average "14, 16, 18" year guy old to consensually fark a buxom "hottie" teacher then it's also okay for him to consensually get it on with a Catholic priest. Even if the priest is male too.


That's why this guy threw out those ages to make his argument - to make it sound better. 18 is legal everywhere and as long as it is consentual and not coerced, it's fine and no one cares, priest or not. 16 is legal in many states, so same deal. 14 is illegal. Period. I don't care if it is a mature 14 year old. An adult has no business being with 14. Bad.

He threw out those ages here, 14, 16, 18, but the truth is, the priests he is talking about have been accused of molesting 8, 10, 12 etc. Just like Sandusky whom he defends. He feels the same way about the little ones, but he is smart enough to know he could never get away with saying so.
 
2012-08-30 10:39:27 AM

blahpers: If and when theist's beliefs ceased having deleterious effects on atheists (and even other theists), I will have some sympathy for your argument. Even if that ever happened, though, many Fark atheists have some background in science and/or philosophy, and such folk are naturally inclined to seek truth (and, consequently, to correct falsehood).


If you were really smart, you'd realize that faith is not based on logic or "truth" and is just a belief system that you can't argue with--the beauty of religion is that it never has to be "proved." it's built right into the system.

So give it up. "Correcting falsehood" might sound all noble to you, but do you really care about what those losers believe? Or does it have a lot more to do with proving something about yourself? I'd be willing to bet that it has a lot more to do with your own ego, than any altruistic notion to save the world from religious foolishness.
 
2012-08-30 10:44:26 AM
i.huffpost.com
So, did you smack dat @55, or did you grab it?
 
2012-08-30 10:54:09 AM

cryinoutloud: If you were really smart, you'd realize that faith is not based on logic or "truth" and is just a belief system that you can't argue with--the beauty of religion is that it never has to be "proved." it's built right into the system.


So, I guess that makes centuries and billions of people who have argued with Religious types over the matter of truth pretty damn stupid.

Kinda shocking considering how many of those people rank in our history books as being very intelligent and visionary in their respective eras, but okay.


And before you get indignant, I get what you're saying. However, as "the faithful" and "the athiests" are both subsets of "human beings", there's an understandable tendency to believe that common ground can be found, despite different views on things.

It might not always be justified in every case, but it's something I can completely understand in people.
 
2012-08-30 10:57:53 AM

cryinoutloud: blahpers: If and when theist's beliefs ceased having deleterious effects on atheists (and even other theists), I will have some sympathy for your argument. Even if that ever happened, though, many Fark atheists have some background in science and/or philosophy, and such folk are naturally inclined to seek truth (and, consequently, to correct falsehood).

If you were really smart, you'd realize that faith is not based on logic or "truth" and is just a belief system that you can't argue with--the beauty of religion is that it never has to be "proved." it's built right into the system.


It is an argument worth attempting nonetheless.

So give it up. "Correcting falsehood" might sound all noble to you, but do you really care about what those losers believe? Or does it have a lot more to do with proving something about yourself? I'd be willing to bet that it has a lot more to do with your own ego, than any altruistic notion to save the world from religious foolishness.

Prove . . . what? Hey, I have to live on this rock too. Altruism doesn't need to enter into the picture at all. Falsehood, as a rule, is ultimately harmful to everyone, including me. Therefore, I combat it. If that means there's something wrong with my ego, I don't want it fixed.
 
2012-08-30 11:00:43 AM
Pressed for clarification, the New York State-based religious leader explained that kids looking for father figures might be drawn to priests to fill a hole.

Exactly.
 
2012-08-30 11:03:00 AM
thepigskindoctors.com
You can't have a Pedo thread without Penn State!
 
2012-08-30 11:38:58 AM
The great part is these people are lecturing the rest of us non-stop on the issue of sexual morality.
 
2012-08-30 12:38:41 PM
namegoeshere:

14 is illegal. Period. I don't care if it is a mature 14 year old. An adult has no business being with 14. Bad.

So you go by the law instead of biology. Too bad you need The Authorities to think for you: physical maturation you can see for yourself, the legal age of consent you have to look up.


He threw out those ages here, 14, 16, 18, but the truth is, the priests he is talking about have been accused of molesting 8, 10, 12 etc. Just like Sandusky whom he defends ...

Congratulations, you're a mind-reader. And you're a genius too: I didn't know Sandusky was a Catholic priest, which is what the article was about, but somehow you tracked down his ordination papers.
 
2012-08-30 12:39:11 PM

miss diminutive: Godscrack: Crazy old fool. They should lock him up.

That might not be the punishment we think it is.

Exile him to the island of Lesbos instead.


Then you'd have straight dudes fiddling boys just to get sent to Snapper Island.
 
2012-08-30 12:48:51 PM

Lionel Mandrake: Dear Catholic Church:

STOP IMITATING THE F*CKING ANCIENT WORLD


[4.bp.blogspot.com image 436x435] 


We have new standards now.


At least the ancients could open up a can of whoop-ass on Persians or Gauls. People's grandmas could thrash most RC priests.
 
2012-08-30 01:04:29 PM

The One True TheDavid: namegoeshere:

14 is illegal. Period. I don't care if it is a mature 14 year old. An adult has no business being with 14. Bad.

So you go by the law instead of biology. Too bad you need The Authorities to think for you: physical maturation you can see for yourself, the legal age of consent you have to look up.


He threw out those ages here, 14, 16, 18, but the truth is, the priests he is talking about have been accused of molesting 8, 10, 12 etc. Just like Sandusky whom he defends ...

Congratulations, you're a mind-reader. And you're a genius too: I didn't know Sandusky was a Catholic priest, which is what the article was about, but somehow you tracked down his ordination papers.


The same article also features him defending (well, at least sympathizing with) Sandusky. It isn't exactly a non sequitur to bring him up.
 
2012-08-30 01:10:30 PM
The ubiquity of this type of person is part of the reason I'm no longer a x-tian. That, and the whole fairy tale- level dogma.
 
2012-08-30 01:13:56 PM

Agent Smiths Laugh:
jso2897:
I have no opinions about what "sides" faith possesses. As far as I am concerned, you can believe whatever you want - and if you have the decency to keep it to yourself, and not try to force it on me, we'll get along famously.

That is precisely, functionally, how I operate. I don't care, however, if they try to share their beliefs. It can be interesting to listen to sometimes. I just care if they try to force me to conform to them in whatever way.





Exactly! As an atheist I do find it interesting to learn about different religions and talk to people about their beliefs. I don't seek religous conversation, but if they bring it up I'll participate. Christians are always surprised to find I have read the bible.

I have talked to many people from different faiths about their religion.....Muslims, Jews, Buddhists and Taoists, yet somehow Christians are LITERALLY the only ones who chastise, question and even berate you for not believeing what they believe.

Not all christians do this...but in my life, all who have looked down on me becasue of my beliefs have been christian.
 
2012-08-30 01:23:26 PM

ShannonKW: Here's a thread full of condemnations, furious calls for barbaric punishment, dogmatic claims, black-and-white attitudes, and herd thinking -- some of it the evident result of glossing over an entire page of text to find a line to justify it all. The people doing this are apparently atheists.

The interview itself is characterized by open-mindedness, reluctance to condemn, objectivity, forgoing of moral absolutes, and willingness to make concessions to human nature. This person is a Catholic priest.

It's quite a spectacle to see secular humanism transformed into the demon it was conceived to fight. Friedrich Nietzsche was right.


Perhaps you're missing the differences between not being Christian, being atheist, and being a secular humanist.

That being said, the anger is there because the Catholic hierarchy has systematically protected and enabled priests who molest children. I'd be surprised if that doesn't make you a little angry as well. While I don't agree with the folks suggesting some pretty heinous stuff themselves, their anger is not misplaced.

As for the "open-mindedness, reluctance to condemn, objectivity, forgoing of moral absolutes," fark it. When the problem is a reluctance to punish child molesters, what is needed is MORE condemnation. That being said, given the responses in this thread, maybe some "willingness to make concessions to human nature" would be nice. The priests who are molesting children are people who have done something terrible and likely unforgivable. (No, I don't believe in forgiveness. That's for Christians. But I ain't going to rule out moving on and looking to the future.) A key point is they're people, and they need help. SO HELP THEM!!! What the church has done lately helps nobody.

As for the fact that he seems to be a decent person who likely misspoke and doesn't really mean what he said, that great. But I ain't giving someone extra credit for being a decent person. Even if he's a Catholic priest, because I don't believe that being a priest makes someone a bad person. Mind you, I also don't believe it makes them a good person.

In short, you're trying to get a reaction by condemning those who are angry about the actions of the Catholic Church, so here's a reaction.
 
2012-08-30 01:24:52 PM

blahpers: The One True TheDavid:
[...]

I didn't know Sandusky was a Catholic priest, which is what the article was about, but somehow you tracked down his ordination papers.

The same article also features him defending (well, at least sympathizing with) Sandusky. It isn't exactly a non sequitur to bring him up.


Ah. Well. I've stood corrected so many times my arches have fallen.
 
2012-08-30 01:32:25 PM

Rain Fall: Why the hell should Christians have to say: This guy disgusts me. ...


You're right. Christians shouldn't need to tell anyone that they think molesting a child is bad. Of course they think that. And anyone here trying to characterize all Catholics or all Christians or (and this would make you a crazy person) all religious folks as child molesters is way off base.

What Catholics need to do is tell their church leaders that they think molesting a child is bad. Because apparently the folks at the top need reminding. So yes, I expect them to speak out, and speak out loudly. Just not here.
 
2012-08-30 01:33:40 PM
You guys do realize that in all likelihood the actual 'seduction' cases were probably less than five total, right?
 
2012-08-30 01:38:44 PM
I May Be Crazy But...:

[T]he anger is there because the Catholic hierarchy has systematically protected and enabled priests who molest children. I'd be surprised if that doesn't make you a little angry as well. While I don't agree with the folks suggesting some pretty heinous stuff themselves, their anger is not misplaced.

Agreed.

As for the rest, the only way to resolve this issue is to somehow breed people who are incapable of being aroused by anyone under whatever the legal age is in any given locality. We could concentrate on teaching everybody to be in full control of their sexuality, but then what would the entertainment industry do?

It's hard for me to sympathize with either "side" of this issue these days, for the same reason it's getting harder to sympathize with anybody about anything "controversial": the biggest sinners are those who throw the most stones, and not stoning anybody has become the greatest evil. All the outrage is getting on my nerves so badly that I'm on the verge of ignoring everything that Americans are supposed to find important. (Even Lindsay Lohan.)
 
2012-08-30 01:38:55 PM

I May Be Crazy But...: As for the "open-mindedness, reluctance to condemn, objectivity, forgoing of moral absolutes," fark it. When the problem is a reluctance to punish child molesters, what is needed is MORE condemnation.


The odd part is that the fire-and-brimstone crowd seem ready to condemn just about everything (and everyone) else, but not this. And this is of course, very obviously and transparently because it'd look bad for "their team".

They'll try to misdirect ("It's not pedophilia, is' homosexuality- which is wrong!")

They'll suggest it's not in line with the doctrine of Forgiveness ("But if your practicing gayness, you're totally going to hell.")

And here we see they'll have no problem blaming the victim (like most rapists).


For a "moral authority" they'll sure spend a lot of time avoiding responsibility in this matter, won't they?


I was raised Catholic, don't get me wrong. I quit, but I won't deny that some of the lessons I brought out of it were worth learning (and still are). And that's precisely why I can't reconcile this kind of behavior with any sort of institution that prides itself on being morally forthright.
 
2012-08-30 01:59:29 PM
Anything less than unqualified condemnation of child molestation coming from the Catholic Church is unacceptable.
 
2012-08-30 02:27:10 PM
Sounds like a nambla spokesperson. What a sick fark. Hopefully law enforcement are investigating this guy.
 
2012-08-30 02:44:18 PM

The One True TheDavid: blahpers: The One True TheDavid:
[...]

I didn't know Sandusky was a Catholic priest, which is what the article was about, but somehow you tracked down his ordination papers.

The same article also features him defending (well, at least sympathizing with) Sandusky. It isn't exactly a non sequitur to bring him up.

Ah. Well. I've stood corrected so many times my arches have fallen.


Just means that you still care enough to discuss things instead of giving in to apathy. : D
 
2012-08-30 02:46:36 PM

PsiChick: You guys do realize that in all likelihood the actual 'seduction' cases were probably less than five total, right?


It really doesn't matter. It isn't as if "seduction" is a legitimate defense of, well, anything. You don't lose the ability to discern right from wrong just because someone gave you a stiffy.
 
2012-08-30 02:55:38 PM

blahpers: The One True TheDavid:

Ah. Well. I've stood corrected so many times my arches have fallen.

Just means that you still care enough to discuss things instead of giving in to apathy. : D


Stop that. That's not fair.
 
2012-08-30 02:55:49 PM

The One True TheDavid: I May Be Crazy But...:

[T]he anger is there because the Catholic hierarchy has systematically protected and enabled priests who molest children. I'd be surprised if that doesn't make you a little angry as well. While I don't agree with the folks suggesting some pretty heinous stuff themselves, their anger is not misplaced.

Agreed.

As for the rest, the only way to resolve this issue is to somehow breed people who are incapable of being aroused by anyone under whatever the legal age is in any given locality. We could concentrate on teaching everybody to be in full control of their sexuality, but then what would the entertainment industry do?

It's hard for me to sympathize with either "side" of this issue these days, for the same reason it's getting harder to sympathize with anybody about anything "controversial": the biggest sinners are those who throw the most stones, and not stoning anybody has become the greatest evil. All the outrage is getting on my nerves so badly that I'm on the verge of ignoring everything that Americans are supposed to find important. (Even Lindsay Lohan.)


Oh no! The apathy beast is rearing its head! Run! ("Eh, why bother?")

I really don't think the only way to resolve the issue of priests molesting children is to breed priests that can't be aroused by children. It might help if the priesthood's ridiculous restrictions on sexuality were lifted. It would help also if, as said before, the priesthood didn't actively work to conceal and protect offenders from secular authority. The Catholic deity may forgive, but I know of few Catholic theologians who would argue that said deity's forgiveness justifiably render's a person immune to the earthly consequences of their actions.

Honestly, the interviewee comes off as pretty borked in the head. Just like a lifetime of physical training can produce amazing feats, a lifetime of indoctrination can produce an amazing ability to rationalize away problems that reflect poorly on the indoctrinating organization.
 
2012-08-30 02:55:57 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: St_Francis_P: The My Little Pony Killer: Any Fark Christians here to speak out against this guy? No?

Would you settle for an agnostic saint?

Good enough for me. I'm just noting that this is a really good thread for the usual "I'm a Christian, but this guy totally disgusts me" crowd to make an appearance.


I'm a Christian, but this guy totally disgusts me. 

There ya go.
 
2012-08-30 02:56:53 PM

The One True TheDavid: blahpers: The One True TheDavid:

Ah. Well. I've stood corrected so many times my arches have fallen.

Just means that you still care enough to discuss things instead of giving in to apathy. : D

Stop that. That's not fair.


Hey, didn't mean anything by it. Discussion is a good thing!
 
2012-08-30 02:59:04 PM
blahpers:

You don't lose the ability to discern right from wrong just because someone gave you a stiffy.

Or you shouldn't anyway, but some guys are 12 forever.
 
2012-08-30 02:59:44 PM

blahpers: It isn't as if "seduction" is a legitimate defense of, well, anything.


Legitimate? No. Common? Yes. Very yes.
 
2012-08-30 03:25:32 PM

blahpers: PsiChick: You guys do realize that in all likelihood the actual 'seduction' cases were probably less than five total, right?

It really doesn't matter. It isn't as if "seduction" is a legitimate defense of, well, anything. You don't lose the ability to discern right from wrong just because someone gave you a stiffy.


Well, in this case, it's also a victim-blaming lie, which moves it into 'disgusting' territory. I agree with what you're saying; I'm just saying that it's a very subtle way of calling the victims sluts. Obviously, that's highly disgusting.
 
2012-08-30 03:37:54 PM

PsiChick: Well, in this case, it's also a victim-blaming lie, which moves it into 'disgusting' territory. I agree with what you're saying; I'm just saying that it's a very subtle way of calling the victims sluts. Obviously, that's highly disgusting.


It's sort of the IRL version of the old joke:

Q: What's the #1 cause of Pedophilia?\

A: Sexy children.
 
2012-08-30 04:35:40 PM
blahpers replied:

I really don't think the only way to resolve the issue of priests molesting children is to breed priests that can't be aroused by children.

Then they should develop a way to weed them out. Including technological means, like those machines that supposedly show the parts of the brain that light up when a person lies or sees something sexy or whatever.


It might help if the priesthood's ridiculous restrictions on sexuality were lifted.

Except the one on molesting prepubescent kids, of course.


It would help also if, as said before, the priesthood didn't actively work to conceal and protect offenders from secular authority.

But what other perks are there to the priesthood these days? You don't seriously think the the religious fervor and moral purity of the clergy has ever had a lot to do with the survival of any church, do you? Muhammad got first pick of the loot and was specifically exempted from the limits on the number and age of wives; apparently having his family and friends decide he's too annoying to live wasn't its own reward, for him anyway.

As far as the "Western" Christian churches go, it's been downhill for them since the laity learned to read and count.

Teaching people to think critically and question authority would be good, except there are too many vested interests with sensitve feet involved for that to get very far.

The more I think on it the more convinced I become that it's largely a matter of scale: drastically reduce the human population and you drastically reduce its "foibles."
 
2012-08-30 05:01:15 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: Any Fark Christians here to speak out against this guy? No?


I'm not a Catholic and not really affected one way or the other if Benedict leaves. I'd rather he retire and cede his funny hat.
 
2012-08-30 07:11:15 PM

ExperianScaresCthulhu: Teens are aggressors. That's fact.
It's up to adults to be adults and nip that shiat in the bud instead of succumbing.
That's also fact, and more important.


Hey, we used to stone people for sodomy, but NOOOOO, people have to be all "progressive" these days, and look where that's gotten us.
 
2012-08-30 07:30:43 PM
For those of you saying that Christians shouldn't have to condemn this guy, please remember that the next time a Muslim blows up a building, mmmkay?
 
2012-08-30 08:03:49 PM

MeanJean: For those of you saying that Christians shouldn't have to condemn this guy, please remember that the next time a Muslim blows up a building, mmmkay?


You're aware that at least a few of us are neither muslim OR christian, right? I can remember not to treat two religions I have no association with roughly the same without being reminded.

As an aside, what's the right adjective for a person who is a Muslim? Is it muslim? Somehow I've managed to never learn this.
 
2012-08-30 08:21:35 PM

The One True TheDavid: Abox:

I've always said closet gays never know what's going to give them away; same goes for closet pedophiles apparently. 


Pedophilia:

pedophilia (usually uncountable; plural pedophilias)

Noun:

1. Sexual or erotic feelings or desires directed by adults and late adolescents towards children; particularly, in psychiatry, a paraphilia consisting of a primary adult sexual attraction to prepubescent children. [from 20th c.]

2. Sexual acts committed by adults with prepubescent children.


Puberty:

Noun

puberty (uncountable)

1. the age at which a person is first capable of sexual reproduction


In this case it's the definition is easy to prove: have the "14, 16, 18" year old guy jerk off into a beaker, then put some of the ejaculate under a microscope and look for "tadpoles." If there are sperm swimming around then the priest cannot engage in pedophilia with him. (Unless the priest is the prepube, but I think canon law rules that out in the first place.)

It's easy to know what you're talking about once you know what the words you use mean.




Like I said...


/but valid point!
 
2012-08-30 10:25:20 PM

grinnel: I don't know if it acceptable to plug a blog on fark, but....

the majority of a/theist tennis matches on Fark all have one thing in common and that is the old testament. The frustration i get from reading this fallacious banter has bothered me so much, I have actually put down my fly rod and biatched to nobody on the intertubes. So far, I have only attacked one side; there is more to come. Link


There is only one side if that side is raping children.

You might want to save the well reasoned apologia for other topics.

Right now the only answer that is right is the answer of moral vengeance against pedo priests and their apologists.
 
2012-08-31 05:30:47 AM
Ilmarinen - I may be Catholic, but I am in no way affiliated with the Catholic Church, in fact I am proud to say that I was almost excommunicated at 18 for telling a damn nun to go and fu(k herself. The US is also a hierarchical place. By electing people who proceed to bumb, torture and murder, the American people are giving their tacid agreement that it is okay to do these things in their name, yet, I do not think all 300 million of them should apologise, because clearly not all agree with the barbarism. My statement stands, unless somehow a Catholic is giving their approval, or otherwise encouraging or helping cover up the atrocities committed in the name of the Catholic church, then it should not be a given that Catholics support the nonsense. Many people consider themselves devoutly Catholic, but do not give a red cent to the church and would be the first in live to cock-punch a molester priest.

I May Be Crazy But... - Nice sentiments, but the Catholic Church does not listen to Catholics.

I disapprove or organised religion. Faith is one thing, whatever relationship someone has between whatever version of God and themselves they have is cool. Religion is corrupt bullshiat, fairytales and corruption inducing rot that is used to divide and conquer us.
 
2012-08-31 11:02:41 PM
"Influential Catholic Priest: "Suppose you have a man having a nervous breakdown, and a youngster comes after him. A lot of the cases, the youngster - 14, 16, 18 - is the seducer"
Yep, because if there is one thing that turns the young guys on it's the prospect of man-love with a fat, sweaty middle-aged guy with a set of moobs. It must be the robes that turns those young guys into absolute sluts.
 
2012-09-01 04:44:56 PM

dbubb: Also, I believe that religion has played a very strong role in the development of science, contrary to what most people think/believe.


This has some similarity to saying the Catholic church has played a very strong role in the development of Protestant philosophy.

grinnel: I don't know if it acceptable to plug a blog on fark, but....


It's acceptable, but the comment of "Your Blog Sucks" is an obligatory response.

Arumat: If I'm walking along, and see someone waving a sign that says "1+2=4" and advocating that the law should reflect their belief, am I not morally obligated to show them that they are wrong?


amultiverse.com


cryinoutloud: "Correcting falsehood" might sound all noble to you, but do you really care about what those losers believe?


imgs.xkcd.com


The impact is reduced but not eliminated for individual voters.

The One True TheDavid: And you're a genius too: I didn't know Sandusky was a Catholic priest, which is what the article was about, but somehow you tracked down his ordination papers.

blahpers: The same article also features him defending (well, at least sympathizing with) Sandusky. It isn't exactly a non sequitur to bring him up.


And that's even without getting into the similarities of religion and sports in general, to strengthen the analogy. See the 1982 "Institutionalized Sport as Quasi-Religion: Preliminary Considerations" by M. Kenneth Brody (doi:10.1177/019372357900300203).

The One True TheDavid: The more I think on it the more convinced I become that it's largely a matter of scale: drastically reduce the human population and you drastically reduce its "foibles."


In terms of absolute numbers, apparently yes; in terms of the scale of the foibles relative to the population, possibly no.
You might look into Steven Pinker's "The Better Angels of Our Nature".
 
Displayed 277 of 277 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report