Do you have adblock enabled?
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.

(NJ.com)   Catholic Church comes up with novel new defense by saying one of their Priests wasn't "on duty" when he molested young boys. Police across the country are shocked they didn't come up with this first as a way to cover their asses when cops screw up   (nj.com) divider line 108
    More: Stupid, Terence McAlinden, Burlington County, priests, youth organizations, dioceses, Toms River, Our Lady  
•       •       •

2673 clicks; posted to Main » on 03 Jun 2014 at 9:04 AM (51 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-06-03 08:20:06 AM  
This isn't a slippery slope issue, this is at the bottom of the hill in the mud already.

"How can you tell if the Catholic Church diocese should be held responsible for a priest's actions?"  Answer: "When they're not molesting a kid."
 
2014-06-03 08:39:46 AM  
And once again the Catholic church shows that the only thing it actually gives two shiats about is the protection of its money and power.

The only thing that will have any effect on their protection of the kiddy rapists is if a large proportion of their congregations stand up and say "this is unacceptable, and we're no longer willing to remain members of the Church"

And that is why I consider anyone who's still a Catholic to be a supporter of child rape. You've made the decision that you're happy to remain a member of an institution which allows and protects people who do this, you provide the support for them to be able to. You can fark off.
 
2014-06-03 08:46:03 AM  
Well, shiat, why don't the priests just go off duty and grab them some strange pussy and leave the boys alone?
 
2014-06-03 08:46:22 AM  
So they're saying it's more of a hobby, really.
 
2014-06-03 08:59:56 AM  

SphericalTime: "How can you tell if the Catholic Church diocese should be held responsible for a priest's actions?" Answer: "When they're not molesting a kid."


Well, I'd say that the diocese is responsible if they have knowledge of the kiddie-diddling and chose to not do anything about it (or chose to cover it up). I think you'd have to prove that the diocese was negligent or not diligent in trying to protect the children.

But the argument they're making here is dumb.
 
2014-06-03 09:05:44 AM  

Sybarite: So they're saying it's more of a hobby, really.


It's a problem distinguishing between coming and going.
 
2014-06-03 09:05:51 AM  

DammitIForgotMyLogin: I consider anyone who's still a Catholic to be a supporter of child rape


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

di-toe
 
2014-06-03 09:09:42 AM  
He was in mufti at the time.
 
2014-06-03 09:12:08 AM  
In before we get accused of Catholic bashing for pointing out facts...

/curious if any of the regular apologists will show up.
 
2014-06-03 09:12:52 AM  
wasn't "on duty" for what?  Humanity?

//wrong is wrong
 
2014-06-03 09:15:18 AM  

PunGent: pointing out facts


conspiracy to support an organization that supports child rape.
For centuries.
FACT.
 
2014-06-03 09:15:21 AM  
Okay, someone has to be slapped with a big pile of "what part of Holy Orders do you not understand"?
 
2014-06-03 09:17:14 AM  
A good example of noun/verb agreement:

One priest was on duty.
Two priests were on duty.

Another example:

One headline writer was attentive,
Two headline writers were attentive.
 
2014-06-03 09:17:31 AM  
So this didn't happen in the priest's rectory,  but in the child's,  is what the church is trying to argue here?
 
2014-06-03 09:18:25 AM  

DammitIForgotMyLogin: And once again the Catholic church shows that the only thing it actually gives two shiats about is the protection of its money and power.

The only thing that will have any effect on their protection of the kiddy rapists is if a large proportion of their congregations stand up and say "this is unacceptable, and we're no longer willing to remain members of the Church"

And that is why I consider anyone who's still a Catholic to be a supporter of child rape. You've made the decision that you're happy to remain a member of an institution which allows and protects people who do this, you provide the support for them to be able to. You can fark off.


This never ever forget this. The Catholic Church really should be considered and treated as a child sex ring.

\Glad to see people are now seeing through the PR Popes PR.
 
2014-06-03 09:18:54 AM  
 th06.deviantart.net
 
2014-06-03 09:19:21 AM  
So does that mean that priests can have regular, consensual sex when they are "off-duty?"
 
2014-06-03 09:28:20 AM  
The Catholic Church is not responsible for the illegal actions of any of its individual members.

The Catholic Church is responsible when they find out about these actions and cover it up instead of turning the perpetrators over to the authorities.
 
2014-06-03 09:28:48 AM  

DammitIForgotMyLogin: And once again the Catholic church shows that the only thing it actually gives two shiats about is the protection of its money and power.



That's because anyone who actually gave up power and money would end up with nothing. And if they kept spouting nonsense about altruism; they might find themselves crucified.  The church learned that lesson from Christ, thank-you very much.  Never give up your power or money!
 
2014-06-03 09:29:06 AM  

goatan: The Catholic Church really should be considered and treated as a child sex ring.


FACT

Another fact, If you beat a pedophile to death, they will not repeat offend.
 
2014-06-03 09:34:36 AM  

DammitIForgotMyLogin: I consider anyone who's still a Catholic to be a supporter of child rape. You've made the decision that you're happy to remain a member of an institution which allows and protects people who do this, you provide the support for them to be able to.


Of course you do.

Just like anyone who is still an American is a supporter of unjust wars [or your favorite peeve].

That said, the headline (while accurate) doesn't really fully convey the idiocy of the comment. It wasn't that he wasn't on duty when he molested the child, it was that he wasn't "on duty" because he was molesting a child.

Seriously, that's some farked up argument right there.

/what, no lawyer hate?
/my dad never murdered anyone that I know of
/not a Catholic
 
2014-06-03 09:34:42 AM  
img.fark.net
 
2014-06-03 09:37:01 AM  

076dd0a50e0c1255009e-bd4b8aabaca29897bc751dfaf75b290c.r40.cf1.rackcdn.com


WORD SALAD!

 
2014-06-03 09:40:33 AM  
article was too long for me to read.  (My brain hurts this morning).

But if the catholic church didn't know what he was up to and was taking reasonable steps to make sure such things didn't happen then I can't blame them.

Of course "reasonable" is open to debate.  If I were a priest or a teacher or in anyway worked with children, I'd want video cameras on me at all times just in case a false accusation was leveled against me.  That along with a pre-employment background check seems reasonable to me.
 
2014-06-03 09:41:05 AM  
If you give these people 1 goddam cent, $0.01, you're giving your approval.
 
2014-06-03 09:41:31 AM  
"Novel new"?
 
2014-06-03 09:43:11 AM  
As a "recovering" Catholic (not practicing for years, and spend my HS years dodging ham handed priests at an all boys Catholic high school), the answer is pretty simple.

On duty, off duty, it doesn't matter.  His relationship with the victim was FACILITATED by his position of authority.  The mother let him spend time with the man expressly because she was "religious" and thought that, because he was a priest, he would be a good influence on the victim.  He then proceeded to use the child as a cum dumpster.  Access he would have never had, except for his priestliness.

I still don't know how I got through my childhood with that ring of molesters about without being violated myself, especially in HS.  What a nightmare....
 
2014-06-03 09:43:18 AM  

Inflatable Rhetoric: If you give these people 1 goddam cent, $0.01, you're giving your approval.


I didn't catch the currency part, could you please explain it again?
 
2014-06-03 09:46:20 AM  

DammitIForgotMyLogin: And that is why I consider anyone who's still a Catholic to be a supporter of child rape. You've made the decision that you're happy to remain a member of an institution which allows and protects people who do this, you provide the support for them to be able to. You can fark off.


Given that the Catholic Church includes something like 1.2+ billion followers (17.5% of the world population) and something like 400,000+ ordained priests, it's probably a safe bet that there is going be some bad behavior in a pool that large.

Yes, the guilty should be weeded out & punished, but it's an absolutely enormous organization.  Nothing that large is ever going to be entirely pure.
 
2014-06-03 09:48:37 AM  

jshine: Yes, the guilty should be weeded out & punished, but it's an absolutely enormous organization. Nothing that large is ever going to be entirely pure.


That's a nice evasion of the actual point, and if it were just a few guilty people you might be right. But it's not, it's the official policies set down by the top of a monolithic institution.

It's not that some priests molested kids, it's that the hierarchy of the Church acts to protect them from any sort of punishment, that's what makes the church as a whole guilty.
 
2014-06-03 09:49:09 AM  
This basically a standard line any org uses when its employees are accused of sexual harassment or other wrongdoing.  The employer is liable for the act of his employee through the doctrine of    Respondeat Superior which essentially says the master is responsible for the torts of the servant.   Therefore the first line of defense to any RS claim is to say simply, "well, when they did that wrong thing they were "off the clock" so it ain't on us".  This is exactly like what a corporation does when a secretary sues them because her boss is sexually harassing her her.  They say yeah, he may be a schmuck, but his job description doesn't include sexually harassing the help, so he is outside the scope of his employment when he does that and therefore we shouldn't be liable.   It'll work about as well here as it does there, which is to say not at all.
 
2014-06-03 09:49:26 AM  
I thought maybe Subby was exaggerating, but the Diocese's lawyers really said that.  Actually they said worse:

FTFA: "How do we determine when a priest is and is not on duty?" one of the justices asked, according to a video of the session on the court's website.  "Well," replied the diocese lawyer, "you can determine a priest is not on duty when he is molesting a child, for example. ... A priest abusing a child is absolutely contrary to the pursuit of his master's business, to the work of a diocese."

That's some fine logic, there, Mr. Lawyer Lou, esq.   Really, it boggles the mind.  That's a whole new level of evil.
 
2014-06-03 09:49:55 AM  

ArcadianRefugee: DammitIForgotMyLogin: I consider anyone who's still a Catholic to be a supporter of child rape. You've made the decision that you're happy to remain a member of an institution which allows and protects people who do this, you provide the support for them to be able to.

Of course you do.

Just like anyone who is still an American is a supporter of unjust wars [or your favorite peeve].

That said, the headline (while accurate) doesn't really fully convey the idiocy of the comment. It wasn't that he wasn't on duty when he molested the child, it was that he wasn't "on duty" because he was molesting a child.

Seriously, that's some farked up argument right there.

/what, no lawyer hate?
/my dad never murdered anyone that I know of
/not a Catholic


Blanket judgement aside, there is a huge difference between being American (as you have no choice and must belong to a country to live on this earth) and willful association with a tertiary organization, like the church.

You may be right that the op is overly categorical in his/her statement, but yours is just about as fool-proof in its logic.
 
2014-06-03 09:50:18 AM  
If you fall, you're fired 1 second before you hit the ground.
 
2014-06-03 09:51:35 AM  

jshine: Yes, the guilty should be weeded out & punished, but it's an absolutely enormous organization.  Nothing that large is ever going to be entirely pure.


Being entirely pure is the one farking thing that they're supposed to be about.
 
2014-06-03 09:53:04 AM  

jshine: DammitIForgotMyLogin: And that is why I consider anyone who's still a Catholic to be a supporter of child rape. You've made the decision that you're happy to remain a member of an institution which allows and protects people who do this, you provide the support for them to be able to. You can fark off.

Given that the Catholic Church includes something like 1.2+ billion followers (17.5% of the world population) and something like 400,000+ ordained priests, it's probably a safe bet that there is going be some bad behavior in a pool that large.

Yes, the guilty should be weeded out & punished, but it's an absolutely enormous organization.  Nothing that large is ever going to be entirely pure.



So. . .a few boys getting turd-burgled by Father O'Malley and company should be par for the course?

Have you ever taken one of thos e pre-job questionnaires, where they ask you the number of acceptable number of absences outside of planned vacation?  You do know the correct response to that is 'zero'.
 
2014-06-03 09:53:28 AM  

CtrlAltDestroy: jshine: Yes, the guilty should be weeded out & punished, but it's an absolutely enormous organization.  Nothing that large is ever going to be entirely pure.

Being entirely pure is the one farking thing that they're supposed to be about.



In theory, there's no difference between theory and practice, but in practice there is.

/ am not Catholic, just FYI
// though I did spend one year in Catholic school being taught by nuns
 
2014-06-03 09:54:57 AM  
Nice try - obscuring the issue is always a good defense.  I would largely agree that their liability would be limited if they weren't complicit in the cover-up, and weren't aware of the problem.  But in far too many cases they knew of the problem, covered it up, and are therefore part of the crime, not some innocent third party.
 
2014-06-03 09:55:16 AM  
The catholic church response unfortunately only sends this message : child molesters come and join priesthood,  and you are under protection. The church should sue the convicted, and let authorities do their  work.
 
2014-06-03 09:56:27 AM  
The Priest Motto
Remember to clock out before you take your cock out.
After you're done putting your cock in, remember to clock in!
 
2014-06-03 09:59:30 AM  

Cdr.Murdock: As a "recovering" Catholic (not practicing for years, and spend my HS years dodging ham handed priests at an all boys Catholic high school), the answer is pretty simple.

On duty, off duty, it doesn't matter.  His relationship with the victim was FACILITATED by his position of authority.  The mother let him spend time with the man expressly because she was "religious" and thought that, because he was a priest, he would be a good influence on the victim.  He then proceeded to use the child as a cum dumpster.  Access he would have never had, except for his priestliness.

I still don't know how I got through my childhood with that ring of molesters about without being violated myself, especially in HS.  What a nightmare....


Also a member of the twelve year Catholic education program - All boys HS - Google "Brother William Mueller"   - molested me in HS , I was thirteen.  I was fortunate, he only did it once and I wised-up. Unfortunately I never told anyone because I was too scared of the repercussions.  I know the school was aware of him and others, but decided to cover it.   I think there are multiple settlements behind the curtain.
 
2014-06-03 09:59:55 AM  

Twigboy: The Catholic Church is not responsible for the illegal actions of any of its individual members.

The Catholic Church is responsible when they find out about these actions and cover it up instead of turning the perpetrators over to the authorities.


Actually that's not true.  If one of their guys abuses their position (sexually, financially, whatever), the church is certainly open to liablity of various sorts.  The scenario you point out where they cover it up is one that amplifies their role and makes them an accessory. So far they've skated mostly because the statute of limitations usually takes effect before the victims come forward.

The archbishop where I live hid one of the abusive priests mentioned in this article in a residence in my town.  When the reporter who wrote today's article looked into it, it turned out that seven other pedophile priests had been housed there over the years.

This residence is in eyeshot of the two parish schools and the public high school.  It is within a few blocks of three private pre-K programs and the public library.  This happened while my child was attending one of the Catholic schools there.  No one, at any time, attempted to inform us that this danger existed.

The whole organization is just really, really, really corrupt.
 
2014-06-03 10:04:30 AM  

jshine: DammitIForgotMyLogin: And that is why I consider anyone who's still a Catholic to be a supporter of child rape. You've made the decision that you're happy to remain a member of an institution which allows and protects people who do this, you provide the support for them to be able to. You can fark off.

Given that the Catholic Church includes something like 1.2+ billion followers (17.5% of the world population) and something like 400,000+ ordained priests, it's probably a safe bet that there is going be some bad behavior in a pool that large.

Yes, the guilty should be weeded out & punished, but it's an absolutely enormous organization.  Nothing that large is ever going to be entirely pure.


However when most organisations find out about abuses like this they usually get rid of the abuser. The Catholic Church protects them to the best of its abilities. That makes it a Child rape ring and if you are a member of the Catholic Church you are a member of a child rape ring which makes it  entirely corrupt no organization regardless of size should be entirely corrupt.
 
2014-06-03 10:05:32 AM  

jshine: In theory, there's no difference between theory and practice, but in practice there is.


That doesn't work here. The point of this religion is how to live one's life. There are rules set forth as the foundation of this way of life. If the people who are in charge of this religion are unable to hold to the very values that required by said religion then there's no point to the thing existing at all as they present it to their followers.

Unless you look at it for what it is. It's just a power grab and a way of controlling people. They book that they beat people with is completely pointless to what they actually do.

Which makes their followers even more worthy of scorn. It's easy to see the disconnection between what they say and what they do. If you continue to support them after they're actions have brought to light again and again and it's obvious that they're lying, evil, hypocrites then you're no better than they are.

In theory catholics are good people. In practice, not so much.
 
2014-06-03 10:10:02 AM  

jshine: CtrlAltDestroy: jshine: Yes, the guilty should be weeded out & punished, but it's an absolutely enormous organization.  Nothing that large is ever going to be entirely pure.

Being entirely pure is the one farking thing that they're supposed to be about.


In theory, there's no difference between theory and practice, but in practice there is.


But this is about their core business.... shouldn't you at least expect them not to do the exact opposite from their raison d'être?

/oops, instead of helping people and doing good works I accidentally molested and traumatized a boy again
 
2014-06-03 10:15:27 AM  

gfid: article was too long for me to read.  (My brain hurts this morning).

But if the catholic church didn't know what he was up to and was taking reasonable steps to make sure such things didn't happen then I can't blame them.

Of course "reasonable" is open to debate.  If I were a priest or a teacher or in anyway worked with children, I'd want video cameras on me at all times just in case a false accusation was leveled against me.  That along with a pre-employment background check seems reasonable to me.


It's really great that you feel comfortable commenting on an article that you didn't read, making assumptions that are contrary to the facts.

That doesn't make you look like a no-nothing idiot at all.

\yes it does
 
2014-06-03 10:19:56 AM  

jshine: DammitIForgotMyLogin: And that is why I consider anyone who's still a Catholic to be a supporter of child rape. You've made the decision that you're happy to remain a member of an institution which allows and protects people who do this, you provide the support for them to be able to. You can fark off.

Given that the Catholic Church includes something like 1.2+ billion followers (17.5% of the world population) and something like 400,000+ ordained priests, it's probably a safe bet that there is going be some bad behavior in a pool that large.

Yes, the guilty should be weeded out & punished, but it's an absolutely enormous organization.  Nothing that large is ever going to be entirely pure.


So what's your point, aside from sidestepping the real issue?

\the real issue being the Catholic church's decades-long policy of sweeping molestation under the carpet, and moving molesting priests to other parishes, instead of excommunicating them and turning them over to the authorities?
\\The Third Reich was a pretty big organization too.  I'm sure a few Jews were bound to get killed, no?
 
2014-06-03 10:20:25 AM  
Hello dispatch? This is xray alpha 6. I'll be 10-10 at Crocker and 5th for about 20 minutes getting a blow job from the corner hooker.

Out.
 
2014-06-03 10:21:34 AM  
James Rieper:

The whole organization is just really, really, really corrupt.


Your statement is over generalized. To say the whole organization is corrupt from some cases, is ignorant. The church handling of cases is pathetic, but applying corruption to the whole body is just stupid. There are some sincere clergymen in the church. Yeah the church has its shortcomings but com on  we are not talk about NK here
 
2014-06-03 10:24:12 AM  
I did not read the article because ew. But as a former Catholic with a huge ass family of Irish Catholics I can tell you if you tried to explain that a priest could be on/off duty they'd cock their heads at you like a cute little dog that didn't understand what the fark the sounds coming out of your mouth meant.

Priests are always priests. They might not be the one 'on call' to go give last rites or be the one assigned to do certain things or to certain places...but they're ALWAYS on duty and that's kinda the farking point of all the rules of priesthood.

It's not a 9 to 5 job, nor do the believers look at priests as though they're just some regular Joe doing a 'job'. One is 'called' to the priesthood, it's a life of service, etc.

But I'm glad they're pulling this shiat, maybe more Catholics will wise up and stop giving them money.
 
Displayed 50 of 108 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report