Catholic sex scandal as undercover reporter 'films priests at gay clubs and havi
#21
(07-23-2010, 08:17 PM)Roy Wrote: No, that's wrong.  The John Jay study found that about 73% of the victims were under 15 years of age.  And if it were truly a "homosexual" problem, those statistics would be in the reverse.

Nitpicking about whether the victims were 15.9 or 16 years old when the abuse started, or exactly where the line is between pedophilia and ephebophilia, is simply an attempt to cloud the issue.  The fact is that most of them were not physically undeveloped little kids with high voices and hairless bodies.  They were post-pubescent, and they were male.  It's also a fact that many of the 'relationships' continued for years, even into adulthood in some cases.  These were not, for the most part, perverts molesting small children.  They were adult men who were attracted to nubile youngsters and gave in to temptation. 

That could happen to straight men if they were put in similar situations with trusting 15-16 year-old girls, but we don't do that because it would be stupid.  We did it with homosexual priests and nubile boys, because we trusted the bishops and/or convinced ourselves that homosexuals would somehow resist the same temptations we wouldn't trust straight men to resist.  So there wasn't the same social oversight --- people who would never let a 15-year-old girl go camping alone with Father allowed their teenage boy to do it --- and that allowed a small number of homosexual priests to run rampant far worse than a similar number of out-of-control straight priests ever could have done.
Reply
#22
(07-24-2010, 03:28 AM)karyn_anne Wrote: every 5 year old knows wikipedia is never a reliable source.  ::)

Rather than being offensive and rolling your eyes and saying Wikipedia isn't reliable, why not just check the accuracy of the listed statistics on other sites.
For example, this Catholic site lists the statistics, and they are the same as on Wikipedia:  http://www.americancatholic.org/news/cle...jaycns.asp
The vast majority of the abused were not in high school.  They were children.

The Catholic website also repeats the same misinformation, that most victims were post-pubescent.  They were not. That's not what the word means.
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topi...cent-phase

The reason why that term is relevant is because it is what Catholic sources including Mr. Donahue are using to determine whether something is homosexual or pedophilia (actually, there's an additional term, but it isn't necessary).

And as Roy already pointed out, if you're going to say that it's a homosexual problem when a man has sexual interest for an 11 year old pubescent, you'd have to say it's heterosexual if a woman did the same.  It's not either, because it's not normal for adults to have sexual interest in elementary and middle school students whether they are heterosexual or homosexual.  In addition, the total percentage of females abused is higher than the number of high school aged males abused.  In every way, the numbers work against the "homosexuality is the cause of all this" argument. 

And as far as the news story itself which started this thread, for every homosexual priest that engages in this behavior, there are probably 3 or more straight priests having illicit affairs with women and living double lives.  I remember those stories being posted here many months back, in fact, and how there were pregnancies, attempted cover-ups and payoffs to the women, etc.  It really doesn't surprise me if there are particular locales where you'll find a majority of priests are homosexuals, because they probably find each other and congregate with the help of bishops.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)