Vatican II’s sex abuse scandal

[dagon]

--Gee. We finally get a Pope who, unlike his predecessors who turned a blind eye to these problems, has taken action to rid the Church of these atrocities and bring the perpetrators to justice and how does Dawkins react? He wants the Benedict XVI to be charged over his handling of it. Makes you wonder what kind of pervert Dawkins is, don’t it.

i dunnu mornac.  dawkins seems pretty hetero to me;  i mean have you seen his wife?  compare and contrast that with Benedict;  vow of celibacy?  what's that all about?  anyway, the reason Benedict is getting in trouble is allegations that have come to light that he was complicit in covering up CHILD MOLESTATION!  got that? 

i aint saying he did what is alleged but don't you think there ought to be some 'splaining' going on?

and you can accuse dawkins of no such allegations.  for the fold, here is the lovely lala ward (richard dawkins wife):



peace

[Mornac]

i dunnu mornac.  dawkins seems pretty hetero to me;

--If that’s so, why is he all bent outta shape over the Pope getting serious about child molesters?

i mean have you seen his wife?

--I guess I have now.

compare and contrast that with Benedict;

--He’s not married.

vow of celibacy?

--Yep

what's that all about?

--Comes with the job.

anyway, the reason Benedict is getting in trouble is allegations that have come to light that he was complicit in covering up CHILD MOLESTATION!

--The only thing that came to light was the New York Times slanderous, faulty journalism.

got that?

 

-- Got this?

i aint saying he did what is alleged but don't you think there ought to be some 'splaining' going on?

--Of course I do, but I’m not so naïve as to believe that the New York Times will come clean. Hell, it seems they even pulled the wool over johnhps eyes.

[dagon]

--If that’s so, why is he all bent outta shape over the Pope getting serious with child molesters?

well,  i guess CHULD MOLESTERS suck.  and it seems like he covered up some stuff.  go figure.

 

--I guess I have now.

your mileage may vary but i think she's kinda hot.  yeah, i know she looks like an elf but there you have it.

--He’s not married.

who?   dawkins?  whatev, they've been together forever.

--Comes with the job.

see above

--The only that came to light was the New York Times slanderous, faulty journalism.

mmmkay!  what came to light was that were questions around Benedict's handling of the molestation charges.  YOU DISAGREE?


btw,  i read about 25 sources daily.  that's why i stump you guys.

peace

[Mornac]

what came to light was that were questions around Benedict's handling of the molestation charges.  YOU DISAGREE?

--Yeah? Well watch this:

1) Does anyone know if dagon was ever involved in any child molestations?

2) Does anyone suppose dagon covered up any child molestations?

3) Will dagon ever confess to being involved in any child molestations?

What came to light here was that were questions about dagons involvement in covering up child molestations.  YOU DISAGREE?

Welcome to the world of liberal media hatchet work.

[dagon]

--Yeah? Well watch this:

1) Does anyone know if dagon was ever involved in any child molestations?

2) Does anyone suppose dagon covered up any child molestations?

3) Will dagon ever confess to being involved in any child molestations?

What came to light here was that were questions about dagons involvement in covering up child molestations.  YOU DISAGREE?

Welcome to the world of liberal media hatchet work.

again, i dunno mornac!  most of these allegations were a while ago AND it looks like Benedick definitely has some answers to account for.  as far as i know, dagon has never been accused of anything to answer for other than being awesome.  same can't be said for Benedict.  you disagree?

peace

[JC]

On the one hand, we can't seem to put our President's birth certificate through enough scrutiny, courts and rulings to satisfy some idiots, and on the other they really have no interest in even investigating or letting courts decide about coverups involving sexual abuse and pedophilia when it comes to Cardinal Ratz. They are not interested in truth. They are only interested in their own "truths".

  Why, if we have dragged President Obama's birth certificate through several courts, can we not demand the same tenacious approach to get to the real truth,no matter how it eventually turns out - what harm is there in at least getting to the bottom of it all?It's not like the Church has no history of sexual abuse, denial and cover up whatsoever. Quite the opposite in fact. I'll be satisfied to let an investigation take place and let courts decide.

...But I'm not holding my breath.....

[johnhp]

Quite frankly, the Holy Father's signature on the letter to Bishop John Cummins, Oakland (Nov 1985) calls at the very least for His Holiness to resign. 




The letters in question.

[Mornac]

again, i dunno mornac!  most of these allegations were a while ago AND it looks like Benedick definitely has some answers to account for.

--So for the record: you "dunno", you recognize that "most of these allegations were a while ago", and to you "it looks like Benedick definitely has some answers to account for." Yet your course of action would be to "arrest this bastard who calls himself the pope next time he comes to England."

I hope you understand why some of us are puzzled by the workings of the liberal mind.

[dagon]

--So for the record: you "dunno", you recognize that "most of these allegations were a while ago", and to you "it looks like Benedick definitely has some answers to account for." Yet your course of action would be to "arrest this bastard who calls himself the pope next time he comes to England."

I hope you understand why some of us are puzzled by the workings of the liberal mind.

well, aren't you curious?  i mean we are talking about the cover up of molestations of young children aren't we?  shouldn't Benedict be required to answer some questions?  whaddaya thiink?

peace

[Mornac]

On the one hand, we can't seem to put our President's birth certificate through enough scrutiny,

--Actually, we can't put his birth certificate through any of that since he refuses to even show it to anyone.

 

...and on the other they really have no interest in even investigating or letting courts decide about coverups involving sexual abuse and pedophilia when it comes to Cardinal Ratz.

 
--The Pope certainly does. Look at his current policy – the likes of which were never seen in the time of his weak-willed predecessors:

"Civil law concerning reporting of crimes to the appropriate authorities should always be followed."

Witness also the fact that he has instituted numerous new policies in this area since the curial office he headed, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, took control of abuse cases:

“A few years later, when the CDF assumed authority over all abuse cases, Cardinal Ratzinger implemented changes that allowed for direct administrative action instead of trials that often took years. Roughly 60% of priests accused of sexual abuse were handled this way. The man who is now pope reopened cases that had been closed; did more than anyone to process cases and hold abusers accountable; and became the first pope to meet with victims.”

Of course he couldn’t do everything the way he wanted as there were sometimes roadblocks set up by higher ups whom he had no power to contradict.
 
 

They are not interested in truth. They are only interested in their own "truths".

 
--Now you’re talking about Novus Ordo dissidents. I can't speak for them and I won't apologize for them.

Why, if we have dragged President Obama's birth certificate through several courts,

 
--Again, we haven't done that. However I won't deny that if he ever releases it may very well meet with all of that scrutiny.
 

... can we not demand the same tenacious approach to get to the real truth, no matter how it eventually turns out - what harm is there in at least getting to the bottom of it all?

 
--Of course. And let me just add JC that I'm very happy that you and I have found so much common ground in the last few days.

 

It's not like the Church has no history of sexual abuse, denial and cover up whatsoever. Quite the opposite in fact. I'll be satisfied to let an investigation take place and let courts decide.

...But I'm not holding my breath.....

 
--I like your attitude JC. While you have your ire up, I'm sure you'll want to blow some of it in the direction of the schools in this country. Whereas the Vatican II sexual abuse scandal is a shameful atrocity for Catholics, the sex abuse scandal in the schools is a mega-cataclysm for those who call themselves American citizens. I have no doubt that, while you call for Catholic hierarchical heads on a platter you make at least as much noise for one hundred times as many bureaucratic heads to roll. Maybe you can even start a thread to call attention to it.  After all, while there are only a handful of Catholics around here, I’m pretty sure that all the members are American citizens or at least registered tax-paying residents:


Thursday April 1, 2010

Forgotten Study: Abuse in School 100 Times Worse than by Priests

By James Tillman and John Jalsevac

WASHINGTON, DC, April 1, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – In the last several weeks such a quantity of ink has been spilled in newspapers across the globe about the priestly sex abuse scandals, that a casual reader might be forgiven for thinking that Catholic priests are the worst and most common perpetrators of child sex abuse.

But according to Charol Shakeshaft, the researcher of a little-remembered 2004 study prepared for the U.S. Department of Education, "the physical sexual abuse of students in schools is likely more than 100 times the abuse by priests."

After effectively disappearing from the radar, Shakeshaft’s study is now being revisited by commentators seeking to restore a sense of proportion to the mainstream coverage of the Church scandal.

According to the 2004 study “the most accurate data available at this time” indicates that “nearly 9.6 percent of students are targets of educator sexual misconduct sometime during their school career.”

“Educator sexual misconduct is woefully under-studied,” writes the researcher. “We have scant data on incidence and even less on descriptions of predators and targets.  There are many questions that call for answers.“

In an article published on Monday, renowned Catholic commentator George Weigel referred to the Shakeshaft study, and observed that “The sexual and physical abuse of children and young people is a global plague” in which Catholic priests constitute only a small minority of perpetrators.

While Weigel observes that the findings of Shakeshaft’s study do nothing to mitigate the harm caused by priestly abuse, or excuse the “clericalism” and “fideism” that led bishops to ignore the problem, they do point to a gross imbalance in the level of scrutiny given to it, throwing suspicion on the motives of the news outlets that are pouring their resources into digging up decades-old dirt on the Church.

“The narrative that has been constructed is often less about the protection of the young (for whom the Catholic Church is, by empirical measure, the safest environment for young people in America today) than it is about taking the Church down," he writes.

Weigel observes that priestly sex abuse is “a phenomenon that spiked between the mid-1960s and the mid-1980s but seems to have virtually disappeared,” and that in recent years the Church has gone to great lengths to punish and remove priestly predators and to protect children. The result of these measures is that “six credible cases of clerical sexual abuse in 2009 were reported in the U.S. bishops’ annual audit, in a Church of some 65,000,000 members.”

Despite these facts, however, “the sexual abuse story in the global media is almost entirely a Catholic story, in which the Catholic Church is portrayed as the epicenter of the sexual abuse of the young.”

Outside of the Church, Shakeshaft is not alone in highlighting the largely unaddressed, and unpublicized problem of child sex abuse in schools. Sherryll Kraizer, executive director of the Denver-based Safe Child Program, told the Colorado Gazette in 2008 that school employees commonly ignore laws meant to prevent the sexual abuse of children.

“I see it regularly,” Kraizer said. “There are laws against failing to report, but the law is almost never enforced. Almost never.”

“What typically happens is you’ll have a teacher who’s spending a little too much time in a room with one child with the door shut,” Kraizer explained. “Another teacher sees it and reports it to the principal. The principal calls the suspected teacher in and says ‘Don’t do that,’ instead of contacting child protective services.”

“Before you know it, the teacher is driving the student home. A whole series of events will unfold, known to other teachers and the principal, and nobody contacts child services before it’s out of control. You see this documented in records after it eventually ends up in court.”

In an editorial last week, The Gazette revisited the testimony of Kraizer in the context of the Church abuse scandal coverage, concluding that “the much larger crisis remains in our public schools today, where children are raped and groped every day in the United States.”

“The media and others must maintain their watchful eye on the Catholic Church and other religious institutions,” wrote The Gazette, “But it’s no less tragic when a child gets abused at school.”

In 2004, shortly after the Shakeshaft study was released, Catholic League President William Donohue, who was unavailable for an interview for this story, asked, “Where is the media in all this?”

“Isn’t it news that the number of public school students who have been abused by a school employee is more than 100 times greater than the number of minors who have been abused by priests?” he asked.

“All those reporters, columnists, talking heads, attorneys general, D.A.’s, psychologists and victims groups who were so quick on the draw to get priests have a moral obligation to pursue this issue to the max.  If they don’t, they’re a fraud.”

http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/apr/10040101.html

[Mornac]

Quite frankly, the Holy Father's signature on the letter to Bishop John Cummins, Oakland (Nov 1985) calls at the very least for His Holiness to resign.

Quite frankly, the Holy Father's signature on the letter to Bishop John Cummins, Oakland (Nov 1985) calls at the very least for His Holiness to resign.

--He signed a letter in which he recognized that the "arguments presented in favor of removal in this case to be of grave significance" yet felt that it was "necessary for this Congregation to submit incidents of this sort to very careful consideration, which necessitates a longer period of time." And you conclude that this judicial prudence "calls at the very least for His Holiness to resign." Maybe you should have consulted someone who knows a little more about the facts before exposing your erstwhile closeted disdain for the man who was a liberal peritus at your beloved Council.

Hell, even the New York Time felt it necessary to do some public penance.

[ivanm]

Abuse of children in public schools is pathetic and deplorable so I am certainly not making excuses for it.  However, in the case of the Catholic abuse allegations, it seems to me that members of the cloth should
be held to a higher standard than the secular school employees, so maybe that is why the press coverage seems to be targeting the church cases more than the public school cases. 

[JC]

Abuse of children in public schools is pathetic and deplorable so I am certainly not making excuses for it.  However, in the case of the Catholic abuse allegations, it seems to me that members of the cloth should
be held to a higher standard than the secular school employees, so maybe that is why the press coverage seems to be targeting the church cases more than the public school cases. 

 Secular schools do not have nearly as bad a history of cover up and denial or enabling of sexual abuse as the Catholic church. It's really sad how Mornac tries to pull the old "but hey, THEY do it too" card as a deflection. The reason there is so much anger with the Catholic church is that they are certainly on record as having simply moved priests to a different area, enabled, allowed, denied, etc....

 To be certain, sexual abuse takes place in many places and institutions and is not exclusive to the Catholic church, but their record is among the worst and their record of action to correct has been lame and among the worst, and that is why the Catholic church is in the spotlight, under the microscope and seems to be the hands down champions when it comes to sexual abuse and cover ups and denials.

[Malone22]

It is rather hypocritical of the Church to have a pro-life stance yet they allowed this sex abuse to go on for literally decades and taking a major part of the child's life away, moving priests parish to parish with no further action.

In my opinion it is crimminal and should be dealt with that way.

[Mornac]

Secular schools do not have nearly as bad a history of cover up and denial...

--Speaking of denial....Have you taken any action to do something about this yet? Or are you one of those who are just going to bury your head in the sand and pretend that nothing's wrong.

It's really sad how Mornac tries to pull the old "but hey, THEY do it too" card as a deflection.

--Deflection???? Have you seen the title and the topic story of this thread? Are you aware that it was I who posted it? Have you even read the thread? I've been agreeing with you all along. I told you that I've been active in trying to stop this crap for years. Do you have a problem with people who object to this sort of thing and attempt to do something about it? That's sick!