the pedophilia thread

[mopaul]

the romans had a total acceptance of sexuality apparently, there were no restrictions against homosexuality, many prominent men had male lovers, and many of these lovers were what we now call 'minors'. boys in fact, and of course, they also accepted slavery, and many of these supplicants were literally sex slaves.

contemporary culture however frowns harshly on sex with children. it's one of our most loathed crimes, and the people who get convicted of it carry great stigma with them ever after. when a man rapes a 14 year old girl, he gets prison, plain a simple. if a woman seduces a 15 year old boy, she also goes to jail. sex with children in our culture is unacceptable.

but we apparently make exceptions. here's where i get flamed i suppose. lets take the case of superstar michael jackson. i am not saying he was guilty of pedophilia, but he certainly was suspected of it. any other man, having done what he had, would have at least been arrested and appeared in court. but michael gets a pass. 'if' he is guilty, then this is a case of pedophilia being acceptable to society.

and now the elephant in the living room, the pedophile priests. very touchy subject, especially if one is a catholic, with children. let's not pretend that pedophilia is not rampant among catholic priests. let's also not pretend that this has been going on for centuries, and that it hasn't been SYSTEMATICALLY covered up. it has been proven, time and again, that when these men get caught, the system goes into work to keep them out of jail, and to shut the victim up also.

the victim and his family are often paid huge sums of money for their silence. and even the parents are cowed by the majesty of the huge catholic church. there are literally thousands of children, of both sexes, whose lives have been turned upside down by gentle, respectable priests. what could be more evil? a man in whom you place your trust, your very souls, a man you associate with the creator himself. a man you let into your home, raping your boys?

does the fact that people are deeply religious protect these perverts?
how could a person allow these priests to be spirited away to other parishes only to repeat their atrocities? where are all the pissed of enraged catholic parents? i never see them. why are not the literally thousands of pedophile priests in prison?

only yesterday a 40 year old document about priest pedophilia and covering for them was discovered in a hidden vault. official vatican laws and regulations concerning how to deal with the offenders and the victims, and how to keep it all quiet. but not condemning the actual act of child rape. very bizarre.

why do priests, who just happen to be catholic, get a free pass for raping children? i wouldn't care if they were baptists, cause there are plenty of pedophile baptists i'm sure. why are they not given the same justice we give all other child rapers? it is absolutely bizarre and sick that this is going on but no one talks about it.
what if the offenders were in the branch davidiots or the 7th day adventists? we'd call them a crazy sex crazed cult of brain washed zombies and burn them down. right? that's what happened to david koresh, he was raping little girls who he called his wives, and the parents ALLOWED it, because of their shared religions. we didn't let HIM get away with pedophilia. but we allow it for father steven, and father gordon, and father robert.

i'm not a catholic, and my intent here is not to bash the whole catholic religion. but let's be real here, as a sect, they have done a lot of very un religious things over the years....a lot of good things too, but there's always been oppression, and every other kind of sin associated with certain popes, bishops, cardinals, and priests.
and all the other brothers jump in to cover for them.

i suggest the catholics stand up and remove all these sick fuckers from their ranks. they are giving all catholics a black eye, and bring disgrace to the whole church. when one of these sickos rapes a child, expose him. and for christ's sake, don't keep quiet about your own child's rape and take hush money from the church as compensation. this makes you just as sick as them.

[King_Crimson]

1. You won't get flamed by me...

Mopaul! I agree with you 100%.

[NashVegas]

2. A Collision of Factors

And not all of them involve the church.

1. Until recently, there was no such thing as a concept of childrens' rights. Maybe what? The last 20 years. I don't think it's a coincidence that with the rise of of childrens' rights concerns, legal authorities have begun to take child sexual abuse seriously.

2. The Sexual Revolution. As I said in another thread, if not for the the swinging '60s and the new openness, we may not be discussing this issue today.

3. Regarding statutory rape and age of consent laws: AoC laws rose side by side with Womens' Suffrage and access to property rights.

[qb]

3. Good points. I do have a question about MJ, however.

If there was any evidence of criminal behavior, wouldn't it be bigger than OJ? I know there were plenty of rumors, but are there any credible allegations of sexual misconduct? I don't see this as anyone condoning pedophilia. Maybe his bizarre life has left him so emotionally and intellectually undeveloped that he just likes to hang out with kids.

[mopaul]

4. yes, nothing unusual about michael jackson

he gets a pass. it never made it to court because he paid the family off, some reports as high as 35M. a man who is even 'suspected' of pedophelia is arrested and given court time to clear himself.

you may believe what you wish about MJ. he's just a little eccentric.
all superstars are. leave him alone. what if it was your boy?

[mopaul]

5. should we publish the names and faces of child raping priests?

i was really expecting more responses from catholics here, but....
what if we had a website that published and exposed those known to be child rapists. is this unconstitutional? unfair? help me out here.

[Muddleoftheroad]

6. Not unconstitutional, not unfair

If they are convicted.

They information is public record and everyone should know. The problem is that many cases are decided privately.

[ScreamingMeemie]

10. Sure, and let's also publish the faces of those teachers who get convicted

every year. I am not a practicing Catholic, but there does seem to be a bit of lopsidedness to the table. Teacher here, accused of molesting child ten years ago...asked to leave, given a letter of recommendation if he went quietly. Accused of molesting child in new school district I see no difference. Both disgust me, both should punished and publicized equally. Just my opininion.

[Vernunft]

7. What´s wrong with sleeping with 14 year old girls ?

In some parts of Europe that´s the legal age of consent and that´s not even going into the marriage practices of other cultures.

[mopaul]

8. biblical men married very young girls

and girls still do get married at that age in america, with parental consent. my wife was knocked up by her first husband when she was 14.
her parents agreed that the two would marry. otherwise, the guy would've gone to jail. this kind of thing happens all the time.
it is we who put age restrictions into law.

other nations allow marriage of so called minors, and we view them as primitive. while one american church is imploding over allowing a gay bishop, another church is imploding over child rape. strange days indeed.

[Muddleoftheroad]

9. Age of Consent

We, as a society, have decided what ages of consent (varies state to state) we are willing to accept. This is based on OUR culture. If Europe or some or other place chooses otherwise, that is their business.

Here is America, we like to protect children from sexual exploitation as much as possible.

[OneBlueSky]

14. well, if you're going there . . .

what's wrong with sleeping with 14-year-old boys? . . .

[Terran]

11. The Romans

That's a pretty big generalization about the Romans you make, and probably an unfair one. Among the ancient cultures, the Romans were, in their pre-Imperial times at least, among the most conservative of cultures and not the rampant hedonists popularly depicted these days. What you say may be true in the era of Roman decline. Almost all ancient cultures in the Middle East and around the Med were far more tolerant of sex with 'minors' than we are today.

Dirk

[mopaul]

12. you are correct

the final days of rome are the ones i was referring to. caligula, nero, and some of the nastier regimes toward the end.

consent is a cultural restraint we created here, like the institution of marriage itself. there really is no such thing, until it's made up as a law or decree by priests and lawyers.

[Liberator_Rev]

13. The Catholic clergy aren't THAT bad, Mopaul !

What are you trying to do, Mopaul, challenge me for the title of most rabbid anti-Catholic DU'er !
Having been a devout R.C. for 33 years culminating with ordination to the priesthood and a professorship in a seminary, I can't quite agree with your statement, "let's not pretend that pedophilia is not rampant among catholic priests. let's also not pretend that this has been going on for centuries, and that it hasn't been SYSTEMATICALLY covered up. it has been proven, time and again, that when these men get caught, the system goes into work to keep them out of jail, and to shut the victim up also."

I've had many contacts with Catholic priests and with future priests and never personally encountered any sexual deviancy in any of them. I relieve believe that the vast majority of priests are great people. My experience has been that the higher one proceeded up the ladder of authority in the Catholic Church, the more compromises one had to make with one's conscience. I think it's fair to say that the problem with the Catholic clergy isn't that sexual deviancy is "rampant", but that the Catholic Church is structured to protect, conceal and thereby foster corruption, rather than to treat it and cure it.

Because their whole belief structure is founded on their view that their Roman Catholic Church, head-quartered in Vatican City is "the Bride of Christ", the "Mystical Body of Christ", "Holy Mother the Church" they can't entertain any serious flaws in that church without the whole meaning of their lives being shattered.

The same holds true for a second pillar of their faith, the belief that their church's CEO, whoever the current pope happens to be is "the Vicar of Christ" and that the words addressed by Jesus to Peter were meant for all of his successors, namely "Thou art Peter (or whoever) "Thou art Peter (a stone), and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." This they take to mean that God's divine son, Jesus, has guaranteed, in advance, all the decisions, all the judgments, all the rules and regulations made by any and all of the successors of Peter, as Bishops of Rome, whom they refer to as "Vicar of Christ", "the Holy Father", "His Holiness", "Supreme Pontiff".
Whether they be powerful bishops appointed by the pope to supervise dioceses, or powerless peons in the pew, Roman Catholics at all levels dare not seriously question their church's CEO on earth, for fear of offending God's own divine Son.
{{ Lest I be accused AGAIN of mis-representing its belief's, I've excerpted below the way the online Catholic Encyclopedia puts it. }}

When the "Vicar of Christ" threatens any who might deviate from his dictates with "excommunication", that's the equivalent of a first class ticket to eternal damnation, not to mention the curse of being a "pariah" on earth for the rest of one's earthly existence.

See how often and how grossly the Catholic CEO's have abused their absolute power and how absurd it is to believe that anything Jesus said to Peter should be taken to cover these self-proclaimed "Vicars of Christ" at http://www.LiberalsLikeChrist.Org/PopesvsChrist .
for much MORE on the problems with the papacy

"X. INDEFECTIBILITY OF THE CHURCH
Among the prerogatives conferred on His Church by Christ is the gift of indefectibility. By this term is signified, not merely that the Church will persist to the end of time, but further, that it will preserve unimpaired its essential characteristics. The Church can never undergo any constitutional change which will make it, as a social organism, something different from what it was originally. It can never become corrupt in faith or in morals; nor can it ever lose the Apostolic hierarchy, or the sacraments through which Christ communicates grace to men. The gift of indefectibility is expressly promised to the Church by Christ, in the words in which He declares that the gates of hell < http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07207a.htm > shall not prevail against it. It is manifest that, could the storms which the Church encounters so shake it as to alter its essential characteristics and make it other than Christ intended it to be, the gates of hell < http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07207a.htm >, i.e. the powers of evil, would have prevailed. It is clear, too, that could the Church suffer substantial change, it would no longer be an instrument capable of accomplishing the work for which God < http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06608a.htm > called it in to being. He established it that it might be to all men the school of holiness. This it would cease to be if ever it could set up a false and corrupt moral standard. He established it to proclaim His revelation to the world, and charged it to warn all men that unless they accepted that message they must perish everlastingly. Could the Church, in defining the truths of revelation err in the smallest point, such a charge would be impossible. No body could enforce under such a penalty the acceptance of what might be erroneous. By the hierarchy and the sacraments, Christ, further, made the Church the depositary of the graces of the Passion. Were it to lose either of these, it could no longer dispense to men the treasures of grace."