I am beginning to believe that sex abuse is simply ubiquitous in all organizations of all kinds. It’s the asbestos of the twenty first century. I have fond memories of scouting, and they didn’t include sexual abuse. Was there abuse in the next tent? I don’t know. Since it is gene-driven, sexual misconduct cannot be stopped and likely not even reduced. If it disappears in one place, it will appear in another. It does represent a massive transfer of wealth to “victims” and their lawyers. In the final analysis, it’s all about the money. When a man says “it is not the money, its the principle of the thing”, rest assured – it’s the money.
First the scandals within the Catholic church and then the Boy Scouts. What do these orders have in common? Male adult supervision of innocent boys in a boy-man “don’t tell” culture where women have no presence or authority to peek “under the tent”. Corporations had similar characteristics when they were all male dominated at the top ranks. So yes it may indeed be male nature, predatory, dominating, clannish and prone to take advantage of the weak. Sadly, money settlements are mere pacifiers, not deterrents.
Male nature is predatory, dominating, clannish and prone to take advantage of the weak???? That’s so silly I can’t even stand it. Men and women alike are prone to sin. Men are no worse than women. It’s ungodliness and predatory men and women that instigate this horrendous behavior against kids. It’s not because it is a man’s nature. I know too many fine men to set back and read this without responding.
Libra,
This reminds me of a certain teenage pageant owner who admitted to going backstage to survey the contestants in undress. Predatory indeed, on his part anyhow.
It’s not off topic. Trump has been credibly accused by 2 women under oath of raping one of them when they were underage at a party with his pedophile friend Epstein, multiple people have accused him of being inappropriate with young girls at pageants, he has also talked about these in an inappropriate way, he has told underage girls he would probably be dating them in a few years, he has bragged about sexually assaulting women and been accused by dozens of doing so. He and his orgs have the same climate and culture as mentioned. It’s applicable both to future policy on these issues and to insuring groups, and his group. Nobody in their right mind would insure one of his beauty shows without exclusions on this type of thing.
Furthermore, as happens constantly the Church was caught hiding thousands more sexual assault and rape violations against young victims recently. Also crazy to insure for the risk averse.
“Male adult supervision of innocent boys in a boy-man “don’t tell” culture where women have no presence or authority to peek “under the tent”.
Oh how dare you. I agree with perplexed and that you got more likes than dislikes shows an inherent sexism problem against men.
In point A: The Catholic church has less sex abuse per priest or capita or whatever you want to call it, than even schools when adjusted for exposure. I’ve done this math. The Church’s program of handling abuse has discouraged it. They have worked with what they have, flawed humanity, and have managed to lower the numbers compared to every other public area. I am really tired of digs at the Church.
As for molestation in general, it is a horrible thing but no more prevalent now than before, and there is no culture encouraging it. This is nonsense. Utter nonsense. Our culture encourages destroying someone at the mere accusation of it, the culture is very hostile to sexual molestation or anything close to it. You are incorrect. No one is supporting rape and molestation, or hiding it. The only person I have ever known to hide rape or molestation, was a woman, and not only one, in a direct circumstance to do with my sister’s own mother who hid it and it was her father, and the husband (grandmother) knew and hid it, (also a woman) I have also seen innumerous events of women let in on the fold only to take control of the social aspects of hiding it. This may be anecdotal, but I have seen every man ever involved bash skulls, most of the time literally. I mean people beaten bloody, tires slashed, people harassed, people fired. I am talking when I have directly seen a revelation of rape or molestation, one of the men currently in trouble for it, when he found out a guy raped his daughter in a group of friends. There is absolutely no encouragement by men to rape, and in each of these scenarios the women were silent, or didn’t want it getting out, as they cared more for image than justice.
You actually put the word “victims” in quotes? And suggest they are in this for the money? You are part of the problem when you marginalize sex abuse victims and subtly rationalize the behavior of monsters who abuse children. Shame on you.
And now they are allowing gay scout leaders, girls and you name it. They are just opening their doors for more. Stick to what worked and stop with caving into the politically correct freaks. They wanted to ruin the Boy Scouts and the Scout leaders helped them accomplish that.
If a man sexually molests a girl, is that man likely to be heterosexual? Of course. In the same way, if a man sexually molests a boy, he is likely to be homosexual. (No, that does NOT mean that all or most homosexuals are pedophiles, so save it. The percentages who are child molesters are very small, of course.)
The Catholic Church has recognized that part of their issue of child abuse was a result of looking the other way when gay men wanted to become priests. No, it does not mean that gay men who wanted to become priests were all pedophiles. However, it is now recognized that predators look for opportunity: in church, on sports teams, in the boy scouts.
And so it is obvious that opening up scout leader positions to gay men also opened the door to predators of young boys. While the vast majority of gay men who applied to become scout leaders were honorable, it is obvious that the likelihood of predatory behavior goes up when you open the door to men attracted to the same sex and putting them in charge of boys.
Would you allow men to become scout leaders in Girl Scouts? Would you allow a young man to babysit YOUR daughter? Not likely.
Common sense, folks. (But not in PC America!) Cue the outrage.
What if a straight male scout leader molests a scout who was male but is transgender and became a woman? Does that make the leader straight or gay? IT DOESN’T MATTER. STOP MOLESTING CHILDREN!!!!
Aw. That is so touching. You are so Politically Correct. And just in time for the “holidays”.
Let me know when you have an original thought that goes against the PC rules.
December 21, 2018 at 8:00 am
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
8
1
Unsurprisingly, you missed my point. Let me re-write it in all capital letters again: IT DOESN’T MATTER (if he’s straight or gay) — STOP MOLESTING CHILDREN!!!
December 21, 2018 at 2:07 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
3
5
It’s a matter of exposure. You missed what he was saying.
I really disagree with him that being gay should be a disqualifier to being a priest (then random accusations could be used to shut down legitimate priests) but if there is a larger risk for a child to be molested if someone gay molests them, it would stand to reason that you expose more children by putting the child around this person.
Let me ask this: Are you more likely to have your female daughter watched by a man, or a woman? Why?
It lessons the risk in cases of women, to keep them away from male care takers. Women won’t turn lesbian to molest a girl randomly, (exaggeration for affect).
This is the same thing.
It’s just you won’t say it because it isn’t pc to do so, and you’re not a man, you’re just a virtue signaling weak boy.
December 21, 2018 at 2:11 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
2
8
So now let’s put it this way:
You have a child and you are taking him to boy scouts. You see a younger gay male, 20’s, (by the way it is proven that many gay men learn at a young age through abuse to become gay as they experiment by an older male, Milo rather famously said that this is a part of gay behavior, he being gay himself, so…There is a double potential risk here. I said many, not all, so STFU about the whining about the statement)
You then see a guy who seems to not be gay, is married, and has kids. Who do you put your child with?
Unless you’re a bad parent, the married man with kids.
It’s less exposure.
And if you don’t like that, due to how it sounds, you’re a bad person or a bad parent, your choice. Get over it.
December 21, 2018 at 2:27 pm
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
8
1
I almost stopped reading at “and you’re not a man, you’re just a virtue signaling weak boy.” I’m hoping one day you can make your points without attacking and belittling people. I’m not holding my breath, though.
It wouldn’t matter to me if my child was being watched by a heterosexual couple or a homosexual couple of either the same sex or the opposite sex … presuming … wait for it … NEITHER OF THE PEOPLE WATCHING MY KID ARE CHILD MOLESTERS!!!
I can’t believe you’re having such a hard time understanding my point.
As long as ‘the watcher’ shows my kids proper respect, are being honest with them, aren’t pushing their agenda on them, and aren’t putting them in mental or physical danger, I don’t care what ‘the watcher’ does with their private parts in the comfort of their own home.
December 21, 2018 at 2:33 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
2
9
Sorry Rosenblatt, I wanted to read your comment, but I couldn’t, because I couldn’t get past your weak morality and poor debate skills.
I’m so sorry, it’s not condescending or that I lack ethics or a good will, it’s all you.
I’m tired of your debate style, I’m mocking a recent comment you made at me about how you couldn’t get past a part of one of my comments and stopped reading on an important issue, because you’re a weak virtue signaling boy.
Don’t like it, man up, change.
I’m not reading your replies.
December 21, 2018 at 9:22 am
Perplexed says:
Like or Dislike:
2
11
Well said, Craig Cornell. Keep it up because some of us appreciate you.
Chances are, it will get worse under the such integrated circumstances. With all straight single sex males in the organization, there should be no issue. There is only an issue when someone gay comes in and takes advantage of the situation. While gay people should have their rights, so should straight people and straight people have sadly thrown their rights out the window because of a very powerful gay lobby.
except that neither Planet nor I are actually liberals, just NeverTrumpers. I was a registered Republican until 2016. Didn’t vote for Obama for either term and would’ve loved to see McCain as president.
Look it up. Homosexuality and pedophilia are NOT the same things. The unbelievable vast majority of the homosexual population want absolutely nothing to do with being associated with pedophiles.
perplexed, stick to your guns. You are right and these fools are wrong and liars to boot. They are among the most liberal on this blog and their Progressive Democratic agenda is on full display with every article on this blog.
As far as the money I was thinking along similar lines; in MI here the Larry Nasser case is going to cost Michigan State a half billion or so — tragic and sick cases but how does the money fix what happened????
I also only encountered good leaders, teachers, pastors etc.. while growing up — how awful to experience otherwise. Any predisposition can be controlled though – you have to deny your very self — which is difficult to do with the devil and his cronies floating around.
Just to clarify: I think it is fine for gay men to be priests as well. I had a friend in college who became a priest and I am nearly certain he was gay and he was a great person and I am sure made a fine priest.
What the Catholic Church realized in hind site was that at a time when there was a distinct fall off in the number of men entering the priesthood, the Catholic Church became lax in screening applicants, gay or straight. As a result, some of the gay priests that were poorly screened committed many – but not all – of the molestations.
The PC crowd needs to account for the fact that the children molested in the Catholic Church were nearly all boys. (Cue Rosenblatt for some mealy mouthed dodging of the issue with outrage about molestations that anyone would make regardless.)
How many altar boys are there compared to altar girls? If there’s a large gap in count between the two, that would likely explain why altar boys are the dominant gender of kids who got abused in the Catholic Church.
Thanks for the response. I wonder if 50/50 or numbers close to that it pretty standard. Obviously I don’t expect you to speak for any parish besides your own, but I just had it in my brain it was closer to an 80/20 split. But hey – I know I don’t know, and that’s why I asked! :)
In a really ignorant way, sure. Hindsight would show more unconscious pun bias than hind site, as looking at the hind, would be different than having one.
In this scenario it’s clear that it’s just a matter of user error.
In your case it’s clear it’s a matter of user using ad hominem style derailing tactics.
One is unethical, one is a part of life. Guess which side you fall on?
December 21, 2018 at 4:23 pm
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
3
1
Yes, let’s all listen to Bob right now – he’s the foremost authority on what constitutes an ad hominem attack around these parts.
Saying someone made an unintentional pun? Ad hominem attack.
Calling me Rosenpoo, a weak man, a virtue signaling child, a bad person or a bad parent, etc = not an ad hominem attack.
Up is down.
Left is right.
Dogs and cats, living together!
It’s mass hysteria!!
December 21, 2018 at 4:24 pm
Fair Playing Field says:
Like or Dislike:
3
1
I’ll just have to assume you’re an expert on being ignorant given that you wrote “by the way it is proven that many gay men learn at a young age through abuse to become gay” earlier in this thread.
December 21, 2018 at 4:13 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
1
1
Subconscious puns? Are you really arguing unconscious bias, in a what, sexual innuendo perverted way?
The Catholic Church did not allow women in these positions until like 1980. None of the normal 3-4 dunderheads have a clue what they are talking about. Just a lot of hate speech and anecdotal BS followed by their fantasy of what happened. ‘I think my friend was gay and probably did well.’ Literally fantasy. So disgusting what this site allows.
“UW says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
The Catholic Church did not allow women in these positions until like 1980. None of the normal 3-4 dunderheads have a clue what they are talking about. Just a lot of hate speech and anecdotal BS followed by their fantasy of what happened. ‘I think my friend was gay and probably did well.’ Literally fantasy. So disgusting what this site allows.”
That I replied to with no swear words, has swear word acronyms, insults on a grade school level, is not on topic, etc.
Stop playing social justice warrior, deal with your UW threat.
David, you posted on December 20 so help me out. I keep hearing the millennial buzz word “marginalize.” What exactly does that mean? It seems to be ubiquitous these days in almost any subject of discussion or allegation.
This once great organization is like everything else in this damned country Ive come to realize. Its rotten to the core. The scouts cheated me out of my Eagle and Ill never forgive them for that. Now its perverts and girls. Just shut it down and let the homeless have their buildings. Damn disgrace.
this is bullcrap, its not the boyscouts fault that theres so many sick twisted demented people in the world!
its not the boyscouts job to police the world! even if someone clears a backround check it doesnt mean they arent a sick pedophiile rapist that likes to stick their weiner into kids anuses! the boyscouts cant be held accountable for this, anymore than any body can sue the state if they are the victim of a crime! suppsely the boyscouts reports inappropriate behavior to the police department AND THEIR RESPONSIBILITY ENDS THERE! if the police department decided to take no action, then you can all redirect your lawsuit to target THE POLICE DEPARTMENT! the boyscouts is NOT A POLICE DEPARTMENT OR A GOVERNMENT AGENCY! their motives and intentions are good, they want to help kids, they try to make sure the volunteers are good people. its not the BSAs fault that so many twisted disgusting sneaky human beings are lurking around in society ! what are they suppose to do, let the kids run around unsupervised? if they did something like limit their volunteers to ONLY females or ONLY people over age 70 or some crap, they would probably open themselves to more lawsuits from this sick litigioius jerks that want to sue for anything and everything , and claim its discrimination! the fact is the odds of a 70 year old woman raping a child are practically zero! and if thats the case it should be totally fine for them to only accept employees / volunteers that fit the criteria for being the least lilkly to rape or sexually abuse children! the bsa has been doing the best it can under the laws of the united states that mandate all this antidiscrimination nonsense! they should be allowed to totally discriminate against any human that has a penis, because it takes a penis to rape a child! the bsa is doing the best it can and its a good organization and its not their fault that lowlife pedophile men have been infiltrating their staff ! start providing for expemptions from all these stupid anti discrimination laws and maybe they can be capable of doing a better job of screening their staff! meantime if a lowlife scum bag rapes or molests a child, its that persons fault and that persons fault alone, sue them not the bsa! like i said, if you get mugged or robbed you dont sue the state for failing to keep all criminals off the streets, do you?!?
I am beginning to believe that sex abuse is simply ubiquitous in all organizations of all kinds. It’s the asbestos of the twenty first century. I have fond memories of scouting, and they didn’t include sexual abuse. Was there abuse in the next tent? I don’t know. Since it is gene-driven, sexual misconduct cannot be stopped and likely not even reduced. If it disappears in one place, it will appear in another. It does represent a massive transfer of wealth to “victims” and their lawyers. In the final analysis, it’s all about the money. When a man says “it is not the money, its the principle of the thing”, rest assured – it’s the money.
First the scandals within the Catholic church and then the Boy Scouts. What do these orders have in common? Male adult supervision of innocent boys in a boy-man “don’t tell” culture where women have no presence or authority to peek “under the tent”. Corporations had similar characteristics when they were all male dominated at the top ranks. So yes it may indeed be male nature, predatory, dominating, clannish and prone to take advantage of the weak. Sadly, money settlements are mere pacifiers, not deterrents.
Male nature is predatory, dominating, clannish and prone to take advantage of the weak???? That’s so silly I can’t even stand it. Men and women alike are prone to sin. Men are no worse than women. It’s ungodliness and predatory men and women that instigate this horrendous behavior against kids. It’s not because it is a man’s nature. I know too many fine men to set back and read this without responding.
Libra,
This reminds me of a certain teenage pageant owner who admitted to going backstage to survey the contestants in undress. Predatory indeed, on his part anyhow.
It’s not off topic. Trump has been credibly accused by 2 women under oath of raping one of them when they were underage at a party with his pedophile friend Epstein, multiple people have accused him of being inappropriate with young girls at pageants, he has also talked about these in an inappropriate way, he has told underage girls he would probably be dating them in a few years, he has bragged about sexually assaulting women and been accused by dozens of doing so. He and his orgs have the same climate and culture as mentioned. It’s applicable both to future policy on these issues and to insuring groups, and his group. Nobody in their right mind would insure one of his beauty shows without exclusions on this type of thing.
Furthermore, as happens constantly the Church was caught hiding thousands more sexual assault and rape violations against young victims recently. Also crazy to insure for the risk averse.
“Male adult supervision of innocent boys in a boy-man “don’t tell” culture where women have no presence or authority to peek “under the tent”.
Oh how dare you. I agree with perplexed and that you got more likes than dislikes shows an inherent sexism problem against men.
In point A: The Catholic church has less sex abuse per priest or capita or whatever you want to call it, than even schools when adjusted for exposure. I’ve done this math. The Church’s program of handling abuse has discouraged it. They have worked with what they have, flawed humanity, and have managed to lower the numbers compared to every other public area. I am really tired of digs at the Church.
As for molestation in general, it is a horrible thing but no more prevalent now than before, and there is no culture encouraging it. This is nonsense. Utter nonsense. Our culture encourages destroying someone at the mere accusation of it, the culture is very hostile to sexual molestation or anything close to it. You are incorrect. No one is supporting rape and molestation, or hiding it. The only person I have ever known to hide rape or molestation, was a woman, and not only one, in a direct circumstance to do with my sister’s own mother who hid it and it was her father, and the husband (grandmother) knew and hid it, (also a woman) I have also seen innumerous events of women let in on the fold only to take control of the social aspects of hiding it. This may be anecdotal, but I have seen every man ever involved bash skulls, most of the time literally. I mean people beaten bloody, tires slashed, people harassed, people fired. I am talking when I have directly seen a revelation of rape or molestation, one of the men currently in trouble for it, when he found out a guy raped his daughter in a group of friends. There is absolutely no encouragement by men to rape, and in each of these scenarios the women were silent, or didn’t want it getting out, as they cared more for image than justice.
You actually put the word “victims” in quotes? And suggest they are in this for the money? You are part of the problem when you marginalize sex abuse victims and subtly rationalize the behavior of monsters who abuse children. Shame on you.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
I hope you are just Trolling.
Obviously that system didn’t work: All of these reported problems happened well before Scouts became more open to enrollment.
If a man sexually molests a girl, is that man likely to be heterosexual? Of course. In the same way, if a man sexually molests a boy, he is likely to be homosexual. (No, that does NOT mean that all or most homosexuals are pedophiles, so save it. The percentages who are child molesters are very small, of course.)
The Catholic Church has recognized that part of their issue of child abuse was a result of looking the other way when gay men wanted to become priests. No, it does not mean that gay men who wanted to become priests were all pedophiles. However, it is now recognized that predators look for opportunity: in church, on sports teams, in the boy scouts.
And so it is obvious that opening up scout leader positions to gay men also opened the door to predators of young boys. While the vast majority of gay men who applied to become scout leaders were honorable, it is obvious that the likelihood of predatory behavior goes up when you open the door to men attracted to the same sex and putting them in charge of boys.
Would you allow men to become scout leaders in Girl Scouts? Would you allow a young man to babysit YOUR daughter? Not likely.
Common sense, folks. (But not in PC America!) Cue the outrage.
What if a straight male scout leader molests a scout who was male but is transgender and became a woman? Does that make the leader straight or gay? IT DOESN’T MATTER. STOP MOLESTING CHILDREN!!!!
Aw. That is so touching. You are so Politically Correct. And just in time for the “holidays”.
Let me know when you have an original thought that goes against the PC rules.
Unsurprisingly, you missed my point. Let me re-write it in all capital letters again: IT DOESN’T MATTER (if he’s straight or gay) — STOP MOLESTING CHILDREN!!!
It’s a matter of exposure. You missed what he was saying.
I really disagree with him that being gay should be a disqualifier to being a priest (then random accusations could be used to shut down legitimate priests) but if there is a larger risk for a child to be molested if someone gay molests them, it would stand to reason that you expose more children by putting the child around this person.
Let me ask this: Are you more likely to have your female daughter watched by a man, or a woman? Why?
It lessons the risk in cases of women, to keep them away from male care takers. Women won’t turn lesbian to molest a girl randomly, (exaggeration for affect).
This is the same thing.
It’s just you won’t say it because it isn’t pc to do so, and you’re not a man, you’re just a virtue signaling weak boy.
So now let’s put it this way:
You have a child and you are taking him to boy scouts. You see a younger gay male, 20’s, (by the way it is proven that many gay men learn at a young age through abuse to become gay as they experiment by an older male, Milo rather famously said that this is a part of gay behavior, he being gay himself, so…There is a double potential risk here. I said many, not all, so STFU about the whining about the statement)
You then see a guy who seems to not be gay, is married, and has kids. Who do you put your child with?
Unless you’re a bad parent, the married man with kids.
It’s less exposure.
And if you don’t like that, due to how it sounds, you’re a bad person or a bad parent, your choice. Get over it.
I almost stopped reading at “and you’re not a man, you’re just a virtue signaling weak boy.” I’m hoping one day you can make your points without attacking and belittling people. I’m not holding my breath, though.
It wouldn’t matter to me if my child was being watched by a heterosexual couple or a homosexual couple of either the same sex or the opposite sex … presuming … wait for it … NEITHER OF THE PEOPLE WATCHING MY KID ARE CHILD MOLESTERS!!!
I can’t believe you’re having such a hard time understanding my point.
As long as ‘the watcher’ shows my kids proper respect, are being honest with them, aren’t pushing their agenda on them, and aren’t putting them in mental or physical danger, I don’t care what ‘the watcher’ does with their private parts in the comfort of their own home.
Sorry Rosenblatt, I wanted to read your comment, but I couldn’t, because I couldn’t get past your weak morality and poor debate skills.
I’m so sorry, it’s not condescending or that I lack ethics or a good will, it’s all you.
I’m tired of your debate style, I’m mocking a recent comment you made at me about how you couldn’t get past a part of one of my comments and stopped reading on an important issue, because you’re a weak virtue signaling boy.
Don’t like it, man up, change.
I’m not reading your replies.
Well said, Craig Cornell. Keep it up because some of us appreciate you.
Closet Agent wrote: “Queers, Trannies ruined the Boy Scouts, no question about it.”
You spelled “Pedophiles” wrong twice in the same sentence, Agent.
Sure. So how do you distinguish gay men from straight men?
Chances are, it will get worse under the such integrated circumstances. With all straight single sex males in the organization, there should be no issue. There is only an issue when someone gay comes in and takes advantage of the situation. While gay people should have their rights, so should straight people and straight people have sadly thrown their rights out the window because of a very powerful gay lobby.
And…this is your brain on Faux Newz – any questions?
…Fox News has nothing to do with his statement.
TheVoice inexplicably wrote:
“With all straight single sex males in the organization, there should be no issue. ”
Wut? Weren’t “straight single sex males” rogering the boys in the first place?
Again, here’s yer sign.
How do you know they didn’t hide the fact they were gay?
Are there any gay child molesters in the world at all? Or do you want to play the “let’s pretend all gay people are saints” game?
I don’t. Similarly, I don’t know they weren’t hiding the fact that they were using an assumed identity and their true surname was “Cornell”.
“Wut? Weren’t “straight single sex males” rogering the boys in the first place?”
No. By definition of your male having sex with a male you are not straight. Your either gay or by. Neither of them two is straight.
You might want to do some reading on that.
yeah, because everyone knows that homosexuality and pedophilia are the same, right?
your ignorance is so unbelievable that I’d swear you were Agent…
It’s not insulting to be assumed to be “agent”. I would take exception to someone assuming I was you or Captain ignorant amongst other liberals.
except that neither Planet nor I are actually liberals, just NeverTrumpers. I was a registered Republican until 2016. Didn’t vote for Obama for either term and would’ve loved to see McCain as president.
Look it up. Homosexuality and pedophilia are NOT the same things. The unbelievable vast majority of the homosexual population want absolutely nothing to do with being associated with pedophiles.
perplexed, stick to your guns. You are right and these fools are wrong and liars to boot. They are among the most liberal on this blog and their Progressive Democratic agenda is on full display with every article on this blog.
As far as the money I was thinking along similar lines; in MI here the Larry Nasser case is going to cost Michigan State a half billion or so — tragic and sick cases but how does the money fix what happened????
I also only encountered good leaders, teachers, pastors etc.. while growing up — how awful to experience otherwise. Any predisposition can be controlled though – you have to deny your very self — which is difficult to do with the devil and his cronies floating around.
TheVoice wrote:
“Stick to what worked…”
Here’s yer sign.
Just to clarify: I think it is fine for gay men to be priests as well. I had a friend in college who became a priest and I am nearly certain he was gay and he was a great person and I am sure made a fine priest.
What the Catholic Church realized in hind site was that at a time when there was a distinct fall off in the number of men entering the priesthood, the Catholic Church became lax in screening applicants, gay or straight. As a result, some of the gay priests that were poorly screened committed many – but not all – of the molestations.
The PC crowd needs to account for the fact that the children molested in the Catholic Church were nearly all boys. (Cue Rosenblatt for some mealy mouthed dodging of the issue with outrage about molestations that anyone would make regardless.)
How many altar boys are there compared to altar girls? If there’s a large gap in count between the two, that would likely explain why altar boys are the dominant gender of kids who got abused in the Catholic Church.
“How many altar boys are there compared to altar girls? ”
My Parish has at least a 50 / 50 mix. Sometime they are both girls up there.
Thanks for the response. I wonder if 50/50 or numbers close to that it pretty standard. Obviously I don’t expect you to speak for any parish besides your own, but I just had it in my brain it was closer to an 80/20 split. But hey – I know I don’t know, and that’s why I asked! :)
They even have at least one woman handing out communion. Me personally, I get in line for the actual priest.
So you’ll only take it from a priest? I guess they trained you well.
I swear, I haven’t seen so many dinosaurs in one place since the last Jurassic Park.
“hind site”? Talk about your unintentional (or subconscious) puns. (o:
p.s. It’s “hindsight”.
Making jokes about child molestation. Classy!
Now, Craig. I’m making jokes about you.
In a really ignorant way, sure. Hindsight would show more unconscious pun bias than hind site, as looking at the hind, would be different than having one.
In this scenario it’s clear that it’s just a matter of user error.
In your case it’s clear it’s a matter of user using ad hominem style derailing tactics.
One is unethical, one is a part of life. Guess which side you fall on?
Yes, let’s all listen to Bob right now – he’s the foremost authority on what constitutes an ad hominem attack around these parts.
Saying someone made an unintentional pun? Ad hominem attack.
Calling me Rosenpoo, a weak man, a virtue signaling child, a bad person or a bad parent, etc = not an ad hominem attack.
Up is down.
Left is right.
Dogs and cats, living together!
It’s mass hysteria!!
I’ll just have to assume you’re an expert on being ignorant given that you wrote “by the way it is proven that many gay men learn at a young age through abuse to become gay” earlier in this thread.
Subconscious puns? Are you really arguing unconscious bias, in a what, sexual innuendo perverted way?
Pseudo science for the win.
The Catholic Church did not allow women in these positions until like 1980. None of the normal 3-4 dunderheads have a clue what they are talking about. Just a lot of hate speech and anecdotal BS followed by their fantasy of what happened. ‘I think my friend was gay and probably did well.’ Literally fantasy. So disgusting what this site allows.
This post:
“UW says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
The Catholic Church did not allow women in these positions until like 1980. None of the normal 3-4 dunderheads have a clue what they are talking about. Just a lot of hate speech and anecdotal BS followed by their fantasy of what happened. ‘I think my friend was gay and probably did well.’ Literally fantasy. So disgusting what this site allows.”
That I replied to with no swear words, has swear word acronyms, insults on a grade school level, is not on topic, etc.
Stop playing social justice warrior, deal with your UW threat.
David, you posted on December 20 so help me out. I keep hearing the millennial buzz word “marginalize.” What exactly does that mean? It seems to be ubiquitous these days in almost any subject of discussion or allegation.
This once great organization is like everything else in this damned country Ive come to realize. Its rotten to the core. The scouts cheated me out of my Eagle and Ill never forgive them for that. Now its perverts and girls. Just shut it down and let the homeless have their buildings. Damn disgrace.
this is bullcrap, its not the boyscouts fault that theres so many sick twisted demented people in the world!
its not the boyscouts job to police the world! even if someone clears a backround check it doesnt mean they arent a sick pedophiile rapist that likes to stick their weiner into kids anuses! the boyscouts cant be held accountable for this, anymore than any body can sue the state if they are the victim of a crime! suppsely the boyscouts reports inappropriate behavior to the police department AND THEIR RESPONSIBILITY ENDS THERE! if the police department decided to take no action, then you can all redirect your lawsuit to target THE POLICE DEPARTMENT! the boyscouts is NOT A POLICE DEPARTMENT OR A GOVERNMENT AGENCY! their motives and intentions are good, they want to help kids, they try to make sure the volunteers are good people. its not the BSAs fault that so many twisted disgusting sneaky human beings are lurking around in society ! what are they suppose to do, let the kids run around unsupervised? if they did something like limit their volunteers to ONLY females or ONLY people over age 70 or some crap, they would probably open themselves to more lawsuits from this sick litigioius jerks that want to sue for anything and everything , and claim its discrimination! the fact is the odds of a 70 year old woman raping a child are practically zero! and if thats the case it should be totally fine for them to only accept employees / volunteers that fit the criteria for being the least lilkly to rape or sexually abuse children! the bsa has been doing the best it can under the laws of the united states that mandate all this antidiscrimination nonsense! they should be allowed to totally discriminate against any human that has a penis, because it takes a penis to rape a child! the bsa is doing the best it can and its a good organization and its not their fault that lowlife pedophile men have been infiltrating their staff ! start providing for expemptions from all these stupid anti discrimination laws and maybe they can be capable of doing a better job of screening their staff! meantime if a lowlife scum bag rapes or molests a child, its that persons fault and that persons fault alone, sue them not the bsa! like i said, if you get mugged or robbed you dont sue the state for failing to keep all criminals off the streets, do you?!?