Child rape and the Catholic Church

[notachance]

Can we all agree that raping a child is bad?

Now, there have been numerous fully documented cases of Catholic priests raping children.

This is important: I do NOT blame the institution of the Catholic Church for those rapes.

While a case could be made that for the Church to forbid consensual sex among its adults members might enhance the desire to rape children in those members who already have a tendency to do so, but that is NOT the argument I make here.

The responsibility for those child-rapes ultimately rests with those priests who committed the rapes.

Here is my problem: It's an irrefutable fact that the Church, instead of immediately reporting these rapes to the authorities, and instead of using their considerable influence to ensure that the criminals faced the most stringent punishments for their crimes, they did the opposite.

They actively labored to ensure that these pedophiles could continue raping as many children as possible. It's an incontrovertible fact that they used their influence to protect the rapists from justice by hiding their identity and relocating them to new parishes where they could rape again. When they were relocated and they raped children again, they would relocate them again. And again. And again.

This is fully documented and undeniable. If anybody is unaware of the facts, I strongly recommend you watch the documentary "Deliver us from evil", which I think is both on Netflix and Hulu.

That is the problem. If the Church had not labored to protect these rapists and give them the means and opportunity to continue raping, less children would have been raped.

While the Catholic Church is not responsible for the fact that some people are seriously mentally sick and enjoy raping children, they are responsible for every single child that was raped subsequent to it coming to their attention that rape was taking place, and subsequent to their failure to stop further incidents.



Lets assume that there are some pedophiles among the American Atheist Association. I know of no reported cases, but it's not impossible, and let's assume that it's the case for the purpose of the argument.

That in itself does not speak about the morality of that atheist institution as a whole. BUT, if it transpired that the atheist institution was using its influence to enable extensive raping by its members instead of reporting the crime to the police, there would be an outrage. The entire American Atheist Association would literally be dismantled overnight by the FBI, and every upper management executive would spend the rest of his life as the personal boy toy of some prison gang leader.


Raping children is wrong. An institutionalized and systemic policy to ensure that as many children as possible are raped is even worse.

The only thing that's worse than killing a Jew is designing a concentration camp to kill many Jews.

The only thing worse than raping a child is designing an institutionalized system to rape many children.

I submit to you that the Catholic Church's actions are unforgivable, and that it's immoral for anybody to associate himself/herself with such an evil institution.

If you ever donated money to the Catholic Church, it's an inescapable mathematical fact that some of it went to pay off rape victims, pay for the expense of relocating a rapist, and to otherwise prevent rapists from being arrested, thus enabling additional rapes.

While I'm sure that my distaste comes across in this post, I submit that it cannot be called inflammatory, or offensive, or a carpet statement, or otherwise forbidden, unless a reasonable case can be made that anything I'm saying is not true, and that my anger is not justified.

[Zzyzx]

If they are innocent, would not the god that they serve, if he were real, protect them? I would think so.

Ask the McMartins that question.

Ask the early Mormons.

Ask the Jews.

etc <snip>

I agree that no "god" appears to protect anyone. That could be because no such thing as "god" exists except in imagination and wishful thinking -- or it could be that Christians and Jews are worshiping the wrong "god".

You have missed the mark. The cover up is the problem. As we all know, and you point out as if it means something, there are child abusers in all walks of life. We know this, so you can drop your strawman. Again, the problem is with the cover up.

Hey,. I agree.

The problem isn't the cover up any more.

OH? Has the coverup gone away? Have those who participated in covering up been imprisoned? Have those who molested children been imprisoned?

Would you be satisfied if your child was molested, the molester was transferred rather than being punished, and church officials covered up the crime?

What part of 'the pendulum has swung too far the other way" was difficult to understand?

What part of crimes and coverup must be exposed and punished is difficult to understand?

How can the pendulum swing too far in the direction of exposing and punishing those who molest children?

[dianaiad]

If they are innocent, would not the god that they serve, if he were real, protect them? I would think so.

Ask the McMartins that question.

Ask the early Mormons.

Ask the Jews.

etc <snip>

I agree that no "god" appears to protect anyone. That could be because no such thing as "god" exists except in imagination and wishful thinking -- or it could be that Christians and Jews are worshiping the wrong "god".

You have missed the mark. The cover up is the problem. As we all know, and you point out as if it means something, there are child abusers in all walks of life. We know this, so you can drop your strawman. Again, the problem is with the cover up.

Hey,. I agree.

The problem isn't the cover up any more.

OH? Has the coverup gone away? Have those who participated in covering up been imprisoned? Have those who molested children been imprisoned?

Would you be satisfied if your child was molested, the molester was transferred rather than being punished, and church officials covered up the crime?

What part of 'the pendulum has swung too far the other way" was difficult to understand?

What part of crimes and coverup must be exposed and punished is difficult to understand?

How can the pendulum swing too far in the direction of exposing and punishing those who molest children?

The part where it's not about exposing and punishing those who actually molest children, but about destroying lives and refusing to protect anybody who has so much as been accused of it.

I'm still a fan of the 'Innocent until proven guilty" idea. Whereas, at the moment with Catholic priests anyway, it's 'guilty until proven guiltier" .....and the statistics, even developed by those who most want to nail the church, show that there are fewer predators and pedophiles in the Catholic priesthood than there are in most other volunteer groups having to do with children.

In fact, you want a REAL cover up? Try getting a pediatrician on trial for sexual child abuse. IN fact, the statisics are at least as bad for them as for Catholic priests, but the cover-up is worse.

If it's 'all about the coverup," go after the AMA.

[Zzyzx]

.

What part of 'the pendulum has swung too far the other way" was difficult to understand?

What part of crimes and coverup must be exposed and punished is difficult to understand?

How can the pendulum swing too far in the direction of exposing and punishing those who molest children?

The part where it's not about exposing and punishing those who actually molest children, but about destroying lives and refusing to protect anybody who has so much as been accused of it.

Should those accused of molesting children be investigated by police and prosecuted if evidence warrants? Or should they be transferred to another congregation, jurisdiction or nation in order to avoid prosecution?

Should those accused of covering up crimes be investigated by police and prosecuted if evidence warrants?

[Clownboat]

.

What part of 'the pendulum has swung too far the other way" was difficult to understand?

What part of crimes and coverup must be exposed and punished is difficult to understand?

How can the pendulum swing too far in the direction of exposing and punishing those who molest children?

The part where it's not about exposing and punishing those who actually molest children, but about destroying lives and refusing to protect anybody who has so much as been accused of it.

Should those accused of molesting children be investigated by police and prosecuted if evidence warrants? Or should they be transferred to another congregation, jurisdiction or nation in order to avoid prosecution?

Should those accused of covering up crimes be investigated by police and prosecuted if evidence warrants?

Yes, they should, no matter what Dianiad says.

[dianaiad]

.

What part of 'the pendulum has swung too far the other way" was difficult to understand?

What part of crimes and coverup must be exposed and punished is difficult to understand?

How can the pendulum swing too far in the direction of exposing and punishing those who molest children?

The part where it's not about exposing and punishing those who actually molest children, but about destroying lives and refusing to protect anybody who has so much as been accused of it.

Should those accused of molesting children be investigated by police and prosecuted if evidence warrants? Or should they be transferred to another congregation, jurisdiction or nation in order to avoid prosecution?

Should those accused of covering up crimes be investigated by police and prosecuted if evidence warrants?

Of course. And they ARE. Now.

And have been for some time.

Now.

The question for you is this: should those accused of molesting children be treated as if they had been tried and convicted, before they have even been charged?

Because THAT is what the church (and everybody else) is doing now.

A priest who is NOW accused of abusing a child, no matter how valid or invalid the accusation is, is removed from office, removed from his home, told to go away and is given NO support. It is simply assumed that if he was accused, then he is guilty; the onus is upon him to prove that he didn't do it.

....and he is given no aid whatsoever to do that. All the resources are given to the accuser.

My claim isn't that these accusations should not be investigated; they should be. However, they should be INVESTIGATED, not assumed to be true no matter what, with the resulting ruination of the accused person's life even if the allegations are not found to be provable.

Or doesn't that matter to you?

[Clownboat]

.

What part of 'the pendulum has swung too far the other way" was difficult to understand?

What part of crimes and coverup must be exposed and punished is difficult to understand?

How can the pendulum swing too far in the direction of exposing and punishing those who molest children?

The part where it's not about exposing and punishing those who actually molest children, but about destroying lives and refusing to protect anybody who has so much as been accused of it.

Should those accused of molesting children be investigated by police and prosecuted if evidence warrants? Or should they be transferred to another congregation, jurisdiction or nation in order to avoid prosecution?

Should those accused of covering up crimes be investigated by police and prosecuted if evidence warrants?

Of course. And they ARE. Now.

And have been for some time.

Now.

The question for you is this: should those accused of molesting children be treated as if they had been tried and convicted, before they have even been charged?

Because THAT is what the church (and everybody else) is doing now.

A priest who is NOW accused of abusing a child, no matter how valid or invalid the accusation is, is removed from office, removed from his home, told to go away and is given NO support. It is simply assumed that if he was accused, then he is guilty; the onus is upon him to prove that he didn't do it.

....and he is given no aid whatsoever to do that. All the resources are given to the accuser.

My claim isn't that these accusations should not be investigated; they should be. However, they should be INVESTIGATED, not assumed to be true no matter what, with the resulting ruination of the accused person's life even if the allegations are not found to be provable.

Or doesn't that matter to you?

Any person that works for the Catholic church, until it is dismantled for their neglect, should be aware of what the organization that they work for has done to so many children. This should not be a black eye for the Catholic church, it should be a nail in their coffin, IMO.

It's like assuming the risk, that you could be murdered just for working in an abortion clinic.

I'm not saying it is right in either case, but the potential should be expected by them both.

If I were a Catholic priest, I would start looking for a change of employment.

[dianaiad]

<snip to here>

If I were a Catholic priest, I would start looking for a change of employment.

By that same logic, you would be advocating a change of employment if one is a pediatrician, a preacher with any other religion, any youth leader, religious or not, any teacher (teachers are FAR more likely to be sexual child predators than Catholic priests are, btw), or indeed anybody whose job involves dealing with children in any way.

You are aren't looking for a reason, Clownboat. You are looking for an excuse. This isn't about protecting children for you. It's about 'getting the Catholics," and anything will do.

[Flail]

.

What part of 'the pendulum has swung too far the other way" was difficult to understand?

What part of crimes and coverup must be exposed and punished is difficult to understand?

How can the pendulum swing too far in the direction of exposing and punishing those who molest children?

The part where it's not about exposing and punishing those who actually molest children, but about destroying lives and refusing to protect anybody who has so much as been accused of it.

Should those accused of molesting children be investigated by police and prosecuted if evidence warrants? Or should they be transferred to another congregation, jurisdiction or nation in order to avoid prosecution?

Should those accused of covering up crimes be investigated by police and prosecuted if evidence warrants?

Of course. And they ARE. Now.

And have been for some time.

Now.

The question for you is this: should those accused of molesting children be treated as if they had been tried and convicted, before they have even been charged?

Because THAT is what the church (and everybody else) is doing now.

A priest who is NOW accused of abusing a child, no matter how valid or invalid the accusation is, is removed from office, removed from his home, told to go away and is given NO support. It is simply assumed that if he was accused, then he is guilty; the onus is upon him to prove that he didn't do it.

....and he is given no aid whatsoever to do that. All the resources are given to the accuser.

My claim isn't that these accusations should not be investigated; they should be. However, they should be INVESTIGATED, not assumed to be true no matter what, with the resulting ruination of the accused person's life even if the allegations are not found to be provable.

Or doesn't that matter to you?

Estimates are that the Church has expended more than a billion dollars to settle claims by alleged victims of priest sexual abuse. Some priests have been prosecuted, but for the most part, victims have been silenced by Church cash. The number of cases we know of are but the tip of the iceberg on what was clearly a rampant disgrace. One wonders what the Church intended on doing with such a cash horde had they not been forced by threat of prosecution to pony up?

[dianaiad]

<snip>
Estimates are that the Church has expended more than a billion dollars to settle claims by alleged victims of priest sexual abuse. Some priests have been prosecuted, but for the most part, victims have been silenced by Church cash. The number of cases we know of are but the tip of the iceberg on what was clearly a rampant disgrace. One wonders what the Church intended on doing with such a cash horde had they not been forced by threat of prosecution to pony up?

So...

it's OK by you that innocent men are being hounded because YOU think that theists all deserve it?

[Flail]

<snip>
Estimates are that the Church has expended more than a billion dollars to settle claims by alleged victims of priest sexual abuse. Some priests have been prosecuted, but for the most part, victims have been silenced by Church cash. The number of cases we know of are but the tip of the iceberg on what was clearly a rampant disgrace. One wonders what the Church intended on doing with such a cash horde had they not been forced by threat of prosecution to pony up?

So...

it's OK by you that innocent men are being hounded because YOU think that theists all deserve it?

Innocent men are often 'hounded', but none of them, so far as I know, suffer 'hounding' because of what I think about theists. Such things as the hounding of innocents often arise by reason of those who jump to conclusions, assuming facts not in evidence.