[quote=anonymous]

Whomit, your ability to back up your viewpoints about why child molestation isn't so bad, speaks much greater volumes about your character than it does about your intellect.

[/quote]

You see Anonymous, this is what is known as an ad hominem argument. You don't refute a single thing I've said and only attack my character (you argue at the man and not the argument he makes.)

This is how I know how smart you aren't (I'm telling you something important here, you'd be well served to take this lesson to heart). people judge your intellect by things like your vocabulary and the depth of your reasoning.

Yes they also judge you by how shiney your shoes are and your suit is not. Yes they also judge you by what kind of car you drive and what sort of wine you drink and what sort of family life you have and on and on and on... But people want to believe that they are dealing with someone who is smarter than they are, and that's why they put their financial trust in you. So far, I'd trust you to get a gallon of milk, but I'd tell you how much change to expect.

Ad Hominem is the second lowest form of argument, lowest being pro hominem, meaning being a "Yes Man" as in, there is no argument. You should ty to avoid ad hominem arguments at all costs

[quote=anonymous]And stop thinking that sex is such a sinful thing that no child could ever recover from premature sex.

I've made my position as clear as I can, if you are serious about discussing this then refute what I have said , not by just spouting dogma, but by showing that you understand what has been said and then saying why it is wrong.

You have made your position perfectly clear:

Whomitmayconcern's positon: sexual molestation of children by priests is just "premature sex" and although is not a good thing, it is only society that makes this a bad thing.  The priests deserve to be forgiven.   The payment to the children who got to enjoy the love making was an undeserved bonus. 

Anonymous' Position: sexual molestation of children by priests is a terrible awful crime.   They belong in jail for the rest of their lives as does anybody who was involved with covering up the crime and allowing these priests to have further access to children.  The payment to the children who were raped will never make up for what happened to them.

If I may give my take on this. Whomit, you do not agree with the pedophile acts of priests (incidentally, they are gay same sex pedophiles) since they don't bother little girls but it could be due to "alter boy" situations, convenience, whatever.   You say that the young boys will "get over it" and won't be scarred for life.  You say that some states recognize a young age as "age of consent".  You say the Catho-o-lic Church is the real victim here and doesn't deserve this penalty of paying out lots to victims.  Have I got that right? re: your viewpoint.  You say some girls are victimized at a young age and you don't say this is wrong.  Sure, maybe the girls would get over it since they never had a chance to use their sex organs, anyway. 

Could it be that when it comes to money or a reputation (for example, the Catholic Church's reputation here), that your judgment is very cloudy?  Judging from your other posts, you are highly influenced by anything financial and it does seem to totally cloud your judgement. 

The Catholic church have the anulment process for making money-it costs lots of money to get an anulment.  Think about someone who is married with a prior child getting their marriage annuled, it's like the child wasn't born with a legal father since you are renouncing the prior marriage with the anulment process.

IMO, It's wrong to prey on young children (boys or girls) and penalty should result.  Just like there are class actions and law suits against financial services agencies, religious institutions should be hit where it hurts (in the pocketbook).  Throughout history, there have been alot of injustices from the results of actions of the Catholic Church or believers thereof - in goverment even hints of mafia affliation with the church. I'm no history buff so can't give specifics.

Before you move on to another headline, look at what you said, whomit, and 'why' you said it.

There was a talkshow few years ago where a gay guy said he had a crusch on this straight guy.  The straight guy was so embarrassed that he murdered this guy.

Sure some children are abused and get over it, --but what about the ones who don't.  Many don't get over it and are scarred for life.  The moneys paid out are for the victims who don't get over it.  There needs to be some justice for the injustice.  Too bad you don't feel this way.  But perhaps once you reflect, you will have a new way of thinking here.  If you are the intellectual you think you are, then you will know when you are actually wrong in your current view and have "faulty' thinking.  Being able to change your view will show just how smart you really are.

Society must pay for it's ills and pedophile priests is an ILL whether a molested, raped child gets over it or not.  

[quote=primary]

Sure some children are abused and get over it, --but
what about the ones who don’t.  Many don’t get over it and are
scarred for life.  The moneys paid out are for the victims who
don’t get over it.  There needs to be some justice for the injustice.[/quote]

So justice can be measured in monetary terms? 13 "bad touches" @ 12,500 per touch == All better???

If this was really about pain and suffering, then the "victims" would not be asking for money.

All of the events in question happened (if they happened) privately, a long time ago, and are subject to hazy recolection. The impact of those events is similarly unquantifiable. How do you show that it was "sexual abuse" that caused the problems vs some other cause.

If someone accuses you "He touched my wee wee 17 years ago"  how exactly do you defend yourself, or even prove that the incident ever happened (not happen)?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability

We have a very big problem with accusations of child abuse being non-falsifiable if the only evidence in their favor is someone claiming to be abused and the only counter evidence being a claim that it didn't happen.

The whole subject has been taken over by people who prefer emotion (rage, hysteria, holier than thou gloating,  smugness, etc) over being in touch with reality and the objective world.

No, it would be better to throw them in jail and let them get butt raped but then they'd probably like it since they are gay but just prefer very young partners since it's all about overpowering a helpless child so let them be overpowered by some tossedsalad 'girlfriends' in prison.

It can be worked out with the JUSTICE system-that's why we have a justice system and normally if you don't go to jail as in case of OJ Simpson whom everyone believes is guilty then you get them where it hurts (monetary)-he owes a bunch of money but won't pay any of it.

If you do a wrong, you must pay and the justice system either puts you away and/or you pay a price.

Whomit, you need to evaulate your faulty thinking here.  If the priests are innocent, let it be worked out in the justice system.

By ignoring and not paying a price, this will only encourage further abuse.  

[quote=primary]

No, it would be better to throw them in jail and let
them get butt raped but then they’d probably like it since they are gay
but just prefer very young partners since it’s all about overpowering a
helpless child so let them be overpowered by some tossedsalad
’girlfriends’ in prison.
[/quote]

I think you are projecting.

[quote]Whomit, you need to evaulate your faulty thinking here.  If the priests are innocent, let it be worked out in the justice system.[/quote]

There's no proof that anything happened. Just alot of people asking for money on the basis of "abuse" that they "experienced"

But it's not socially acceptable to point out how weak and swiss cheese the case of the "victims" is. E.g see the reaction to whomit is.

[quote]By ignoring and not paying a price, this will only encourage further abuse.  

That's like asking how DUI's are being deterred.  If you have a punishment that fits the crime (of course! they should go to jail).

I'm not projecting anything just commenting on prior post that prison isn't that nice and you can be raped in prison (better to avoid doing wrong or going to prison and if innocent, we hope the justice system will serve you just as we do if you are guilty.)

My post was directed to whomit and understanding why he thinks the way he does.  Appears to be financially motivated.  If there's no proof, Catholic church can seek justice so they don't have to pay then.  It's up to the justice system out of our hands.

The best thing would be to throw these priests out of the church-assume this has been done. Not Catholic and don't have the interest in knowing all the details here.  Maybe there's a saint for pedofile priests they can pray to. Yes, Christian way is to forgive sins and they should repent of those sins.  I don't know the details but maybe the Catholic Church will have a fresh start to ensure this doesn't continue to reoccur and since it's in the "headlines" victims will promptly report it.  Parents have more awareness and so do children on what's appropriate behavior of a Catholic priest.  Underlying issue is that church requires celibacy and seems to ensnare pedophiles into the profession just as teachers are drawn into the profession so they can have close interaction and opportunity for committing pedophile acts.  

http://www.webistry.net/jan/consent.html

Here's a list of consent ages by state, please note Mississippi.

Primary, I must say that I don't understand much of what you have said, and while I thank you for at least trying to show that you understand what I have said, I'm pretty sure that you have some key points wrong.

First, Yes, I do NOT agree with the actions of pedophile priests.

Second,(firstly) I don't care if they are gay or not. I do think that the priesthood has become a closet for men who did not want to face the fact that they were gay and went into the priesthood for the "safety" of celibacy. Secondly, I do not think that pedophile priests are so because they are gay, two gay men in the priesthood are much more likely to be attracted to each other than to young boys. Historically, hetero males "make do" with young boys so as to get around the commandment against adultery.

Third.. something about little girls... Well, when MY little girls are involved, I'm damned sure to be aware of what's going on around them, I can't imagine some parent just letting their son go away for the weekend with a full grown man who has no nookie of his own and there is no chaperone. Not me! No way!

4. "scarred for life" We're all scarred. But the way the boy whose father died in the car crash, or the girl whose face was torn asunder by a dog, or a car accident, or the boy I went to school with who dropped a firecracker into a tank of gasoline and had burn scars from his neck to his feet, they have to learn to live with it. What then is the difference?

The difference is the phony importance we put on sex. We make the victim of sexual abuse feel that it is better to hide the fact that they had been abused than to report it. We're in many ways no better than the Pakistani's who will kill a woman who allowed herself to be raped. We cling to this old testament view of ourselves that sex is evil (when King David took Bathsheba to be his wife, by sending her husband, a general out on a mission that David knew was suicide, after having seen her bathe nude on her rooftop, God, who used to talk with David all the time, suddenly stopped. The message was clear, sexual desire is a sin!) As I stated earlier in re prison rape, the reason for the rape is to subjugate to victim, how is this? Because the victim knows, deep in his heart that having sex done to you is dirty. It's the same with the boy molested by the priest. Whether the boy wanted to engage or not (most boys are smart enough to know when to get away from somebody whose getting too close) he still knows, deep down that what happened is wrong. Not because it specifically IS, but because we accept that it is.

We know that this is true because we can see throughout history that people who have lived without this prohibition have suffered no ill effects.

The irony here is that, given the freedom to choose, most opt away from this sort of activity and it is mostly in theocratic societies that this behavior manifests.

5. Catholic victim... Again, here is an example of "A" equals "Not B" thinking. I don't mean to imply that the true victim is the Church, but I do point out that they are also a victim of a vested interest. Don't think for a second that this is not costing the Catholic Church both members and at the collection plate. There is a resistance to dropping money into a basket that will pay fines for a priest that did what we all know is wrong.

The Catholic Church already has a huge problem in the USA, not enough priests, not enough people entering the priesthood. As I mentioned before, the church thrives where prosperity doesn't. This blow is not going to help the Church's situation. That helps the Anti Papist churches who want the Catholic money in their collection plates.

So when you ask "Have I got it right re: your viewpoint?', I guess I have to say no.

Nor do you have this right: "You say some girls are victimized at a young age and you don't say this is wrong. Sure, maybe the girls would get over it since they never had a chance to use their sex organs, anyway." You have that so wrong it makes me wonder what the heck you're talking about. Female Genital Mutilation was brought up to give some perspective to the issue. The point was raised that priests are particularly heinous because of their position of authority, and yet mothers are the one's who hold down their daughters (some as young as 5 years old) and spread their legs as someone practically tears away the clitoris and labia while the child screams in horror and pain! And yet, these girls grow up to be women (there's some supermodel who speaks out against this and it happened to her) So when someone says that an altar boy will never get over this, I ask "why?". One answer is that this is something that happens to all girls of certain cultures, and so they don't grow up with the shame. That is the reason that I aver that it is our attitude towards sex that causes the "mental anguish" that never heals.

"

Could it be that when it comes to money or a reputation (for example, the Catholic Church's reputation here), that your judgment is very cloudy? Judging from your other posts, you are highly influenced by anything financial and it does seem to totally cloud your judgement."

You're not in this business are you? Fine with me, I'll have the discussion anyway, but this point is not worthy of response.

The Catholic Church does lots of things that make it lots of money. Religion in general is the opiate of the people and by that I mean they will pay anything to have more of it once they're hooked on it. Annulment is one of those sorts of conveniences that Thomas Moore (author of the book Utopia ) says is why the Catholic Church is far from Christ's message (BTW Thomas Moore was martyred when he would not go along with Henry the Eight's break from the Church because they wouldn't grant him another annulment, he became Saint Thomas for his pains).

Keep in mind that I am the one who Indyone disdains for having said "Christians are retarded" by which I meant that they are forced to accept ideas that fly in the face of all logic and reason, they must "retard" (hold back) their own thought process.

"Throughout history, there have been alot of injustices from the results of actions of the Catholic Church or believers thereof - in goverment even hints of mafia affliation with the church. I'm no history buff so can't give specifics."

Yeah, I'm no history buff, but I'm pretty sure that was Godfather III !

I'm so glad you brought up the bad things that mother Church is responsible for. I don't suppose the number of St Somebody colleges in this country? They're Catholic! In fact it was the church that established the university system, based on the books of Aristotle. How about the St. Somebody Hospitals? Heard of them?

But of course, nobody wants to talk about the good the Church has done with its money and power.

Yes the Jenny Jones incident, that goes to prove my point about how screwed up our sexual morays are, thanks for bringing it up, but I don't think we see it as having the same significance.

"Sure some children are abused and get over it, --but what about the ones who don't. Many don't get over it and are scarred for life. The moneys paid out are for the victims who don't get over it. "

That is one psychotic thought, that money can make it better! Money, the sex you can carry in your wallet!

Money equals Justice huh? You shouldn't be talking to me about religion or morality.

"Too bad you don't feel this way. But perhaps once you reflect, you will have a new way of thinking here. If you are the intellectual you think you are, then you will know when you are actually wrong in your current view and have "faulty' thinking. Being able to change your view will show just how smart you really are."

That only works one way huh? It doesn't work if you decide that I'm correct in my thinking, only if I capitulate and surrender myself to the "TRUTH!" You prove it and I'll consider it, but so far you got bubkiss.

Societies' ills, we agree, but I want to treat the disease, not just punish the symptoms.

You see Anonymous, this is what is known as an ad hominem argument. You don't refute a single thing I've said and only attack my character (you argue at the man and not the argument he makes.)

Your character deserves to be attacked.   Your specific points are not worthy of a response.

"I'd bet a milkshake, that if the church offered only free psychotherapy and no cash to anyone who had been "molested" you would see very few takers."

I'm sure that this is true.  So what.  It doesn't change the fact about what happened to them.  It just means that free psychotherapy doesn't make it worth it to the victims to have this take center stage in their life again.  Can't you understand that they want the church and the priests to be punished. 

At best this is a medical issue and should be treated as such.

Well at least I can understand why you  are backing up Whomit in this conversation.

Allreit,

I just want to say that I'm honored to be one the same side here.

I admire people who can recognize that one difference of opinion doesn't mean all opinions must be different.

Primary, I'm sorry, I should have ignored you from the start.

Now youre going to ruin the thread.

I'm asking you, please don't.

Please.

You know and I know, and I'm asking you politely, please leave.

Anonymous,

Ok, You're right.

Why is "Anti Papist" inflammatory?

The whole of the Protestant Revolution was based on the Fallibility of the "infallibility' of the Pope. The Poe is supposed to be the voice of God on earth and yet here were these popes selling indulgences and having lotteries and making exceptions for this one and that one and generally mucking the whole holy thing up.

Once you reach that point then you get to where Protestants put forth the "There is no way to the father save through Me" line which they say the Pope short circuits. Not to mention the Idea that they then put Mother Mary in there as a way to get her son's ear. And then there are all those saints that you can, for a fee, pray to and they will pass your prayer along to the big guy at the next board meeting. (I like the saints myself, but mostly because they are a remnant of the Greek/Roman pagan gods where there was a different god for each subdivision of living, and they really did break it down quite nicely!)

Let's not forget that the country almost didn't (it can be well argued that they didn't) elect JFK because he was a Catholic who the country feared would take his orders from the Pope (pretty funny to think that JFK was considered a religious man).

I have been observing this site for a few weeks as a financial advisor looking to pick up a new sales idea or two after work hours. After finding this thread, though, I felt compelled to post. I had no idea that upon visiting a financial chat site, that I might find enlightenment to rival that of the Buddha himself. The originator of this post, specifically, is one of the few men I’ve ever read that can legitimately be called a true Renaissance Man. He is obviously infallible, not only as an extremely wealthy and successful financial advisor, but also proves his infallibility as a theologian, philosopher, social commentator, arbiter, linguist and moral compass to us all. To him, all I can do is offer my eternal, heartfelt thanks to have had the privilege to have been in the cyber-presence of such intellectual power. Sir, thank you.

The point being that the Christian community doesn't see the Catholics as Christian at all, because they have the Pope and the others I mentioned.

Evangelical Fundamentalist Christians would like to see the Catholic church abolished in accordance with God's word. That way they can "save" all those misbegotten Catholics from the hellfire and damnation that they are sure to experience! After the rapture, which could come at any time!

Joe,

I'm happy for you that you're happy where you are.

Personally I just can/will not believe in an anthropomorphic "God" (much less one who's three). And religion itself is something that I feel has outlived it's usefulness.

But that's me.