The Clerical Child Abuse Thread (merged)

Zorbas

soterpisc wrote: »

Simple facts are sufficient. Not one single abuse case reported in the last 10 years... Obvious fact showing measures put in place are working.

If cases subsequently come to light then your fact is no longer a fact. Takes time for such crimes as we are discussing here to emerge.
Let us hope you are correct anyhow and then perhaps you can stop repeating your mantra.

The Quadratic Equation

gigino wrote: »

So say you !

If what you say is true, then the 00.1% ( a tenth of a per cent ) of the population who are clerics have a lot to answer for if what the website of the Child Safeguarding and Protection Service of the ( Roman Catholic ) Archdiocese of Dublin says is true ( and we have no reason to doubt it ) :

"Five per cent of all Irish children who are sexually abused are harmed by clerics"

http://www.cps.dublindiocese.ie/article_287.shtml


Clerics are punching well above their weight, would'nt you say ?

What % of Irish children were abused by Catholic Priests in the last 10 years ?

soterpisc

Zorbas wrote: »

If cases subsequently come to light then your fact is no longer a fact. Takes time for such crimes as we are discussing here to emerge.
Let us hope you are correct anyhow and then perhaps you can stop repeating your mantra.

Its not a Mantra, Its a Fact. The reason I repeat it is to voice the reality that the Church has Changed. The Priests that abused are dead/Imprisoned or sanctioned.

Why do I voice this here, Because we have a Media and government fixed on bashing the church for the past, a society that think that 40% of priests have abused, when this does not stack up to the current facts.


the fact there has been no abuse reported in the last 10 years does not make headlines is why I voice it here. All the media want to do is regurgitate past failings as if they were present failings or fabricate an accusation against an innocent priest.

Zorbas

The Quadratic Equation wrote: »

What % of Irish children were abused by Catholic Priests in the last 10 years ?

Just for the record: Are you constantly repeating this question as some kind of statement which you feel can be answered at this time
or
Is this your way of seeking to avoid or diminish the sexual crimes of priests over the recent past?

soterpisc

Zorbas wrote: »

Just for the record: Are you constantly repeating this question as some kind of statement which you feel can be answered at this time
or
Is this your way of seeking to avoid or diminish the sexual crimes of priests over the recent past?

The factual statement that there has been no current cases of abusr reported in the last ten years is a statement of fact.

Nobody is diminishing the horrors of abuse the some clerics commited.. But past failings are not the failings of current priests.

The Quadratic Equation

Zorbas wrote: »

Just for the record: Are you constantly repeating this question as some kind of statement which you feel can be answered at this time
or
Is this your way of seeking to avoid or diminish the sexual crimes of priests over the recent past?

Just waiting for an answer as to what % ?

So be honest and answer the question :

What % of Irish children were abused by Catholic Priests in the last 10 years ?

ISAW

gigino wrote: »

I knew of the source already and I can assure you I read it. I have quoted from iot numerous times on this thread to you, inc reproducing the table above a number of times.

No you didn't! You posted about SAVI only after I posted about it. It is easy to check. Just point out where you fiorst posted about SAVI and we will see if I posted about it before you. If you are right and you did post forst I am happy to admit I was wrong.

How dare you claim I "didnt read the report" !

If you had read it you would know the abuse might not have happened in Ireland or to Irish people.

I said "The ( SAVI ) study / survey is in the Republic of Ireland.
1.9% of all abusers are religous ministers ( inc RC Priests )".
I reproduced the chart for you again ( see several posts up ), and earlier in the thread I cut and pasted text from the report for you, as well as linking the report.

You pasted an image someone posted before you ever did!
It refers to "abuse" which might not have happened in Ireland or to Irish people.
And "abuse" incluides non tpouching e.g. asking someone who is seventeen years old to watch porn. You would know that if you actually read the report.

Even having read the odd but you clearly don't understand the ramifications.

There is no seperate category for RC priests to fit in to in the SAVI statistics, so therefore they are included in "Ministers".

If indeed the 6 cases refer only to RC priests we are not told.

Incidentally in the lifetime of most people ( say in the past 60 years ) all of the clerical child abuse in the state is known to have taken place in the RC church,

That isnt true either. While catholic clergy are 90 per cent plus of all clergy there are examples of Protestant abuse. Indeed even some Protestant homes were reported.
I gave you the reference just above but you dont seem to have read them.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2002/en/act/pub/0013/sched.html
Look up Stwearts Hospital and Miss Carrs
http://www.paddydoyle.com/category/bethany-homes/
Bethany has been refused by Minister Quinn.

Do you have any proof that the average number of victims are so much higher for clerics as to explain the fact that "Five per cent of all Irish children who are sexually abused are harmed by clerics"

Well the stats themselves explain that. If less than 1% of abusers are priests and if 5%of victims are victims of priests - do the mathematics yourself.

while RC Priests are well less than a tenth of one percent of the population ?

Yes RC priests are maybe less than a tenth of a per cent of the population. I say maybe because they might be half a per cent . I would think they are less then one per cent today. Your point about the less than 0.1% being?

ISAW

Zorbas wrote: »

Just for the record: Are you constantly repeating this question as some kind of statement which you feel can be answered at this time
or
Is this your way of seeking to avoid or diminish the sexual crimes of priests over the recent past?

I would go for option one. It is a type of question 9 not statement) thatcan be answered at this time.
Have you an answer?

ISAW

Zorbas wrote: »

If cases subsequently come to light then your fact is no longer a fact. Takes time for such crimes as we are discussing here to emerge.

Please look up "argument form ignorance" it is a fallacy.

I have no doubt if a priest was convicrted of a sexual offence of anykind you would behere trumpeting it. the think is even if a case happened there are thousands of sex abuse cases convicted in the courts every year.

Let us hope you are correct anyhow and then perhaps you can stop repeating your mantra.

LOL! When people come her e with the "pedo priests" mantra thay are supported by the likes of you but when the obvious lack of support for your "pedo priests" myth is continually pointed out and evidence is requested, you think this is somehow unfair?

Zorbas

Slippery is how I would describe people who answer a valid question with another oft repeated question which is irrelevant.
Have looked up "argument form ignorance" but no such thing - have you been over-excited again?

ISAW

Zorbas wrote: »

Slippery is how I would describe people who answer a valid question with another oft repeated question which is irrelevant.
Have looked up "argument form ignorance" but no such thing - have you been over-excited again?

Let us be quite clear
Yoiu are suggesting thatchild abuse is currently happening but we just don't know about it yet.
It is argument from ignorance a logical fallacy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance
It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false.
A Fallacy!
http://www.skepdic.com/ignorance.html
when one claims that something is true only because it hasn't been proved false
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance
a logical fallacy that claims the truth of a premise is based on the fact that it has not been proven false, or that a premise is false because it has not been proven true

Need i go on?

The Quadratic Equation

Zorbas wrote: »

Slippery is how I would describe people who answer a valid question with another oft repeated question which is irrelevant.

The question will be repeated untill you have the honesty to answer it. Avoiding or trying to sidestep and slip away from the question is not answering it.

soterpisc

Zorbas wrote: »

Slippery is how I would describe people who answer a valid question with another oft repeated question which is irrelevant.
Have looked up "argument form ignorance" but no such thing - have you been over-excited again?

Why do you bother posting here? We are all on the side of the abused, they were wronged, they are the victims, and those who committed it should be locked up.

On the other side.. What is wrong with defending the vast Majority who did not abuse or cover it up.

So what is the aim of your posts.. Because they constantly lack clear logic and are just off the cuff remarks. If you have a point to make, Make it clearly.

gimmebroadband

soterpisc wrote: »

Why do you bother posting here? We are all on the side of the abused, they were wronged, they are the victims, and those who committed it should be locked up.

On the other side.. What is wrong with defending the vast Majority who did not abuse or cover it up.

So what is the aim of your posts.. Because they constantly lack clear logic and are just off the cuff remarks. If you have a point to make, Make it clearly.

Trolling springs to mind!

Plowman

This post has been deleted.

gigino

soterpisc wrote: »

Because they constantly lack clear logic and are just off the cuff remarks.

His / her points actually are very logical and you are out of order in your personal attack on him / her.

gigino

The Quadratic Equation wrote: »

Just waiting for an answer as to what % ?

So be honest and answer the question :

What % of Irish children were abused by Catholic Priests in the last 10 years ?

Asking the same question ten or 20 times amounts to badgering.

Besides, the section of the ( Roman Catholic ) Archdiocese of Dublin which currently deals with child abuse prevention could be considered an authority on the matter. Their website - the website of the Child Safeguarding and Protection Service of the ( Roman Catholic ) Archdiocese of Dublin say ( and we have no reason to doubt them, although the SAVI report states 5.8% of child abusers are religous ministers and religous teachers/brothers ) :

"Five per cent of all Irish children who are sexually abused are harmed by clerics"

Note it uses the present tense. " are harmed". Their website does not say were harmed in the eighties, or nineties, or fifties. Maybe they are aware of cases pending or cases confidentially settled out of the media spotlight ( as most cases are / were ), maybe it was a freudian slip, maybe they think that the long term statistical average figure is 5% of all children harmed ?

Now, time for you to answer the question you were asked : Are you constantly repeating this question as some kind of statement which you feel can be answered at this time
or
Is this your way of seeking to avoid or diminish the sexual crimes of priests over the recent past?

gigino

ISAW wrote: »

While catholic clergy are 90 per cent plus of all clergy there are examples of Protestant abuse. Indeed even some Protestant homes were reported.

But no Protestant clergy accused or convicted, was there ? Can you give say a solid example of Protestant abuse in the state in say the past 50 years ?

ISAW wrote: »

Yes RC priests are maybe less than a tenth of a per cent of the population. I say maybe because they might be half a per cent . I would think they are less then one per cent today. Your point about the less than 0.1% being?

Given the website of their own church claims only "Five per cent of all Irish children who are sexually abused are harmed by clerics", it still shows the Priests punching well above their weight ?

What other group comprises less than 00.1% of the population yet is still responsible for 5% ( at least ) of "Irish children who are sexually abused"?

The Quadratic Equation

gigino wrote: »

Asking the same question ten or 20 times amounts to badgering.

No actually avoiding a very simple question is dishonest.

Repeatedly avoiding a very simple question is repeatedly dishonest.

But I'll give you another chance :

What % of Irish children in the last 10 years were abused by Catholic Priests ? What %, have guess. What % ?

gigino

The Quadratic Equation wrote: »

What %, have guess. What % ?

as said before, the section of the ( Roman Catholic ) Archdiocese of Dublin which currently deals with child abuse prevention could be considered an authority on the matter. Who should doubt them ? Their website - the website of the Child Safeguarding and Protection Service of the ( Roman Catholic ) Archdiocese of Dublin say ( and we have no reason to doubt them, although the SAVI report states 5.8% of child abusers are religous ministers and religous teachers/brothers ) :

"Five per cent of all Irish children who are sexually abused are harmed by clerics"

Note it uses the present tense. " are harmed". Their website does not say were harmed in the eighties, or nineties, or fifties. Maybe they are aware of cases pending or cases confidentially settled out of the media spotlight ( as most cases are / were ), maybe it was a freudian slip, maybe they think that the long term statistical average figure is 5% of all children harmed ?

Do you doubt the written word as publicised by the Archdiocese of Dublin ?


Now, time for you to answer the question you were asked : Are you constantly repeating this question as some kind of statement which you feel can be answered at this time
or
Is this your way of seeking to avoid or diminish the sexual crimes of priests over the recent past?

ISAW

gigino wrote: »

But no Protestant clergy accused or convicted, was there ? Can you give say a solid example of Protestant abuse in the state in say the past 50 years ?

Im not aware of any Protestant Clerics convicted of sexually abusing a pre pubescent child in the past 50 years. I don't know if ther were any and I dont intend to go into that debate because it is basically saying "only Catholics clerics abuse and Protestant ones don't" which I don't accept and I think is unfair to propose as it will drag this whole thread into a sectarian "Catholics abuse at a higher rate than Protestants" thread.

Given the website of their own church claims only "Five per cent of all Irish children who are sexually abused are harmed by clerics", it still shows the Priests punching well above their weight ?

Asked and answered

What other group comprises less than 00.1% of the population yet is still responsible for 5% ( at least ) of "Irish children who are sexually abused"?

Your misuse of statistics is astounding! I have to complain about this.

ISAW

gigino wrote: »

Are you constantly repeating this question as some kind of statement which you feel can be answered at this time
or
Is this your way of seeking to avoid or diminish the sexual crimes of priests over the recent past?

Nice side step to throw your red herring into the pot!
The thing is if you keep misusing stats and troll out the same debunked argument and you then accuse others of badgering you must be aware of the offense.

Zorbas

ISAW wrote: »

Nice side step to throw your red herring into the pot!
The thing is if you keep misusing stats and troll out the same debunked argument and you then accuse others of badgering you must be aware of the offense.

Yet another misunderstanding I suggest since you are ascribing a post to someone who did not write it. No doubt you will ask for proof and how many times this has happened over last 10 years etc.
What are the statistics which I have misquoted by the way?

soterpisc

gigino wrote: »

as said before, the section of the ( Roman Catholic ) Archdiocese of Dublin which currently deals with child abuse prevention could be considered an authority on the matter. Who should doubt them ? Their website - the website of the Child Safeguarding and Protection Service of the ( Roman Catholic ) Archdiocese of Dublin say ( and we have no reason to doubt them, although the SAVI report states 5.8% of child abusers are religous ministers and religous teachers/brothers ) :

"Five per cent of all Irish children who are sexually abused are harmed by clerics"

Note it uses the present tense. " are harmed". Their website does not say were harmed in the eighties, or nineties, or fifties. Maybe they are aware of cases pending or cases confidentially settled out of the media spotlight ( as most cases are / were ), maybe it was a freudian slip, maybe they think that the long term statistical average figure is 5% of all children harmed ?

Do you doubt the written word as publicised by the Archdiocese of Dublin ?


Now, time for you to answer the question you were asked : Are you constantly repeating this question as some kind of statement which you feel can be answered at this time
or
Is this your way of seeking to avoid or diminish the sexual crimes of priests over the recent past?

I have checked and there are no current cases of Child abuse before the courts. If the website says that 5% of Children today in the Dublin Dioceses are harmed, current abuse. Then this has not made it to Court or even has been reported. Not one single case.

All abuse cases reported to the Bishop have to be also reported to HSE/GARDS. Its the law and its also the Church Guidelines.

So where in the website does it say that there are current abuse cases being committed by priests?

http://www.dacoi.ie

There are cases before the courts of abuse. But the abuse dates back to the 80's 90's. Show me one case from the last 10 years in Ireland.

The Dublin Dioceses is saying that there is current abuse taking place by Clergy in the Ireland of today, do you not think that knowing this and not reporting it would constitute in Todays Ireland a crime that nobody can stand over.

Priests are not removed form Parishes when they get convicted, they are removed as soon as any allegation is made until the allegation is investigated. Its all in the public domain.

So again I ask name one single case of abuse committed in the last 10 years.

Zorbas

Does the following fill us with confidence about the new policies, procedure and general attitudes to sexual abuse in the Catholic Church?

THE first complaint of sexual abuse against the former principal of Carrignavar College and Cork GAA selector, Fr Donncha Mac Cárthaigh, was investigated by his brother, who was then the head of his order in Ireland.
The complaint was lodged against Fr Donncha in 1986.
Within a number of years of the complaint, Fr Donncha had stepped aside "under a cloud" from his post as principal, and was installed by the order as a career and guidance counsellor, where he had further access to children.
Six more complaints against Fr Donncha were made over the next 12 years and, in 1996, he was put on restricted ministry.
However, it has emerged that Fr Donncha con-celebrated wedding masses as recently as 2005, another violation of restricted ministry guidelines, and that he wears a priest’s collar — even though Church guidelines on restricted ministry state "you are requested to refrain from being identified as a Roman Catholic priest".

Fr Donncha was well known in Cork GAA circles as a selector with the Cork minor football team between 1991 and 1993. He was also involved in training under-16 county football teams
he travelled to Fatima and Rome in the past two years without receiving permission from the order. On the Fatima trip, he was described as "spiritual director".


Read more: http://www.examiner.ie/ireland/priests-brother-investigated-sex-abuse-claims-162604.html#ixzz1hMSEPlZG

soterpisc

Zorbas wrote: »

Does the following fill us with confidence about the new policies, procedure and general attitudes to sexual abuse in the Catholic Church?

Past failings are past failings that only path open is reform and acknowledgement of these failings.


Todays church has changed. The facts state that. Not 1 case reported of abuse in the last 10 years.

The Quadratic Equation

gigino wrote: »

as said before, the section of the ( Roman Catholic ) Archdiocese of Dublin which currently deals with child abuse prevention could be considered an authority on the matter. Who should doubt them ? Their website - the website of the Child Safeguarding and Protection Service of the ( Roman Catholic ) Archdiocese of Dublin say ( and we have no reason to doubt them, although the SAVI report states 5.8% of child abusers are religous ministers and religous teachers/brothers ) :

"Five per cent of all Irish children who are sexually abused are harmed by clerics"

Note it uses the present tense. " are harmed". Their website does not say were harmed in the eighties, or nineties, or fifties. Maybe they are aware of cases pending or cases confidentially settled out of the media spotlight ( as most cases are / were ), maybe it was a freudian slip, maybe they think that the long term statistical average figure is 5% of all children harmed ?

Do you doubt the written word as publicised by the Archdiocese of Dublin ?


Now, time for you to answer the question you were asked : Are you constantly repeating this question as some kind of statement which you feel can be answered at this time
or
Is this your way of seeking to avoid or diminish the sexual crimes of priests over the recent past?

That does not answer my question, it is yet more dishonest side stepping.

Now, again, what % of Irish children in the last 10 years were abused by Catholic Priests ? What %, have guess. What % ?

joseph brand

Tens of thousands of children have been victims of sexual abuse by the Roman Catholic Church in the Netherlands since 1945, an independent commission said today, criticising what it called the church's cover-up and culture of silence.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2011/1216/breaking27.html

Ah sure, it was only tens of thousand of raped children. What's everyone getting so heated about. They were only 'fiddlin'. It wasn't BJ's and anal sex.

Jesus told them to keep schtum.

soterpisc
Todays church has changed. The facts state that. Not 1 case reported of abuse in the last 10 years.

In the last 10 years people have been working to try and expose all these cases of children raped in holy churches, so its probably not that easy for priests anymore. Different times we live in, better.
Also, are there many alter boys these days? Not a hope of my son being an alter boy, it's too dangerous and it's irresponsible for any parent to let their son work under a priest.

joseph brand

The Quadratic Equation wrote: »

That does not answer my question, it is yet more dishonest side stepping.

Now, again, what % of Irish children in the last 10 years were abused by Catholic Priests ? What %, have guess. What % ?

No offence, but, it's a stupid question.
The cases always seem to come out long after the crime. We see priests who have since died accused of rape, others in their 80s and 90s. Is there any point sending a 92 yr old to jail? Why wasn't he caught when in his raping prime?
There are cases from all over Europe coming to light each year, (rapes which happened over 10 years ago).

Perhaps in 10 years we will have news reports of tens of thousands, maybe even millions of kids raped in third world countries by priests. Or what % certain are you that this won't happen? Eh, what %, Guess?

The Quadratic Equation

joseph brand wrote: »

The cases always seem to come out long after the crime.

You mean the old cases are old hmmm I see.

Meanwhile as another post has said, there has been approx. 200 convictions for child abuse carried out in Ireland the last 10 years. So it should not be too hard to work out what % of these were carried out by Catholic Priests, so what % ? Still waiting for the honest answer . . .