Priest says priests are often seduced by children?

Actor

Show Time wrote: »

He is only making more excuses for this cult of evil.

Here we go again. Yet more anti-Catholicism. Are there no mods on this morning?

shopaholic01

Actor wrote: »

Not all priests and bishops are paedophiles. And not all paedophilia is restricted to the Catholic Church (most paedophilia occurs within the family home).

Yes, I acknowledged that. We all know that paedophilia is common outside the chutch, but this thread is in response to a comment that children encouraged abuse from priests.

Actor wrote: »

The comment was inappropriate.

How so?

Actor

shopaholic01 wrote: »

How so?

Do you agree that comments calling for people to be "lined up and shot" is inappropriate?

shopaholic01

shopaholic01 wrote: »

You just edited your post after I quoted - I think people are calling for the punishment of all those involved in clerical abuse - the perpetrators and those who helped cover it up, not all priests.

Actor wrote: »

Do you agree that comments calling for people to be "lined up and shot" is inappropriate?

I quoted my own response so clarify. Those involved in any way sould be punished. The 'lined up and shot' remark may not have been meant literally - this is after hours. However anyone involved in paedophilis should be punished, both clerical and lay people.


The anger towards paedophilia in the church is justified, we were brought up to trust priests, their actions are in direct conflict with the teachings of catholicism and it was covered up for years.

No, I personally do not think they should be lined up and shot, I would opt for chemical castration.

Corkfeen

Actor wrote: »

shopaholic01 wrote: »

How so?

Do you agree that comments calling for people to be "lined up and shot" is inappropriate?

While I would not endorse the death penalty for anyone. It is an emotive issue for everyone, that the church's authorities engaged in a large scale cover up yet managed to avoid all forms of punishment including the paying of compensation.. You may believe it to be anti-Catholic(the organisation perhaps) but it is based on the actions of the moral authority in the RCC.

Why aren't you responding to the subject of the priest claiming that those who claim to be molested are supposedly seducing the priest. I'd consider his idiocy to be far more worrying that he would prefer to claim that the organisation is incapable of doing wrong and victim blame instead.

Biggins

Rather than have two threads about priests, I'll just post this here: http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/article3525880.ece

Police have obtained a European Arrest Warrant for a Catholic cleric accused of historic sex offences who failed to answer bail, they said today.
They have gained the warrant for Father Laurence Soper, who is wanted over allegations of child abuse dating back to when he taught at St Benedict’s School, a private independent Catholic school which is part of Ealing Abbey in west London.

...Fr Soper, who was abbot of Ealing Abbey from 1991 to 2000, was believed to have been living in a monastery in Rome, and was due to return to London to answer bail in March last year.
However he failed to show up... “It is believed he may be in Italy"

Now I wonder what part of Italy is that!

shopaholic01

Biggins wrote: »

Rather than have two threads about priests, I'll just post this here: http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/article3525880.ece




Now I wonder what part of Italy is that!

Hmmmmm, let's think about this logically ....................... apparently all roads lead to Rome;).

EZ24GET

Anyone who abuses sexually- I did say abuses not talking about consensual sexual behavior between adults- should be reported and legally punished. This includes unwanted sexual activities aimed toward adults. Recently some prominent people have voiced the opinion that there exists legitimate rape, as opposed to what? illegitimate rape?? Rape is rape. Rapists no matter who they are, no matter from what community they come, regardless of wealth or social standing, should be punished for their criminal behavior - not protected.

Show Time

Actor wrote: »

Here we go again. Yet more anti-Catholicism. Are there no mods on this morning?

What would you call a cult that has their way with the youngest and weakest element of society time after time and continue to deny or cover it up????

EZ24GET

I believe those who prey on children seek jobs and vocations that place them in positions with access and authority over children. priests, pastors, youth ministers, teachers, counselors etc. None of these professions can be painted with a broad brush. What I object to in the instance of the priesthood is the denial and cover up. The catholic church is not the only organization to cover up these cases but it is a major player. In some cases it may be a reluctance to take financial responsibility, but to many moving priests from place to place, still allowing their access to young children seems to be acceptance of this crime against children. I realize that cover ups are not limited to the catholic church and it is not my intention to bash the church, but I do believe that if you set your self up as being morally above the common man you should accept a higher degree of responsibility.

Colmustard

It must be the short pants and skirts children wear.

That priest is seriously Fkuced up. I find it hard to believe he actually said this, I first thought it must be a wind up, but no, its reported in multi-media.

“Suppose you have a man having a nervous breakdown, and a youngster comes after him,” 79-year-old Fr Groeschel, said in the interview. “A lot of the cases, the youngster — 14, 16, 18 — is the seducer.”

I am flabbergasted.

J K

Actor wrote: »

Here we go again. Yet more anti-Catholicism. Are there no mods on this morning?

It might have been individual priests (and lots of them) who raped kids.
But the RCC as an organisation covered for the priests. It was done over a protracted periods of time. Involved all ranks of the organisation. And the covering up was so routine and widespread as to have evolved in to a standard operating procedure.
Also bear in mind that the innocent irish tax payer has forked out for the compensation of the victims of your wealthy materialistic unchristian cult.

Feeona

J K wrote: »

innocent irish tax payer

Irish tax payers can be paedophiles too you know!

J K

Feeona wrote: »

Irish tax payers can be paedophiles too you know!

If and when they are proven to be they should pay the penalty and be liable for compensation. I don't like compensating the victim of someone else s perverted crimes. Especially when that someone else is loaded to the gills.

UCDVet

I don't know anything about priests - but I do know that in sexual crimes involving age of consent; a lot of times it really is the 'innocent child' seducing the older person.

Chuck Stone

dharma200 wrote: »

what I found more unbeleivable in this interview, the priest says that he feels first time abusers should not be given jail., as they did not mean to do the abusing.

There should be a minimum custodial sentence (none of this suspended sentence nonsense) for a sex abuser's first offence and the second strike should be natural life in a secure facility.

Just take 'em out of society.

jimthemental

Chuck Stone wrote: »

There should be a minimum custodial sentence (none of this suspended sentence nonsense) for a sex abuser's first offence and the second strike should be natural life in a secure facility.

Just take 'em out of society.

I think suspended sentences are bollocks in general, joke some of the things people walk free from and yet I could be jailed for going after a burglar in my home.

Millicent

UCDVet wrote: »

I don't know anything about priests - but I do know that in sexual crimes involving age of consent; a lot of times it really is the 'innocent child' seducing the older person.

What?!

UCDVet

Millicent wrote: »

What?!

I'm kind of new to Ireland, but I believe the age of consent is 17.

The age of consent in Ireland is 17, and the law does not make exceptions for being close in age or for marriage.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_Europe#Ireland

I'm 100% certain that there are couples who are dating/seeing each other/hooking up/otherwise participating in consensual sexual activity in which one couple is under 17 and the other is not. IE - it's illegal for a 16 year old to 'mess around' with a 17 year old.

I'm also certain that, in some cases, the 16 year old is the one actively pursuing the activity - knowing that it is against the law.

I personally had a friend in school who was dating a girl two years younger than him. It was illegal for them to have sex - and *she* was pushing for them to do it and he was worried about what people would think.

So, in some cases, the 'innocent child' who is protected by the law is the one who wants to break it. I'm not saying that justifies breaking the law (the idea behind the law is that the child is too immature to know what they want.)

It suggests that, it's at least possible, that some people are seduced into committing a sexual crime. In some cases the victim does want to participate in the sexual activity.

shopaholic01

UCDVet wrote: »

I'm kind of new to Ireland, but I believe the age of consent is 17.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_Europe#Ireland

I'm 100% certain that there are couples who are dating/seeing each other/hooking up/otherwise participating in consensual sexual activity in which one couple is under 17 and the other is not. IE - it's illegal for a 16 year old to 'mess around' with a 17 year old.

I'm also certain that, in some cases, the 16 year old is the one actively pursuing the activity - knowing that it is against the law.

I personally had a friend in school who was dating a girl two years younger than him. It was illegal for them to have sex - and *she* was pushing for them to do it and he was worried about what people would think.

So, in some cases, the 'innocent child' who is protected by the law is the one who wants to break it. I'm not saying that justifies breaking the law (the idea behind the law is that the child is too immature to know what they want.)

It suggests that, it's at least possible, that some people are seduced into committing a sexual crime. In some cases the victim does want to participate in the sexual activity.

You're giving examples of 16 year olds, paedophiles are attracted to pre-pubescent children. Do you think a child of 13 or younger is sexually attracted to an adult and willingly pursues a sexual relationship?

UCDVet

shopaholic01 wrote: »

You're giving examples of 16 year olds, paedophiles are attracted to pre-pubescent children. Do you think a child of 13 or younger is sexually attracted to an adult and willingly pursues a sexual relationship?

And the initial quote that sparked this thread was:

“Suppose you have a man having a nervous breakdown, and a youngster comes after him,” 79-year-old Fr Groeschel, said in the interview. “A lot of the cases, the youngster — 14, 16, 18 — is the seducer."

shopaholic01

UCDVet wrote: »

And the initial quote that sparked this thread was:

Most cases of clerical sexual abuse involved younger children. That quote was a pathetic attempt to blame victims for the actions of adults.


Do you think a 14 is responsible for being anally or orally raped by an adult?