[quote="charlotte"]There...the truth according to such a specialist on the subject.[/quote]
I resent that implication. Might be a good time for an apology.
I do, however, know the difference in the meanings of pedophile and pederast. I also know that the legislature is not interested in protecting the public from either.
[quote]I could not disagree more, but you know that. Look at the facts on pedophiles or men who abuse kids under the legal age (whatever word floats your boat)...many in society are married white men. Go figure?[/quote]
There you are spinning again.
Those are not fact, when you use the term "pedophile" as a generic term, it's simply agenda driven propaganda designed to protect pederasts.
The priest deal was virtually all boy rapists, not "pedophiles."
[quote]Clearly, you seem fixed on blaming gay men.[/quote]
Absolutely. Were there any gay women involved?
More than likely, to be specific, groups like NAMBLA are responsible.
Whatever they want to call themselves, they did a pretty good job of infiltrating and practically destroying the Catholic Church. (maybe because they believe like you)
I have a little trouble believing they were there for the purpose of being a priest ,or for the "lucrative paycheck."
[quote]Fine...pull all the gay men out...and like in the Boy scouts...there are still plenty of pedos...who seemingly get in.[/quote]
Well, in the Boy Scouts, these "pedos" wouldn't be looking for little girls...Would they?
I don't want to debate your esoteric terms of art. Who cares if they are "gay" with all it's high brow psychological nomenclature?
As far as the average member of the Maine public is concerned, anyone who engages in same sex activity is gay.
From now on they're WBRPs.
[quote="Naran"]Sorry, Gerald, you're incorrect. I don't bash all Catholics, just those on here I see being stiff-necked and blind to the inequities and wrongdoing of their Church administration ..[/quote]
Naran and Charlotte the abortion and sodomy advocate twins.
This thread that reveals the Catholic Church's determination not to accept homosexual sex must really upset you.
Not as much as the last forty years of shunting pedophile priests from one parish to another, and the diligent work required to cover it all up.
Now, that really upsets me.
You're right Gerald, the Catholic Church is determined to disavow homosexual sex...unless of course you are a priest.
I wouldn't be so sure.
The Bishop wasn't real patronizing to the subject the other day at his Legislative dinner.
MV wrote:"The priest deal was virtually all boy rapists, not "pedophiles.""
A boy is a child.
adult with sexual desire for children: an adult who has sexual desire for children or who has committed the crime of sex with a child
pedÂ·erÂ·ast [ pÃ©ddÉ™ rÃ st ] (plural pedÂ·erÂ·asts)
man who has sex with boy: a man who has sexual relations with a boy ( formal )
[quote="Naran"]Not as much as the last forty years of shunting pedophile priests from one parish to another, and the diligent work required to cover it all up.
Now, that really upsets me.[/quote]
You spend a lot of time criticizing and bashing the Catholic Church, who is trying to correct the past abuses of some homosexual priests.
Knowing that you approve of sodomy, abortion, and fornication (condoms for children), have you found a church to attend that supports these "virtues"?
Yes, the majority of the priests were pederasts. They also, and mostly, assaulted young teenage boys.
The "having-it-both-ways" crowd, by using the comment "most pedophiles are hetero" seeks through word semantics to conduct a big cover up.
The terms are not interchangable.
The Catholic Church is holding to the teachings of the Bible, as they should. Why should they change their beliefs to make the liberals happy.
The liberal voters, legislatures and activists have pushed thru anti-discrimination and other pro-gay laws. This has caused the change in adoption policy at the church!!
So put the blame where it belongs. With the gay rights activists and their supporters.
I spend barely any time criticizing the Catholic church. I never even think about the issue in particular, unless I'm watching you and IMHO pick on Charlotte.
However, delighted to give you an opportunity to write your usual sordid laundry list of what you [i]"KNOW"[/i] I "approve of." (yeah, right).
You forgot to write "cucumber," however; better get on that, you're slipping again.
Mike...so you are a specialist? If so, I am sorry I offended you..lmao. Many studies discuss how pedophiles abuse any child they can get their hands on...it is about power...but what they heck, why throw in facts...eh?
As for blame...Kris...I put it where it belongs...on the leaders of the church. They are not doing what is right.
[quote="Naran"]Sorry, but I don't believe Charlotte has ever insulted Catholics in what I've read. She has repeatedly stated disagreement with the way the Church treats gay people. That's not an insult, it's a difference of opinion.
I think your comments to her on learning she has departed the Church were a cheap shot, and if your overall agenda is to welcome and keep fellow Catholics in the fold, didn't serve the process.[/quote]
Charlotte has repeatedly insulted the Catholic Church. Go back and read her posts. Even in her statement in this thread announcing her departure from the Church (to which I responded), she fired this parting shot: "I find the Catholic church very hypocritical."
If you can't (or won't) see the difference between this and other insulting comments against the Church by her, and "questions, comments and theological dissension" as you put it, then you are hopelessly confused.
And by the way, my agenda is not to keep fellow Catholics in the fold (especially CINO's). That is their "choice", as you feminists like to say.
Calling the Catholic Church "hypocritical" is an insult in your book?
A reasoned expression of disapproval is an insult?
[quote="charlotte"]As for blame...Kris...I put it where it belongs...on the leaders of the church. They are not doing what is right.[/quote]
So you believe that a church should change it's doctrine to reflect what some of society has accepted? Yep, Churches (leaders) fault that the law changed and requires them to adopt children out to unsuitable parents (according to their beliefs).
Again, the state changed the law, not the church.
[quote="Naran"]I spend barely any time criticizing the Catholic church. I never even think about the issue in particular, unless I'm watching you and IMHO pick on Charlotte.
You forgot to write "cucumber," however; better get on that, you're slipping again.
In your above rant you got carried away and forgot to inform us of the Church you attend which supports your advocacy of sodomy, abortion, fornication, and as you reminded me cucumber demonstrations for our kids? What is the Church Naran???
IMHO...hypocritical...is a critique...not an insult. What is insulting is convicted pedophile priest still allowed to keep their priestly pension...
Kris...the church should give kids good homes...and follow their state contract...or get out. simple.
Gerald, why would I tell you? We don't need any pompous officiators at our church suppers, thanks anyway. We like to eat in peace and fellowship.
[quote="charlotte"]Mike...so you are a specialist? [/quote]No I'm not, nor a practitioner as you implied. Are you?
[quote]If so, I am sorry I offended you..lmao.[/quote] Apparently you're not (lmao)
[quote]Many studies discuss how pedophiles abuse any child they can get their hands on[/quote]So what? That would not be the profile of the subjects at hand.
We're talking about whackjob boy raping predators, and your thinly veiled position of defending them.
They are/were NAMBLA recruiters lounging comfortably under the guise of celibate clergy, not "pedophiles" as you imply when constantly attempting to change the subject.
Are you trying to convince us that the NAMBLA crowd is equal opportunity, or that it doesn't really exist?
I'm sure a quick Google search will tell you more than you want to know.
On one point I'll agree.
This round of investigations could be just scratching the surface, any of the heirarchy involved in protecting the guilty should also be suspect in either participating or perpetuating the horror show for some other reason.
In other words, who are "the leaders?"
Careful, Michael, I'm afraid you're close to "insulting" the Church, according to some on here.
[quote="Naran"]Calling the Catholic Church "hypocritical" is an insult in your book?
A reasoned expression of disapproval is an insult?[/quote]
Yes, to me characterizing a person or institution as a hypocrite or hypocritical is an insult, amazing as it might be to you.
Anyone who thinks it is simply a benign "reasoned expression of disapproval" must have a pretty thick skin IMHO.
That has nothing to do with the profile of the subjects at hand? HUh? Pedophiles abuse what is typically available to them...it is about power (or so the experts say...I just listen to them...). The Catholic Church did not allow alter girls until recently. So there were only boys for decades...seems like a good detail to remember. In addition, I am not defending...sick whackos who rape/abuse boys or girls (keep in mind 20%abused were little girls)...I find scapegoating gay men a ignorant way to solve this issue.
Regarding Nambla...if you look at their web page (I know this from debating on this issue prior)....they devote a whole section about the vast gay groups that are fighting their efforts...
Well, there's "The Church" and then there's the divide between the heirarchy and the parishioners.
The faithful should be raising hell and demanding answers. If they don't, then they are hypocritical.
The clergy who are driving these investigations are doing the right thing, those impeding or historically involved with protectionist transfers need to go. Of course that is not an absolute measure, only God will figure that one out.
The Bishop has said repeatedly that this activity is not church doctrine, but failure to follow church doctrine.
That doesn't sound hypocritical to me.
No, it doesn't to me either.
Let's see what others have to say, or if they think daring to raise Hell and question the Hierarchy is an insult.
[quote="charlotte"]...(keep in mind 20%abused were little girls)[/quote]Well there's your damn pedophiles. Did I not say "MOST" are pederasts?
[quote]...I find scapegoating gay men a ignorant way to solve this issue.[/quote]Fine, who's doing that? First I'm a specialist, now I'm ignorant. Geesh.
I told you I'm not going to buy the dogma of that agenda including the term "gay." Males who do this with males perform a homosexual act, fact, period, end of sentence. Their state of mind, consciousness, sexual history, whatever...notwithstanding.
According to the very definition from another poster, the "priests" in question (male) assaulting the victims (boys) qualify themselves as pederasts. (80%)
I'm not scapegoating gay men, and we are not talking about pedophiles. They are a minority but deserve equal contempt.
[quote]Regarding Nambla...if you look at their web page (I know this from debating on this issue prior)....they devote a whole section about the vast gay groups that are fighting their efforts...[/quote]Well, I would certainly hope so.
But since it took this long in the thread to get this out, it reminds me of the "moderate" Muslims who say nothing to condemn the murdering jihadists.
Mike...plenty of pedophiles who abuse kids (boys and girls) consider themselves "straight"...
I believe it is wrong to say men sex with boys is gay just as it is wrong to say males sex with girls straight. Pedophiles abuse what they can easily get...many abuse both boys and girls when they can...
Let's stop the abuse...and my hope the church will stop scapegoating gay men...
It will not solve this issue.
[quote="charlotte"]Mike...plenty of pedophiles who abuse kids (boys and girls) consider themselves "straight"...[/quote]Well they're wrong! Practicing the "perversion" of child molesting is not being "straight."
"Perversion" also means curving, turning or reversing, none of defines "straight."
[quote]I believe it is wrong to say men sex with boys is gay[/quote]That's fine except I never said it.
I said it is a homosexual act. If you analyse the word, it means literally "pertaining to same-sex"
I also said I don't subscribe to the deliberate obfuscatory nature of "The Agenda's" language, including the word "gay"
[quote]Let's stop the abuse[/quote]Then get your party, the democrats, to endorse Jessica's law and pass LD 1717. It won't stop it, but it will keep the animals away from children for a long time.
[quote]...and my hope the church will stop scapegoating gay men[/quote]That is the church's long held policy which predates the Constitution and the militant homosexual agenda. It is their right to have that position.
[quote]It will not solve this issue.[/quote]If they stick to their guns and are serious about policing their own ranks in order to eradicate and punish both perversions, it will discourage and suppress the life destroying practice within the Catholic clergy.
[quote="Naran"]Gerald, why would I tell you? We don't need any pompous officiators at our church suppers, thanks anyway. We like to eat in peace and fellowship.
Should have known that no church would support your advocacy of abortion, sodomy, fornication, and cucumber demomstrations for kids. No wonder the Catholic Church upsets you, it stands against all those evils.
Ok, then just tell us the name of your coven.
...if you accept privte messages, I just sent you one. If you don't, could you PM me about a way to send you an e-mail?
There is something I would like to discuss with you.
[quote="Gerald E. Thibodeau"][quote="Naran"]Gerald, why would I tell you? We don't need any pompous officiators at our church suppers, thanks anyway. We like to eat in peace and fellowship.
Ok, then just tell us the name of your coven.[/quote]Don't expect an answer soon Gerald.
Naran and Charlotte know that it is much easier to throw stones at other religions when you don't have to defend your own.
Some might call it hypocritical.
Michael...I think we are both for protecting children. Acts with kids doesn't make them str8 or gay...it makes them perverted and abusive. I don't care if it is a man who associates with being gay or straight...I want them put away...! Not just for a few months.
I will look into the law. What are the reasons the Dems are not voting for the bill? Thank you.