Study: At least 1 in 20 catholic priests is an abuser.

[D1B]

I'm a practicing Catholic.

Just saying that allowing them to marry doesn't stop abuse by sick people. Other denomonations have almost as many problems.

The Catholic Church is the worst of em all by far.

[89Hen]

Just saying that allowing them to marry doesn't stop abuse by sick people. Other denomonations have almost as many problems.

The Catholic Church is the worst of em all by far.

Catholics - 57,000,000

Baptist - 36,000,000
Methodist - 11,000,000
Lutheran - 9,000,000
56,000,000

[D1B]

The Catholic Church is the worst of em all by far.

Catholics - 57,000,000

Baptist - 36,000,000
Methodist - 11,000,000
Lutheran - 9,000,000
56,000,000

Father murphy raped at least 200 deaf children, one with cerebal palsy.

[D1B]

http://stopbaptistpredators.org/index.htm

I'm a practicing Catholic.

From the article.

•Called for married priests, as are being allowed now in the Anglican ordinariate within the Catholic Church, as a "circuit-breaker" that would reduce child sex abuse. The state should remove the Equal Opportunity Act exemption letting the church discriminate on grounds of marital status, he said.
•Described the Church as "a holy and unholy mess, except where religious sisters or laypeople are in charge, for example schools and welfare agencies".
•Called for an "eminent Catholic task force" of lay people to work with the Church on reform and transparency.
•Said other religions were not immune from child sex abuse, including credible anecdotal evidence of two incidents within Melbourne's Hindu community where the offending monks were "shipped back to the home country".

Looks like secularists and humanists need to come in and help the church see the light of reason.


Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/one-i ... z2A9MEYenc" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[JohnStOnge]

Start your own thread, psycho ****

Oh c'mon. You're always ragging on the Catholic Church but analyze the situation further. It appears as though part of the problem is that for some reason the Priesthood attracts male homosexuals. I'm ready with a reference if you want to talk about it. And I can probably find more.

Do you not want to get to all of the roots of the problem?

[D1B]

Start your own thread, psycho ****

Oh c'mon. You're always ragging on the Catholic Church but analyze the situation further. It appears as though part of the problem is that for some reason the Priesthood attracts male homosexuals. I'm ready with a reference if you want to talk about it. And I can probably find more.

Do you not want to get to all of the roots of the problem?

The priesthood attracts male homosexual pedophiles.

[JohnStOnge]

The priesthood attracts male homosexual pedophiles.

Believe it or not I think there's a different word for many of the offenses among Priests. It's hebephilia, which I understand is a sexual attraction to persons in the early stages of puberty. Googling it I see age ranges like 11-14 and 11-16. The reference I was going to use, at http://www.americancatholic.org/news/cl ... jaycns.asp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;, is to a description of an assessment in which 81% of the victims of priests were males and about half of those males were 11 to 14 years old. It's an old study but I suspect things haven't changed much.

Not that the terminology matters all that much. Just words.

[JoltinJoe]

The claim that 1 in 20 priests is an abuser rates four Pinocchios:



The cs.com Fact Check Squad -- working to keep D1B honest since 2007

[D1B]

The claim that 1 in 20 priests is an abuser rates four Pinocchios:



The cs.com Fact Check Squad -- working to keep D1B honest since 2007

The study was conducted by Catholics.

Joltin Joe - ensuring pedophile priests have a fertile environment to molest children in since 1980.

[D1B]

Phoenix diocese recentily released its list of catholic child molesters (29 so far) and apparently Gallup promised to do the same. Oh wait...the fucking scumbag bishop is vacationing (hiding) in Italy.

Bishop James S. Wall of the Diocese of Gallup has made his own promises to post a similar list of credibly accused clergy on the diocesan website but has yet to do so. When contacted for comment, the Rev. Tim Farrell, the media liaison for the diocese, said because Wall is on pilgrimage in Italy, an official statement on such a listing would have to wait until the bishop returns at the end of the month.

Phoenix attorney Robert Pastor, who represents several clients with abuse allegations against the Diocese of Gallup, told the Arizona Republic he was “hopeful” about Phoenix Bishop Thomas J. Olmsted’s decision to post the list.

However, when contacted about the Gallup Diocese, Pastor emailed a critical statement that referred to Wall’s May 12, 2009, news release in which he promised to review more than 400 diocesan personnel files and post a similar list of abusers on the diocese’s website.

“At the time, this promise was a thoughtful gesture by the Bishop of Gallup,” Pastor said. “After waiting three years for the Bishop to make good on his promise, we have to call it what it is: another lie and half truth that is part of a greater effort to cover-up clergy sexual abuse. I have no faith that the Bishop of Gallup will make good on his promise. The Bishop of Gallup either has no intention of being a real leader for his flock or he has too many files of pedophile priests hiding in the archives of the Chancery.”

And thank you secularists and people who actually care about children.....

The Independent has compiled its own list of alleged sexual abusers from the Gallup Diocese based on information from church documents, police reports and court records. The following list includes both diocesan and religious order priests accused of abusing minors: William Allison, Michael J. Aten, John Boland, James M. Burns, Santino “Tony A. Casimano, Charles “Chuck” Cichanowicz, David J. Clark, Laurence Florez, Clement A. Hageman, Julian Hartig, Robert J. Kirsch, Diego Mazon, Bruce MacArthur, Douglas A. McNeill, Harry R. Morgan, Francis “Frank” Murphy, Jose H. Rodriguez, Raul Sanchez, John T. Sullivan and Samuel Wilson.

Gee, lets see, protect the public/stupid ass parishoners or vacation in Italy?

29 priests in Phoenix alone. Bet there were 90, at least.

[JoltinJoe]

The study was conducted by Catholics.

[D1B]

Australia may have the balls to pull off a real solution to the massive catholic child molestation scandal:

ONE of the most fundamental responsibilities of government is to protect the community's most vulnerable citizens. Children are achingly vulnerable. They have a right to be able to trust adults who exercise direct institutional power over them. Schools and the church are two of the most powerful institutions. Children are at their mercy.

There is abundant, tragic evidence that many thousands of children have suffered sex crimes by Catholic priests in schools and dioceses. These perverted men of God have shown the children no mercy. Their putrid crimes have destroyed lives and caused untold misery, not only for their direct victims, but for the people who love them. There is no greater love than that felt by a parent for their child. Think how you would feel to discover a priest had raped your child.

These crimes have caused many to commit suicide. They have caused crippling anguish and mental health problems. They have caused drug and alcohol problems. They have caused relationship problems.

The Catholic Church has spent millions protecting paedophile priests. It has withheld evidence from police that would be likely to lead to the prosecution and jailing of an unknown number of perpetrators. These are criminals who, to add hypocrisy to horror, claim to speak for Jesus Christ, a figure revered by many for his love and compassion and who, one would think, would condemn child abuse above all else.


The Catholic Church claims to have processes to properly investigate child sex crimes by its priests. It is a matter of logic and common sense that when an institution investigates itself, that probe cannot be impartial and independent. Yet the church would seriously have us believe it is putting the victims' interests to the fore. That is an absurd proposition. It also makes victims of all those priests and nuns who are decent, for they can be unfairly tarred, and it must sit uncomfortably with many parishioners, people who would like to feel an uncluttered, pure association with religion.

The failure by the church to hand over documents can be argued to be a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. That is a crime.

In April, half bowing to public outrage, most of it directed at the Catholic Church, the Baillieu government launched a limited parliamentary inquiry into the handling by churches and other organisations of sex-abuse allegations. There is little doubt the six politicians on the committee would like to see justice. But they will not be able to fully deliver it; the inquiry falls woefully short of what is required, because it lacks the time, independence and judicial powers of a royal commission.

It is curious that the Baillieu government opted for such a shackled course. It is hard to see how it might, of itself, lead to changes that might reduce or even end this long-running scourge. In the past week, the need for a royal commission has been underscored by statements to the inquiry that Catholic clergy commit at least six times as much abuse as those in the rest of the churches combined, and that as many as one in 15 Catholic priests may be guilty of child sex abuse. This requires the most robust investigation possible.

Without wishing to unduly pre-empt the inquiry's findings, I would like to suggest a way the situation might be salvaged and good flow from the efforts of the politicians and their support staff. It would be honourable and constructive were the cross-party panel to find that the crimes are so serious, insidious and widespread that further investigation is compelled. Such a statement would be neither an admission of failure, nor a criticism of the government's decision to establish such a restricted inquiry. It would merely be making the rational suggestion that the evidence suggests more ought to be done, that the Victorian inquiry provided a fine first step.

The panel's argument for further action would be buttressed by the fact that child sex crimes by Catholic clergy and others do not halt at Victoria's borders. It is a national issue. This creates an opportunity for Prime Minister Julia Gillard to take the lead. She could seek consensus from the premiers by putting the issue on the agenda of the Council of Australian Governments. Voters would be supportive; who, after all, other than some members of the hierarchy of the Catholic Church, would argue against a royal commission? Which premiers would really feel it appropriate to resist such an idea?

Alternatively, the Prime Minister could just seize the initiative and establish a royal commission. It is hard to think of a better way to spend some public money; surely our children merit such protection and care and justice. The Prime Minister would be rightly applauded throughout the nation.

From Gillard's perspective, there would, too, be a tantalising added element, although it should, of course, have no real weight in the decision. George Pell, an Australian cardinal of the Roman Catholic Church and the current Archbishop of Sydney, is Opposition Leader Tony Abbott's spiritual counsel. Pell (pictured) was formerly Archbishop of Melbourne, and before that led the church in Ballarat, where some of the worst clusters of child sex crimes by Catholic clergy occurred. Pell, one assumes, would resist a royal commission. Would Abbott refuse to support a call for a royal commission on these appalling acts by such a large number of Pell's priests?

The victims and their families want to be heard, and they want a royal commission. They deserve one, and so do all the potential victims who will be all the more vulnerable should proper justice not be rendered.

A royal commission is the path most likely to counter the damning disgrace of so many priests and those who protect them.

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politi ... z2APu9wqxa" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[D1B]

The study was conducted by Catholics.

Pro boner Joe

[JoltinJoe]

Australia may have the balls to pull off a real solution to the massive catholic child molestation scandal:

ONE of the most fundamental responsibilities of government is to protect the community's most vulnerable citizens. Children are achingly vulnerable. They have a right to be able to trust adults who exercise direct institutional power over them. Schools and the church are two of the most powerful institutions. Children are at their mercy.

There is abundant, tragic evidence that many thousands of children have suffered sex crimes by Catholic priests in schools and dioceses. These perverted men of God have shown the children no mercy. Their putrid crimes have destroyed lives and caused untold misery, not only for their direct victims, but for the people who love them. There is no greater love than that felt by a parent for their child. Think how you would feel to discover a priest had raped your child.

These crimes have caused many to commit suicide. They have caused crippling anguish and mental health problems. They have caused drug and alcohol problems. They have caused relationship problems.

The Catholic Church has spent millions protecting paedophile priests. It has withheld evidence from police that would be likely to lead to the prosecution and jailing of an unknown number of perpetrators. These are criminals who, to add hypocrisy to horror, claim to speak for Jesus Christ, a figure revered by many for his love and compassion and who, one would think, would condemn child abuse above all else.


The Catholic Church claims to have processes to properly investigate child sex crimes by its priests. It is a matter of logic and common sense that when an institution investigates itself, that probe cannot be impartial and independent. Yet the church would seriously have us believe it is putting the victims' interests to the fore. That is an absurd proposition. It also makes victims of all those priests and nuns who are decent, for they can be unfairly tarred, and it must sit uncomfortably with many parishioners, people who would like to feel an uncluttered, pure association with religion.

The failure by the church to hand over documents can be argued to be a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. That is a crime.

In April, half bowing to public outrage, most of it directed at the Catholic Church, the Baillieu government launched a limited parliamentary inquiry into the handling by churches and other organisations of sex-abuse allegations. There is little doubt the six politicians on the committee would like to see justice. But they will not be able to fully deliver it; the inquiry falls woefully short of what is required, because it lacks the time, independence and judicial powers of a royal commission.

It is curious that the Baillieu government opted for such a shackled course. It is hard to see how it might, of itself, lead to changes that might reduce or even end this long-running scourge. In the past week, the need for a royal commission has been underscored by statements to the inquiry that Catholic clergy commit at least six times as much abuse as those in the rest of the churches combined, and that as many as one in 15 Catholic priests may be guilty of child sex abuse. This requires the most robust investigation possible.

Without wishing to unduly pre-empt the inquiry's findings, I would like to suggest a way the situation might be salvaged and good flow from the efforts of the politicians and their support staff. It would be honourable and constructive were the cross-party panel to find that the crimes are so serious, insidious and widespread that further investigation is compelled. Such a statement would be neither an admission of failure, nor a criticism of the government's decision to establish such a restricted inquiry. It would merely be making the rational suggestion that the evidence suggests more ought to be done, that the Victorian inquiry provided a fine first step.

The panel's argument for further action would be buttressed by the fact that child sex crimes by Catholic clergy and others do not halt at Victoria's borders. It is a national issue. This creates an opportunity for Prime Minister Julia Gillard to take the lead. She could seek consensus from the premiers by putting the issue on the agenda of the Council of Australian Governments. Voters would be supportive; who, after all, other than some members of the hierarchy of the Catholic Church, would argue against a royal commission? Which premiers would really feel it appropriate to resist such an idea?

Alternatively, the Prime Minister could just seize the initiative and establish a royal commission. It is hard to think of a better way to spend some public money; surely our children merit such protection and care and justice. The Prime Minister would be rightly applauded throughout the nation.

From Gillard's perspective, there would, too, be a tantalising added element, although it should, of course, have no real weight in the decision. George Pell, an Australian cardinal of the Roman Catholic Church and the current Archbishop of Sydney, is Opposition Leader Tony Abbott's spiritual counsel. Pell (pictured) was formerly Archbishop of Melbourne, and before that led the church in Ballarat, where some of the worst clusters of child sex crimes by Catholic clergy occurred. Pell, one assumes, would resist a royal commission. Would Abbott refuse to support a call for a royal commission on these appalling acts by such a large number of Pell's priests?

The victims and their families want to be heard, and they want a royal commission. They deserve one, and so do all the potential victims who will be all the more vulnerable should proper justice not be rendered.

A royal commission is the path most likely to counter the damning disgrace of so many priests and those who protect them.

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politi ... z2APu9wqxa" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[tribe_pride]

You guys realize that this study was done based on analyzing conviction rates of priests ordained from one school in Australia, right? That is not a very diverse study.