Fire fe de Vatican

nomadthethird

more issues than Time mag
lol. I also like the way 'a 1000 people I could trust off the top of my head' quickly became a wiki list - and still no counter evidence!

Regardless. I'm open to seeing more detailed stats if anyone has them. Those came from memory after a similar argument I had a few years back. Saw something recently from a uk child protection agency that claimed 86% of abuse was committed by family or friends though.

Mobile internet usage does not encourage lengthy posts or thorough sourcing I admit...

Yeah, statistics from memory! Yay! And quoted from conversations with friends!

I'm sorry I don't have time to find you actual statics, but I have a math exam and a biology exam tomorrow. This thread is going to have to wait, alas.
 

nomadthethird

more issues than Time mag
Some really retarded comments, though (plus ca change...) - many of them falling foul of the same fallacy that nomad did when she attacked you earlier. It goes like this:

Person A: [issue X] is bad!
Person B: but independently of this, [issue Y] (which may be less widely discussed than [issue X]) is also bad.
Person A: OMG! You're excusing [issue X]! How COULD you?!


It happens on here aaall the time. One person will say "Al-Qa'eda are bad" and someone will respond "So Guantanamo Bay is fine, is it?"; if someone says "Guantanamo Bay is bad" you'll get "So al-Qa'eda are fine, are they?".

For FUCK'S SAKE. I never said Droid was "excusing" anything. I said the language he was using, and the bogus hearsay "statistics" were the same statistics the Vatican was using to make excuses for itself.

Can you people read?
 

nomadthethird

more issues than Time mag
Real statistics... well whatdoyaknow! They do exist.


And what do they indicate? Well, as of 2008, most of the overall abuse--60%+ from a parent (esp a mother)-- falls under "neglect" or "medical neglect" or "psychological abuse". However, this does not mean that most children who are sexually abused are abused by a parent. In fact, from what I can tell, and I only had a few minutes to look it over, most sexual abuse is perpetrated by non-parent caregivers or custodians (professionals, doctors, soccer coach, whoever).

Here's the quote:
The percentage of perpetrators of sexual abuse was highest among friends or neighbors (58.3%), “other” (41.0%), other professionals (36.1%), other relatives (30.8%), and child daycare providers (21.2%).7

It's very misleading to cite overall abuse statistics as if they reflect perp incidence in sex abuse specifically.
 
Last edited:
D

droid

Guest
Oh yeah? You did? That should be easy enough to google up...

Citation please.

Off you go then. I can't be arsed, and you're the (self professed) expert, who, incidentally has yet to provide a single stat herself - cited or no.
 

nomadthethird

more issues than Time mag
Off you go then. I can't be arsed, and you're the (self professed) expert, who, incidentally has yet to provide a single stat herself - cited or no.

See above.

Edit: By the way, "Other" up there includes clergy.
 
Last edited:

nomadthethird

more issues than Time mag
It would be really nice, if, in this whole Vatican debacle, people would stop spreading false information that seems to downplay the issue. I know I'd really appreciate that.

If Bill Donahue would shut up, I for one would be grateful.
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
For FUCK'S SAKE. I never said Droid was "excusing" anything. I said the language he was using, and the bogus hearsay "statistics" were the same statistics the Vatican was using to make excuses for itself.

Can you people read?

You said "Does any of this excuse the past several hundred years of cover up?", in a post specifically replying to droid. If you weren't accusing him of "excusing" the Vatican, who were you accusing exactly? And if you weren't saying anyone was excusing it, why use the word at all? Putting something in context is not the same as saying it's acceptable, at least not in my book.
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
May be of interest to droid and nomad:

"[C]urrent research and expert opinion suggest that men within the Catholic Church may be no more likely than others to abuse, and that the prevalence of abuse by priests has fallen sharply in the last 20-30 years."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8654789.stm

Not that this comes anywhere close to "excusing" abuse, obviously - and as others have pointed out in this thread, most people don't claim to be doing the work of God in their daily 9-to-5. Worth noting, too, that one of the reports mentioned was "[c]ommissioned by the US Conference of Catholic Bishops", although apparently conducted by an independent body and several other sources are mentioned in the article. Also a nice rebuttal of this repuslive equiviocation of gays with paedophiles.
 

scottdisco

rip this joint please
Consider the ludicrous ideology that made it possible: The Catholic Church has spent two millennia demonizing human sexuality to a degree unmatched by any other institution, declaring the most basic, healthy, mature, and consensual behaviors taboo. Indeed, this organization still opposes the use of contraception: preferring, instead, that the poorest people on earth be blessed with the largest families and the shortest lives. As a consequence of this hallowed and incorrigible stupidity, the Church has condemned generations of decent people to shame and hypocrisy—or to Neolithic fecundity, poverty, and death by AIDS. Add to this inhumanity the artifice of cloistered celibacy, and you now have an institution—one of the wealthiest on earth—that preferentially attracts pederasts, pedophiles, and sexual sadists into its ranks, promotes them to positions of authority and grants them privileged access to children. Finally, consider that vast numbers of children will be born out of wedlock, and their unwed mothers vilified, wherever Church teaching holds sway—leading boys and girls by the thousands to be abandoned to Church-run orphanages only to be raped and terrorized by the clergy. Here, in this ghoulish machinery set to whirling through the ages by the opposing winds of shame and sadism, we mortals can finally glimpse how strangely perfect are the ways of the Lord.

nabbed from here
 

john eden

male pale and stale
so it seems like the papal visit has started well with the UK being compared to a 3rd world country because of all the darkies what live here, filled up with aggressive atheists.

Apparently he likened atheists to Nazis in his first speech also:


And people wonder why we're aggressive!
 
D

droid

Guest
May be of interest to droid and nomad:

"[C]urrent research and expert opinion suggest that men within the Catholic Church may be no more likely than others to abuse, and that the prevalence of abuse by priests has fallen sharply in the last 20-30 years."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8654789.stm

Yeah thanks. The SAVI study (the largest study into sexual abuse ever completed in Ireland) pretty much says the same thing (in fact it points out that clergy are 'underepresented'), as do several studies from the UK and US - but as I said, who can be arsed?
 

grizzleb

Well-known member
popebear.jpg
 

martin

----
He cracks me up, he's such a troll. I'm convinced he's part of some Vatican City wind-up...seeing how far they can push it. And he had a pop at BA as well, brilliant...
 

swears

preppy-kei
Having the pope moan about "aggressive secularism" is quite a coup for Dawkins, Hitchens, et al, no?
Best not to even acknowledge it, you'd have thought.
 

john eden

male pale and stale
Having the pope moan about "aggressive secularism" is quite a coup for Dawkins, Hitchens, et al, no?
Best not to even acknowledge it, you'd have thought.

I think this is a crucial point - the visit has been overshadowed by the reaction, hasn't it? Mainstream media is about half and half handshaking vs debate, but net stuff has been a barrage of secularism and so on (or at least it has for me).
 
Top