Notwithstanding the crimes of individual clergymen or the failure of the Catholic Church to deal with these properly ... I thought that the rate of child abuse by clergymen ran at about the same rate for the general public (or possibly males in the general public). If this is the case does it somehow make any comments by any men on this issue hypocritical and irrelevant? In my opinion any organization is entitled to make its views on any issue known. Whether or not the relevant authorities should listen to or act on them is another matter.I find it extemely hypocritical for an organisation with a track record of child abuse and rape among its members and one where perpetrators of these crimes were protected and shielded to be suddenly giving us moral guidance on the protection of our children.
Some were never Catholics in the first place. And some never had any religious beliefs.Who ever pays attention to what the church says. I think we as a nation lost our faith/believe years ago
Notwithstanding the crimes of individual clergymen or the failure of the Catholic Church to deal with these properly ... I thought that the rate of child abuse by clergymen ran at about the same rate for the general public (or possibly males in the general public). If this is the case does it somehow make any comments by any men on this issue hypocritical and irrelevant? In my opinion any organization is entitled to make its views on any issue known. Whether or not the relevant authorities should listen to or act on them is another matter.
AFAIK Clubman is correct (according to Vincent Bowne anyway), the prevalence of person's committing abuse was at worst the same in the clergy as it was amongst the general population.The abuse of children by the clergy involved a systematic cover up of the crimes by the Church hierarchy which must have been just as painful for the victims as the actual abuse. Also the people in the general public who committed these sick crimes didn't go into mass the next Sunday and lecture on sin and morality. I am not saying they are not entitled to express a view but I just found the use of the word morality when talking about children and sex in the same statement a bit hypocritical.
According to the bishops, children need to be protected not only from irresponsible adults but also from themselves
Am I'm mistaken in assuming that no Irish bishop has ever been charged with, never mind convicted of, child sex abuse?
Can you name the bishop(s) who was (were) charged and/or convicted with aiding and abetting the sexual abuse of children please?Just aiding and abetting as far as I know, but I'm open to correction.
In fairness Betty Og, I think that killing your son for having underage sex should be a crime, I'm not saying Murder 1, but certainly manslaughter of some sortSay you have a teenage son, you might want to kill him if he's underage & having sex (whether with someone underage or not), but is it really in anyones interest for that to be a crime?
Let legislators, parent groups and child groups decide on the appropriate age of consent. Let the Church worry about its own morality.
I'm of a time when you had to be married to buy condoms and you also needed a prescription AND you need a pharmacist who would actually supply them.Am I wrong in remembering a time in Ireland when the age of consent for sex was lower than they age at which you could buy contraceptives.
I know there was a time when you culdn't buy contraceptives at all, but after their introduction I think I remember their being an age limit on who could buy them.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?