Age Of consent- Bishops Statement

[ClubMan]

I don't think it should be socially sanctioned to have sex under 18. Same as alcohol and voting. We know they'll do it, but we shouldn't give them the ok. That's not to say that we should criminalise sexual activity between consenting teenagers.

So why have any legislation in this area at all so?

 

[ClubMan]

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.

There was a time when they were still illegal but you could still openly buy them in Dublin city centre and probably elsewhere.

 

[Gordanus]

You need legislation to keep kids from being taken advantage of, as we used to say. To prevent adults from preying on the children. I don't think a boyfriend and girlfriend with a 1 years age difference is the same thing at all. REmember Mr A and his nasty cohorts crawling out of the woodwork?

There was a time they were illegal and the only way of getting them was to import them yourself, and hoped they got through customs. What was the famous case that made importing them legal?

"you could still openly buy them in Dublin city centre": Clubman are you suggesting you could buy them from hawkers in Henry St, like fireworks? My memory is that you had to present yourself to a Family Planning Clinic, tell them you were engaged at the very least, and that you were over 18. You had to see a doctor even for condoms. I seem to remember there was one FPC in Mountjoy Sq and another in Ballsbridge. (I was refused in one, very humiliating.)

 

[sunrock]

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.

How can you say that the rate of child abuse by the clergy was the same level as the general public?
I would have thought that the rate of child abuse by the clergy was much higher than by the general public .. in fact much,much higher.
People attracted to life in the clergy ,with its celibacy rules were either gay or else their hormones didn`t kick in until later in most cases.However nature was not to be denied and in the repressive sexual atmosphere of the clergy, it wasn`t a great surprise that trusting children were among those abused.
After the disaster of the famine, the clergy and remaining farmers and others with viable jobs wanted a more stable society.No more the large mass of people living on the margins....they wanted population control and a strict ownership and inheritance of viable positions and farms...so we had a very strict morality ..no sex only in marriage...no marriage until a viable position and dowry was in place .The priest became a dealmaker and a figure of power... and because they were able to dispence favors they were popular much like local t.d.s today.
This power was still very evident in the 80s in the minds of the people.
Girls when i was in college ,though very clever and well educated were very reluctant to have a sexual relationship with their boyfriends,terrified as they were of getting pregnant ,even more so than the remote chance then of an std.The main reason was not to be out of step with the accepted mores of the time .This frustrating behavior by these girls ,even with condoms stealthily obtained by the lads ,left a lot of frustrated males and females in our colleges in the 80s .It also nailed on the head the idea of women of education being able to think for themselves...women especially, go with the prevailing morals of the society they are in.....in this case the repressive morals of our clergy.
No doubt the clergy has been severly criticised over the cases of child abuse and rightly so , in many cases these abuses have given people the ammunition to criticise and undermine the clergy`s whole stance on sexual morality ...by linking the two together.
The clergy made a big mistake in the 80s by opposing contraception,but what did people expect.
Now the clergy are debating the age of consent....
People should see the clergy for what they are....ordinary human beings who go through a repressive ,male only,repressive training based on a god ,many people now don`t believe in .....who come out into the community as religious guides/social workers /in a position of influence with many trusting believers ........its no surprise that their natural and latent sexual energy should go into being a ....
firebrand/evangelist/moraliser/abuser/community activist/etc etc
How can people take the bishops seriously....these people are living in a time warp.. and are unlikely to come down from their ivory towers now,even with their p.r. advise.

 

[Superman]

How can you say that the rate of child abuse by the clergy was the same level as the general public?

If I remember correctly the statistic for both the clergy and general male population who commit child abuse is 2%.

 

[Brendan Burgess]

Sun Rock

I have deleted your off topic posts as this is an important topic and it should not be diverted by your contribution.

If you want to raise the other issues do so in a separate topic and in accordance with the Posting Guidelines

Brendan
Administrator