+1
Parishioners asked to fund pay-offs for paedophiles victims
- Thread starter dereko1969
- Start date
+1
I think that might have as much to do with the way Protestant Churches are organised. The Clergyman/woman is appointed by the parish and they are responsible for financing him/her. The whole structure is devolved and the parishioners are much more involved, and have much more say, in how things are run. The whole thing is far less autocratic so there’s not the same culture of deference and no monolithic organisation to hide behind.
How's this for balance, let's take an imaginary Organisation made up solely of men, they make the rules for both men and women, their sole aim in life is money and power. To do this they decide that all women must reproduce as much as possible, certainly every time they have sex the aim must be to procreate, they go to the poor countries of the world and instead of helping the poverty and lowering child mortality rates they dictate that the women who cannot afford to have children must continue to procrate with no access to condoms or the pill or sterilisation or abortion. Everyone in the modern world gets around this by going to another country for abortions and Amniocentises tests. In this organisation women are second class citizens and basically can only be virgin or harlot.
The men are trained together at a young age. Young men and older male mentor's together. The older one's initiate the younger ones into paedophilia etc to prepetrate the cycle and to keep everybody in line because who knows where the bodies are buried. That's how paedophilia rings operate. If any of the outside world objects (to paedophilia or any other normal world CRIME) the organisation uses all it's power and might to silence them. Examples would be a teacher losing a job, or being on a teachers barred list, having your children ostracised at school, being offered recompense (BRIBE) to not go to court, being kept uneducated (IGNORANT) so that you cannot see evil for what it is. The organisation has vast resources and spies everywhere. The spies are called the devout and get a direct route to Nirvana and some celebrated Organisation medal along the way to keep them on the right track. They get the fast track to Nirvana should they leave riches to the organisation. Every second will in Ireland leaves something to either a person in the Organisation or the organisation itself. They infiltrate every corner of society. They have the controlling influence in some countries over schooling and health STILL. The Organisation has different layers so that no one can figure out who exactly reports to who and it means no one can ever pin down the main Organisation as the seat of all the EVIL.
C
Capt. Beaky
Guest
There seems to be a preponderance of this kind of activity between adult males and victimised young boys. After all most of the crimes have been reported so. Would the term "predatory homosexual" be more apt? In the other cases "predatory heterosexual"?
A consenting older male adult and a consenting young male adult is homosexuality which is not a crime and is perfectly normal.
An older male raping a boy or girl is a paedophile, it is a henious and despicable crime and is abnormal. The only reason there weren't more girls in the Ireland model is they didn't have access to girls.
C
Capt. Beaky
Guest
A victimised young boy is IMO not a consenting young male.
Men who rape boys are not homosexual. Paedophilia is a perversion of heterosexuality as the attraction is to a pre-pubescent effeminate form.
C
Capt. Beaky
Guest
Hadn't thought of it that way Purple. But it figures.
truthseeker
Registered User
- Messages
- 2,577
What has non celibacy to do with reproduction? As animals we have sexual urges. Reproduction has nothing to do with it.
Although evolution would tend to agree that it is natural for our species to reporduce - otherwise how do we continue to evolve?
You're putting words in my remark. I said young male as distinct from a boy. A 20 year old man and a 40 year old man is not the same as a 10 year old boy and a 30 year old man. A 20 year old female may consent to go with a 40 year old man and a 10 year old girl may not consent to go with a 30 year old man. The difference is paedophilia.
A homosexual man can rape a homosexual man same as a hetrosexual man can rape a hetrosexual male or female of whatever age.
Sometimes, and I don't mean you Beaky, people try to muddy the debate on the Church abuse with throwing in that old chestnet homophobia. Let's be clear most of the Church abuse was paedophilia.
- Anyone - how can I find a post from long ago about the Church influence on schools in Ireland, at least a year ago where a poster (with D as the first initial) was arguing against Church involvement and most argued the other way.
Yes, makes sense.
Interesting point Purple but I was always under the impression that some paedophiles tend to abuse just boys and not girls. Maybe it is an access issue as a previous posters suggested.
I am not suggesting a link between homosexuality and paedophilia BTW.
To answer your question I'd give you an F- for balance. For balance you would need to include fact throughout your rant.
i was trying to come up with a possible reason that posters think that celibacy is unnatural, I have yet to be given one.
truthseeker
Registered User
- Messages
- 2,577
Dont you think if it were natural we wouldnt be here talking about it at all as the species would have died out?
The sensation associated with the act of procreation and the result of it appears to be instinctive. i.e. it is human nature.
To deny such urges is arguably unnatural. By extension, e.g. homosexuality could be argued as being 'unnatural' - in a literal sense. It's unfortunate as this the often used emotive and derogatory term favoured by the christian right, but it doesn't mean that it isn't technically accurate in some respects.
I have absolutely no problem with gay people by the way, just making a technical point.
Lots of things we do as human beings are natural/instinctive in a negative way obviously too (e.g. violence) and lots of things we do as human beings are 'unnatural' but we still do them - whether they are relatively inconsequential and mundane or highly unusual.
To deny such urges is arguably unnatural. By extension, e.g. homosexuality could be argued as being 'unnatural' - in a literal sense. It's unfortunate as this the often used emotive and derogatory term favoured by the christian right, but it doesn't mean that it isn't technically accurate in some respects.
I have absolutely no problem with gay people by the way, just making a technical point.
Lots of things we do as human beings are natural/instinctive in a negative way obviously too (e.g. violence) and lots of things we do as human beings are 'unnatural' but we still do them - whether they are relatively inconsequential and mundane or highly unusual.
Should be easy enough but need more info.
Did you post in the thread? Do you know who started it?
The_Banker
Registered User
- Messages
- 342
To lighten the mood....
Interesting article with tongue firmly in cheek
http://www.peoplesrepublicofcork.com/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=945
Interesting article with tongue firmly in cheek
http://www.peoplesrepublicofcork.com/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=945
truthseeker
Registered User
- Messages
- 2,577
Tbh - I was more thinking in terms of sexual urges, semen production and ejaculation of such. Whether or not it happens through sex(hetero or homo), masturbation or wet dreams - its a physically natural thing to happen and to deny it must surely lead to terrible mental frustration? Im not a doctor, but Id imagine it cant be good for you to deny basic animal urges like this? Arguably different for women, who I would imagine would be far more likely to practice celibacy without the same frustration levels- but physically they are not producing something that the body ejaculates.
Anyway this is alll way off topic. I genuinely dont think anyone could take seriously the notion that the parishioners in this case would really pay up - why would they?
