Banning "Gay" RC priests

[Kreed]

Most of you guys know that Solange & Me are Roman Catholics. We both try
to be good ones & we "mostly" beleive "most" of the teachings, but i read
recently where someone questioned whether the RC priests who molested
the young boys were Really Gay or, more likely as the author wrote, they were
(are) Straights, Pedos, who like most all Pedos take advantage of kids who are
around them, presenting the opportunity. Ergo, since Boys are there, and
not girls, what looks like Gay isn't really. Hence, the Pope's emphasis on Gays
is wrong. What do you all think? ps: we're off to hear mass in French today,
great singing & organ music also, and Happy Sunday guys. derek

[Tom]

The new Pope may be taking an interest in addressing htis horrible issue. Some suggest that preditors are using hte Church as a safe haven and ready supply.

Whatever, gay or straingt, they are criminals and the Pope MSUT decree that they ALL be identified and turned over to authorities for incarceration. This is an issue the Church cannot and must not handle itself. No preditor should EVER be released to the public. NONE can ever be trusted and ALL are jsut time bombs wating to strike again.
I can't believe the old Pope and government authorites did as little as they did.

[boxcar]

I don't understand why Derek is even raising this issue. As Tom has said, these perverts must be put away.

But perhaps Derek was seeking clarification for purposes of viable solutions to this big problem. For example, if they're classified as "gay", then how can you incarcerate or in any way punish someone for a "genetic defect"? Might as well lock up or shoot a black man because of the color of his skin, right?

Boxcar

[JustRalph]

I don't understand why Derek is even raising this issue.

Maybe Solange is a guy? ;)

[tonto1944]

They will do the same thing they did with Cardinal Law. Even though he isn't gay,at least I think. They will send them to Rome or in some order where they don't come in contact with people outside the church. Cardinal Law should have been prosecuted for lieing under oath, but the good people (LOL) in hte DA's office in Boston said nah. He's a good guy. As far as I am concerned he and any other person in the Church who covered all this stuff up is worse than the perp. , because they just shopped them around to commit their crime somewhere else. Yes and I went to Catholic School, St. Edmunds in Brooklyn. And 2 yrs of Catolic High.

[joeyspicks]

as a fellow Catholic......IMHO THEY MUST move quickly to solve this problem....gay or straight...it doesnt matter....they MUST move to STOP these perverts from hurting kids. Whatever moral authority the Church had is rapidly vanishing......and who can blame the critics ? ?

[lsbets]

This is where political correctness rears its very ugly head. If you desire sex with someone of the same sex, than you desire a homosexual act. "Gay" is generally associated as a term to mean a homosexual.

If someone is a pedophile, they desire sex with children. If they desire sex with children of the same sex, they desire a homosexual act with children. However, due to our desire not to offend gay people (the overwhelming majority of whom, like everyone else find sex with children to be disgusting and wrong), pedophiles who have sex with children of the same sex are not labeled as homosexual pedophiles. There are straight pedophiles and there are gay pedohiles. A guy who wants to have sex with a boy is a homosexual pedophile. Its as simple as that.

[boxcar]

This is where political correctness rears its very ugly head. If you desire sex with someone of the same sex, than you desire a homosexual act. "Gay" is generally associated as a term to mean a homosexual.

If someone is a pedophile, they desire sex with children. If they desire sex with children of the same sex, they desire a homosexual act with children. However, due to our desire not to offend gay people (the overwhelming majority of whom, like everyone else find sex with children to be disgusting and wrong), pedophiles who have sex with children of the same sex are not labeled as homosexual pedophiles. There are straight pedophiles and there are gay pedohiles. A guy who wants to have sex with a boy is a homosexual pedophile. Its as simple as that.

Okay...if he's a "homosexual pedophile", does socieity punish the guy, since the conventional wisdom is that homesexuality is a genetic trait? Or do you, personally, subscribe to this "wisdom"?

Boxcar

[lsbets]

Whether or not homosexuality is a genetic trait is not related at all to the behavior of pedophilia. Pedophilia is a crime, homosexuality between consenting adults is not (regardless of what your personal views on the subject are). The crime is what should be punished.

[lsbets]

Chickenhead - where did your reply go? You hit the nail right on the head.

[chickenhead]

You said all that needed to be said...didn't want to duplicate :)

[boxcar]

Whether or not homosexuality is a genetic trait is not related at all to the behavior of pedophilia. Pedophilia is a crime, homosexuality between consenting adults is not (regardless of what your personal views on the subject are). The crime is what should be punished.

With all due respect, LS, your answer begs the question.

If homosexual behavior is genetically-driven, then that type of conduct is taken out of the realm of morality and goes into the realm of science or medicine. According to proponents of this theory, when two consenting adults have a sexual relationship, their act is not immoral. Not at all. They're doing what comes natural to them. Essentially, they're slaves to their genes.

If this theory is true -- if this is society's conventional wisdom, then how can we justify punishment of a "homosexual pedophile"? You say that in this case, it's a "crime". You're quite right. Society has deemed it so. But why has society done this? It's a crime because such acts are considered to be immoral in nature.

Despite another bit of conventional wisdom that says that we can't legislate morality, the indisuptable fact is that societies do! Murder is an immoral act. Stealing an immoral act. Lying, cheating, prostitution are immoral acts, and are also punishable in courts of law. Theire are even states that still have sodomy laws on the books, etc.

This is why your answer begs the question. Acts of homosexual pedophilia are indeed criminal. And they're criminal because they're considered to be immoral in nature. But if homosexual pedophila is also genetically-driven (and, logicaly, I dont see why it wouldn't be!), then how can society go against its own conventional wisdom by punishing behavior that would be amoral in nature. Cannot the homosexual pedophile just as easily claim that he's a product of his gene pool, just like his consenting adults counerparts usually do?

While it is true that children would be victims of such acts, nevertheless the homsexual pedophile's behavior would have to be considered involuntary.

Boxcar

[lsbets]

Boxcar - do you see a difference between a law abiding citizen who is homosexual and a pedophile who engages in homosexual acts with children?

[so.cal.fan]

<Whether or not homosexuality is a genetic trait is not related at all to the behavior of pedophilia. Pedophilia is a crime, homosexuality between consenting adults is not (regardless of what your personal views on the subject are). The crime is what should be punished.>


As usual, lsbets is right.

Unfortunately, many of these priests are not very "spiritual" type guys....they are in the priest business because it is or hopefully WAS a safe haven for pedophiles.
When I was a young teenager we had a young priest at the Catholic Church across the street from my home who was a preditor of young girls. He was not a nice man. :ThmbDown:
Same doll.....different dress.

[JustRalph]

Same doll.....different dress.

:lol::lol::lol:

[chickenhead]

Let's assume all pedophilia is genetically driven (regardelss of sexual preference of the offender), Hey, it might be for all I know.

Whether a persons behavior is involuntary or not, we have to take measures to protect others from them. If it is a scientific fact that they have no control over this, even more reason to lock them away forever.

Our laws are set up to protect people from being preyed upon by others. The "whys" of the predators don't matter all that much.

[Tom]

SoCalFan - as always, you have insights shared by few! :D


Whatever - gay, hereditery, doll collecting - you cannot let theses guys out - ever. Not political, Fact. They cannot/willnot help themselves. Just look at how many grusome mureders have made the news in the last year by repeat offenders. How many are unreported?
And NO, flooded not only with water, it seems, but preditors as well. Something like 3500 missing> How the heck do you LOSE 3500 preditors? How the heck do you get 3500 preditors to begin with?

[Kreed]

YES it's a BIG problem. The reason I raised this is simple: If you start WRONG,
with the Wrong assumption, or ASK the Wrong question, your solution is iffy.
Why not admit women to priesthood? Why not explore letting men priests have
wives? etc etc .... These changes WILL happen, but why not let some steam
escape?

[joeyspicks]

Kreed:


:ThmbUp:

[JustRalph]

Why not explore letting men priests have
wives? etc etc .... These changes WILL happen, but why not let some steam
escape?

I don't know how you can say these changes will happen? The Catholic church isn't exactly in its infancy............ been a few hundred years or so and I don't see Priests being allowed to have wives having anything to do with the latest problems in the Cath. church.

Your comment on "letting off steam" is puzzling? If you made the same comment about a basic male on female rape case you would get hammered about how rape is a crime of violence as opposed to a crime initiated by sexual urges. In fact many rapist carry on relationships wherein they have frequent sex with a partner in the traditional sense. But they also prey on others whilst carrying on a so called "normal relationship" I am not so sure that a Priest who is also a pedophile who preys on young men, would stop should he be "allowed" to have a wife.

[boxcar]

Boxcar - do you see a difference between a law abiding citizen who is homosexual and a pedophile who engages in homosexual acts with children?

Again, your question begs the question. We're talking about sexual acts here -- acts involving homosexuals in both cases . In one case, a large segment of our society has given its stamp of approval to consenting adults on the basis that such behavior is amoral in nature because it's genetically-driven and, therefore, by implication involuntary. While in the other case, society has deemed homosexual acts with children to be criminal on the basis that such acts are immoral in nature and, therefore, by implication, once again, voluntary. Why in the former case is such behavior compulsory, while in the latter it's self-determined? Why couldn't the "homsexual pedophile" have a slightly different structure to his gene pool that would make his attraction to children to be just as involuntary as his counterparts who are attracted to adults of the same sex?

The fact that there are children involved has nothing to do with the question of possible genetically-driven behavior of adults -- no more than it would with two adults getting together. Yes, the child in this scenario is an "unfortunate victim", if he is not genetically-predisposed to engaging in homsexual acts with an adult. But children cannot control someone's genetic predisposition, no more than a black child, for example, can control the color of his own skin.

I'm not trying to debate this or pick a fight with you. I'm simply pointing out that a large segment of our society is seriously conflicted on these kinds of issues; for it cannot tell us why in one case we should consider one type of sexual behavor to be normal, amoral and involuntary because it's genetically driven (supposedly); while in another a different type of sexual activity is abnormal, immoral and self-determined -- making this behavior "criminal" in nature.

Regarding your question about what I personally think: I have no conflicts; for I view both acts to be immoral in nature -- one certainly more abominable than the other because, presumably, innocent children are involved; but nonetheless unlike socieity, I see no difference in the fundamental nature of the acts.

Boxcar

[Light]

Intentionally denying and abstaining from sex is not natural. Not everyone practicing celibacy will have the emotional maturity and conviction of their faith just cause they wear a collar to deal with it. Some who can't will naturally turn deviant. Letting steam out may lessen the problem but can't erdicate a self perpetuating neurosis. That's treating the symptoms,not the cause.

[lsbets]

Box,

I understand the point you are trying to make, yet I think here is where most people (at least myself) would say you fail.

Heterosexual sex is normal. Heterosexual pedophilia is not, and is a crime that should be punished. People are genetically predisposed to hetersexual sex. But if they have an impulse to have sex with a child and they follow through on it, whether it was because of genetics or something else, they deserve to be punished. IMHO punished by death.

My personal views on homosexuality don't matter. I don't want the government getting involved in legislating what two consenting adults do in private (private is much, much different than public policy matters like marriage). However, if one has urges to engage in homosexual acts with a child, the same applies to them as when someone engages in heterosexual pedophilia. If I were to hand out the sentances, death row would be a lot larger.

Let me ask you, since you said that you see no difference in the fundamental nature of the acts of pedophilia and homosexuality - do you think it would be okay for the government to make homosexuality illegal, and would you support doing so?

[ljb]

YES it's a BIG problem. The reason I raised this is simple: If you start WRONG,
with the Wrong assumption, or ASK the Wrong question, your solution is iffy.
Why not admit women to priesthood? Why not explore letting men priests have
wives? etc etc .... These changes WILL happen, but why not let some steam
escape?
Kreed,
There was a time when the Catholic church allowed priests to marry. They stopped it because the priests were leaving the wealth of individual churches to their familys. I also question why not women priests ?

Lsbets,
I am in total agreement with you on this one.

[so.cal.fan]

<There was a time when the Catholic church allowed priests to marry. They stopped it because the priests were leaving the wealth of individual churches to their familys. I also question why not women priests ?>



I didn't know that little historical tidbit.

[PaceAdvantage]

lsbets, great post. Your common sense is amazing.

Boxcar, we know what you're trying to say....ban all the gays....your argument is indeed a weak one.

[Tom]

lsbets makes the point better than I have ever heard it made before.

Homosexuality has nothing to do with it. Preditors are sick people who cannot be cured. Thier civil rights must be put aside to protect innocent children.
The high profile cases in the news lately involve little girls being abducted,not little boys.

If homosexuality is:

-hereditary, then you must blame God!
-choice, then it is thier choice and who are you to judge it?

[betchatoo]

Kreed,
There was a time when the Catholic church allowed priests to marry. They stopped it because the priests were leaving the wealth of individual churches to their familys.

Before the middle ages it was allowable for Catholic priests to have wives (and mistresses were overlooked). But with concerns for protecting Church property from inheritance Pope Pelagius I made new priests agree offspring could not inherit Church property. Pope Gregory then declared all sons of priests illegitimate (only sons since lowly daughters could not inherit anyway in society).

In 1022 Pope Benedict VIII banned marriages for priests and in 1139 Pope Innocent II voided all marriages of priests and all new priests had to divorce their wives. This had nothing to do with morality but it was about MONEY!

[so.cal.fan]

Thanks for the information, Betchatoo....I find that very interesting.
I never remember learning that in history class.....I was a graduate of the Los Angeles School District :(
It's a miracle I can read! :D

[boxcar]

Box,

I understand the point you are trying to make, yet I think here is where most people (at least myself) would say you fail.

Heterosexual sex is normal. Heterosexual pedophilia is not, and is a crime that should be punished. People are genetically predisposed to hetersexual sex. But if they have an impulse to have sex with a child and they follow through on it, whether it was because of genetics or something else, they deserve to be punished. IMHO punished by death.

You say, "heterosexual sex is "normal". By what or whose standard? And does this mean, LS, that homosexual sex, conversely, is "abnormal"? Do you wish to define "normal'" for us?

Then you tells us that, "people are genetically predisoposed to heterosexual sex". So, let me understand this: The human race's "sexual orientiation" is governed and determined exclusively by our gene pool? To your way of thinking, then, one's sexual orientiation/conduct does not and has never belonged to the realm of human volition -- to the realm of moral free agency? If this type of human behavior has been historically but erroneously assigned to the realm of free moral choices, then is there other human behavior that has also been so falsely classified? Is there other human behavior that is strictly genetically-governed?

You went on to say, "But if they have an impulse to have sex with a child and they follow through on it..." An "impulse" you say? Aren't you confusing oranges with apples? Even "irresistable impulses" are driven by psychological phenomena -- not genetics. For example, pyromaniacs and kleptomaniacs suffer from acute neuroses -- which are mental and emotional disorders. Should we logically infer from your statement that homosexuality is a mental/emotional disorder? Again, that this is abnormal human behavior? (Of course, I think more than a few pinhead scientists and homosexuals would take extreme offense at this position!)

Then you went on to make this amazing statment, "...whether it was because of genetics or something else, they deserve to be punished. IMHO punished by death." But I'm glad you said this, because herein lies the very rough rub with your genetics theory: If [all] human sexual conduct, including pedophila, is driven by one's genetic makeup, then doesn't this clearly imply that "homosexual pedophiles" (or any other kind of pedophile, for that matter) are not morally culpable? How can they be!? They don't have control over their gene pool! But, yet, you would criminally prosecute these people, whose only "crime" is that they possess a "defective" gene pool? That they possess a gene or two that other "normal people" don't have? What manner of justice is this!? Certainly, not the righteous type!

You might as well have said that it's perfectly just to kill all people who have diseases caused by genetic disorders because such people put a terrible drain on society's medical resources, thereby vicitimizing the general public! (Welcome to the not-so-wonderful Death Culture of Euthanasia.) Let's kill all people with sickel cell anemia because they're guilty of not being able to resist the "impulse" to get the disease!

And then there is a further problem with your "genetically-driven/predisposed theory": Since human sexual behavior is supposedly driven in this manner, i.e. becasue of what a person is, that is to say, what has been determined by his genetic composition, then we cannot logically or justly say that a pedophile, for example, is morally culpable, since he has no control over his gene pool's composition. In the absence of moral culpability, where is the crime? And if no crime, how can any affected children be criminal victims!? At best we could only say that children involved in these acts are unfortunate "victims of circumstances". They were at the wrong place at the wrong time.

It's understandable that anyone who holds to this genetics theory would want to protect these "victims", but vis-a-vis criminal prosecution? I could understand wanting to permanently segragate such perverts from society -- perhaps on some deserted island somewhere -- but punished in some penal institution or even executed!? We might as well punish all the people in this country with genetically-caused diseases!

My personal views on homosexuality don't matter. I don't want the government getting involved in legislating what two consenting adults do in private (private is much, much different than public policy matters like marriage). However, if one has urges to engage in homosexual acts with a child, the same applies to them as when someone engages in heterosexual pedophilia. If I were to hand out the sentances, death row would be a lot larger.

Let me ask you, since you said that you see no difference in the fundamental nature of the acts of pedophilia and homosexuality - do you think it would be okay for the government to make homosexuality illegal, and would you support doing so?

Ahh...now I see where and how PA jumped to false and unwarranted conclusions!

Just because I categorized "normal" homosexual acts and homosexual-pedophiliac acts as being fundamentally the same in terms of what realm they belong, i.e. the Realm of Moral Choices, does not necessarily mean that both activities are criminal or should be criminalized.

Take Lying: Lying is always a moral issue. Lying in some circumstances (or socieital contexts) can be criminally prosecuted. (Ask Martha Stewart.) But in other circumstances, lying is not a criminal act. And lying, in some limited set of ethical contexts can even be justified.

When you say "government", I take it you mean the federal government? If so, my answer is "yes" and "no". No to the federal governent. I wouldn't want to criminalize homosexual acts on a federal level. However...if a local community or even a state were to do so, I might support such an effort if they could show me how they would enforce it, what the penalties would be, etc. But practically speaking, I don't see how such laws would be enforceable -- not in a secular, democratic republic.

Having said this, communities all over this nation legislate on what they want and don't want in them. Some communities don't want any adult porn shops in their area -- or at least they want to set strict limits. Some communities don't want strip clubs in their area. Some communities don't want X-rated movie houses in their area, etc.

In closing, maybe some day we can get into a discussion about what you think are the vast differences between "public policy" and "private matters".

Boxcar

[betchatoo]

Thanks for the information, Betchatoo....I find that very interesting.
I never remember learning that in history class.....I was a graduate of the Los Angeles School District :(
It's a miracle I can read! :D

I grew up Catholic and was lucky enough to have a very enlightened priest, whose college major was on Catholic history, as one of my good friends. The way he explained things to me was thus (to the best of my now aging memory)

Marriage within the Catholic church came to head during the medieval times because more and more it was the sons of the rich and noble who came to the priesthood. A nobleman's first son would inherit the bulk of the estate. The second son would almost inevitably go into the military as an officer and the third would enter the priesthood (I'm not sure what happened if there were 4 or more). To ensure their acceptance the Nobleman would set assign land and build a church. But often, upon their deaths, the priests would will this land back to their heirs and the church would lose it. Thus it became financially impractical to allow priests to marry.

[boxcar]

lsbets makes the point better than I have ever heard it made before.

Homosexuality has nothing to do with it. Preditors are sick people who cannot be cured. Thier civil rights must be put aside to protect innocent children.
The high profile cases in the news lately involve little girls being abducted,not little boys.

If homosexuality is:

-hereditary, then you must blame God!
-choice, then it is thier choice and who are you to judge it?

And you would have done well to have added, Tom:

And if homosexual pedophilia is hereditary, then blame God for this, too. Put the Guilty One on trial, not the innocent pedophiles!

Boxcar

[PaceAdvantage]

Why do people have to complicate such simple matters?

TWO CONSENTING ADULTS = I don't care, you do what you want with each other....

Anything involving children....and you get the strongest penalty the law will allow, period. End of story.

Doesn't matter about genetics, doesn't matter about personal beliefs on homosexual or heterosexual orientation, blah blah blah blah blah.

Over...done with...next.

[boxcar]

Why do people have to complicate such simple matters?

You continue to amaze me. You, too, only see things in black and white?

Boxcar

[ljb]

Why do people have to complicate such simple matters?

TWO CONSENTING ADULTS = I don't care, you do what you want with each other....

Anything involving children....and you get the strongest penalty the law will allow, period. End of story.

Doesn't matter about genetics, doesn't matter about personal beliefs on homosexual or heterosexual orientation, blah blah blah blah blah.

Over...done with...next.
Nice post PA

[kingfin66]

Derek,

For some reason, I thought you were Buddhist?????

[Kreed]

YES KingFin I am the Most Modern Budhist---I'm will combine RC w/Easter
Enlightenment, for example, I Will Allow bUDHISTS to Eat that Burger. See?
Now, I must canter to my ashram on Wall St. Have fun today guys.

[freeneasy]

if i sodomized the innocence of your young son or penetrated the virginity of your little daughter would you not take a 44 magnum, shove it up my ass and blow the top of my head off?
and then just for good measure
shoot everyone in the catholic church including the pope, who had the direct responsibility to stop their pediphile priest, from having sex, weather it be frontal, back or oral with your little boy or your little girl,
but stood idally by while abdicating their basic duty to protect their perishtioners and enforce a power that every american citizen is bound by, that is report all crimes to your local police,
as well as shoot anyone in the justice system who had the power to restrict the punishment for this crime to death or at the very least a minimum sentencing of life in prison without the possibility of perole, and just stood by while seeing to it that the rights of these criminals to once again eventually have the freedom to return to the streets and then again to continue practicing thier deeds but this time with much greater caution so to prolong being caught for as long as possible.
anyone who has ever had the opportunity to severly deal with such a montrosity and failed to correctly do so is in fact the criminal and is as criminally to blame as the pediphile who loves what he does himself. anyone who says different is nothing more then an insommneac with pediphillic tendencies.

[ljb]

Free,
We are now civilized, this type of activity is no longer acceptable.
While it may be in everyones mind, we just don't do it.

[so.cal.fan]

LJB is correct, Free, but I sure like the way YOU would do things!
Something tells me it would drastically reduce these awful crimes.

[Kreed]

Since I started this thread -- and watched it morph into an expanded thread, which is cool because comments breed counter comments -- I want
to clear up these points: #1, I ASKED "are these guys who go after kids
Gay or are they really PEDOS who find themselves with ONLY boys to attack?"
Its known that MOST (proportionately) PEDOS are straight. Its also known
that PEDOS go after kids to whom they have immediate access. So, is the Pope just really doing more harm, or is he being guided wisely? ***** I asked this question because I wanted opinions, not to argue. Both Solange & me are VERY involved in our faith & 2 RC parishes. Not matter how "wild" I was as a Teen, and have zero regrets, I am very very concerned about this breakdown of the PEDO issue & whats it doing to My faith. So, after some discussion with me & Sol & other Catholics I raised this issue here. #2, How often do we see smoke-screens, in business & politics, but Religion? Did Pope John Paul the Second fail me? YES. btw, I think ALL Popes just tout the same crap; its like CEO's of major corps. No New Ideas. Like what Derek? LET WOMEN IN. LET GUYS who really need to marry (a woman) do so. Maybe, others, with no such desire, well, stay celibate. ANYrate, just a
comment or two about why I STARTED this thread.

[Suff]

The Catholic church does not weigh sin. Each human being is a sinner. If Your neighbor drives up in a new car and you envy him, that is sin. The Catholic church doesn't rate sin. Envy and Sexual Perversion are equal in their interpretation of the scriptures.

They believe some things that are jolting. When the Pope went to Africa to address the AIDS crisis, he warned the people of the Sin of Condoms. He went as far to say that even if a woman knows her husband has the HIV virus, she should not use Birth control. Catholic leaders do not concern themselves with Cultural trends, or disease's or local laws or customs. They profess undying adherence to the tenements of the Faith.

Any consequence's of staying the course are the natural laws of God's Will.

Troubling and difficult to comprehend. But true.
----------------------------------------------------------------

Religion is very strange. I posted a picture of some Protestants holding signs that declared "God Hates America" and "Thank God for Katrina".
I then posted comments from the Pastor of the New Covenant Baptist church in Louisiana..... "God cleaned out New Orleans because of the sodomites and the witchcraft and other undesirables.


I got a few Comments that these people are "fringe".

Let me post you a Q&A that took place on MSNBC last night. It was between an ALABAMA State Senator Hank Erwin and Joe Scarborough, A former Republican congressman.

SCARBOROUGH: . Explain to me why you think that Katrina was God‘s wrath.

ERWIN: Well, I think, if you look at what‘s going on, this whole region has always known that, with the church, that New Orleans and the Gulf Coast are known for sin.

And if you go to a church and you read your Bible, you are always told avoid sin and that there‘s judgment for sin. And I just think that, in my analysis— you look at the factors, that you had a city that was known for sin—the signature of New Orleans is the French Quarter, Bourbon Street. It is known for sin. And you have a Bible that says God will judge sin, you can put two and two together

SCARBOROUGH: But, you know, Senator—you know, Senator, though, I mean, the thing about the New Orleans—the New Orleans storm is that it was the French Quarter that seemed to be spared of devastation.

ERWIN: Well, I understand that, and I think the lord sent them a message that we need to turn around or we may have another hurricane come.



SCARBOROUGH: But I will tell you, it is a debate—I promise you, it‘s a debate that is raging across America right now in churches and other areas, too.

Mainstream media..& a Statewide Politician agreeing that the argument about "If god sent Katrina" is a valid and worthy debate!

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Let me ask you this is you have bothered to read down this far.

Do you think on the face of it that the comments below are Racist?



But I do know that it's true that if you wanted to reduce crime, you could -- if that were your sole purpose, you could abort every black baby in this country, and your crime rate would go down.



The above comments were said this week by one of the great thinking conservatives or our time. A man with uninhibited access to not only the white house, but virtually every hall of Economic, Spiritual, Educational and legal power in America.

[Tom]

Actually, the Catholic Church does rate sin - mortal or venial.

And as for the quote, out of context it might sound racist. What was said befreo and after, and the purpose of the entire speech is relevant. A cut and paste job means nothing. In reality, it might be true. If we arrested every black person in Rochester NY, crime would be cut by 90%. True statement. Teenage deaths by gunfire would go away completly. No social statement, onnly math.

But neither is an acceptable solution.

Now, go qoute me out of context and use my one sentence and you got yourself a biggot.



Quote my whole post and you have sometheing else.

[DrugSalvastore]

Why do people have to complicate such simple matters?

TWO CONSENTING ADULTS = I don't care, you do what you want with each other....

Anything involving children....and you get the strongest penalty the law will allow, period. End of story.

Doesn't matter about genetics, doesn't matter about personal beliefs on homosexual or heterosexual orientation, blah blah blah blah blah.

Over...done with...next.

I agree that the Priests who even think about kiddies are sick bastards. Any old man who wants anything to do with a child is sick.

However, let's not forget, that 18yo's and 14yo's bang each other constantly, and it's something that is very healthy and necessary--and should be encouraged.

Seniors in high school (typically 18yo's) should have an obligation to banging the freshman (typically 14yo's) and showing them the ropes and all. Obviously as long as the acts are consentual.

I'm still pretty bitter that no senior girls got it on with me, when I was a freshman in high school. At the time, it wasn't seen as being all that "cool". Demi Moore is doing a great job in showing the female youth that it is okay to hook up with younger men. I did get my share of freshman 'tang in my fourth year of high school--I think we all did really--and if it wasn't for that and football, I wouldn't even have bothered staying in school that freaking long.

I think 14yo's, regardless of gender, want to be broken in by the older classmates they find attractive. Any one who finds anything wrong with that is a weasel...it's really just healthy.

After you reach 20, the rule of law should read that you're only allowed to hook up with your own age, divided by two, and plus seven.

* So, if you're 20yrs old---17 is the minimum age you're allowed

* If you're 22yrs old---18 is the minimum age you're allowed

* If you're 30yrs old---22 is the minimum age you're allowed.

* If you're 90yrs old---52 is the minimum age you're allowed.

This system should only be law in cases of old man and young woman. If, we are talking about old woman and young man, than all bets are off and everything is legal as long as the acts are consentual.

I see nothing wrong with a 30 year old girl hooking up with a 13 year old boy, as long as the boy consents to it.

[Suff]

Actually, the Catholic Church does rate sin - mortal or venial.




.

They view Selfishness , Envy and Fornication as one in the same.


Q. How many kinds of sins are there?


A. According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church,

"There are a great many kinds of sins. Scripture provides several lists of them. The Letter to the Galatians contrasts the works of the flesh with the fruit of the Spirit: 'Now the works of the flesh are plain: fornication, impurity, licentiousness, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, anger, selfishness, dissension, factions, envy, drunkenness, carousing, and the like. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things shall not inherit the Kingdom of God.



licentiousness: To Include, Homosexuality, Pedophilia, Masturbation, et al

[freeneasy]

i think that the catholic church believes that because their priest's are representative of god that they should be accorded a special and justified type of holy immunity from the law. which is exactly what has been taking place all these years during their ministry to and sexual violation of the ones they should teach and love.
the church believes that it is above the laws of the land and that they, the catholic church and all its ordained ministers are not obligated to represent those laws and neither should they be bound to it or by it, and that if the cc does not agree with the laws of the land then those laws cannot and should not apply to a figure of god and that this figure should be reasonalbly free from the demands that the law sets down as punishment for whatever crimes it is that he, a priest commits.
a priest a cardinal a bishop and a pope are all well insulated with the sanctified covering and protectection of mother church backed by the blessed virgin mary, peter, paul, joesph and all the saints and angels that surround heaven.
they believe that if a pedifile, better yet, child molesting sadist priest of grown age, maturity, knowledge, understanding, education and accountability and is exposed by a member of the parish weather it be victim or not or by another priest, cadinal or bishop and that priest is convicted and goes to jail for the rest of his life then the cc compares that to being the same as convicting god of this crime and sending god to prison for the span of a human life. got news for you pope sob, god dont commit no crimes. the only thing you can convict god of is john 3:16
and oh lordy d-man if that priest should be tried, convicted and receive the death penalty think of what an overload on the cc that something like that would be. its all politics d, nothing but horseshit coming from a dirty dogs ass

[PaceAdvantage]

This thread is getting way outta hand. Too many different directions, too many uncomfortable subjects for a message board such as this, even given that it is off-topic.

Perhaps I'm not being fair or just, but it is my house, and I've had enough for now.....

[freeneasy]

I agree that the Priests who even think about kiddies are sick bastards. Any old man who wants anything to do with a child is sick.

However, let's not forget, that 18yo's and 14yo's bang each other constantly, and it's something that is very healthy and necessary--and should be encouraged.

Seniors in high school (typically 18yo's) should have an obligation to banging the freshman (typically 14yo's) and showing them the ropes and all. Obviously as long as the acts are consentual.

I'm still pretty bitter that no senior girls got it on with me, when I was a freshman in high school. At the time, it wasn't seen as being all that "cool". Demi Moore is doing a great job in showing the female youth that it is okay to hook up with younger men. I did get my share of freshman 'tang in my fourth year of high school--I think we all did really--and if it wasn't for that and football, I wouldn't even have bothered staying in school that freaking long.

I think 14yo's, regardless of gender, want to be broken in by the older classmates they find attractive. Any one who finds anything wrong with that is a weasel...it's really just healthy.

After you reach 20, the rule of law should read that you're only allowed to hook up with your own age, divided by two, and plus seven.

* So, if you're 20yrs old---17 is the minimum age you're allowed

* If you're 22yrs old---18 is the minimum age you're allowed

* If you're 30yrs old---22 is the minimum age you're allowed.

* If you're 90yrs old---52 is the minimum age you're allowed.

This system should only be law in cases of old man and young woman. If, we are talking about old woman and young man, than all bets are off and everything is legal as long as the acts are consentual.

I see nothing wrong with a 30 year old girl hooking up with a 13 year old boy, as long as the boy consents to it.

yeah and teenage pregnecies are going thru the roof as well as the same teens becoming single teenage mothers going on welfare without a clue as to raising a child while getting such sound productive advise from the wacked out likes of your kind who tell their sons to yeah get out there and fuck, sorry pa, as much pussy as you can before you die and hey if you knock a few 14 year olds up then fuck em if they cant take a joke and going on from there to tell your 14 year old daughters to yeah get out and spread you legs as wide as you can get them to go and if you have a bunch of kids that end up speding the rest of their life in prison then hey feitctaj. and oh shit so what if you get aids who cares no one lives forever, hey what the hell, spread the wealth, give it to the next guy or girl. dude, you need to get along on home now boy cause yo mama's call'n you and i can hear her from here

[DrugSalvastore]

yeah and teenage pregnecies are going thru the roof as well as the same teens becoming single teenage mothers going on welfare without a clue as to raising a child while getting such sound productive advise from the wacked out likes of your kind who tell their sons to yeah get out there and fuck, sorry pa, as much pussy as you can before you die and hey if you knock a few 14 year olds up then fuck em if they cant take a joke and going on from there to tell your 14 year old daughters to yeah get out and spread you legs as wide as you can get them to go and if you have a bunch of kids that end up speding the rest of their life in prison then hey feitctaj. and oh shit so what if you get aids who cares no one lives forever, hey what the hell, spread the wealth, give it to the next guy or girl. dude, you need to get along on home now boy cause yo mama's call'n you and i can hear her from here

Yea---so just scare the kids into not having any fun....that's the answer to everything....scare tactics!

It's the 'you'll get hairy palms if you do that' mentality that I find comical.

The foul language was over the top as well---easy does it my man.

People only get one life, they only get to be young once, let them have fun

[freeneasy]

your the kind of person that does not want to recognize and acknowledge the source and causes for teenage pregnancies, abortions, abuses, aids, deseases, drug addiction, alcohalism, murder, wife beating, child abuse, molestation, incest, kidnapping, abandonment, rape, torture, suicide, desperity, pain, suffering, depression, and hopelessness that surrounds us.

i believe you recognize and understand that your so called beliefs are wrong but because of your weak, yet stanch defense to justify your position, your stand, and your calling for the blatent, flagrant, unsupervised and uncontrolled right that young childran should have to engage in endless sexual behavior on a massive scale i also believe that you probably have an agenda or a subtle reason for all this spewing hogwash of yours.

you dont care and you dont wonder where all these tradgities comes from, where all these desperate endings begin, how all this confusion sets in, when it all began, what it all began with and how it all comes to the desperate hours these young men and women will face when all the fun is over.
no you dont want to know any of these things because i will say that your probably hoping for the day when goverment will make sex with a 14 year old child legal so you can get your own personal freak on.
hey maybe iam wrong but that age scale crap thing of yours sure as hell didnt come from the intelegence level that you display here, no it comes from a higher up source. that scale thing came from a professional source or organization. one that believes in teenage permiscuity, abuse, pregnancy and molestaion. and these kinds of organizations dont send that kind of crap out in a causual haphazard flyer to john doe non member. that kind of crap goes out to serious parties only or comes as part of a membership newsletter or at the request of a member. what else can i say, you and your kind are bad medicine for the good of our childran. and from now on just talk to the hand

[DrugSalvastore]

your the kind of person that does not want to recognize and acknowledge the source and causes for teenage pregnancies, abortions, abuses, aids, deseases, drug addiction, alcohalism, murder, wife beating, child abuse, molestation, incest, kidnapping, abandonment, rape, torture, suicide, desperity, pain, suffering, depression, and hopelessness that surrounds us.

Yes, my bad, you're right...consesual sex between two highschool kids causes all that.

Keep on scaring em!!!!!!!!

[DrugSalvastore]

i believe you recognize and understand that your so called beliefs are wrong but because of your weak, yet stanch defense to justify your position, your stand, and your calling for the blatent, flagrant, unsupervised and uncontrolled right that young childran should have to engage in endless sexual behavior on a massive scale i also believe that you probably have an agenda or a subtle reason for all this spewing hogwash of yours.

BWAHAHAHAAHAH!!! LOL!!! I have an agenda! what crap.

I'm just bitter I didn't get any from the senior girls when I was a freshman.

When did I ever say that "young children should have to engage in endless sexual behavior on a massive scale" ????????

All i said is that if a freshman has a crush on a senior (by senior I mean 12th grader, not a senior citizen) and they WANT TO hook up---the senior should have an obligation to show them the ropes---as long as the senior is also attracted in some way.

I think you have an agenda---you just want to control how everyone lives their lives, and I think you would prefer it if everyone locked themselves in a room and did nothing all life. That way, nothing bad would ever happen to anyone.

[DrugSalvastore]

hey maybe iam wrong but that age scale crap thing of yours sure as hell didnt come from the intelegence level that you display here, no it comes from a higher up source. that scale thing came from a professional source or organization. one that believes in teenage permiscuity, abuse, pregnancy and molestaion. and these kinds of organizations dont send that kind of crap out in a causual haphazard flyer to john doe non member. that kind of crap goes out to serious parties only or comes as part of a membership newsletter or at the request of a member. what else can i say, you and your kind are bad medicine for the good of our childran. and from now on just talk to the hand

Oh my god---dude, you've lost it!!!

My "age scale" makes it illegal for people my age to have sex with 18 year olds. I'm 24yrs old. My age divided by two is 12. 12 + 7 = 19 which would be my minimum age by law.

The "age scale" I use isn't some sort of idea the priests or catholic church came up with....

It's the "age scale" that the youth culture uses to find the appropriate minimum age they can hook up with.

If you're 18, divide that number by 2, and add 7--you get 16. So the age scale says that a 16yo is the minimum an 18yo should hook up with or date.

I don't agree with the age scale about that. I was in high school once. You have to help out the freshman---I wasn't helped out as a freshman..and that's bullcrap!!!! The senior girls really let me down. A few of them even liked me---they just wouldn't show me the ropes because it was precieved as being "uncool." at the time.

This idea that people who are active in high school all suffer later on is outright nonsense. It's such a fraud it isn't even funny. I hooked up when I was young---now my life is doomed!!! What garbage.

[freeneasy]

so if a female high school frosh likes a senior then its that senior's obligation to break this young girl into the world of sex, which generally leads to alcohol which generally leads to drugs which generally leads to addictions to these things which generally leads to unwanted pregnancies, leaving school, leaving home, which can and does lead to prostitution and deseases which can and does lead to death and suicde and on and on. theres to many blanks that can also be added to the list that it would take 6 hours to cover all the general possibilities

obligation? you wouldnt know what an obligation was if it slapped your face.

6 years of continuious ongoing teenage sexual activity? what? you think that this is going to lead to something healthy and productive?

before you answer that get yourself a job as a volenteer in a teenage crisis suicide hotline like i did. this is the kind of job where the time expectancy of a volenteer worker to remain on the phones is no more then 2 months and only an extremely blessed and speacily gifted person can take the job on and treat it as an obligation, ho theres that word obligation, and a responsibility to continue on, its that brutal and disheartning,

go ahead, i dare you. get a job as a suicide crisis hotline councilor. you'll find out real quick where most of all these problems started out. yeah thats right, with your ideas, in their early teen years beginning with sex, alcohol and on and on from there.

scare tactics?
obviously you've never met or talked to a teen with aids or a teenage alcoholic or drug addict and all they got to hold on to is the hope that they will soon die
obviously youve never talked to a teen or a women out of her teens that as a young teenager got past around and abused like a piece of meat.
obviously you never met or talked to a young teenage girl or a women out of her teens that went thru an abortion as a young teen and was left with the lifelong and horrifying rememberence of killing a fetus that was alive and a part of their body
obviously you've taken these matters so lightly that you've done nothing more then regeritate the truth back up and held it to a standing of nothing more then "scare tactics"
see but the truth is that while your out there knocking off all the little 14 year olds that you can get your prick into, these kids are still calling and will continue calling the drug, alcohol, rape, abuse, pregnancy, aids, suicide crisis center hotline
scare tactics, unbelievable, shows what world your living in

so right about now, and this might seem a little harsh but i think i can honestly tell you that i dont care if you live and i really dont care if you die, but what i do care about is the kids that you dont give a shit about.
but of coarse today you will refuse to understand these things and iam sure you will refuse to understand these same things tommarrow and that because simply put you did'nt get laid by some senior when you were a freshman in high school.
now please go away from me. i really have nothing else to say to the savior of the teenage human race.

[freeneasy]

and that is i have nothing to really say to a man whose advise to the entire teenage population is nothing more then
hey the short lived fun your going to have as a promiscuous teen is well worth the dear price you will probably end up having to pay for the experience. so c'mon kids lets get the tourches out and burn rome to the ground