No Gay Catholic Priests
Word has it that the current Pope is about to no longer permit priests to be gay. No matter your feelings on people who are gay, the reasoning behind this move really can't be questioned.
The Catholic church has an image problem. Since 2002 there have been literally thousands of claims of sexual abuse. Almost 9,000 of the claims were from boys. The Pope wants to try and "clean up" the image of the church and these abuses. If there were no gays as priests, the 9,000 sexual abuse cases go away. Some will claim it's a "witch hunt," others have already claimed it will "set the church back decades." Again, no matter how much you think gays should be allowed to be priests, you simply cannot deny that if all gay priests are removed, the number of sexual abuses of children will drop by 80% or more.
Comments
1
"Again, no matter how much you think gays should be allowed to be priests, you simply cannot deny that if all gay priests are removed, the number of sexual abuses of children will drop by 80% or more."
I don't think it will have much of an effect on reducing the number of kids that will be abused, but it will diminish the number of kids getting abused by priests. Just a matter of whether they will get abused by someone with a collar or no collar. Now when you stated "if all gay priests are removed" and implied removed from this planet, then you are definitely on to something there. Of course I am not advocating launching all gay priests into space, just the convicted child molesters. I don't think there is a more evil crime than that.
I know what you meant though and you are right. The Catholic church has some major image issues. Priests used to be highly respected, but are now looked at with contempt and suspicion. And the way they tried to hide and trivialize these abuses, the contempt and suspicion is justified in MHO.
I don't think it will have much of an effect on reducing the number of kids that will be abused, but it will diminish the number of kids getting abused by priests. Just a matter of whether they will get abused by someone with a collar or no collar. Now when you stated "if all gay priests are removed" and implied removed from this planet, then you are definitely on to something there. Of course I am not advocating launching all gay priests into space, just the convicted child molesters. I don't think there is a more evil crime than that.
I know what you meant though and you are right. The Catholic church has some major image issues. Priests used to be highly respected, but are now looked at with contempt and suspicion. And the way they tried to hide and trivialize these abuses, the contempt and suspicion is justified in MHO.
Posted by: Tomslick at September 23, 2005 02:12 PM (xNjHI)
2
I'm only for launching them into space if we can do it with a budget shuttle -- no oxygen.
And it actually might have an effect on the number of children abused because the gays predators will not have as easy access to the boys, nor will they be in an institution that has protected them. They won't have quite as much power over the boys because they won't be in a position of power.
So I think it will reduce the overall numbers of cases of abuse AND the number abused by priests.
And it actually might have an effect on the number of children abused because the gays predators will not have as easy access to the boys, nor will they be in an institution that has protected them. They won't have quite as much power over the boys because they won't be in a position of power.
So I think it will reduce the overall numbers of cases of abuse AND the number abused by priests.
Posted by: Ogre at September 23, 2005 02:24 PM (/k+l4)
3
You do have a point with the position of power statement. People can also be sports coaches or cub scout leaders which would give them access to kids, but it doesn't seem the abuse cases are nearly as high from these people as it is from priests.
If a priest takes a vow of celibacy, then volontary castration would just prove that they are sincere about it. It's their asinine rule, back it up. Problem solved. No more child molesting and a boon to our space program.
If a priest takes a vow of celibacy, then volontary castration would just prove that they are sincere about it. It's their asinine rule, back it up. Problem solved. No more child molesting and a boon to our space program.
Posted by: Tomslick at September 23, 2005 02:56 PM (xNjHI)
4
I like the idea of castration -- but I think that would defeat the purpose on the whole church and pure body thing, don't you? 
Posted by: Ogre at September 23, 2005 02:59 PM (/k+l4)
5
I guess it would be a tad draconian. But for the convicted molesters, it would be fitting,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, then launch them.
I wonder if the ACLU would represent a child molester priest?
I wonder if the ACLU would represent a child molester priest?
Posted by: Tomslick at September 23, 2005 03:16 PM (xNjHI)
6
What's really sad, Tomslick, is that I'd be willing to bet they already have.
Posted by: Ogre at September 23, 2005 04:01 PM (/k+l4)
7
I cannot believe that not a single person has gone through the "just because someone's gay does not mean he's a pedophile" argument here.
(*)>
(*)>
Posted by: birdwoman at September 23, 2005 06:59 PM (Sc2Wh)
8
Interesting... I was thinking the same thing as birdwoman. When did gay = pedophile? Did I miss something somewhere?
Posted by: vw bug at September 23, 2005 07:34 PM (J3xJ9)
9
The other way around. If a male priest molests a boy, by definition, that's gay.
Posted by: Ogre at September 23, 2005 08:12 PM (iJFc9)
10
1. How do we identify ALL gay men attempting to become priests? Same way they kept gays out of the military when they were forbidden to serve?
2. No, not by any means are all gays pedophiles.
3. The church should be more concerned about PUNISHING THE GUILTY PRIESTS than about banning gays.
We all know that for years upon years the catholic church has covered up for and protected the guilty parties, and they still are by confusing the issue and turning everyone's attention to gay members.
This is just an excuse to bring gay bashing into a more acceptable light by dressing it the implied intent that they're trying to protect kids.
Clean up the image... nice try.
2. No, not by any means are all gays pedophiles.
3. The church should be more concerned about PUNISHING THE GUILTY PRIESTS than about banning gays.
We all know that for years upon years the catholic church has covered up for and protected the guilty parties, and they still are by confusing the issue and turning everyone's attention to gay members.
This is just an excuse to bring gay bashing into a more acceptable light by dressing it the implied intent that they're trying to protect kids.
Clean up the image... nice try.
Posted by: Erin Monahan at September 24, 2005 12:40 AM (vtVgw)
11
1. I don't know how they're going to identify them -- that's up to the church.
2. I never said that nor implied it! But the converse it true by definition -- if a boy is molested by a male, that makes the male gay.
3. Yes, I completely agree!
Yes, the church has done massively wrong for many years. I just think they are trying to clean up their image. After all, if there were no gay priests, there could not possibly be an molestation of any boys -- again, by definition.
It may only be theoretical, but they have to do something.
2. I never said that nor implied it! But the converse it true by definition -- if a boy is molested by a male, that makes the male gay.
3. Yes, I completely agree!
Yes, the church has done massively wrong for many years. I just think they are trying to clean up their image. After all, if there were no gay priests, there could not possibly be an molestation of any boys -- again, by definition.
It may only be theoretical, but they have to do something.
Posted by: Ogre at September 24, 2005 07:47 AM (iJFc9)
12
the vast majority of pedophiles are adult, straight males. this is not about sex, it's about power. an adult male molesting a boy is not 'gay' -- it's pedophelia. it's not the same thing at all. read some reputable psychology texts before you go spouting off.
Posted by: d00d at September 24, 2005 07:15 PM (Y01zl)
13
d00d -- if a male has sexual relations with another male by choice, that's gay. I'm sorry if you don't like the word. It may be done for power or other reasons, but they're still gay, whether you or anyone else likes it or not.
Posted by: Ogre at September 24, 2005 07:21 PM (iJFc9)
Processing 0.0, elapsed 0.0079 seconds.
18 queries taking 0.0062 seconds, 21 records returned.
Page size 10 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.