Evolution, development, and random biological ejaculations from a godless liberal
PZ Myers is a biologist and associate professor at the University of Minnesota, Morris.
…and this is a pharyngula stage embryo.
• a longer profile of yours truly
• my calendar
• Nature Network
• RichardDawkins Network
• facebook
• MySpace
• Twitter
• Atheist Nexus
• the Pharyngula chat room
(#pharyngula on irc.synirc.net)
To understand what a Libertarian is, fill the mold with the intellectual racism of Charles Murray, the political extremism of Ron Paul, and the nature of Timothy McVeigh.
Stay abreast of your favorite bloggers' latest and greatest via e-mail, via a daily digest.
« The Darwin Conspiracy | Main | Nice funeral »
Category: Religion
Posted on: July 7, 2008 10:15 PM, by PZ Myers
You knew this was coming, right? How else to honor World Youth than for Cardinal Pell, Archbishop of Sydney, to cover up an incident of child molestation by a Catholic priest? It's traditional!
Comments
I saw this and had the same reaction. Classic (but expected) hypocrisy!
Posted by: Silver | July 7, 2008 10:16 PM
This makes me want to take out an ad in my local paper and refer to the local Catholic Churches as "Child Rape Incorporated." Hey, it's a small town, we could use some excitement.
Seriously, these people should be locked in stocks and pelted with rotten tomatoes.
Posted by: Paul Lundgren | July 7, 2008 10:30 PM
Haha gotta love Catholicism.
Posted by: Scott | July 7, 2008 10:30 PM
Does he think that pretending he's not sure if ejaculated paints him in a better light?
Posted by: Jose | July 7, 2008 10:37 PM
All sins are equal, so if Pell doesn't repent for his lies, he's going to hell... or at least he would be if there was a hell. Damn, and he knows there's no such thing. How can any Chatholics still believe in their Chruch? I guess it's just that damn faith thing, again.
Posted by: Jackal | July 7, 2008 10:37 PM
If the guy's brain-dead enough to be deceived by the tripe in the Bible, he's probably too stupid to understand that he's done something wrong by covering up a molestation.
Either that, or he's a complete fucking asshole who likes jerking around the victims of crimes.
Posted by: CalGeorge | July 7, 2008 10:38 PM
Pell is a total wanker. I don't know if it's symptomatic of the Catholic Church in choosing archbishops who are total sycophants and willing to tow the Vatican line or it's just he was in the right place at the right time, but there are much better Catholic priests in Australia than him, ones that won't use the threat of excommunication on politicians who vote for unfavourable bills, ones who want a focus on helping the needy as opposed to spending hundreds of millions on the self-flagellating exercise that is World Youth Day.
If anyone wanted to show how the catholic church was out of touch with the community, all we have to do is put wankers like Pell in the spotlight.
Posted by: Kel | July 7, 2008 10:39 PM
Just think how well adjusted many of the priests would have been without the horrible and horribly repressive Catholic Church; hell, any repressive church.(uh, that would be the majority of religions, huh?)
I loved the use of "buggery" as a formal charge in the article. It's so British and almost as wittily colloquial as "buttsecks".
I'm sure Pope Ratzi will love going downunder clad in his bitchin' robes and his fierce red Prada shoes.
Posted by: j | July 7, 2008 10:40 PM
These people should have large placards that read: "Why did your god permit this to happen? There is no god, but just freaking molesting male priests that should have a human designed rope around his neck and have his god save him" Funny thing about a rope: it wasn't intelligently designed, but can fit around any neck, whether a priest or other type of criminal.
Posted by: Holbach | July 7, 2008 10:41 PM
"Either that, or he's a complete fucking asshole who likes jerking around the victims of crimes."
With minimal editing of this sentence, you've answered your own argument...
Posted by: J | July 7, 2008 10:44 PM
Someone has to explain to me sometime why half a million kids from around the planet are travelling to this event,and why millions are still believing the whole catholic schmonz,when it has become crystal clear to any other than the dumbest of brainwashed dumbwits,that the catholic church is nothing but an organisation of old guys in robes who like to fuck children.
Oh,I posted this yesterday,but still cute today,its not that the catholics shun earthly rewards either :
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=593227
Posted by: clinteas | July 7, 2008 10:53 PM
The Catholics tend to be a little heavy on homoeroticism anyway. (uh-oh, here comes the Catholic League - all one of them. Hi Bill!)
There is, of course, the anecdote about Talulah Bankhead visiting a catholic church during mass. As the priest came by swinging a censer, Bankhead remarked, " Dahling, I looove the dress...but your purse is on fire!"
Posted by: j | July 7, 2008 11:00 PM
Why is this site so anti-child molesting priest! Lets hear both sides of the arguement.
Posted by: Jose | July 7, 2008 11:08 PM
What I want to know is where can I hire a lot of lions in the Sydney area.
Stadiums full of Christians and no lions? What an opportunity for the nations big cat wranglers.
Think of the broadcasting rights.
Posted by: Marius Vanderlubbe | July 7, 2008 11:09 PM
I must admit, your "It's traditional!" remark had me spewing tea out my nose.
Posted by: John Phillips, FCD | July 7, 2008 11:12 PM
It's not just Catholics. The most obnoxiously bigoted sect of christianity has put a feather in their cap. Sexual Abuse at Church Camp (Warning - shameless self promotion)
Posted by: S.Scott | July 7, 2008 11:20 PM
Cardinal Pell-end is a stain on this country just as the Vatican is a stain on this planet.
http://generalsystemsvehicle.blogspot.com/
Posted by: mandrellian | July 7, 2008 11:26 PM
This blog is ridiculous. It's like some version of hell where there are nothing but God-haters and PZ Myers buttocks to kiss. I'm only here because I'm reviewing atheist blogs. Why the rest of you are here begging for crumbs from a middle-aged, apparently sex-fixated ass. professor from a university that probably has more snow days than classes is beyond me.
But I have to admit, it's a popular blog. It's smoking in that regard. And I can't leave until I've checked out whatever the heck the "dungeon" is, gay S&M no doubt.
And atheist come to my site constantly complaining that I won't admit to their great moral instincts as evolved apes. Amazing.
Posted by: Edward Gordon | July 7, 2008 11:31 PM
Not to apologize for the Catholic Church, but there's a good chance that some of the young males who were 'touched' by priests actually enjoyed it. Some, not all, but some.
Posted by: TemHock | July 7, 2008 11:31 PM
Under our Trade Practices Act, if you buy something, it has to work, otherwise the seller can be prosecuted. I'd like to see someone buy one of these stupid WYDGETS, get hit by a bus, and then sue Pope Palpatine because they ended up a paraplegic (what, no miraculous cure??)
Of course it's no surprise tha good 'ol Gorgeous George has pulled this stunt; if you can say one thing about the Catholic Church, at least they're consistent...
Posted by: Phaedrus | July 7, 2008 11:32 PM
Edward Gordon wrote:
Jealous?
Posted by: Wowbagger | July 7, 2008 11:34 PM
Jealous of its traffic, that's for sure.
Posted by: Edward Gordon | July 7, 2008 11:38 PM
To #18: I don't hate god, Edward, because I find it hard to hate something that doesn't exist. Bit like saying I hate the Big Blue Bunny because my undies need a new elastic.
Posted by: Phaedrus | July 7, 2008 11:41 PM
That more like it, Edward Gordon! Finally someone who's not afraid to challenge the anti-priest molestation cartel.
Posted by: Jose | July 7, 2008 11:41 PM
The comedian Louie C.K. has already figured it out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VABSoHYQr6k
Posted by: Andrew | July 7, 2008 11:41 PM
Edward,
Congratulations on your site, by the way - best satire I've seen in a while. It's hilarious. I mean, atheism leads to obesity? That's comedy gold right there.
Posted by: Wowbagger | July 7, 2008 11:43 PM
"atheism leads to obesity"... fat chance.
*boom*tish*
Posted by: Phaedrus | July 7, 2008 11:52 PM
Does jealousy of website traffic count as envy, greed or both? Avarilicious!
Posted by: Blake Stacey | July 7, 2008 11:53 PM
Posted by: llewelly | July 7, 2008 11:53 PM
Oh, I recommend you have a look through Edward's site - it is truly fascinating. The post about the increase in obesity being the result of atheism is so utterly bizarre that I do wonder whether he's a Poe or not.
Posted by: Wowbagger | July 7, 2008 11:56 PM
@Edward Gordon, #18
God-haters? Heavens no. God doesn't exist silly. Hating something that doesn't exist would be a waste of time...
Protecting child molesters on the other hand, I can get past nutjobs doing silly rituals every Sunday, but I can't get past the protection of such despicable human beings.
Posted by: Kel | July 8, 2008 12:02 AM
So, Edward Gordon, why no url? Not that you will get any ad revenue from me with my ad blocker software on.
Yes, some probably did, until the guilt, shame and sense of betrayal hit them. My buddy Milo, who was molested by a priest, chose to end the pain with a bullet in the head. I miss him and think about him way too much.Posted by: Blind Squirrel FCD | July 8, 2008 12:03 AM
Oh and by the way, Edward, I have a few friends who are pro Dommes, and another who's a pro Dom. Their dungeons are nicely furnished, there's a lovely selection of floggers & butt plugs to choose from, the St. Andrews Cross (see? Religious appeal already!) has just been re-lacquered, and I'm sure they'd be delighted to sort out Repressed Religious Ranters.
Who knows? You might even actually enjoy it. Some, not all, but some.
Posted by: Phaedrus | July 8, 2008 12:04 AM
Edward,
Let me clue you in on gods true plan? All people who don't lie to themselves in order to believe in god will be admitted to heaven. Don't worry though. The believers still go to heaven. They go to the special education section of heaven, but it's still heaven.
Posted by: Jose | July 8, 2008 12:04 AM
I'm not Catholic so I've got nothing to defend here but it's interesting that many atheists here are ready to denounce the Catholic Church and shut it down because of this heinous incident but never do I hear atheists crying out for reform in the secularized public schools.
The amount of sexual abuse that takes place in public schools is astounding and it is on the rise. Would any of you consider wiping the saliva from the side of your mouth when it comes to attacking anything that moves regarding Christianity and start attacking the secularized public schools with an equal amount of ferocity? I'd like to see that but it seems that most atheists are more comfortable with convenient truths.
Posted by: Ryan | July 8, 2008 12:05 AM
Ryan, public schools don't make a point of claiming that they're guided by an supposedly all-loving superbeing who - you'd think - would make an effort to stop the people doing 'his' work from molesting children.
It's about the hypocrisy.
Posted by: Wowbagger | July 8, 2008 12:10 AM
@Ryan: We like to pick on the Catholics for rich irony that isn't to be found in secular institutions (though we did get upset about the asshat teacher who burned items into his students' arms), because these idiots actually claim moral superiority. Right after shuffling around to hide assholes, not this one in particular, but others, who abuse kids to hide them from the public eye and block prosecution.
Posted by: Leigh Shryock | July 8, 2008 12:12 AM
Temhock at #19
Victim-blaming, clueless, rape apologist,faux controversy,
Bingo!
Posted by: watercat | July 8, 2008 12:13 AM
Right on Ryan,
Our under funded secular schools are responsible for much more evil in the world than the Catholic Church. It's despicable and hypocritical that atheist hate molesting priests, but rush to support molestation in our public schools.
Posted by: Jose | July 8, 2008 12:16 AM
Wowbagger said, "Ryan, public schools don't make a point of claiming that they're guided by an supposedly all-loving superbeing who - you'd think - would make an effort to stop the people doing 'his' work from molesting children.
It's about the hypocrisy."
So it's hypocritical for the Catholic Church but not for public schools? I agree that it is hypocritical of the Catholic Church. I'm not disputing that. I just think it's equally as hypocritical to complain against the Catholic Church but not to ever say a word about the increasing sexual abuse in public schools. You apparently see no hypocrisy there.
Posted by: Ryan | July 8, 2008 12:18 AM
@Ryan: As this is an article about specific incidents, complaining that we're not talking about another subject is rather silly, isn't it?
Posted by: Leigh Shryock | July 8, 2008 12:21 AM
Ryan,
The secular schools aren't being watched over by a benevolent super-being; nor do they make claims that they are better, more moral people because of their belief in said benevolent super-being.
That's the hypocrisy.
Posted by: Wowbagger | July 8, 2008 12:22 AM
Just reading Orwell's "1984"...
Edward Gordon was taken to Room 101. O'Brien was speaking to him, but Edward was only half-listening, because he already knew what was going to happen to him.
"You asked me once, what was in Room 101. I told you that you knew the answer already. Everyone knows it. The thing that is in Room 101 is the worst thing in the world."
Yes, Edward knew, all right; he knew what was behind the door of Room 101. He broke out in a cold sweat.
O'Brien paused for a contemplative moment, and then the door slowly opened. Edward's pulse shot up, and his hands went cold and clammy. A knot formed in his stomach. O'Brien could see the look of sheer terror in Edward's eyes.
"Please... no, NO! Not... THAT!" he begged.
"It's too late," O'Brien said, and propelled Edward into the darkened room. Just as the heavy, metallic door swung shut, the lights came up, and Edward could see that he was indeed correct in dreading his worst fears were about to be realised. The room was empty of any furnishings, apart from a table and a chair.
There was a man sitting on the chair, with his back to Edward. The man slowly spun his chair around, blinked rapidly about five times, and said, "Hello, Edward. My name is Dawkins."
A muted, terrifying scream penetrated into the hallway through the door of Room 101.
Posted by: Phaedrus | July 8, 2008 12:24 AM
Do you have evidence for this assertion? If so, do you also have evidence that secular public schools have banded together in a worldwide effort to cover up said sexual abuse? If so, do you have evidence that the people who participated in this coverup were chosen for leadership positions? Is one of those leaders going to be visiting Australia for a state-sponsored youth rally where anyone who questions him about the abuse and coverup can be fined AU$5500 for causing annoyance?
Please, share your knowledge with us.
Posted by: NDT | July 8, 2008 12:24 AM
Just because people aren't singing from the hills on public schools doesn't mean it's any less wrong, or that we aren't critical of it. The Catholic Church draws a lot of ire because it claims moral superiority. Not to mention that the church does it's best to silence victims and has no problem with simply moving the priest to another area instead of sacking him. Yes there are adults who molest children in all walks of life. To cover it up is really low, and to have it systemic is a major problem. Bitching about public schools is just a red herring argument.
Posted by: Kel | July 8, 2008 12:25 AM
Again Wowbagger said, "The secular schools aren't being watched over by a benevolent super-being; nor do they make claims that they are better, more moral people because of their belief in said benevolent super-being.
That's the hypocrisy."
Honestly, I've never heard a Catholic tell me that their better or more moral than me or anybody else. Incidentally, I've heard many atheists tell me that they are more moral than me. But that's a different discussion.
Again, is it or is it not hypocrisy to denounce the Catholic Church but not denounce secularized public schools?
Posted by: Ryan | July 8, 2008 12:30 AM
Eward Gordon @ 18 You obviously have great insane faith in your imaginary shit god. If I felt that way about atheists I would have this demented ghost come down and smite us all at this site. You can try as hard as your religion compacted cesspit of a brain will let you, but you will never make it happen. When are you religious retards going to realize that there is nothing imaginary to change the course of natural events? You have only to prove it and convince us this shit god of yours has the power to come down and wipe the floor with us. We have been wiping the Universe clear of this insane nonsense since we realized that all religions are produced in demented brains such as yours, and as hard as they shit they cannot pass it from their ossified brains to their rectums. Prove it, and let your fecal matter be the deciding factor. Let's see your god.
Posted by: Holbach | July 8, 2008 12:32 AM
Other than NAMBLA and the Catholic Church, I'm unaware of any organizations that have systematically supported Child molesters.
If a public school teacher molests a student, they're fired and go to jail. What's there to be critical about?
If a priest molests a child, it's covered up, and the priest is transferred so that he can go on molesting.
I don't think the Catholic Church should be shut down, but it should be held accountable for terrible injustice it's ignored and fostered.
Posted by: Jose | July 8, 2008 12:33 AM
No, it is not. If what we're pointing out is hypocrisy.
Now, tell me, where are your statistics on these 'rampant secular school sexual abuses'? I'd love to see some citations here.
Posted by: Leigh Shryock | July 8, 2008 12:35 AM
NDT: "Do you have evidence for this assertion?"
Yeah, I do. Again, I'm not defending the Catholic Church and I'm not Catholic. I can see that you've already firmly buried your head in the sand so this information won't actually get through but here is some info.
http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/4/5/01552.shtml
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0206/15/smn.13.html
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53859
Wipe the saliva from your mouth and take your hands off of your ears for once.
Posted by: Ryan | July 8, 2008 12:36 AM
Ryan,
It would be hypocrisy if i were defending secularised schools. I'm not, so it isn't. Two separate arguments.
My issue, as I've made quite clear, is that Catholicism is a religion, based around the existence of an all-loving superbeing with interventionist powers. That the being that is the focus of the religion cannot or does not stop this from happening is the hypocrisy to which I refer.
To a lesser extent I'm referring to the general Christian tenet that belief in god, jesus etc. makes you a better person than someone who doesn't, and therefore a truly religious person should not be able to do such a thing.
But I guess I can accept - although I am a little surprised - that you haven't experienced that particular interpretation of it before.
Posted by: Wowbagger | July 8, 2008 12:38 AM
It is disappointing that George Pell will get away with this. He is quite devoted to medieval catholicism and no doubt wishes there was no evidence for evolution or anything else which disturbs his views. Fundamentally, he hates people, especially those who think for themselves.
Posted by: Roger Scott | July 8, 2008 12:38 AM
That CNN transcript is about one study by one researcher. Newmax and WorldNetDaily are not exactly reliable sources for anything. Have any actual evidence? And how about that global coverup?
Posted by: ndt | July 8, 2008 12:39 AM
WingnutDaily, a transcript from a news report which simply talks about the fact that said sexual abuse exists and some news site I never heard of (which, from a casual search has revealed to have fabricated entire stories), is the best you can come up with?
Now, do schools persistently try to cover it up, keep their accused on staff and shuffle them around to try to prevent prosecution?
Posted by: Leigh Shryock | July 8, 2008 12:40 AM
Google that Carol Shakeshaft study and you'll find it had several methodological problems, among which was defining "sexual abuse" so broadly as to include dirty jokes.
And the study itself shows no evidence of the increase claimed by Ryan.
Posted by: ndt | July 8, 2008 12:44 AM
NDT,
You're being a bit ridiculous. It's like you expect me to show you a story that is exactly in every way like the Catholic sex scandal except the word "Catholic" is replaced with "public school". I never said that the public schools are covering them up. You keep wanting me to defend the Catholic Church but I could care less about doing that.
"Newmax and WorldNetDaily are not exactly reliable sources for anything."
Nice ad hom. What exactly is inaccurate in what is written there? What source would you like it to come from? What about the CNN report? I suppose if it doesn't flow from the mighty stroke of PZ, then it can't be true.
Posted by: Ryan | July 8, 2008 12:49 AM
What a piece of spectacular arrogance to call their tax-payer subsidised mega-gathering "World Youth Day". I know of youths who will be ignoring it. What is wrong with "World Catholic Youth Day"?
Of course the Roman Catholic Church thinks everyone should follow their lead on almost everything, but it so happens that less than 20% of the planet agrees with them. As an oldie, I merely deplore the extravagance and the inconvenience it will bring. Parts of Sydney will stop until an octogenarian former inquisitor is conducted in style from point A to point B. What a pity point B isn't a dock where he can answer for the crimes of the organisation he leads.
Posted by: Roger Scott | July 8, 2008 12:50 AM
Ryan: you really don't get it, then again I believe you have made this same point before and didn't get the point then either. However, to spell it out for you, unlike the catholic church, public schools don't operate a world wide organisation which has been proven to not only systematically cover up the abuse carried out by its priests but to actually have a policy of doing so dictated on from high i.e. the vatican. Not only that, it has also in at least one case, enabled an abusing priest to escape legal jurisdiction in one country by giving him sanctuary in the vatican.
None of the posts here condones abuse by anyone, priest, teacher, whatever. However, considering this is a post about the catholic high poobah visiting OZ where its most senior official has just been caught out in more of its famed hypocrisy, what was the point of your post again.
By the way, you have made this point about the vast number of abusers in public schools a number of times and not only on this particular post, so would you care to supply any evidence beyond bilious ranting because we are being mean to the deluded.
Posted by: John Phillips, FCD | July 8, 2008 12:50 AM
@Ryan, #56
Ryan, you are missing the point at the outrage. We are outraged because the Catholic Church is covering up sexual abuse. If public schools were doing so then there would be outrage at that too.
We're not dumb, we understand that molestation occurs in many places (most likely in the home by trusted family members), schools are a place where there is adults in direct supervision of children so it's a risk area. But that's not the problem that people are speaking out on. It's that the church is covering up abuse and not only protecting child molesters but moving them to new communities who have no idea about the priest's past. Surely that should be obvious.
Posted by: Kel | July 8, 2008 12:57 AM
Pell is a prick, pure and simple. I remember when the RU486/abortion debate came up and he threatened pollies so that he would get his way. Its no surprise he would do this.
Posted by: Pandora Neurospora | July 8, 2008 1:00 AM
Ryan: sorry I was posting when you posted those links. However, even a quick glance at the first link shows that in the cases being reported, the people involved in the abuse lost their jobs or were prosecuted. Unlike the catholic church which only came clean when they had no other option. Though as others have said, using that study as evidence on its own is flawed to say the least, due to criticisms of its methodology and use of the term abuse.
None of that is to deny that abuse goes on in school or any where else where abusers have access to numbers of children. However, as can be seen from even the one I did have time to look at the abusers were being dealt with appropriately and it was not being covered up. If it had been, then you would have a point. However, our whole point is about the hypocrisy of the catholic church covering it up until they had no choice but to cone partly clean about it. Even then, as can be seen with this post, there are plenty at a senior level in that church still trying to sweep things under the rug. Hence again the call of hypocrisy on our part.
Posted by: John Phillips, FCD | July 8, 2008 1:01 AM
Off-topic (if only slightly):
Cathie from Canada has a great post up on some crap-for-brains named Rabbi Reuven Bulka, who is endorsing Ben Stein's Expelled.
http://cathiefromcanada.blogspot.com/2008/07/idiocys-defenders.html
Posted by: CalGeorge | July 8, 2008 1:02 AM
I understand the outrage at the Catholic Church. I'm with you. The point of my post was NOT to say that the Catholic sex scandal is the same as public schools. But only to say that sex abuse in public schools is on the increase and some experts say it far surpasses that of the Catholic Church.
Sex abuse is bad. I understand that it is ridiculous for the Catholic Church to cover it up. I'm just saying that I've never heard or read about an atheist making the obvious connection that not only is sex abuse a problem in the Catholic Church but it is an even bigger problem in secularized public schools. Atheists often cry about the problems of the Catholic Church and the problems of intelligent design in public schools and what not. I never hear them tackling the ever growing issue of sexual abuse in public schools.
By the way, here is an AP article on the topic. I hope that will pacify everyone:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21392345/
Posted by: Ryan | July 8, 2008 1:03 AM
ArchB Pell...*shudder*
REMO, which sadly as a shop front is no more, but they have a great online store is holding a WYD Annoying Tshirt competion.
Some of the entries are great.
http://remogeneralstore.com/pages/domBrowse.cfm?theme=122
Posted by: coz | July 8, 2008 1:04 AM
You sure go on about public schools a lot...
Posted by: Kel | July 8, 2008 1:05 AM
By the way, the AP article documents (in the first few paragraphs no less!) a teacher who was indeed dismissed for sexual abuse but he was simply moved to a different district and taught for decades and was also accused of several more abuses. Interesting.
Here it is again:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21392345/
Posted by: Ryan | July 8, 2008 1:07 AM
It is bad that it's happening at non-religious schools. But that doesn't change my point about why god isn't doing anything about it.
Posted by: Wowbagger | July 8, 2008 1:13 AM
Ryan,
How many people here are denying that there is sexual abuse in public schools? We aren't protecting public schools at all, we aren't denying there is a problem, we aren't trying to show that the catholic church has a monopoly on adults forcing themselves onto young children, all we are doing here is highlighting the hypocrisy of an organisation that gives moral guidance to over 1 billion people worldwide covering up an atrocity. If schools were covering up these atrocities, we would be calling for heads to roll. But the vatican gets away with it.
Bill Maher points out this very issue and he gets lampooned in the media.
Posted by: Kel | July 8, 2008 1:14 AM
I am sorry, but aren't you fuckers here missing the point or what?
The guy in question was fucking TWENTY NINE years old when he was "assaulted".
I do not know by who's definition this constitutes "child" abuse?
How can you assault an apparently - at the time - 29 year old teacher trainee of the male persuasion, and that in a swimming pool?
I smell something rotten - and this smell does not eminate from the church alone. The so called "victim" has a rather strong smell as well.
Posted by: kraut | July 8, 2008 1:17 AM
Why does it seem so easy for me to see, but so difficult for theists, that every religion ever has had some sort of sexual dynamic at its base?
It's always; don't have sex, have sex only with those I choose, never do this one thing that I like, never like that thing that I do, don't do it with those of the same sex, don't do it with those of the opposite sex, men can do it with a bunch of girls, girls can do it with a bunch of men, farm animals are either on or off limits, depending on the season, and FOR GOD'S SAKE, DO NOT MIX FABRICS!
Atheism is so much easier: do what is right as determined by society. If society seems wrong, work to change it. Do this without resorting to individual "revalations".
Under this atheist philosophy, societal change is possible, but a demogougic leader forcing change is unlikely.
Just my ha-penny,
cheers,
Autumn
Posted by: Autumn | July 8, 2008 1:17 AM
The church can sometimes drive the good guys to suicide. As a youngster more than 20 years ago I was have some issues and my parents sent me to the local priest for some "counselling". Fr. Maurie Crocker was a good guy. Didn't waste my time with god talk. He was a former soldier and boxer and we just chatted.
Recently I found out that about 10 years ago he hanged himself. Turns out a couple of young men came to him to report abuse by priests. Maurie was shocked but he got the boys to report it to the law and he took it to the local bishop. Of course he didn't get much support from the church. As a matter of fact he was ostracised, but eventually one of the priest involved committed suicide and the other went to jail. It appears Maurie copped flak continuously from his "brothers" and eventually he took his own life.
Details of the whole sordid story here. I suppose the moral of the story is the church will eat its own rather than acknowledge abuse or guilt.
Posted by: shane | July 8, 2008 1:20 AM
I hope that will pacify everyone:
no, it won't, because you're failing to realize what our bone of contention is with your logic:
It seems like all you are doing is trying to deflect concern over the CC's attempts at coverup by pointing out that others do it too.
If you were really concerned about sexual abuse in the public schools, you would be presenting your argument in a different way; you'd be decrying BOTH the CC's approach, AND the approach of the public school system, instead of trying to pit one against the other as being worse.
your argument smacks of disingenuity, even if that wasn't your intention.
as to whether teachers get away with abuse... perhaps you haven't been following the story of the teacher who burned crosses into his kids arms?
been all over the cable news channels, and there have been at least a couple of threads about it on this blog too.
Posted by: ichthyic | July 8, 2008 1:21 AM
"you'd be decrying BOTH the CC's approach, AND the approach of the public school system, instead of trying to pit one against the other as being worse."
Ummm, they're both bad. I think I said that. Yup, I did. If we're talking numbers though, it does seem as if public schools are much, much worse than the Catholic Church.
My point is that atheists should condemn both equally but don't. In fact, they don't ever mention the abuse taking place in public schools and they don't mention that it does indeed seem to be far, far worse than that of the Catholic Church. I smell something disingenuous there.
They're both bad though. Does that pacify you now? Probably not.
Posted by: Ryan | July 8, 2008 1:28 AM
Ryan,
Your own links undermine your arguments.
1. Those teachers are fired, prosecuted, and convicted.
2. These cases are reported on. I certainly hear about them all the time. But as proof, I offer the fact that they are cited in the articles.
3. "The seven-month investigation found 2,570 educators whose teaching credentials were revoked, denied, surrendered or sanctioned from 2001 through 2005 following allegations of sexual misconduct." That sure looks like proof that Publics schools do act on this info.
4. "We're not the only molesters" is a horrible stance to take in order to deflect attention from the real criticism. There are child molesters in all professions. The issue is that the Catholic Church has done it's best to protect child molesting priests instead of addressing the problem. People have been excommunicated for less serious offences. How is it that a priest who rapes 30 children can get off with a transfer?
5. Gary C. Lindsey wasn't moved to a new school district. He moved out of state on his own to take up a teaching position where his background was unknown. You can criticize the Illinois school district for not doing their homework, but that's about it.
Posted by: Jose | July 8, 2008 1:28 AM
Kraut @ #69, you're right. It isn't child abuse when you're 29. In these here parts we call it rape. Thanks for bringing it to our attention.
Posted by: shane | July 8, 2008 1:29 AM
"I'm just saying that I've never heard or read about an atheist making the obvious connection that not only is sex abuse a problem in the Catholic Church but it is an even bigger problem in secularized public schools."
FYI, PZ is no above talking about sexual abuse in public schools:
"Colleen Leduc has an autistic child named Victoria who is enrolled in a public school. She recently got a terrifying phone call -- her daughter was being sexually abused. We parents know well the fear and worry a threat to our children can cause, and Leduc was receiving an urgent, frantic phone call from school officials telling her that her daughter was being victimized in the worst way."
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/06/the_consequences_of_the_erosio.php
Have a look.
Posted by: CalGeorge | July 8, 2008 1:30 AM
Stop sidetracking, someone answer me the question, please:
How can you assault a healthy - at the time apparently - 29 year old male, and do it twice without getting a shiner or a busted mouth before you do it the second time?
My take - the "assaultee" only found out later that there might some money be made with "role playing" the victim.
Posted by: kraut | July 8, 2008 1:32 AM
"Your own links undermine your arguments."
Jose, I think the amount of posts defending public schools so far has been assisting my argument. Including yours. Thanks!
Oh and you should read closer. The article clearly stated: "Most of the abuse never gets reported. Those cases reported often end with no action." Did you catch that?
Posted by: Ryan | July 8, 2008 1:33 AM
@Ryan
My point is that atheists should condemn both equally but don't.
how many times does it need to be said that the outrage here is over the Catholic Churches' cover-up? Child molestation is universally condemned here, the problem is the systematic cover-up that the Catholic Church does. If the schools were covering it up, and it was something commonplace then there would be equal condemnation. But if you keep missing the point of WHY we are condemning the church, you'll never understand why your argument is invalid.
Posted by: Kel | July 8, 2008 1:36 AM
If we're talking numbers though, it does seem as if public schools are much, much worse than the Catholic Church.
like I said, disingenuous, considering we are talking about the Church in THIS thread.
you keep seeming to think somehow that not condeming one instance of criminal behavior means that all criminal behavior should not be condemned, or we're hypocrites.
that is a disingenuous argument.
We see through you.
stop.
Posted by: Ichthyic | July 8, 2008 1:38 AM
Kraut @ #77. Answered @ #75. But it is called rape. Thanks.
Posted by: shane | July 8, 2008 1:39 AM
[quote]Kraut @ #69, you're right. It isn't child abuse when you're 29. In these here parts we call it rape. Thanks for bringing it to our attention.[/quote]
If you get raped - as an adult male - by another male, and you do not take action to prevent that from happening again,either by definite physical action or reporting to the police should this "aleged rape" be against your express wishes, I feel you should take yourself out of the gene pool voluntarily.
Its refreshing that the child abuse of the CC priesthood comes to light, but I find it simply vomit inducing that the victim of this alleged assault plays this same card.
Posted by: kraut | July 8, 2008 1:42 AM
CalGeorge:
Thanks for the link. At least I know of one atheist who mentioned it. Although, PZ seems to blame it on religion anyways: "This is what happens when a culture tells people that reason and evidence are optional, and faith is touted as a virtue." This is what I'm talking about. It can't even be mentioned without blaming religion.
What I'm really looking for is atheists who recognize that the sex abuse in public schools is worse than that of the Catholic Church. Both need to be condemned but both are not unfortunately.
Posted by: Ryan | July 8, 2008 1:43 AM
So is Ryan's point that if it happens in public schools it's ok for priests?
And is Kraut suggesting that if you're not a child you can't be sexually assaulted?
Sheeeeiiit.
Posted by: shane | July 8, 2008 1:44 AM
Jose, I think the amount of posts defending public schools so far has been assisting my argument. Including yours. Thanks!
That's a joke, right? Your argument is "A lot of people think I'm an Idiot, therefore I must be right."
OK,
You win. I concede to your superior logic. Be warned, anyone who questions Ryan. I'm on his side now.
Posted by: Jose | July 8, 2008 1:46 AM
"If the schools were covering it up, and it was something commonplace then there would be equal condemnation. But if you keep missing the point of WHY we are condemning the church, you'll never understand why your argument is invalid."
Kel,
The article I provided from the AP clearly stated: "Most of the abuse never gets reported. Those cases reported often end with no action." It does seem to be being covered up. That is the point. Read the article:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21392345/
Posted by: Ryan | July 8, 2008 1:48 AM
Most molestation occurs in the home, done by loved ones. Should be be critical of the family unit even more so than the catholic church? The point is and always has been that the CHURCH IS SYSTEMATICALLY COVERING UP SEXUAL ABUSE, not that the abuse is taking place. We know abuse occurs elsewhere, we speak out on it elsewhere. On this thread it's all about the COVER-UP.
Posted by: Kel | July 8, 2008 1:48 AM