Comments

  1. says

    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.

  2. Jose says

    Does he think that pretending he’s not sure if ejaculated paints him in a better light?

  3. says

    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.

  4. CalGeorge says

    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.

  5. says

    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.

  6. j says

    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.

  7. Holbach says

    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.

  8. J says

    “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…

  9. clinteas says

    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

  10. j says

    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!”

  11. Jose says

    Why is this site so anti-child molesting priest! Lets hear both sides of the arguement.

  12. Marius Vanderlubbe says

    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.

  13. John Phillips, FCD says

    I must admit, your “It’s traditional!” remark had me spewing tea out my nose.

  14. says

    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.

  15. TemHock says

    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.

  16. says

    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…

  17. Wowbagger says

    Edward Gordon wrote:

    This blog is ridiculous. It’s like some version of hell where there are nothing but God-haters and PZ Myers buttocks to kiss.

    Jealous?

  18. says

    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.

  19. Jose says

    That more like it, Edward Gordon! Finally someone who’s not afraid to challenge the anti-priest molestation cartel.

  20. Wowbagger says

    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.

  21. llewelly says

    I can’t leave until I’ve checked out whatever the heck the “dungeon” is, gay S&M no doubt.

    You’ll love it so much you’ll never leave.

  22. Wowbagger says

    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.

  23. says

    @Edward Gordon, #18

    This blog is ridiculous. It’s like some version of hell where there are nothing but God-haters and PZ Myers buttocks to kiss.

    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.

  24. Blind Squirrel FCD says

    So, Edward Gordon, why no url? Not that you will get any ad revenue from me with my ad blocker software on.

    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.

    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.

  25. says

    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.

  26. Jose says

    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.

  27. Ryan says

    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.

  28. Wowbagger says

    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.

  29. Leigh Shryock says

    @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.

  30. watercat says

    Temhock at #19
    Victim-blaming, clueless, rape apologist,faux controversy,
    Bingo!

  31. Jose says

    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.

  32. Ryan says

    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.

  33. Leigh Shryock says

    @Ryan: As this is an article about specific incidents, complaining that we’re not talking about another subject is rather silly, isn’t it?

  34. Wowbagger says

    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.

  35. says

    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.

  36. says

    The amount of sexual abuse that takes place in public schools is astounding and it is on the rise.

    Posted by: Ryan | July 8, 2008 12:05 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.

  37. says

    So it’s hypocritical for the Catholic Church but not for public schools?

    No, it’s not hypocritical. But that doesn’t mean that it’s not wrong.

    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.

  38. Ryan says

    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?

  39. Holbach says

    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.

  40. Jose says

    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.

  41. Leigh Shryock says

    Again, is it or is it not hypocrisy to denounce the Catholic Church but not denounce secularized public schools?

    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.

  42. Ryan says

    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.

  43. Wowbagger says

    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.

  44. Roger Scott says

    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.

  45. says

    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?

  46. Leigh Shryock says

    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?

  47. says

    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.

  48. Ryan says

    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.

  49. Roger Scott says

    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.

  50. John Phillips, FCD says

    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.

  51. says

    @Ryan, #56

    I never said that the public schools are covering them up.

    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.

  52. Pandora Neurospora says

    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.

  53. John Phillips, FCD says

    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.

  54. Ryan says

    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/

  55. Ryan says

    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/

  56. Wowbagger says

    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.

  57. says

    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.

  58. kraut says

    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.

  59. Autumn says

    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

  60. shane says

    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.

  61. ichthyic says

    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.

  62. Ryan says

    “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.

  63. Jose says

    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.

  64. shane says

    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.

  65. CalGeorge says

    “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.

  66. kraut says

    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.

  67. Ryan says

    “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?

  68. says

    @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.

  69. Ichthyic says

    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.

  70. kraut says

    [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.

  71. Ryan says

    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.

  72. shane says

    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.

  73. Jose says

    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.

  74. Ryan says

    “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/

  75. says

    Both need to be condemned but both are not unfortunately.

    MOLESTATION IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS IS BEING CONDEMNED!!! NO-ONE HERE IS DENYING THAT MOLESTATION HAPPENS IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS. JUST LIKE IT HAPPENS IN PRIVATE SCHOOLS AND ANYWHERE WHERE ADULTS HAVE RESPONSIBILITY OVER CHILDREN.

    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.

  76. Rick R says

    Ryan wrote- “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.”

    Ryan, how exactly is it ‘worse’? Numbers? Does quantity of abuse somehow transform it’s quality? Are there shades of ‘wrongness’ when it comes to child sexual abuse?

    I sense you’re a liar. Child sexual abuse is the last thing bothering you. What bothers you is that we won’t give the Catholic clergy the pass they so desperately desire.

    Fuck anyone who willfully harms a child. Fuck the clergy, fuck the public school teachers.

    And fuck you too.

  77. shane says

    Kraut, you are clearly clueless but according any statistics I can find certainly less than half of all rapes of adult females are reported. The incident of reporting of rape for adult males is significantly less than for females. So you can take you blame the victim attitude and smoke it.

  78. Jose says

    Ryan is right. All you atheists condemning the Catholic Church are idiots. You’re just mad that you were never made to feel “special” by a priest as a child. Stop being so close minded and get some therapy.

  79. shane says

    Jose, you’re right I was never made feel special by some of the priests when I was an alter boy. They were generally too pissed (drunk).

  80. says

    Even if some cases go unreported, doesn’t mean it’s being covered up. Or that even it’s a systemic practice. And even if it were covered up, that doesn’t mean that we should devote equal time to the church and public schools. maybe we should throw private schools in there too. And talk about the Hare Krishna camps where molestation ran rampant.

    The blog is a reaction to a particular news story. People are commenting on that particular news story. If you want people to give a comprehensive review of every single sexual molestation case and where it took place, you are at the wrong sight. It’s diffusing the issue by saying “don’t be so quick to condemn group A when group B does it too”. That cultural relativistic crap doesn’t fly.

    Is it wrong to talk about abortion clinic bombers without making reference to the American military blowing up hospitals? Is it wrong to condemn the extremists in one sect without showing the extremists in another? This was purely about the catholic church and it’s cover-up. If you want people to talk about schools covering up sexual abuse, then write a blog on that. PZ Myers’ post was not a comprehensive history of sexual abuse, it was reactionary to a single story. Of course it’s not going to cover anything. But prattling on here about how atheists never talk about molestation in public schools is a) misrepresenting atheists and b) missing the entire point of this blog post.

    Does it say anywhere in the blog post that molestation is caused by the church? No. Did it say anywhere that molestation isn’t happening in schools? No. It didn’t comment on those at all. You are just trying to make it out like atheists are using it to attack religion; and this is exactly the reason why Bill Maher was condemned for saying the same thing.

  81. says

    What Bill Maher said:

    BILL MAHER: Now I know what you’re thinking: “Bill, you shouldn’t be saying that the Catholic Church is no better than this creepy Texas cult.” For one thing, altar boys can’t even get pregnant. But really, what tripped up the little cult on the prairie was that they only abused hundreds of kids, not thousands, all over the world. Cults get raided, religions get parades. How does the Catholic Church get away with all of their buggery? Volume, volume, volume!
    If you have a few hundred followers, and you let some of them molest children, they call you a cult leader. If have a billion, they call you ‘Pope.’ It’s like, if you can’t pay your mortgage, you’re a deadbeat. But if you can’t pay a million mortgages, you’re BearStearns and we bail you out. And that is who the Catholic Church is: the BearStearns of organized pedophilia — too big, too fat. When the current pope was in his previous Vatican job as John Paul’s Dick Cheney, he wrote a letter instructing every Catholic bishop to keep the sex abuse of minors secret until the Statute of Limitations ran out. And that’s the Church’s attitude: ‘We’re here, we’re queer, get used to it,’ which is fine, far be it from me to criticize religion. But just remember one thing: if the Pope was — instead of a religious figure — merely the CEO of a nationwide chain of day care centers, where thousands of employees had been caught molesting kids and then covering it up, he’d be arrested faster than you can say ‘who wants to touch Mr. Wiggle?’

  82. Jose says

    Wow,
    Being a born again idiot is awesome. It’s so liberating to be on the side that doesn’t require thinking. Hail Satan! King of lies. Ryan and I have served you well.

  83. says

    Reading comprehension, folks. There are *two* cases in the article. One was the sexual assault on the named guy who was 29 at the time, so duh, of course that’s not child abuse. The other case was an anonymous nine year old. Nine years old=child, OK?

  84. kraut says

    “The incident of reporting of rape for adult males is significantly less than for females”

    any sane and healthy adult male that lets a rape by the same person happen twice is either a willing “victim” or a worthless member of the male persuasion.
    I can cmpletely see the point of said bishop to admit liability for the molestation of the 9 year old, but not admitting liability for the “assault” happening to the 29 year old.

    As I said – an adult male getting “raped” twice by a priest and doing nothing about it, does not deserve the honorarium “male” as to his gender. I assume that the “male” in question has taken the approbriate action and has abstained from procreating. The better for the gene pool.

    Yes, it is very fashionable and politically correct to play the victim card by initially having done nothing to stop the victimization – at least when it happened the second time doubts enter my mind as to the validity of the so called victims claim.

  85. Ichthyic says

    any sane and healthy adult male that lets a rape by the same person happen twice is either a willing “victim” or a worthless member of the male persuasion.

    well, there is the “sane and healthy” qualifier, I suppose.

    How many sane and healthy individuals do you suppose don’t report cases of repeated rape?

    How many sane and healthy individuals do you suppose don’t report cases of repeated domestic abuse?

    who, exactly, is the worthless one, the one being abused, who feels helpless to do anything about it, or the abuser, realizing they can do anything they want because they have put so much fear and doubt into their victims?

    are any involved at that point ‘sane and healthy’, do you suppose?

    http://healthvermont.gov/family/domestic_abuse/domestic_abuse.aspx#what

    Be aware of barriers the patient has in disclosing abuse.

    * Fear of threats or actions by the abuser.
    * Economic dependence upon the abuse.
    * Feelings of guilt or personal responsibility for the abuse.
    * Cultural, ethnic or religous background.
    * Non-recognition of an abusive situation due to a different definition of abuse. (e.g. “The injuries aren’t serious enough to matter.”)

    These issues apply equally well to issues of rape.

    I think you have much to learn about both rape, and other types of physical abuse.

    that site I linked to is an excellent place to start.

  86. shane says

    Kraut, you’re a goose. I can’t figure out why you’re intent on blaming the victim. You and Sheik Hilaly should get together and compare notes about uncovered meat and victim blaming and systematic abuse.

  87. Rey Fox says

    “I can’t figure out why you’re intent on blaming the victim. ”

    Because he’s a member of the Manly Man Club.

  88. ao9news says

    #93:
    I didn’t know whether to laugh or cry when I saw that on Real Time, one of Maher’s best New Rules that I can remember.

  89. andyo says

    Ryan,

    What also you must take into account is that we “atheists” don’t usually think alike or have the same attitudes. To me, for instance, what angers me is not so much the hipocrisy. The molestation itself angers me as much as any other case of molestation. What makes it worse and more worth noting is that the catholic church is in effect and unambiguously organized crime institution and it’s largely getting a free pass, despite the negative press. The Pope should be being investigated and maybe prosecuted, but that will never happen. The covering-up, the lies and the obstruction of investigators, the payoffs, even the demonizing of victims by other catholics is what stinks the most for me.

    And many of these things that the church gets away with are directly related to the virus of religion. Without it, who would be defending priests and demonizing the victims for no reason at all? Who would be giving the bishops and pope a free pass?

    And who in their right mind would leave their kids in the care of a total stranger with no qualifications whatsoever to take care of them, or even knowing their background, if not for stupid faith (as if there’s other kind) in that the priests are somehow better and wiser people just for being priests?

  90. kraut says

    As I have no respect for those who indulge in the idiocies of religion, I have no respect for those who are not willing to defend their personal integrity by any means available to them.

    Do not give me that crap about “victimization” or “manly” bullshit. If are defenseless through injury or sickness, I accept your inability to defend yourself. If you are a male, or female, able to defend yourself and do not do it to the utmost of your abilities, red in fang and claw, you deserve no respect – at least not by me.
    There is nobody out there looking after you but yourself, maybe your next of kin. To believe in the kindness of strangers – my arse.
    And the police are as criminal in their behaviour and attitude as the criminal itself – no help there

    To let it happen once – is a mistake, but excusable. To let it happen twice is either utter incompetence, idiocy or a willingness to suffer. The latter a sign what religion makes of you, and as such equally undeserving of any respect.

    If you are offended by my attitude – remember, you have no right not to be offended.

  91. Ichthyic says

    If are defenseless through injury or sickness, I accept your inability to defend yourself. If you are a male, or female, able to defend yourself and do not do it to the utmost of your abilities, red in fang and claw, you deserve no respect – at least not by me.

    congratulations on contributing to the horribly ignorant attitudes that have made domestic violence a hugely growing problem.

    that site I linked to was but one of hundreds that would have educated you as to the relevant psychology involved in abuse cases, but you can’t be bothered, right?

    seriously, slap yourself on the back, stud.

  92. Ichthyic says

    If you are offended by my attitude – remember, you have no right not to be offended.

    you’re a fucking moron.

    please feel free not to be offended.

    To let it happen once – is a mistake, but excusable.

    so if I drug you repeatedly, and you don’t recall what happened during the blackout, it’s your fault if I rape you again, right?

    nobody LETS rape happen to begin with, you sick fuck.

    and that’s aside from the relevant psychological issues I listed plainly for you in a previous post, which explain why someone might not report rape, let alone “let” it happen to them multiple times.

    In short:

    you have nothing to support your contentions but sheer ignorance.

    that don’t play well here, homey.

  93. Darwin's Minion says

    Kraut – shut the fuck up. I hope you get run over by a truck. It’s attitudes like yours that are one of the main reasons why victims of rape and abuse keep quiet about it. Because they fear, no, know that that the world is full of scumbags like you that will tell them that it’s their fault. And that’s the fucking last thing they need. More blame. More guilt. More feeling dirty, powerless, helpless. As if they’re not feeling that way already.

    But then again, what am I getting worked up over? It’s not as if you’re human, anyway. Human beings have empathy and compassion. Hell, animals have empathy and compassion. Which just goes to show that you’re pondscum.

  94. kraut says

    It is outright comical to read the conjectures (suddenly drugs are playing a role, I guess, when defenseless propositions are to be defended, drugs always are a handy tool, be it politics or rape by the clergy) and the qausi religious fervor with which the to me rather doubtful claims of a 29 year old “victim” of “childabuse” (stated as such in the heading of the thread) are being defended in the name of politically correctness and social workers sensitivities.

    And to top it off, we throw some, however far in this case removed from the topic domestic violence, in to crush the sceptic of said claims and the supporter of the correctness of the bishops decision. Not that I have any other sympathies with any bishop of any church.

    I propose a church of the “offended by doubters of adult male rape during consciousness” with the approbriate vestments and sacerdotal hierarchy.

    I still maintain, especially with some experience in willing anal intercourse with both sexes, that anal rape with an unwilling adult male is a task that is in my estimation – due to the mechanics involved – quite hard to achieve, if at all, and relies on at least some willingness of the participant. Is it in the face of such willingness correct to use the term rape, especially when the act perpetrated twice?

  95. kraut says

    “Kraut – shut the fuck up. I hope you get run over by a truck. It’s attitudes like yours that are one of the main reasons why victims of rape and abuse keep quiet about it.”

    Thanks for your loving concern, I find the responses of a so called sceptical crowd in the face of rather doubtful claims refreshing, do they so much remind me of responses from the religious of all colourations.
    I guess, the associated idiotic atheist here are very much the mirror of the religious idiots on the other side.

    I feel right at home.

  96. Ichthyic says

    And to top it off, we throw some, however far in this case removed from the topic domestic violence,

    yes, because the psychology involved with rape by a family priest is SO far removed from those surrounding domestic abuse.

    seriously, you’re a fucking dipstick.

    how did you manage to live this long being so incredibly fucking stupid?

    beyond my comprehension.

    I still maintain, especially with some experience in willing anal intercourse with both sexes

    I rather think that your anal experience more involves shoving your own head up your ass.

    *psst* that doesn’t count as intercourse, FYI

  97. Ichthyic says

    ah, I get it, “Kraut” was raped himself, and this is his way of dealing with it (denial).

    My apologies for not recognizing the standard psychological defense mechanisms sooner.

    You’re on the wrong board, chief.

    you should try this support group out:

    http://www.aftersilence.org/

    seriously, there aren’t enough psychologists hanging around here to help you.

  98. Darwin's Minion says

    Ichthyic – I think you’re on to something here. All this hypermasculine swaggering has to come from somewhere. Though becoming extra-tough and seemingly uncaring is also one of the standard defense mechanisms of those who were bullied.

    Also, Kraut, I sure hope I didn’t offend you with my wishes for your painful, bloody demise. Denial in 3…2…1…

  99. kraut says

    Interesting, all the conjectures, assumptions.
    Really guys, this is like a site by Intelligent Design supporters – just on a different topic.

    But lets do away with the frivolities.

    The thread started by claiming another cover up of child abuse by the CC.
    Reading the article however reveals that the child in question was 29 at the time of the incident
    He was a fully able adult – a teacher trainee of some rudimentary intelligence (I dare to presume)

    And that far from being covered up, there was actually a court case with the result of a rather symbolic fine.

    So anything the heading indicated is just – a lie?

    Is that the strategy those fighting against organized religion should apply – the same lies our opponents resort tro when the truth for defending ones position isn’t good enough or sufficient any more?

    This untruthfulness stated clearly by the heading got my dander up. To me, resorting to the lying tatctics and strategy of organized, especially evangelical religions, is something I deeply despise. You might have gathered from my reactions.

    But I thank you all for your deep concerns regarding my mental health, my sexual preferences, and past experiences. You have resorted nicely to the tactics applied by any believer of any religion who encounters those doubting his beliefs, and question the validity of assumptions – not even supported by closer reading of the article in question.

  100. clinteas says

    @ kraut,the Chuck Norris of anal sex :

    //If are defenseless through injury or sickness, I accept your inability to defend yourself. If you are a male, or female, able to defend yourself and do not do it to the utmost of your abilities, red in fang and claw, you deserve no respect – at least not by me.//

    I find it hard to believe anyone could be so blatantly ignorant to not realize that clergy is in a position of power and authority,and whether you are 29 or 9,you can be manipulated into almost anything from a position of authority and if you are gullible and brainwashed enough.

    And of course in your narrowmindedness and Rambo attitude you have chosen to ignore everything Ichthyic pointed you to in No 98,namely fear of your abuser,intimidation,dependance,cultural differences…..the various reasons for repeated and sustained abuse,but thats too differentiated a worldview for you isnt it !

  101. IAmMarauder says

    Do not give me that crap about “victimization” or “manly” bullshit. If are defenseless through injury or sickness, I accept your inability to defend yourself. If you are a male, or female, able to defend yourself and do not do it to the utmost of your abilities, red in fang and claw, you deserve no respect – at least not by me.

    Injury and sickness are not the only things that make one defenseless. And how do you know he wasn’t injured or sick?

    And he was 29? So what? I know a couple of healthy, uninjured 30-odd year olds that could be easily beaten up by a 12 year old. He might fight “it to the utmost of your abilities, red in fang and claw”, but in the end he ends up beaten.

    The guy was also at the mercy of someone in a superior position. It may not have been physically superior, but superior nonetheless. Who knows what threats were made? There is more to overpower someone than physical violence.

    I’ll echo Darwin’s Minion, but for a different reason: I hope you get hit by a truck. And I hope that a group of strangers sees it, and whilst one tends to your wounds the other calls for an ambulance. Then you can see the kindness of strangers first hand.

    Of course chances are it won’t make you believe in it, but that is only because I believe you truly are a world class fucktard!

    As for respect, you get none from me…

  102. Ichthyic says

    But lets do away with the frivolities.

    you’re leaving?

    But I thank you all for your deep concerns regarding my mental health, my sexual preferences, and past experiences

    hey, we’re just reflecting the tone you set.

    wait, you mean you were offended?

    seriously, you’ll need some lube to pull your head out, it’s so far wedged up in there. I don’t even think a crowbar will help at this point.

    This untruthfulness stated clearly by the heading got my dander up. To me, resorting to the lying tatctics and strategy of organized, especially evangelical religions, is something I deeply despise. You might have gathered from my reactions.

    to us, utilizing poorly constructed strawmen to try and make a point makes you a fucking moron, and more like the creobots than you evidently can possibly imagine.

    bye.

    and if you really are in denial, seriously, it won’t do you any good to stick around here to get whipped for your deliberate ignorance.

    you really are at the wrong place.

  103. Ragutis says

    Hey fucktard Kraut, have you ever done something unwillingly, been coerced or too afraid or ashamed to resist? Pressured in some way, blackmailed perhaps? On any given day I’d bet some officer in our military takes advantage of a soldier or cadet(male or female, I’m sure it happens to both). Now this is a leader, someone they’re supposed to trust, respect, obey. Can you not see the similarity? You can be raped without being tied down or incapacitated, you know. Whether in religion, or the military, the school or the home, authority figures have the psychological upper hand when taking advantage of those trained to obey and trust them. Why aren’t these soldiers breaking their superior’s neck? Why aren’t the football players and wrestlers beating the shit out of their coach? Why aren’t wives biting off hubby’s cock or kids kicking daddy in his pee-pee?

    Ichthyic gave you one source out of hundreds available for you to educate yourself, but you insist on sticking to your brutish and stupid misconceptions.

    Ryan, your stupid premise has been well-flayed already and it’s late so I’ll not say anything more than “When you’re in a hole, Step 1 is: Stop digging.” If you still haven’t gotten the point later, I’ll try to help, but you certainly appear to be being deliberately obtuse. Not much that I or anyone can do against willful ignorance.

  104. truth machine, OM says

    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?

    What part of

    However, documents obtained by the ABC’s Lateline show that on the same day he wrote to Mr Jones, Cardinal Pell wrote to a second victim – who was nine when Father Goodall abused him – to say he was satisfied with the truth of that man’s complaint.

    and


    Cardinal Pell, in his letter to the other victim, acknowledged that Father Goodall had also engaged in “inappropriate behaviour” with altar boys.

    and


    In his letter to the other victim, Cardinal Pell accepted that he had been attacked by Father Goodall. “After examining all the material, Mr Murray provided me with a report in which he recommended that the complaints of inappropriate behaviour with altar boys and of indecent assault of you when a young boy be found to be substantiated.”

    are you too fucking dumb to understand?

  105. SEF says

    The Catholic Church epitomises the sin of pride (and the vice of loyalty). They are so proud of their allegedly superior morality and their unmerited position of power and respect that they will actually be hideously immoral in trying to protect those false perceptions instead of acting to create/preserve any of the real thing they might have. This is such routine human behaviour that, although there’s also a (much rarer) virtuous version of pride*, the religion does the blunt instrument thing of simplistically warning against pride without explaining why – and then inevitably indulges in massive fail.

    * the type through which people drive themselves to always do better, will root out their own mistakes in public to get things fixed and to prevent others from repeating the mistake etc. It is vanishingly rare among humans though. So religion could be forgiven for ignoring it, if not for the fact that being explicitly aware of it and the contrast between the two might then make them less likely to fall for the “sinful” type of pride.

  106. Ichthyic says

    btw, one of the many reasons I noted Krauts protestations were nothing but poorly constructed strawmen, was that one of the very obvious things he apparently failed to notice in screeching about the “dishonesty” of the title of the thread, was the fact that the abuse included children other than the 29 year old as well, which kraut could have easily figured out if he could actually manage to click on a link:

    However, documents obtained by the ABC’s Lateline show that on the same day he wrote to Mr Jones[the 29 year old victim], Cardinal Pell wrote to a second victim – who was nine when Father Goodall abused him – to say he was satisfied with the truth of that man’s complaint.

    so, in constructing his wafer-thin strawman, kraut apparently missed both the fact that it’s the coverup that was key, as well as the fact that there were indeed, even under his “thinking” (if that’s what to properly term it), YOUNG children being raped or abused as well.

    so, while running around with his head firmly wedged up his ass:

    http://home.earthlink.net/~tjneal/SPHINCRONYS2.jpg

    he managed to accomplish nothing but confirming for us that he knows nothing about rape, or abuse, and had no real point whatsoever.

    again, that stud should really give himself a good pat on the butt…

    er, I mean neck?

  107. Ichthyic says

    damnit, TM beat me to it.

    not that it wasn’t obvious to everyone but kraut anyway.

  108. truth machine, OM says

    Cath the Canberra Cook got there first in #95, but people seem to have missed it.

  109. truth machine, OM says

    And in #96 kraut acknowledges that a 9 year old was involved, so in addition to being stupid and incredibly vile, he’s thoroughly dishonest in his complaints about the title and references to child abuse.

  110. Ichthyic says

    Cath the Canberra Cook got there first in #95, but people seem to have missed it.

    yup.

    time for bed.

  111. Andreas Johansson says

    It’s hilarious. I mean, atheism leads to obesity?

    Apparently, and epidemological study found that Christianity is a risk factor for obesity. (Source: the newspaper)

  112. wobert says

    Edward #18 Atleast PZ has never demanded that readers of this blog kiss his buttocks, unlike the Pope, who demands millions the world over kiss his ring.

  113. Sauceress says

    I wonder how many of the child molestering clergy who were simply transferred to parishes overseas, following their “indiscretions* (as has been termed by catlick damage control) will be attending WYD?

  114. Sauceress says

    #112 kraut slimed:

    The thread started by claiming another cover up of child abuse by the CC. And that far from being covered up, there was actually a court case with the result of a rather symbolic fine. So anything the heading indicated is just – a lie?

    Listen you sleazy, fucking low life apologist for clergy child molesters…are you blind?
    Pell lied big time.
    He got caught in his cover up big time!

    “George Pell, concealed details of a priest’s history of sexual abuse from a victim seeking justice.
    Cardinal Pell, the Archbishop of Sydney, wrote to the victim, Anthony Jones, on February 14, 2003, claiming his complaint of sexual assault could not be substantiated because an investigator had found that no other victims had come forward and that the priest, Father Terence Goodall, had denied the allegations.

    However, documents obtained by the ABC’s Lateline show that on the same day he wrote to Mr Jones, Cardinal Pell wrote to a second victim – who was nine when Father Goodall abused him – to say he was satisfied with the truth of that man’s complaint.”

    Just think…
    Sex Offenders @ World Youth Day WYD08

  115. says

    Thanks, folks. Just call me Cath, anyway. I only use the blog title when I comment anywhere as a minor help to uniqueness, and to help my googleability. It’s not exactly relevant here, I know.

  116. Stephenk says

    Similar to Shane’s story at #71. Geoffrey Robinson (a Catholic Bishop) was on the TV tonight. He has been a critic of the Catholic church and its entrenched behaviours
    http://www.eurekastreet.com.au/article.aspx?aeid=3413
    and now finds himself somewhat on the outer for his views.

    Meanwhile, Pell is saying it was a mistake in his wording and he meant something different to what he wrote
    BUT the ABC is now advising that they have documents that show there was a known third victim.
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/07/08/2298183.htm

    Stephenk

  117. Vidar says

    Why are the authorities not putting some pressure on the catholic church to stop sheltering their pedophilic members? Surely any priest that conducts himself in a manner unfitting his position should be excommunicated post haste, and not moved to a new pasture where he can continue his transgressions? Does the catholic church not see child molestation as a sin worthy of hell?

  118. says

    Damn, everybody beat me to it…

    Jesus Quintana: You said it, man. Nobody fucks with the Jesus.

    Walter Sobchak: Eight(nine)-year-olds, Dude.

    The Big Lebowski

  119. Nick Gotts says

    Maybe if things get too hot for Pell in Australia, Ratfinger will move him to another province, where he can go on lying to cover up for sexual abusers. Or he’ll go to ground in the Vatican, as Marcinkus did.

  120. Dave says

    Ryan – please just shut the fuck up.

    If I were condemning child abuse by the Catholic church, would I identify myself as an atheist when I do so? Quite likely, because of the “we’re so moral and nice” façade erected by the church – pointing out their hypocrisy is a good thing to do.

    If I were condemning child abuse in public schools, would I identify myself as an atheist? No. Why would I? It’s irrelevant and mentioning it makes as much sense as saying, “I don’t collect stamps, and I want to say how much I condemn child abuse in public schools.”

  121. Lithium says

    Hey, I’m new and I’m young so there’s my excuses. Anyway.

    I think some people on this site (PZ included) can be a little hot headed.

    Let me explain. I take it most of you are atheists of one flavor or another. As an atheist you have undoubtedly reached your worldview due to an appreciation of evidence, rational discussion, and logical argument.

    Is it not a little ironic that you would be so quick to flame Pell when so little evidence has been brought against him?

    From reading the article, all I can see is that there is SOME evidence that MAY indicate he has covered up the sexual abuse of a child by a priest.

    At this point, the only rational step that can be taken, in my opinion, is to launch a police investigation to see if there is any more substantial evidence to support the allegations.

    If there is, he should be brought before the courts, and if found guilty of covering up the sexual abuse of a child then he should be dealt with like any other criminal, and then we can get on these boards and flame him to our hearts content.

    I just think this hasty “believer bashing” ruins the rationaler-than-thou image that atheists/secularists/whatever should be trying to maintain.

  122. Dave says

    Ryan said:

    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.

    First – in schools and elsewhere – if abuse is never reported, how does anyone know it’s happening? Why does anyone even suspect it’s happening?

    Second – if it’s not reported in the first place, how do you expect anyone to take action on instances of abuse they know nothing about?

    Third – where abuse is reported but no action taken, how often is that due to there being no evidence of the abuse? Should we throw someone out of their job because of an unsubstantiated allegation? Bear in mind that malicious allegations can be and have been made against unpopular teachers.

    A mindless crusade is not what’s called for here.

  123. Torbjörn Larsson, OM says

    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 reacted to that too. Buggery? Charged? How quaint^2!

    Can’t say Australia makes a good impression.

    How does the Catholic Church get away with all of their buggery? Volume, volume, volume!

    If you have a few hundred followers, and you let some of them molest children, they call you a cult leader. If have a billion, they call you ‘Pope.’ [Bill Maher]

    Brilliant!

    Surely any priest that conducts himself in a manner unfitting his position should be excommunicated post haste, and not moved to a new pasture where he can continue his transgressions?

    That may depend to some degree on the reasons behind the phenomena of churches.

    If it is for priests to live well on the bloodied backs of the congregation, it all makes sense to me…

  124. says

    To #134: sorry but I think you’re being a little naive about this. I agree with you that he should be brought before the courts etc. etc. etc. and in an ideal world, that’s what would happen, but let’s face it: the Catholic Church has SO much money and SO much influence, that it rarely, if ever, happens. They almost always weasel their way out of it, and that’s precisely why people here are “believer bashing”… we’re all sick of how these absolute bastards get away with it, keep ON getting away with it, and at the same time, carry on as if their shit doesn’t stink.

    Money talks. It’s one thing they’re not short of. If one of them does indeed get busted, and has to pay for their crime, it’s a fluke.

    I think they deserve all the “believer bashing” they can get – they’ve EARNED IT.

  125. Nick Gotts says

    ruins the rationaler-than-thou image that atheists/secularists/whatever should be trying to maintain.

    A common error – rationality and passion are quite compatible.

  126. Torbjörn Larsson, OM says

    From reading the article, all I can see is that there is SOME evidence that MAY indicate he has covered up the sexual abuse of a child by a priest.

    You need to read more. Say the post, comments here, and similar reports of the same behavior of homosexual rapes and church cover-ups repeated through the years, and suspected to continue because of, well, the tendency for cover-up.

    We are discussing a pattern here, confirmed by the post’s description of rape and the victim’s feelings of again being raped by a church official, not so much the particular case of whether there was a cover-up or not. “It’s traditional!”

  127. Matt Penfold says

    Lithium,

    There is no evidence that what Pell did in lying was illegal. There have been cases where the hierarchy within the Catholic church have been aware that priests have committed sex acts on minors and have simply moved the priest in question. It does not appear that is the case here. What happened here is Pell gave contradictory information to two people claiming to have been abused by a priest. To one he admitted that the priest had sexually assualted a child, in the other he told the person there were no other claims of sexual assault made against the preist. Since he was neither under oath, or providing a statement to the police it is unlikely he commited a crime is deliberatly misleading people. However what he did was both immoral and highly unethical and I cannot understand why you think that it not worthy of condemnation.

  128. says

    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.

    Two assertions you have offered no support for.

    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.

    Except it isn’t an even bigger problem in public schools, because public schools do not have a policy of covering it up like the Catholic church does.

    I never hear them tackling the ever growing issue of sexual abuse in public schools.

    Posted by: Ryan | July 8, 2008 1:03 AM

    Except it isn’t an “ever growing issue.”

  129. anon says

    From http://www.news.com.au, via Bruce Schneier:

    “The Rail Tram and Bus Union (RTBU) said today it was planning a 24-hour strike by rail workers on July 17, the busiest day of the Catholic event.”

    Sometimes a transit strike can be a good thing…

  130. Ktesibios says

    Umm, Matt… unless you happen to be well-versed in Australian law you probably shouldn’t be speculating on whether or not the Bishop committed a crime.

    In at least some jurisdictions (quite a few in the USA) anyone who had the knowledge of credible evidence of abuse that the bish did is legally obligated to report it to the relevant authorities (vide the case where the allegation came from some idiot “psychic”) and commits an offense by failing to do so. Whetheris is the case in Oz I know no, nor, I suspect, do you.

    BTW, if Ratzi did send a letter to all the bishes instructing them to conceal evidence of abuse until the statute of limitations had run out, he almost certainly committed a crime, at least under US law. Not that it would have worked- in most place the statute of limitations starts ticking at the time the crime is discovered, not when it is committed.

  131. Matt Penfold says

    Ktesibios,

    Australian law does not differ much from English law, which I am reasonably well versed in. It is an offence in English law to withold evidence of a crime from the Police.

    The issue discussed in the article is NOT whether Pell failed to inform the authorities, but whether he lied in a letter to an alleged victim in saying no one else had complained about the priest. I note you fail to address that issue directly but can only assume you think that is a crime under Australian law. Unless and until you support that assertion by either citing the common law precedent or the relavent statue I contend you are simply wrong. If you fail to support the claim, you will be admitting your error.

  132. Matt Penfold says

    Ktesibios,

    You also failed to note than in my post I explicitly stated I was NOT addressing the issue of church hierarchy covering up child abuse. Somehow that part of my post must have escaped your attention. You really did not do very well in reading what I said did you ? Your entire objection is based upon an issue I stated I was not addressing. If I did not know better I would suspect malice on your part.

  133. Patricia says

    Kraut you are an idiot. I can fight red fanged with all of my physical might and I will still get raped or beaten to death by Joe Blow any day of the week he chooses to cut me out from the herd. Congratulations on being at the top of the brute chain by the way.

  134. Midnight Rambler says

    Somewhat OT, but in a story linked to in the sidebar of the news article (about a dispute over a naked but non-sexual picture of a six year old girl, who is now older and says she’s offended by other peoples’ offense) ends with:

    Ms Tankard Reist said it was hard to talk about art restoring dignity when another image in the magazine showed a woman being given oral sex by an octopus.

    Sounds like your kind of mag, PZ!

  135. Nick Gotts says

    Patricia,

    I think Kraut’s only talking about men who get raped. As long as you hadn’t worn a short skirt/looked like a feminist/had a drink with the rapist/looked him in the eyes as you passed/answered him back/… – he wouldn’t blame you. Or not much, anyway. So long as you could prove you hadn’t enjoyed it.

  136. Patricia says

    #18- Edward Gordon – Piss off! No one is here to kiss PZ’s ass. I will however, volunteer to kiss your ass the minute you trot out God.
    Oh what the hell, I’m in a good mood today – trot out father, son or holy ghost and I’ll kiss your ass. Come on Eddie boy!

  137. Tulse says

    the magazine showed a woman being given oral sex by an octopus.

    I wouldn’t think a beak would be suited to that.

  138. tsg says

    I’m not Catholic so I’ve got nothing to defend here

    So, if you were Catholic, you would defend priests molesting children and the Church covering it up?

    but it’s interesting

    Weasel words. What you mean is “I don’t like it” but are too chicken-shit to say anything anyone can hold you to.

    that many atheists

    I find it “interesting” how some people are so quick to complain about others condemning an entire group of people for the actions of a few and then do the very same thing themselves. (See how the weasel words work? I didn’t actually accuse you of anything while making the implication clear so I can back out of it very easily if challenged.)

    here are ready to denounce the Catholic Church and shut it down because of this heinous incident

    and oft repeated, let’s not forget. Despite your implication otherwise, this isn’t the first time it’s happened. I can almost see where you backspaced over “isolated”.

    but never do I hear atheists crying out for reform in the secularized public schools.

    Do you normally ask people who are crying out for reform in public schools (providing, of course, any is actually needed since you haven’t actually supported this assertion) what their religious affiliations are? Or is there just nobody crying out and you just decided to single out atheists for your blather?

    I find it “interesting” that morons are ready to denounce the atheists, regardless if they actually are, who denounce the Catholic Church for incidents which the morons themselves admit are heinous but never do I hear them crying out for something to be done about the number of unpaired dress socks sitting in the drawers of America.

    Really.

  139. Longtime Lurker says

    Wow, Ryan was a grade-A conservatroll, using terms like “secularized public schools”, trotting out links to Newsmax and WorldNetDaily. Of course, without statistics, his arguments against public schools are crap. Of course, if both religious schools and public schools are hotbeds of pedophilia, then the logical way to protect your children is homeschooling…

    Of course, then there’s always the danger of “Bad Touch Uncle”.

    Kraut, I will never act up in a Cinnabon, knowing that you are on duty as a Mall Ninja. Seriously, you are unhinged.