Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Anti-gay Vatican plays victim card, wants tolerance for homophobia
National Examiner ^ | March 24th, 2011 | Michael Stone

Posted on 03/28/2011 3:09:36 PM PDT by presidio9

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-77 next last
Apparently Michael is having difficulty with the fact that the Vatican's opinion's only apply to those who chose to be Catholic. Either that or his own homosexual self-loathing inspired this article.
1 posted on 03/28/2011 3:09:40 PM PDT by presidio9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: presidio9

2 posted on 03/28/2011 3:20:40 PM PDT by BenLurkin (This post is not a statement of fact. It is merely a personal opinion -- or humor -- or both)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

homoPhiles on the march!


3 posted on 03/28/2011 3:22:10 PM PDT by Darteaus94025
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

I like the Catholics stand on Homosexuals and Pedophilia, Now if they would place actions where their words are and dump Homosexual and Pedophile Priests we would be in complete agreement.


4 posted on 03/28/2011 3:24:47 PM PDT by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Darteaus94025

What part of “unnatural” and “disorderd” do they not get?


5 posted on 03/28/2011 3:25:25 PM PDT by caldera599
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

All any journalist has to do is a simple search on official Church documents, like the following, and then read, in order to get the Vatican’s stance on any of these matters.

On the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons
Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
October 1, 1986


6 posted on 03/28/2011 3:26:06 PM PDT by stanne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
Where does the Islamist Human Rights Council stand on freedom of religion in muslim ruled nations? Such as the Saudi government seizing and burning Christian Bibles? Death penalty for any non-muslims who'd dare enter the segregated cities of Mecca and Medina?

Some "human rights" council.

7 posted on 03/28/2011 3:26:19 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (The biggest waste of brainpower is to want to change something that's not changeable. -Albert Brooks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

“...for the world to tolerate bigotry and intolerance towards the gay and lesbian community.”

Since when is a phobia bigotry? Intolerance, maybe, but not bigotry. If I have claustrophobia, I’m intolerant of closed places. If I have agoraphobia, I’m intolerant of open spaces. But bigotry? No.

I think the term “homophobia” as applied by those who oppose it is a bastardization of the concept of phobias and should not be used, but if they want to use it then they should treat it like other phobias.


8 posted on 03/28/2011 3:27:14 PM PDT by KrisKrinkle (Blessed be those who know the depth and breadth of their ignorance. Cursed be those who don't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

The United Nations should do more to rid itself of perverts who exploit woman and children for sexual slavery.

THOSE are human rights being wronged.


9 posted on 03/28/2011 3:27:57 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (The biggest waste of brainpower is to want to change something that's not changeable. -Albert Brooks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

no barf alert?


10 posted on 03/28/2011 3:28:13 PM PDT by MNDude (so that's what they meant by Carter's second term)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Love the lib use of the “phobia” appendage.

IMHO, I’m not phobic if I’m repulsed by the thought of fudge packing.

(Doesn’t stop me from knowing and liking homosexuals...but it’s still gross. Period.)


11 posted on 03/28/2011 3:29:39 PM PDT by Da Coyote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

I’d think a number of religious groups would oppose the UN resolution inasmuch as it encroaches on that religion’s right to enforce standards of conduct on its adherents in order to remain in good standing. Where Are The Moose? These are about the only ones that answer homosexual relations with violence today. One would think this would bring about a brouhaha over Islam, but no! Instead churches, which are much laxer and forgiving, are being drubbed on.


12 posted on 03/28/2011 3:31:36 PM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Hawk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Da Coyote

When government constructs like the United Nations seeks to redefine what IS and IS NOT a sin, they are pushing their OWN religious view.

Screw the United Nations. They don’t speak for ME or my religious traditions that have lasted for THOUSANDS of years.


13 posted on 03/28/2011 3:32:52 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (The biggest waste of brainpower is to want to change something that's not changeable. -Albert Brooks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: presidio9; 185JHP; AFA-Michigan; Abathar; Agitate; Albion Wilde; AliVeritas; Antoninus; ...
Homosexual Agenda Ping

Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda ping list.

Be sure to click the FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search link for a list of all related articles. We don't ping you to all related articles so be sure to click the previous link to see the latest articles.

Add keywords homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list.

In checking out the author of this piece it says: Michael Stone is a freethinker and freelance writer residing in beautiful Portland, Oregon. As the National Humanist Examiner, Michael's concern is the place where politics and religion intersect. The task is to promote civil rights and the separation of church and state; to explore and expose religious bigotry, oppression and discrimination; to promote reason and eschew superstition and dogma. You can contact Michael at mstonemat@gmail.com.

In other words Mr Stone believes that the only valid opinion is his. Too bad he's wrong.

14 posted on 03/28/2011 3:33:59 PM PDT by DJ MacWoW (America! The wolves are at your door! How will you answer the knock?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Venturer

To be fair, the mop-up has been underway for years now.


15 posted on 03/28/2011 3:34:30 PM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Hawk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: a fool in paradise

I want to see the U.N. take the Moose head on, then I’ll know they’re SERIOUS.


16 posted on 03/28/2011 3:36:14 PM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Hawk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

What do they have to complain about, the Holy Roman Catholic Church should be prosecuted in the RICO statues.


17 posted on 03/28/2011 3:37:21 PM PDT by burroak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: burroak

On behalf of sodomites?


18 posted on 03/28/2011 3:39:27 PM PDT by DJ MacWoW (America! The wolves are at your door! How will you answer the knock?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
Michael Stone is a freethinker and freelance writer residing in beautiful Portland, Oregon. As the National Humanist Examiner, Michael's concern is the place where politics and religion intersect. The task is to promote civil rights and the separation of church and state; to explore and expose religious bigotry, oppression and discrimination; to promote reason and eschew superstition and dogma.

"As the National Humanist Examiner. . ."

Is that an elected or appointed (or self-anointed) position? Whichever, its bearer certainly doesn't lack for pompous, solipsistic self-aggrandizement, does he?

19 posted on 03/28/2011 3:43:22 PM PDT by rhema ("Break the conventions; keep the commandments." -- G. K. Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rhema

The pope of unbelief? Surely it meant to say “At” rather than “As” but it could be a Freudian slip.


20 posted on 03/28/2011 3:56:35 PM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Hawk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Are these people stupid? What is all this hooker and pimp talk from the left? The Vatican helps prostitutes and gays and displays affection to gays for condemning this perverted satan and animalistic baiting human rights charter glorifying sex abuse covered up by drugs, misleading emotions, body pleasure and a biscuit.


21 posted on 03/28/2011 4:01:22 PM PDT by JudgemAll (Democrates Fed. job-security Whorocracy & hate:hypocrites must be gay like us or be tested/crucified)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Da Coyote

Sam Kinison years ago was targeted by gays for his simple (yet graphic) routine about what they actually do. It really put things in perspective, especially when they called him sick for being “anti-gay.”


22 posted on 03/28/2011 4:11:16 PM PDT by scott7278 (and"...I have not changed Congress and how it operates the way I would have liked..." - BHO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: presidio9; caldera599; KrisKrinkle; DJ MacWoW

The Catholic Church in its teachings follows reasonable scholarship,concluding Christian faith cannot advocate homosexual relationship or marriage. The entire Bible, in speaking of the character, identity, and purpose of God, continuously addresses the issue of homosexual behavior. The scriptures say that in addition to creating all things, God created a single institution, which was marriage between a man and woman as the earthy manifestation of the oneness of relationship He seeks with all human beings. Any arguments from the scriptures including the catechism must move forward from that foundation.

Throughout the Bible He is spoken of as masculine, and all humans become feminine in relation to Him; become the Bride of Christ. To restore relationship lost in Eden, God sent Christ to die for all human sins, but people must repent of, reject all their sins. To pursue sexual sin including fornication, adultery, or homosexual behavior is to reject His identity and His character, and therefore repudiate His gift of salvation enabling relationship with Him.

In Him absolute righteousness and absolute love achieves perfect justice. The scriptures provide no prescription or no equivalent of a legal “safe haven” for this issue. Humans are left with a moral paradox requiring them to come before Him in faith. His solution compromises neither His righteousness, nor His unconditional love in guiding each person who lives in a fallen world, and struggles with aspects of a fallen nature which may include falling into a trap of homosexual behavior.

Others may construct apologetics for homosexual relationship or marriage by using comforting social justice homilies to weave together selected Old and New Testament scriptures, but these are intellectually flawed approaches. Jesus’ teachings are prophecies about life based on relationship in Him, and not prescriptions of behavior standards to gain admittance to His Kingdom of Heaven. In advocating homosexual relationships, Christian leaders must abandon sound scholarship to fabricate a god of their own design. The result is comforting, popular, and easily controlled.

C. S. Lewis knew that the Christian God was not a tame lion. The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob remains timeless, all knowing, all powerful, terrible, unconditionally loving, and awaits humanity’s plea to Him.


23 posted on 03/28/2011 4:12:59 PM PDT by Retain Mike
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: burroak

Sodomites were the problem.


24 posted on 03/28/2011 4:21:04 PM PDT by pbear8 (the Lord is my light and my salvation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Venturer
OK, the rules are:

This whole shameful, inexcusable, gut-wrenching abuse crisis has revealed two "links" concerning the Church: the "strong link" here is doctrine, which is excellent; the "weak link" has been discipline, or in other words, enforcement, which in many places ha been disgustingly lax. But that's turned around under Benedict XVI: he has made it his priority, and that has made a world of difference. And it's about time. Thank God.

Good article here (Link), followed by some very penetrating comments. It may be of interest to you.

25 posted on 03/28/2011 4:49:00 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (The Holy Catholic Church: the more Catholic it is, the more Holy it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Venturer

They started dumping them when they had to shell out millions; now it is reason to be barred from the seminary. Took a lot of money lost to motivate them, but I think that little lesson in tolerance is over. The days are gone when anyone is going to cover up for a freaky priest; costs just too much, and some of these officials must know how close they themselves came to being charged as accessories.


26 posted on 03/28/2011 5:06:21 PM PDT by kearnyirish2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Hmm... Homophobe = victim = government grant. I sense a business opportunity here.


27 posted on 03/28/2011 5:08:41 PM PDT by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: a fool in paradise

The countries that oppose the liberal/progressive agenda are the ones populating the world, while the decadent West recedes into the shadows with their diminishing birthrates. Unfortunately for Western libs, the pets they have instead of children can’t be indoctrinated in the New Way...


28 posted on 03/28/2011 5:09:02 PM PDT by kearnyirish2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck

Some African countries that also have Christians and animists are very “intolerant”; the Anglican bishops in West Africa were furious about the promotion of that “gay bishop” (Robinson?), and many left the larger body in protest. When the Western churches threatened to withhold funds from their African brethren, most of them didn’t bat an eye and walked out. One of their bishops publicly proclaimed that the episode demonstrated that Satan was alive & well in the Anglican union.


29 posted on 03/28/2011 5:13:06 PM PDT by kearnyirish2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

No.

The whole structure of the Church is filled with the enablers or sex offenders who have assulted the most vulnerable among us.


30 posted on 03/28/2011 5:15:27 PM PDT by burroak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: burroak

Not everyone is guilty and the Catholic Church is one of the few standing up to the homosexual agenda. And I’m not Catholic.


31 posted on 03/28/2011 5:30:28 PM PDT by DJ MacWoW (America! The wolves are at your door! How will you answer the knock?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Sodomy nazis invented the word “homophobe” to disparage and prevent rational thinking on same-sex attraction disorder.

What sodomites really want in our society is affirmation—enthusiastic endorsement—and they don’t care if it comes at the point of a gun. There is a reason that they seem compelled to broadcast their practice of sodomy to the entire world, with stickers, flags, marches, indoctrination of children, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. It’s not about rights: that’s just boob-bait for liberal bubbas. What they really want is for every single human being to applaud, pat them on the back, and tell them how strong and great they are for being sodomites, whenever and wherever they prance in and commence to swan about. They want to thrust their perversion into the face of each individual resident of planet Earth, and be met with nothing but compliments and homage. Not even that will make them happy, though, as they’ll still have to deal with their awareness of the disordered nature of their behavior.


32 posted on 03/28/2011 5:55:09 PM PDT by dsc (Any attempt to move a government to the left is a crime against humanity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Venturer; HiTech RedNeck; Mrs. Don-o; kearnyirish2
I like the Catholics stand on Homosexuals and Pedophilia, Now if they would place actions where their words are and dump Homosexual and Pedophile Priests we would be in complete agreement.

A good refresher is always helpful:

No need to differentiate between "homosexual" and "pedophile" priests, as they are virtually always one in the same. The media never wants you to know that overwhelming majority of complaints against Catholic priests were based on "consensual" relationships between those priests and gay teens who later found out from lawyers and people who played lawyers on TV that the money store was officially open. Not that statutory rape is excusable, but hardly the same as honest to goodness pedophilia. Sad, really, because a lot of that money that went to pay off those fag teenagers who had second thoughts would have gone to people who really needed it. The Catholic Church is the largest charitable organization on the planet. Sad also, because the idea of a "pedophile priest" is basically a fallacy. For all intents and purposes, none of the "victims" were little boys (or little girls for that matter). A Catholic priest is actually less likely to sexually abuse a minor than the male population in general. And pedophilia accusations are generally less common among among the Catholic clergy than among the clergy of just about any other religion you can name? Why? Easy: There is significantly more accountability and oversight within the Catholic clergy than in the other major (and minor) religions. That's the point of a hierarchy in the first place.

So where did this stereoype come from? Partially from the liberal media: The Catholic Church is, of course the world's greatest advocates of the pro-life, pro-family, anti-homosexual, pro- private charity, and pro-decency initiatives. Liberals hate that. Also, Catholicism being the nation's (and the world's) top religious denomination, there is a larger sample of priests to choose from, and a story makes a greater impact when it comes from there. Finally, as evidenced on FR, there is still plenty of anti-Catholic bigotry to go around in this world. A perfect example is a thread like this. A story written by homosexual criticizing the Church, always attracts a few jackasses who need to take his side and find another irrelevant fault to pile on.

The MSM loves to attack priests for something they are statistically no more guilty of than anyone else. Kids are actually in far greater danger in any number of situations, so why doesn't someone try to hijack every thread about coaches, or karate teachers, or scout leaders, or camp counselors, or day care providers, or rabbis, or ministers, or public school teacers. Shouldn't have to think too hard. You already know the answer.

33 posted on 03/28/2011 9:55:57 PM PDT by presidio9 (Islam is as Islam does)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: burroak
What do they have to complain about, the Holy Roman Catholic Church should be prosecuted in the RICO statues.

And what about your own religion (as Christ would certainly say if he were on this trhread)?

34 posted on 03/28/2011 9:58:05 PM PDT by presidio9 (Islam is as Islam does)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

The number of convicted priests the amounts of money spent to settle claims, the bankruptcy threats of dioceses and the institutional cover ups by relocating priests are overwhelming evidence of RICO violations.

Don’t go for the head fake. Look at what they are doing not what they are saying.


35 posted on 03/28/2011 10:00:04 PM PDT by burroak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Christ had not trouble with driving out the money changers from the temple; I’m sure he would have no trouble taking aggressive action to the perverts that institutionally abuse those whom he said, “Suffer the little children and bring them unto me.”

Do your home work an the concept of “Turn the Other Cheek” it’s not what you think.

God, and by extension, Christ can be angered. They are just slow to anger.


36 posted on 03/28/2011 10:06:12 PM PDT by burroak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: burroak
“Suffer the little children and bring them unto me.”

Clearly you either do not understand the nature of the problem itself, or you are being intentially liberal with your metaphor. Either one disqualifies you as an imparial critic.

And the first thing Christ would tell you would be to fix the problem in your own house before worrying about what goes on in other houses.

Catholicism does not presume to be perfect. Identify your own perfect faith and I'll look into it.

37 posted on 03/28/2011 10:13:51 PM PDT by presidio9 (Islam is as Islam does)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Just gotta say that it seems like you’re baiting the trolls by posting this crap. I mean, seriously. A homosexual activist from Portland, Oregon in “The National Examiner??? At least the comments on this thread are better reasoned than the original article.


38 posted on 03/28/2011 11:28:11 PM PDT by absalom01 (You should do your duty in all things. You can never do more, you should never wish to do less.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: kearnyirish2
Took a lot of money lost to motivate them, but I think that little lesson in tolerance is over.

I think they had a deeper problem with a seminary cabal similar to those organized by gay men in other churches. The gays succeeded in rolling the Western Anglicans. (IMHO they used female ordination both as a stalking-horse and as a strategic ploy: I'll scratch your back if you'll scratch mine, and together we'll mug the squares totally.)

s The homosexual Anglicans still have to deal with the Imperials -- Church of India, Anglicans in Africa and elsewhere who refuse to drink the Kool-Aid.

The Catholic Rota is on the job now after taking four or five years to realize the depth of the problem.

The Lutherans, Methodists, and Presbyterians are very, very close to getting rolled, if they haven't been already. This conspiracy has been underway since the mid-60's.

My estimate of the situation, anyway.

39 posted on 03/29/2011 12:46:44 AM PDT by lentulusgracchus (Concealed carry is a pro-life position.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: KrisKrinkle
Since when is a phobia bigotry?

Gays abuse "phobia" and "phobe" deliberately as a propaganda technique called "jamming", trying to make righteous, honest people feel bad about themselves not on merit but out of direct, hostile malice aimed at shutting them up and shaming their honesty, dishonestly.

It's pure evil. Pay them no mind, except to contradict them -- with a bullhorn, if necessary.

40 posted on 03/29/2011 12:52:24 AM PDT by lentulusgracchus (Concealed carry is a pro-life position.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Many good points; the homosexual priests set up the Church as an easy target for detractors. The consensual side of many of these relationships has consistently been ignored by the media; I have no problem with ignoring that for a minor, but here in NJ we had a 53 year-old man claim he had been abused 20 years before...at the tender age of 33. The media reporting the story felt no need to question or analyze this bizarre claim.

As long as the Church was acting in a similar manner to the civil authorities in terms of treatment and return to work, it is difficult to attack them; later actions (when governments started “civilly committing” such predators - imprisoning them beyond their sentences due to their own admissions that it would happen again) were unexcusable. The number of teachers in the NYC public schools involved with these crimes was incredible, as exposed by the Catholic League in demonstrating how the Church alone was being targeted.

Some people had valid reasons to attack the Church; others saw it as a useful battering ram. Groups like Voice of the Faithful were exposed when they switched from demanding accountability from to changing the structure of the Church.


41 posted on 03/29/2011 4:00:45 AM PDT by kearnyirish2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: lentulusgracchus

Well put; many of those Protestant denominations will split with a smaller, conservative group remaining true to some form of Christianity while the larger, “progressive” body becaomes a political shell organization with nothing that can be traced to the New Testament. The basic flaw of their model is that the diseent that created them is their undoing; permissive attitudes towards abortion/contraception, divorce, homosexuality, etc. means that NOTHING can be “off-limits”. The “religious left” is a myth because there are no 2 members that agree on anything theologically; their unity is political, as is their whole focus.


42 posted on 03/29/2011 4:05:18 AM PDT by kearnyirish2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: burroak

What a lovely precedent to set for suing and closing churches./s


43 posted on 03/29/2011 4:48:05 AM PDT by DJ MacWoW (America! The wolves are at your door! How will you answer the knock?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

I guess that’s why the Philadelphia just suspended 21 Priests on March 8 of this year. Also they have a Monsignor up for covering up and hiding these Priests.

Yes: I thought it was taken care of too, but it seems there are a few lingering around.


44 posted on 03/29/2011 6:09:08 AM PDT by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: KrisKrinkle
for the world to tolerate bigotry and intolerance towards the gay and lesbian community

The word he is trying so desperately to avoid writing (as it would expose his true agenda) is "acceptance".

45 posted on 03/29/2011 6:15:06 AM PDT by glennaro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

I don’t have to do any such thing. These organized perverts, under the guise of religion, need to be prosecuted.

It it telling that you do not attempt to discuss the facts; you just want to immune the character of one who is just shining a light on a very despicable practice.


46 posted on 03/29/2011 6:43:19 AM PDT by burroak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

The pervasive and ongoing behavior of the vilest kind, in the name of religion, should be confronted and rooted out, not given a pass by selling it as a religion.

Just do the research and do the math; what is happening is pure evil and it is systematic. The Church is being given a pass by letting it buy its way out of this mess. But, the mess goes on.


47 posted on 03/29/2011 6:48:05 AM PDT by burroak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: burroak; presidio9
What you are suggesting is against the First Amendment. There is no excuse for unconstitutional remedies when it's what the left wants and has been stoked by them.

But I believe these are the end times and you WILL eventually get your wish. It won't be to your liking though.

48 posted on 03/29/2011 6:51:19 AM PDT by DJ MacWoW (America! The wolves are at your door! How will you answer the knock?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Venturer
I guess that’s why the Philadelphia just suspended 21 Priests on March 8 of this year. Also they have a Monsignor up for covering up and hiding these Priests.

That's right, the Archdiocese suspended 21 priests in response to a GJ report, one whose fairness is easily questioned.

These priests haven't been convicted, and only two priests and one archbishop have even been indicted, along with a former priest who was laicized before the FIRST Philadelphia GJ. And the behavior alleged took place in the 90's and earlier.

Of course, I guess the 4 indictments justifies taking another bite at the GJ apple, since the 2006 GJ returned ZERO indictments.

As for the suspensions, I suppose you could criticize that, but I thought people wanted the Church to act on any allegation, no matter how spurious.

I'll wait for convictions, myself.

49 posted on 03/29/2011 7:08:07 AM PDT by Trailerpark Badass (I'm sick of damn idiots)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

What? Unconstitutional? All I’m saying is prosecute, using the Law under the Constitution to purge the Church of the sickest and most vile of perps. If there is enough left to have a church, so be it. That church doesn’t have just one Elmer Gantry, Swaggert, or Baker, it is rife with pedophiles. Why are you defending that mess?


50 posted on 03/29/2011 7:22:02 AM PDT by burroak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-77 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson