| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 04/28/2010 11:54:24 PM PDT by Admin Moderator, reason:
Per poster’s request |
Posted on 04/18/2010 9:49:35 PM PDT by Judith Anne
I seriously wonder about some FReepers, sometimes. Any other person accused of a crime would be defended by every FReeper as being innocent until proven guilty by a court of law. I've seen whole threads written by men who have been accused of child abuse by ex-wives out to deny them their visitation rights or to wrest more money out of them. These men are rightly indignant, and furious about the unjust accusations that cannot be proven but are never withdrawn.
Yet where are those FReepers when a PRIEST is accused? Where is the presumption of innocence? Suddenly, every accusation becomes a verdict, and not only the accused but his entire organization and all its adherents are held responsible.
I can only wonder what some of these so-called conservatives (who so faithfully defend the Constitution) would do, if THEY were the ones accused! It is a nightmare for any man -- all of you know how even the accusation stains the man forever, even if it is proven false!
Not only that, many here assert that the problems of 30, 40 and even 50 years ago must be tried in the media TODAY!
Remember the Duke rape case? There are more similarities than differences here. The priests are accused, nifonged, and instead of being defended, they are vilified!
What other man of you could stand under the weight of such an accusation trumpeted by the press, and come out whole? None! And such accusations made, LONG after the statute of limitations has passed, sometimes even after the accused is dead and buried for YEARS -- are YOU one of those who automatically, reflexively, spitefully, and gleefully act as judge, jury, and executioner?
Women! What if it were YOUR HUSBAND, YOUR BROTHER, YOUR FATHER, YOUR UNCLE, YOUR SON who was accused? Wouldn't you want the best defense possible? Wouldn't YOU believe in their innocence? Wouldn't YOU help protect your loved ones as much as possible? And yet, YOU JUDGE THE CHURCH FOR DOING WHAT YOU WOULD DO?
Shame! Vast shame! On all who have sinned against the innocent!
Depends on the state. Varies widely.
Name one, in the USA. Provide a link.
lol. Raping a 13-year-old is a felony in EVERY state, Judith. Wake up.
Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone. Atheists, sit down.
Sure. But sexual contact isn’t.
By the way, please name a priest who raped a 13 yo in the US, and please provide a link.
So, there is no priest who has raped a 13 yo, in spite of the hysterical, anti-Catholic bigoted ranting?
Yes, I read the link I posted. Do you think the statute of limitations should be abolished? Do you think 20-50 yo allegations of child sexual abuse should be given ANY credibility? If so, why?
Your question is beyond offensive.
I do not recommend consulting Wikipedia for information regarding "age of consent". I recommend consulting with a lawyer.
"If you call teens “children” then I guess so. Have you ever heard of ephebephilia?....I can say there are teens who don’t care who they have sex with, who exploit sick, perverted adults for power, money, and drugs, just as they exploit others younger than they are for power and sex....I absolutely do not trust most of the so-called victims.Post #62:
"...teens do exploit adults to get what they want. Exploiting gay men for money, power, drugs, and sexual satisfaction is a common occurance. I’m not blaming VICTIMS, I’m blaming the deviant homosexual subculture.Post #63:
"...a distinct preference for individuals in mid or late adolescence is not generally regarded by psychologists as a pathology when it does not interfere with other major areas of one's life. Ephebophilia is not listed by name as a mental disorder in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR), or the ICD-10, nor is it listed as a paraphilia."Post #65:
It’s time to stop coddling these middle-aged homosexuals who want to exploit the Church financially, who remember that Father so and so from 20-30-years ago was gay...Post #68:
Ephebophile priests were not victims, neither were their teen partners. Each got something they wanted. 20-30-40-50 years later, the middle aged gay men found out they could financially benefit by suing the Church and pretending to be victims.Post #127 :
...In some cases, the “children” are old enough that the age of consent renders the case moot and there is no prosecution...Post #129:
...you can talk of a "child" of 17 years of age? Or 17 years, 11 months, and 29 days? Don't be ridiculous. Age of consent refers to the age which a person can legally consent to sexual activity. If that age is 15, are we talking about "child" abuse? What about 14?Post #165:
Statutory rape is a strict liability crime, meaning that the consent of the younger person or mistake about their age is not a defense....Federal law makes it criminal to knowingly engage in a sexual act with another person who is between the age of 12 and 16 if they are at least four years younger than you.
Yes, I made those posts on this thread and anyone can read them. What is the reason for making a collection of them? Will that collection be added to the collection of threads I started since 2008? What’s the deal, here?
Am I supposed to be intimidated?
I guess that’s to cover up the fact that neither you nor Dr. E. can come up with the name of a priest who raped a 13 yo.
Age of consent refers to the age which a person can legally consent to sexual activity. If that age is 15, are we talking about "child" abuse? What about 14?
In none of the 50 states is the age of consent for sexual activity 15 or 14.
You are the one drawing distinctions between misdemeanors and felonies regarding pederast priests either forcing or enticing 13-year-old boys into having sex with them.
The only people I've heard arguing the way you have tonight are members of NAMBLA.
Sure it is, in the case of marriage. I guess you still don't have the name of an American priest who raped a 13 yo. Do you have the name of an American priest who raped a 14 yo?
Evidently, you only read the mainstream leftist media.
Incidently, are you trying to intimidate Catholics who defend their priesthood against baseless, anti-Catholic bigoted accusations, by bringing up NAMBLA? That underhanded, deviant, sick, twisted tactic won't work with me.
NAME A PRIEST WHO RAPED A 13 YO and PROVIDE A LINK.
"...teens do exploit adults to get what they want. Exploiting gay men for money, power, drugs, and sexual satisfaction is a common occurance."
"I absolutely do not trust most of the so-called victims."
"...a distinct preference for individuals in mid or late adolescence is not generally regarded by psychologists as a pathology when it does not interfere with other major areas of one's life. "
Oh, Lord, I missed most of those posts.
NAMBLA may be too tame for some RC apologists, judging by that sickening defense of the indefensible.
The devious, deceitful, malicious posts of the anti-Catholic bigot brigade are getting hysterical.
Intimating that defense of Catholic priests unjustly accused of child sexual abuse equates to membership in NAMBLA is the most evil thing I have ever seen any presbyterian do.
Boo! There is a Catholic priest within 500 miles of you.
“in the case of marriage.”
lol. We’re talking about “age of consent” for sex, Judith, not for marriage. A pretty fumbling attempt at changing the topic.
As you can see from the following link, you are wrong. The age of consent for sexual activity is 16 and above in this country in every 50 states.
http://www.livestrong.com/article/12483-age-consensual-sex/
RC apologists think if they repeat an error often enough it might take on a sheen of respectability.
It doesn’t.
The truth is my defense. Everything I have written is true. Ignorance does not excuse the bigoted attacks on those who defend their Church and her priests against bigotry. Stating that my defense is equivalent to membership in NAMBLA is the worst thing I have ever seen on this forum, anywhere.
That’s sick.
There's plenty a lot closer than that -- there's a prison within 100 miles.
Except in the case of marriage.
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.