The Catholic Church's Watergate

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Catholic : One Thread

The Catholic Church's Watergate

This has nothing to do with anti-Catholicism because the Catholic Church is wholly to blame, says William Donohue

Interview by Deborah Caldwell

William Donohue is the president of the Catholic League, a 350,000-member organization well-known for going toe-to-toe with the media for anti-Catholic bias. Voluble and opinionated, Donohue delights in sparring with his many critics. These days, he says he's surprised even himself with his vehement anger at the church he normally loves to defend. He explains why, and pronounces his cure for American Catholicism's ailments, in this interview.

How important is this crisis to the church?

This is the Catholic Church’s Watergate, and these wounds are entirely self-inflicted. This has nothing to do with anti-Catholicism in the media or anyplace else. The Catholic Church is wholly to blame for this dereliction of duty, the collapse of standards. And I don’t think it’s any mistake as a believing, practicing Catholic that this series of events unfolded during Lent. I believe Christ gave the Catholic Church a huge cross, one that it has justly earned. And I believe that while the cross is a symbol of death, it is also a symbol of resurrection and redemption. I believe the Catholic Church will in the long run come out of this for the better, after it faces up to the crisis. It has yet to face up to the crisis. But it’s going to be forced to face up to it.

How will it be forced?

Lay people will force them to. Let me be specific. In the Bronx recently, a Father Gentile was sent off to a parish in the Throgs Neck section of the Bronx. Word got out he had been previously involved in a sex abuse scandal. The parish had contacted the Archdiocese and got nowhere. So they started pressing it themselves with petitions and flyers and they got it out.

If you pick up Newsday (April 2), a priest whom I know personally, Father Brian McKeon, was let go in November, because he was a serial pedophile. Now why was he let go? Because after some parents had complained and the dioc of Rockville center did nothing, one of the parents got so angry--and this is after he’d been sent off to Canada to get treatment and come back to Long Island, and was working in Nassau Hospital and doing work in parishes, a parent put over 100 fliers on people's windshields in the parking lot of Nassau University Hospital, saying the man is a pedophile and the diocese is doing nothing. And after that he was let go.

You’re going to see lay participation like this all over the United States. At the end of the day, it won’t matter if the bishop wants to move with alacrity, because he’ll be forced to.

And the media did a very good job of outing a Father Vollmer on Long Island. The day after he is outed, we see steps taken to release him. Between the media and lay Catholics, once they get word there’s a problem here, the day is gone when people are going to sit back and feel sorry for the priest. One of the fundamental problems with the clerics in the United States is an astounding lack of courage. They’ve gone soft. They’ve bought into the therapeutic movement. They flip-flopped 180 degrees from the rigidity of the Catholic Church of the 1950s and 60s to being kinder and gentler to such an extent that anything that was judgmental was wrong, they downplayed discussions of sin and hell. Everyone was to be loved. Anybody with a malady can be cured. We can save people. While there are obvious kernels of truth and goodness to what I’m saying here, it’s also true that if you make that the mainstay of your philosophy, where feelings triumph over reason, and where you don’t have the courage of your convictions to say this guy has to go...Even (a monsignor) who knew Father McKeown had problems, said, “Probably in hindsight I should have been more participatory." Probably? So he’s still not sure. There’s no courage there to make the tough decisions.

That kind of unmanliness is deeply ingrained in the Catholic Church. But you can find someone who is friendly and affable and at the same time accountable. I know many priests like that.

And here’s another problem. Too many of the bishops treated this problem of sexual abuse as being morally analogous to a priest who might have had a drinking problem. If a priest has a drinking problem, you can put the poor devil in the tank for a month and let him clean up his act and you can bring him back, because most of the damage has been done to himself. But this is a very serious crime. This is evil. And treated as something other than evil is moral delinquency.

-- Dennis Molson (dennismolson@hotmail.com), April 07, 2002

Answers

At least there's ONE catholic willing to admit to his churchs crimes. Odd that the issue is so rarely discussed here..

-- Dennis Molson (dennismolson@hotmail.com), April 07, 2002.

Truth be told, Mr. Molson, I don't think you're going to find too many Catholics that are ok with all of this. And I don't think it's a matter of all Catholics admitting there is a problem. Obviously, we are very well aware there is a problem. We've been accused to caring more about the Church than the victims and that just isn't true at all. Personally speaking~do I think these priests that are abusers should stay to continue their behavior? Of course not. I think they should be punished, the same as you or I would be. They're not above the law. Am I ashamed at the cover ups and sweeping under the rug? You're darned right I am! I think something SHOULD be done about it. But I also see cases like Cardinal Mahoney's right now. Here you have a woman that 30 years later is accusing the man of ... what?! She doesn't even know what. There is an accusation being leveled against this man and on what grounds? It's rubbish, quite frankly and I'm terribly afraid that more and more of these cases are going to pop up. Unsubstantiated claims of abuse. If someone were truly abused, then yes~by all means, the priest needs to be dealt with by the proper authorities. But if you think that people aren't just going pop up and file lawsuits against a priest...for whatever reason~money, attention, whatever...then you're sorely mistaken. Need I remind you of all of the bogus death claims that were made after the WTC?

-- Jackiea (sorry@dontlikespam.com), April 07, 2002.

''Ga-a-awr-shhh!''
- - - - Walt Disney Productions,-- Goofy.

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), April 07, 2002.

Dennis Molson,

As plagerism is illegal, please quote your sources. Your "cut-and-paste" does not constitute authorship. Are you claiming that you composed this post?

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), April 07, 2002.


Jackiea wrote:

"But I also see cases like Cardinal Mahoney's right now. Here you have a woman that 30 years later is accusing the man of ... what?! She doesn't even know what. There is an accusation being leveled against this man and on what grounds?"

The purpose is character assassination. Evidently, Dennis conveniently forgets that libel is illegal in this country, and that all those who are accused are allowed due process of the law before being charged with guilt. He feels that justice should be administered primarily as a political tool against those who disagree with him.

I don't know what to like most about Dennis: that he believes in fascism, that he plagerizes, or that he is an admitted sadist. Oh, the virtues that Dennis fosters in himself.

Mateo el feo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), April 07, 2002.



I agree, Mateo.

You know, people can say all they want that this isn't Catholic bashing but the majority of it is. And it isn't all aimed at just Catholics. I've seen many religion bashers crawl out of the wood work, as well. Sadly, it is the perfect opportunity for them to say "see?! Where is your God now? Organized religion is wrong and this just proves it" and it digresses from there. I have felt my heart tear at the vile and disgusting things that are said about our church, Pope John Paul, priests, nuns, Jesus, God, etc. And yes, it has also made me sick to hear of the *admitted*, not accused, things that priests have done. I pray for the victims, the priests and the church.

-- Jackiea (sorry@dontlikespam.com), April 07, 2002.


Hi Dennis, Good post, thanks. I see the usual need to deflect from the topic via character assassination has once again transpired here from the usual characters! :-)

Believe me this topic is being shouted from the rooftops in a good number of the Catholic parishes. The folks here are not the run of the mill average Catholics, they are the fundamentalist segment that most religious groups are plagued with. Fundamentalists by their very nature have difficulty with open dialogue.

This entire episode is for the Catholic Church an alarm.....an alarm to awaken a sense of humility long missing from their leadership. An alarm calling to attention the humanity of the Church and the need for a revision in its relationship to its followers and to the world in general.

Sexual abuse is more easily overlooked and hidden in a structure which has not a healthy outlook on sexuality itself. The Church has need to open its windows and let in the fresh air of health.

I do hope this event and the proximity of a new papal election will together encourage the much needed change in the hierarchy, a change that needs to, if anything, strip itself of such an archaic and patriarchal formation if it truly wishes to be a shepherd for all its people. The fertilized ground in which sexual abuse is enabled is ground that has too long been fed with other abuses.

Thanks for bringing such an important topic. I think some folks have such a need for a father figure, a leader, they would support the "hierarchy" even if they called for the re-initiation of the Crusades or another Pogram. Joan

-- Joan Storey (godessss@mindspring.com), April 07, 2002.


Joan writes:

"I see the usual need to deflect from the topic via character assassination has once again transpired here from the usual characters!

Joan, are you saying that character assassination is appropriate? Or are you saying that due process of the law is not necessary? Both of these issues are inconvenient to fascist ideology.

Thanks for your wisdom,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), April 07, 2002.


Joan~I don't know you and you don't know me so, I don't see how you can lump the entire group of people that post here as being "not the run of the mill average Catholics, they are the fundamentalist segment that most religious groups are plagued with". How in the world would you know whether or not I am a "run of the mill average Catholic"?

You went on to say "I think some folks have such a need for a father figure, a leader, they would support the "hierarchy" even if they called for the re-initiation of the Crusades or another Pogram". That's rather presumptious of you, isn't it?

-- Jackiea (sorry@dontlikespam.com), April 07, 2002.


Joan writes:

"I do hope this event and the proximity of a new papal election..."

Sounds like you are looking forward to the Pope dying. Is he "in the way" of your agenda?

BTW, you proclaim that we should have open dialog. Is a libelous press and "guilty before proven innocent" justice part of this open dialog that you want?

Finally, Joan, I'd like to remind you that Dennis believes you to be a lunatic because you believe that a deity exists. He believes that you should shake off your out-dated religion based on old wives' tale. Do you agree with Dennis that belief in a deity is foolish? Or, do you see this a small difference between the two of you?

Besides prejudice against Catholics, what do you and Dennis have in common?

Mateo.

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), April 07, 2002.



Joan,

This is a classic "Joan" post. You write:

"I think some folks have such a need for a father figure, a leader, they would support the "hierarchy" even if they called for the re-initiation of the Crusades or another Pogram.

Once again, you are drawing conclusions based on your own psychological projection. I forget, didn't you say that you are a practicing psychologist? Enjoy,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), April 07, 2002.


Poor matty - once again getting bogged down in character assassination and ad hominen attacks and ignoring the crimes of his church. Plagiarism? "Interview by Deborah Caldwell" was the third line in the post. Face your church’s demons matty...

-- Dennis Molson (dennismolson@hotmail.com), April 07, 2002.

Dennis, You should cite your source, especially if you are only sharing one page of the four page interview on belief-net.

-- Father Chris LaBarge (marydelfr@starband.net), April 07, 2002.

Jackiea,

I am afraid you are probably correct in that, false accusations will be coming in from everywhere now.

The 51 year old woman that made her claim against Cardinal Mahony on Saturday has a history of mental Problems. She was diagnosed with schizophrenia in the early 1970's. She was motivated to press forward with her allegations, in, part, because the state is cutting her disability payments and she needs a cash settlement from the Church. She has also claimed that nearly every other person in her life has molested her or has emotionally abused her, including her parents, and other family members. I can't even imagine how the holy Cardinal must feel now. God bless him.

David S

-- David S (asdzxc8176@aol.com), April 07, 2002.


Nothing ever changes in the catholic church - attack the one bringing the charges - never examine the charges. How proud you must all be...

-- Dennis Molson (dennismolson@hotmail.com), April 07, 2002.


Dennis,

I'm sorry. You didn't plagerize this time. But your still a sadist and a fascist.

"Face your church?s demons matty... "

Explain this to me--what haven't I faced? I've clearly stated my position. Are you not reading my posts?

Also, I thought that demons don't exist. Now you're telling me that they do? Please try to be consistent, little one.

Enjoy,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), April 07, 2002.


Matty,

My how literal we are, perhaps the result of an inferior education? Perhaps too much time spent on a kneeler praying to your "god" and not enough time spent at the logic school...

-- Dennis Molson (dennismolson@hotmail.com), April 07, 2002.


Dennis,

Your comments can make me laugh sometimes. But I'm getting bored with your negative viewpoint, just as I imagine many around you already have.

Regardless of your acknowledgement of God, I hope that you pursue virtue in your life. That choice will bring you happiness. If you hold on to your cynicism and sadism, you decision will lead to a very lonely life.

Mateo.

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), April 07, 2002.


Joan, you said,

I do hope this event and the proximity of a new papal election will together encourage the much needed change in the hierarchy, a change that needs to, if anything, strip itself of such an archaic and patriarchal formation if it truly wishes to be a shepherd for all its people

Actually, I predict that the opposite will happen (or should)! It's the whole "let's embrace all the deviant philosophies" instead of "love the sinner, hate the sin" that got the church into trouble in the first place. What the church needs is a housecleaning of *acceptance of evil* conceptually. What the church needs is a return to orthodoxy, not more of a sprial away from it.

I have faith though, the church survived worse times than this, and the Holy Spirit will bring it in line again. What you and I can do to help is to pray for God's will to be done, and not that our own agendas get forwarded.

Frank

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), April 08, 2002.


" I'm getting bored with your negative viewpoint"

So sayeth the king of Ad Hominen attacks...

"I hope that you pursue virtue in your life. That choice will bring you happiness. If you hold on to your cynicism and sadism, you decision will lead to a very lonely life."

Another self-important and pious lecture – do you have no shame? Good gravy man, my point has always been you folks need to lecture the evil doers in your own "church" not the ones pointing out the evil deeds...

-- Dennis Molson (dennismolson@hotmail.com), April 08, 2002.


Dennis writes:

"So sayeth the king of Ad Hominen attacks..."

Dennis,

When have I personally attacked you to make a point? BTW, for a guy that questions people's faith in God, questions my education, and questions my IQ, I have a hard time believing that you aren't the one wearing the crown for Ad Hominem attacks. I actually wonder why you think that anyone whose signature is "Mateo el Feo" would care about your 3rd grade insults.

"Another self-important and pious lecture ? do you have no shame?"

I'm just giving you the facts. If your pride is worth losing happiness, by all means keep your silly pride. Of course, I'm probably not as smart as you, because I didn't go to logic school, whatever that is! You see, I was too busy on a kneeler to attend school.

Enjoy,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), April 08, 2002.


Frank

I believe you are correct that we will see more orthodoxy coming from the next POPE. It is sorely needed. Of course i have the utmost respect for John Paul II. He has done many things that no other Pope has ever done. Change of personality can only cause more improvement not dispair. GOD Bless the POPE. John Paul II.

-- Fred Bishop (fcbishop@globaleyes.net), April 08, 2002.


Dear Fred and Frank,

LOL.....more orthodoxy....yep that's just what the Taliban said!

How about you box yourself with more orthodoxy and the rest of us will open the window to let Godde back in. LOL. Joan

-- Joan Storey (godessss@mindspring.com), April 08, 2002.


Joan

There is an OLD Jewish Law. To call the almighty another name out of disrespect is condemnation of that person. I resent your calling the Almighty GOD, Jesus, A godde. He is GOD and that is it. Stop the heretical rubbish. You ARE a heretic and that is final in my judgement. I don't care for your new age stuff and I wish you would show respect to our GOD and his Church. THANKS.

-- Fred Bishop (fcbishop@globaleyes.net), April 08, 2002.


I agree completely, Fred. I find it most offensive and defames His name. The following is from Dr. Hobart E. Freeman Th.D.~webpage:

http://members.tripod.com/~Fivefold/chapter2.html

According to the Scriptures, heresy with regard to the Son of God is any doctrine or teaching which does not remain true to the Doctrine of Christ as set forth in the Word of God.

In 2 John 7-11, we are informed that those who deviate from the biblical teaching concerning Jesus Christ have departed from the truth and are designated as "deceivers." This is such a serious offense to God that we are warned to avoid these individuals because such deceivers have the spirit of antichrist. Read 2 John 7-11, and here you will see that those who ignore this solemn warning do so to their own peril. Merely to give them greeting makes one a partaker with them of their evil, and by implication such individuals will also partake in their judgment.

This passage is not simply to be limited to a test of whether or not one believes in the incarnation of Christ (as, for example, the denial of His eternal deity by the Modernists, the religious cults etc.),1 but it encompasses the entire Doctrine of Christ.

The test for belief in the incarnation is found in verse 7 (cf. 1 John 4:1f.), whereas the full Doctrine of Christ test is in view in verses 9-11.

1.The early forms of Gnosticism also denied that the Christ became incarnate in Jesus. Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God (vs.9).

The Doctrine of Christ involves everything concerning Jesus Christ as contained in the Word of God: the O.T. prophecies; incarnation; virgin birth; sinless life; deity; substitutionary blood atonement; His resurrection; ascension; the Second Advent, and so on.

It should be understood from the outset that the JDS supporters do not adhere to the scriptural Doctrine of Christ, but have grossly perverted it, especially with regard to His blood atonement, and to the sinlessness of the Son of God during the period of the cross until His resurrection.

The seriousness of their departure from the biblical Doctrine of Christ is seen in the fact that the JDS Doctrine portrays Jesus as unregenerate on the cross and in Hell. In Hell He is said to have been born again, providing redemption from the Pit. The Scriptures, however, prove that Jesus Christ was always sinless and holy, fulfilling the Old Testament type, and that He completed the work of redemption on the cross. On the cross He declared, "It is finished," and at death He confessed that He was going to His heavenly Father, not to Satan in the Pit, saying "Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit."

Thus, the false JDS Doctrine is plainly condemned by the Word of God. In an attempt to avoid the clear meaning of these passages, as well as others, the JDS teachers have been forced to change their obvious meaning to try to harmonize them with their erroneous doctrine. For example, although Jesus clearly stated that His work of redemption was finished on the cross, the JDS teachers boldly contradict Him by telling us that the redemptive work was not finished then, but was only beginning, inasmuch as it was to be completed in Hell.

Moreover, like all others who deviate from the truth, the JDS proponents begin, not with the Word of God as a basis for their teachings, but with their erroneous doctrine, and then leapfrog through the Bible searching for some alleged "proof texts" in an attempt to find support for their doctrine.

In addition to the warning in 2 John 7-11 concerning those who pervert the Doctrine of Christ, there are others also. The Apostle Peter warns of those who are "unlearned and unstable," and, as a consequence, wrest (twist, distort) the Scriptures unto their own destruction (2 Peter 3:16). The Apostle Paul speaks of those who in the latter days "...shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and the doctrines of demons" (I Timothy 4:1). This does not necessarily mean such individuals always depart from religion, but from Bible faith and truth.

But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily (craftily) shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of (2 Pet. 2:1-2).

The warning is clear. False teachers will arise who craftily introduce heresies which deny the scriptural view of the Lord (which is precisely what the JDS teachers are doing in their denial of Christ's sinlessness on the cross, and by their perversion of the blood atonement). Moreover, it is predicted that many will believe these errors and follow them, just as it is happening today!

-- Jackiea (sorry@dontlikespam.com), April 08, 2002.


Fred, As for the Jewish tradition, you are mistaken.. first it is not law, it is tradition and secondly ....it refuses to 'pronounce' the divine name or to write it out in its entirety. YHWH as a name for Godde is unfinished, it is in a state of becoming, as Divinity and all of Creation is in a state of becoming.

Thomas Aquinas: "Through creatures God is both hidden from us and made manifest to us" and this is why "every name imposed by us onto God falls short of God...God is inaccessible light, surpassing every light that can be seen by us either through sense or through intellect".

In other words the intellect cannot grasp the Divine And the Divine One is none of these beings insofar as god surpasses all things." Thus Aquinas's view,..... God can be named by any being in the universe because god is the cause of every being in the universe. But Aquinas also warns us to live with this dialectic- that Godde is named by all beings and by no beings. To live this way is to dance the dance of truth. No name, absolutely no name, suffices for Divinity. Which is also to say that all names suffice for Divinity ...but on a limited scale.

Meister Eckhart ( a thirteenth century Mystic) puts it, "All the names which the soul gives God it receives from the knowlege of itself."

None of us controls Godde, not even God's name. To attempt to control Godde by controlling a name of God is an act of idolatry...an act of freezing Divinity. Although I do not consider you such ...you yourself may very well be the heretic. Joan

-- Joan Storey (godessss@mindspring.com), April 08, 2002.


Joan writes:

"None of us controls Godde, not even God's name. To attempt to control Godde by controlling a name of God is an act of idolatry...an act of freezing Divinity. Although I do not consider you such ...you yourself may very well be the heretic. Joan"

Joan,

Here is a projection of your own idolatrous practice on to another. 8^)

Mateo.

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), April 08, 2002.


Joan

All you have done is put down GOD and his church. You have clearly shown who the Idolatrous one is "YOU". You want to project yourself all of the time in this forum and have not a clue of what faith is. You spin of many others writtings that are totally the writings of people who have an axe to grind as you yourself have. All you seem to desire is to put a wedge between the relationship of men and women. It was and is clear for all intentions the fact that GOD is "GOD". To define him as anyother is to DENY the very DEITY of Christ. Why are you so persistant? Do you really "HATE" men? If you do tehn you must dislike Christ. Funny thing we have never seen any dislike of Christ's manhood from the other women in the Scriptures. It is you against them. Get real woman. I am getting tired of your foolishness.

-- Fred Bishop (fcbishop@globaleyes.net), April 08, 2002.


''. . . He rejoiced in the Holy Spirit and said, ''I praise thee, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that Thou didst hide these things from the wise and prudent, and didst reveal them to little ones. Yes, Father, for such was Thy good pleasure. All things have been delivered to me by my Father; and no one knows who the Son is, except the Father; and who the Father is except the Son, and him to whom the Son chooses to reveal Him.''
Luke 10, :21-:22

Jesus did reveal who His Father is. We know; because he revealed it to the little ones; not the boasters and literati.

Our parish celebrated Divine Mercy Sunday yesterday; and our good Pastor and his associate pastor both wore new hand-embroidered chasubles with Our Lord's image emblazoned on them. We were informed that these were made by Filipino nuns in Manila. The Filipino community of Vallejo, CA made this gift to our priests. Extremely generous and loving of them.

Why bring this up? Because I'm referring to the ''little ones''; who have no need for Meister Ekhart, or for your glib appeals of the New Age. '' --every name imposed by us onto God falls short of God...God is inaccessible light, surpassing every light that can be seen by us either through sense or through intellect,'' you boast. But in fact, you are trumpeting your own ego and intellect. You are not like the ''little ones'' of whom Our Lord speaks. You are ''sophisticated'' and self-absorbed, Joan. A humble nun in Manila works with her tiny hands, to produce an image of her Divine Spouse, and all her love goes into the task, until something spiritually exalting is addedd to this world. By HER-- not by Godde; who is a figment of your imagination. God is revealed to us by His Son, Jesus Christ; and in His prayer, Jesus addresses Him as FATHER. Jesus, the Son chose to reveal His Father to our Holy Church; who has never taught us in error. You really ought to come back to the True Faith, Sister Joan /

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), April 08, 2002.


GEEZ, You mean to tell me Eugene...you deny even the words of St. Thomas Aquinas? Hmmmm I wonder what the Papacy would think of that. Last I heard Thomas Aquinas was a canonized Saint whose teachings were honored and taught by the Bishops and priests of the Catholic Church.

I must have missed something, did he go the route of St.Christopher...removal from the dashboard to the glove compartment? Joan

-- Joan Storey (godessss@mindspring.com), April 08, 2002.


Of course not, Sister.-- I know what the ineffable nature of God is. But I don't find your quotes applicable to the nutty portions of your monologue. You speak as with authority; but you have bowdlerised a simple truth so it will support your pet agenda. Godde is neither sensible nor Thomistic. It's a figment of your dim imagination. To try to leverage your odd wrinkle on God's holy name, and promote your Girl-Godde by quoting the Scholastics is pure sophism. Save it for the pre-teen chickies you're indoctrinating.

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), April 08, 2002.

Father Chris La Barge - It would be of interest to know what Order you belong to and where and by whom you were educated as this to myself would give credance to any input by yourself. Thank you.

-- Jean Bouchard (jeanb@cwk.imag.net), April 09, 2002.

[prior posts edited for content. Moderator] Dennis wrote:

"I don't assume anything that I write is "important" matty, but it must have been irritating enough for the forum censors to remove. Perhaps cutting a little to close to home in the recognition that your church has a problem and you lot stick your heads in the sand?"

Dennis,

Despite my clear posts, I don't think that you'll ever hear what I am saying regarding the media frenzy that you love so much. Against my better judgment, I'll try to state my position again:

1. Those who are sexually abused should bring up criminal charges against any sexual predators.

2. Those men and women who can be criminally convicted of any abuse of children should be placed in prison.

3. The media should not report accusations as if they were facts. Their libelous reporting damages innocents when they make assumptions.

4. The media should not be selective in reporting. If the media were concerned with occupational trends in child abuse, they've got some explaining to do--the local priest-abuser story is an extreme exception to the rule. I have never seen a news exposé of public school teachers, baby sitters, or parents who abuse children. The scores of local stories that I have seen never make it to national news.

5. As a side note, the media should abandon its hypocrisy of glorifying immoral and illegal behavior of adults who pursue teenagers.

6. If the media were truly objective, they wouldn't cover-up the apparent fact that many child-abusers are homosexuals who pursue teenagers.

7. It's clear that attacking the church is a fascist tactic that uses the criminal justice system to attack political enemies. Most alleged abusers were kicked-out or left the priesthood long ago. The criminals who allegedly perpetrated these crimes aren't the ones being attacked. Claimants aren't going after them to seek justice.

Enjoy,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), April 09, 2002.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ