Catholic Church as The Matrix

Thank you for your questions. First of all, , you know it is fairly easy to express your views and opinions.....and it can be very difficult to give a response to these views. It would demand research and providing solid evidence as to WHY your (wild?) accusations are false, and without solid foundation. WHAT IS THE EVIDENCE FOR YOUR ACCUSATION, YOUR OPINION?? WHAT YOU ARE DOING IS MAKING A GENERAL ACCUSATION. These GENERAL accusations are NEVER TRUE, as such. They are too general. Thus to say that the Bishops of the Catholic Hierarchy COVERED UP the crimes of pedophiles....this is simply not true. Perhaps some few bishops did, in a way, cover up these crimes by not reporting them to the police. But, not every bishops did this. Also, even though some few bishops did not inform the police of the crime of a priest against a child, that doesn't mean that the guilty priest was not punished severly. Take, for example, the statement of that person who dislikes the Catholic Church about Cardinal Law: "some priests molest boys, sometimes many boys, and sometimes over a period of many years. Church officials, including Cardinal Law, knew about this but did NOTHING to stop it or turn the priests into the police." Now, from what I have told you here, you can see that such an accusation against "church officials"(WHO ARE THESE??? AND ON WHAT BASIS, FOR WHAT REASONS, DOES HE BASE THIS ACCUSATION???) and when he mentions Cardinal Law...WHAT ARE HIS REASONS, WHAT ARE HIS PROOFS, FOR THIS ACCUSATION AGAINST CARDINAL LAW??? As I said, ANYONE can make accusations against ANYONE, about ANYTHING. But, if that persons has not solid proof, has no clear reasons, for his accusations, then he is doing evil, he is spreading falsehoods, he is acting unjustly. The only practical advice I can give you is to LISTEN respectfully to the person who is making unfounded accusations, and to notice that he/she is doing so out of hatred or dislike, and simply to respond by saying: "WHAT EVIDENCE, WHAT PROOF, DO YOU HAVE OF THE ACCUSATIONS YOU ARE MAKING???" Or, HOW CAN YOU MAKE SUCH VAGUE GENERALIZATIONS?? What basis do you have for your general statemens or accusations. I hope these reflections are helpful. By the way, I am not trying to imply here that there were not some bishops who did wrong by not taking quicker and more immediate action to bring any and all persons who abuse children to justice. Nor am I trying to excuse ANYONE, even priests, who do wrong, and especially who abuse children...sexually, or any other way. If they are guilty, they deserve to be punished according to the seriousness of their crimes. But, I do say again, wild, general, and UNFOUNDED accusations are always wrong.

Mike, since I never said that ALL Catholic Bishops covered up for child molesting priests, your criticism of me for that is incorrect and irrelevant.

As for the PROOF of what I've said, just go back a few pages in this thread and you'll see where I linked to several news stories about it.

It DID happen and it WAS covered up by Bishops and others in the hierarchy of the Catholic Church. That is an unfortunate fact. Those people should be in prison for obstructing justice. If politicians weren't afraid of "offending" the largest Christian denomination in America, it's possible that the Catholic Church could be prosecuted for RICO (Racketeering in a Corrupt Organization).

I find it really humorous that you critique people for changing their arguments all over this site and then you change little arguments of yours. Sounds a little hypocritical to me. You ARE making generalizations,or in other words stereotypes of Catholic clergyman.Yes your links do have things on it about some bishops covering up for child molestors but allow me to quote myself:"I am not trying to imply here that there were not some bishops who did wrong by not taking quicker and more immediate action to bring any and all persons who abuse children to justice. Nor am I trying to excuse ANYONE, even priests, who do wrong, and especially who abuse children...sexually, or any other way. If they are guilty, they deserve to be punished according to the seriousness of their crimes. But, I do say again, wild, general, and UNFOUNDED accusations are always wrong." And allow me to quote myself again since you seem to have missed this point: "Take, for example, the statement of that person who dislikes the Catholic Church about Cardinal Law: "some priests molest boys, sometimes many boys, and sometimes over a period of many years. Church officials, including Cardinal Law, knew about this but did NOTHING to stop it or turn the priests into the police." Now, from what I have told you here, you can see that such an accusation against "church officials"(WHO ARE THESE??? AND ON WHAT BASIS, FOR WHAT REASONS, DOES HE BASE THIS ACCUSATION???) and when he mentions Cardinal Law...WHAT ARE HIS REASONS, WHAT ARE HIS PROOFS, FOR THIS ACCUSATION AGAINST CARDINAL LAW??? As I said, ANYONE can make accusations against ANYONE, about ANYTHING. But, if that persons has not solid proof, has no clear reasons, for his accusations, then he is doing evil, he is spreading falsehoods, he is acting unjustly." There my point has been made.

Mike, instead of quoting yourself repeatedly, how about if you see if you can find where I said that ALL Catholic Bishops or ALL of the Catholic Church hierarchy are guilty of concealing the crimes of the child molesting priests.

Mind you, it won't be easy, BECAUSE I NEVER SAID IT. You seem intent on arguing with me about something I never said. Why?

As for what my proof of the fact that SOME Catholic Bishops DID cover up the molestations is, all you need do is go back a few pages and follow the links I've provided. I've suggested this previously but you seem to prefer to argue against things I've never said. Why do you refuse to simply take a look at the links? Are you afraid that it might destroy whatever point you're trying to make?

The only point I am trying to make is that you seem intent on lying to everyone that reads these comments.Some Catholic Bishops were not as quick as others in having these priests prosecuted but just because they were not as quick as you would like then to have been does not mean they were "covering up" for anyone.And no you do not literally say "all catholic bishops covered up for these priests crimes" but you did say "some priests molest boys, sometimes many boys, and sometimes over a period of many years. Church officials, including Cardinal Law, knew about this but did NOTHING to stop it or turn the priests into the police." When you say "Church officials" you are not excluding any "officials" whomever they are, and so it may have been an error on your part but you ARE saying intentionally or not that ALL catholic "officials" covered up for these crimes.P.S.- I have looked at your links but all they state is that priests/one nun has molested/raped children. It does not say anything about "officials" as you call them covering up for these clergyman, just how the "officials" were slow in having these guilty clergy prosecuted.

Mike said:

"Some Catholic Bishops were not as quick as others in having these priests prosecuted but just because they were not as quick as you would like then to have been does not mean they were "covering up" for anyone."

"I have looked at your links but all they state is that priests/one nun has molested/raped children. It does not say anything about "officials" as you call them covering up for these clergyman, just how the "officials" were slow in having these guilty clergy prosecuted."

No, Mike, that is NOT all the news stories say. If you look at the Boston Globe articles in particular, you'll see that they name specific people in the Catholic Church who covered up for the child molesting priests.

Yes, Mike, SOME Catholic Bishops DID know about the sexual molestation of young boys by some priests and, rather than report them to the police AS REQUIRED BY THE LAW, moved them to other parishes to protect them. Sad but true.

If you know of even one child molesting priest who was reported to the initially (before the family of the victim reported the crime, in other words) by a Catholic Bishop, please give us the name of the priest and Bishop in question. I won't hold my breath.

Please stop making excuses for authority figures who deliberately took advantage of children and hurt them and those who covered up for those criminals.

To do it Cranky style-Cranky said "Please stop making excuses for authority figures who deliberately took advantage of children and hurt them and those who covered up for those criminals."
Let me ask you a question Cranky Media Guy- While yes, I do admit "authority figures" did take advantage of children, and so thus they should be punished, how do you automatically come to the conclusion that lots of Bishops in the Catholic Church covered up for them? I agree with Mike when he states that maybe some Bishops were slow in having the priests prosecuted but that it doesn't mean they covered up for them. And please do NOT point to the Boston Globe again as a good source of evidence. That is ONE Cardinal who covered up for one or two priests (I forget how many)That was one real situation where a Cardinal covered up for a priest so he wouldn't be prosecuted for a while and in case you didn't know Cardinal Law is no longer a Cardinal.If all you have to show for your argument that Catholic officials have been covering up for molestors is one webiste talking abut ONE Cardinal covering up for a priest or two, I'd say you had a crap argument there Crank Media Guy.

Also everyone these are the sites Cranky listed for his onfo on how Catholics have been covering up for molestors :Here are some links you may find interesting:

http://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=8607

http://www.harpers.org/subjects/CatholicFaith/SubjectOf/Event

http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050731/NEWS08/507310305/-1/ARCHIVES30
Now let's talk about these shall we?

1. I hardly believe that a good source of evidence from you should be from asye called "SKEPTIC FORUM" WRITTEN BY PEOPLE LIKE YOU.
2.Harpers lists a series of Catholic events from the year 2001 to like 20003 and contains one paragraph saying how a couple of ex-catholic priest were prosecuted.
3. And finally toledoblade talks about an EX-PRIEST that was fired from his diocese and banned from working in all other ones and basically stalked a high school nearby. That has absolutely nothing tot do with current not-fired priests being covered up for.

William said:


"1. I hardly believe that a good source of evidence from you should be from asye called "SKEPTIC FORUM" WRITTEN BY PEOPLE LIKE YOU."

What does "people like you" mean in this context? People who aren't willing to overlook the fact that officials of the Catholic Church deliberately protected child molesters?

"2.Harpers lists a series of Catholic events from the year 2001 to like 20003 and contains one paragraph saying how a couple of ex-catholic priest were prosecuted."

Does it say antyhing about them being prosecuted because members of the Catholic Church "management" reported their crimes to the police? It doesn't, does it? That would be because THAT NEVER HAPPENED.

"3. And finally toledoblade talks about an EX-PRIEST that was fired from his diocese and banned from working in all other ones and basically stalked a high school nearby. That has absolutely nothing tot do with current not-fired priests being covered up for."

I notice you left out the Boston Globe articles which have been linked to. Hmmm, why would that be, I wonder.

You also don't deal with the fact that the priest who was apparently the worst offender was quietly transferred to the Vatican where, of course, he is away from American law enforcement.

William said:

"[H]ow do you automatically come to the conclusion that lots of Bishops in the Catholic Church covered up for them? I agree with Mike when he states that maybe some Bishops were slow in having the priests prosecuted but that it doesn't mean they covered up for them."

What does "slow" mean here? I've asked you before to give me the name of even ONE Bishop who reported the sexual abuse of a child by a priest to the authorities. Please do so.

The Bishops had to deal with the situation AFTER the families or the victims themselves reported it, but to my knowledge, NO Bishop EVER reported any of the crimes to the police, AS THE LAW REQUIRES. Dealing with it after the fact DOES NOT count as "reporting" it.

They were not "slow," they were criminally negligent.

"And please do NOT point to the Boston Globe again as a good source of evidence."

Why? Don't you think that if the Globe was incorrect or inaccurate in its reporting, the Church would have sued for libel and/or slander?

Even if you feel that the Globe only points to ONE incident, it's still evidence than YOU'VE provided us with.

Name ONE Bishop or other person in the hierarchy of the Church who did what the law requires them to do and turned in a child molesting priset to the authorities.

Since you apologists seem to have a problem with newspaper articles which are a few years old, how about one from March 7, 2008? That's yesterday.

http://rawstory.com/news/afp/US_Catholic_church_paid_615_mln_dlr_03072008.html

Here's my favorite part:

"According to Terry McKiernan, president of 'Bishop Accountability,' which documents the abuse crisis in the Roman Catholic church, more than 5,000 priests out of the 42,000 across the United States have been denounced for sexual abuse."

Is 5,000 a "few?"

Don't like that number? How about this:

"The John Jay report was commissioned by the US Conference of Catholic Bishops from the eponymous College of Criminal Justice in Washington. It found that nearly 4,400 priests had been accused of abuse."

Did you catch that that is from a study commissioned by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops? In other words, the Catholic Church PAID for a study that says that "nearly 4,400 priest had been accused of abuse."

Let's take the Catholic Church at its word. Over 4,000 priests have been accused of sexually molesting children. Still want to downplay the problem in the Catholic Church? Why?

Wow you are arrogant aren't you little man? I DID mention the Boston Globe article in the comment I made BEFORE the one with all the other sites, so yeah, try to pay more attention next time okay? Can you do that? Also you've never asked me to give you the name of a Bishop who had a priest prosecuted but I will get that for you since you seem to want a name so badly.And on Harpers it may not say that a Bishop reported the crimes but it also never said that a Bishop never did.Apparently you only managed to be able to read one sentence of my Boston Globe comments let me give you the rest right here "That is ONE Cardinal who covered up for one or two priests (I forget how many)That was one real situation where a Cardinal covered up for a priest so he wouldn't be prosecuted for a while and in case you didn't know Cardinal Law is no longer a Cardinal.If all you have to show for your argument that Catholic officials have been covering up for molestors is one webiste talking abut ONE Cardinal covering up for a priest or two, I'd say you had a crap argument there Cranky Media Guy." And finally, 5,000 molestors in the history of the Catholic Church? First off where did you get the statistic, and considering there have been like 3 billion Catholics in the history of the world I would say that's pretty good in regards to other churches. In 500 years the Portestant church has had an average of 282 sex abuse cases a year. That's a little bit more than 5,000 just to give you an idea of how bad it is in comparison to other churches. But whether you're an atheist. Jew, Christian, Muslim, Hindu etc... there will always be a child molestor in your religion.

William said:

"Wow you are arrogant aren't you little man? I DID mention the Boston Globe article in the comment I made BEFORE the one with all the other sites, so yeah, try to pay more attention next time okay?"

Getting testy are we? I was referring to the fact that you cherry-picked which articles to refer to, leaving out the Boston Globe one. Yes, I'm perfectly aware that you've referred to it previously; I was talking about the ones you referred to in THAT posting.

"Also you've never asked me to give you the name of a Bishop who had a priest prosecuted but I will get that for you since you seem to want a name so badly."

Let's be clear here. I'm talking about any Bishop who was the person who reported the crime(s) committed by a child molesting priest to the police. NOT a Bishop who, after the fact, was forced to admit that a priest or priests had molested young boys. I won't hold my breath waiting for you to find such a name.

"And finally, 5,000 molestors in the history of the Catholic Church? First off where did you get the statistic, and considering there have been like 3 billion Catholics in the history of the world I would say that's pretty good in regards to other churches."

Gee, your reading comprehension isn't all that great, is it? The article DOES NOT say that there have been 5,000 child molesters in the 2000-year history of the Catholic Church. It says that an organization of victims of abuse by priests says that 5000 of the priests in America CURRENTLY have been accused of molestation. Very different from what you want to believe it says.

It also says that a study COMMISSIONED BY THE CATHOLIC CHURCH determined that 4,400 priests currently in the U.S. have been accused of molestation.

So, pick your number: 5,000 or the *mere* 4,400 admitted to by the Church. Even if we go with the lower number admitted to by the Church, it's a LOT of perverted priests. Or are you calling the Catholic Church a liar?

"In 500 years the Portestant church has had an average of 282 sex abuse cases a year."

First off, there is no such thing as the "Protestant church" (even correcting for your typo). There are many Christian denominations which are called "protestant" but there is NO "Protestant Church."

Second, you're claiming that from the year 1508 on, there's been an average of 282 sex abuse cases per year involving Protestant clergy? Wow, that's some statistic. Uh, where did you get it from, may I ask? Who was keeping statistics like that 500, 400, 300, 200, even 100 years ago? Please give us your source(s) for that information.

As a Catholic, you DO know that lying is a sin, right?

Well, how many child abusing Catholic Priest's have been sent to prison for molestation in the past 100, 200, 300, 400, 500, +++++++ year's, then Mr Peado Priest, cuz there aint any cuz of the fact that Your a Nazi 2nd Chance to of a Dog half brain to rape a kid Organisation in colude with the World Health Organisation, with your Freemaqson Fama Fratunitatis deal to keep Your Priest's public record's out of any shit, and drugging million's of kid's in school's with Ketamine to get your corrupted hand's on their Da Vinci code of the Poet's since 1956, and that's a fact!
What make's me laugh is that you've lost your 2nd Chance with the Globe anyway, cuz the Auroura Borialis, or rather, The Green Man, has now left the Theatre, and not one of you attempted to get on your Roslyn Winding Spinal Apprentice Pillar on Any Lay Line on This Turf to get your 2nd Chance with, cuz all you wanted was to make someone else pay your debt's with their 33 spinal bone's in their back's, instead of paying Jacob Yourself! Now you have no chance left whatsoever, and the Globe will be split in two for the last time! Watching the Weather, when all along Mara has been Watching YOU!

Oh, I forgot to say, Neo, as in Neo Nazi, and All who openeth the Matrix; as if we didn't work that one out! And by the way, you need a Lay Line Conjunction to Open the Matrix in the Bible to know what Constant-in-Pole's mean's Debir, ie; Between the eye's of the Lord", and Your Back's can't turn like Isreal's Daughter'$, lol, you ain't Gat the Ass for it!

Let me restate what I was trying to say- sorry little girl- try and not cry because I chose to type really fast and thus maybe wasn't as clear as you would like. Since 1930 (this statistic can be found on CNN, FOX, AND the Catholic League websites) the Protestant Church- by this I mean out of all the 33,800 Protestant Denomiantions combined sice they all consider themselves to be part of the same denomination, there has been an average of 282 sex abuse cases a year for them. I recently asked a Franciscan if he knew any Bishops that reported a sex abuseer before the faimiles did and this is what I got in reply : think you would have to tell your friend that he needs to contact the Bishops or the Police Departments if he wants that kind of knowledge. If he is interested in statistics he would discover that the number of Catholic Priests who are pedophiles is smaller that any other religious denomination, or any group of teachers in the Public Schools of a particular state, or even in a comparable number of family men in a comparable size group. What I would share with my friend is that the most important thing is that WHEN THE GREAT MAJORITY OF BISHOPS DISCOVERED HOW SERIOUS THIS MATTER WAS, THEY IMMEDIATELY TOOK ACTION....TO PUNISH THE PERPETRATOR,...AND TO MAKE AMENDS TO THE VICTIMS. That is the point that should be stressed. Your friend should know that catholic priests are ordinary human beings, with their strengths and weaknesses. It is not surprising that they do, at times, fall and do terrible deeds. But, it should equally be noted that this is RARE when considering the thousands and thousands of good priests throughout the country. Your friend should also be aware if he has any knowledge of the education practices in general (from say, 1930-1970), and the seminary education in particular in that same period.... He should know that the education was very, very poor when it came to social responsibility in general, and sexual responsibility in particular. This is not to excuse ANYONE in the Catholic Church, be he CARDINAL, BISHOP, PRIEST, OR LAYMAN. But it is to recognize that all this does help us UNDERSTAND (NOT EXCUSE) those who are guilty. I hope these reflections are of some help to you, and your friend. P.S.- I have no idea why he called you my "friend" just so you know.

William said:

"Let me restate what I was trying to say- sorry little girl- try and not cry because I chose to type really fast and thus maybe wasn't as clear as you would like."

So, when you used that silly thing about "the last 500 years," that wasn't you simply pulling something out of your ass but a TYPO? Wow, that's some typo--a multi-sentence typo.

I didn't "misunderstand" what you said. I understood it perfectly; unfortunately for your argument, it was complete, transparent nonsense.

"Since 1930 (this statistic can be found on CNN, FOX, AND the Catholic League websites) the Protestant Church- by this I mean out of all the 33,800 Protestant Denomiantions combined sice they all consider themselves to be part of the same denomination, there has been an average of 282 sex abuse cases a year for them."

If this "statistic" can be found on CNN and Fox, please give us some links to those articles. I don't think I'll be seeing them any time soon, however. I wouldn't be surprised to get a link to the Catholic League website, of course. They're also apologists for the abusers in the Catholic clergy.

Even if we accept your numbers, you're comparing ONE demonination (Catholicism) which according to a survey PAID FOR BY THE CATHOLIC CHURCH has 4,400 priests (out of a total of 24,000) who seem to have a problem with keeping their hands off young children to 33,800 other denominations? Uh, let's divide 4,400 by 33,800 and see how many perverted clergy members those other denominations have on average, shall we? Hint: it would be far fewer than one clergy member per denomination, on average. Your own numbers show what a huge problem there is in the Catholic Church.

More...

"I recently asked a Franciscan if he knew any Bishops that reported a sex abuseer before the faimiles did and this is what I got in reply : think you would have to tell your friend that he needs to contact the Bishops or the Police Departments if he wants that kind of knowledge."

In other words, you have no answer to my question. That's what I thought. I asked you to give me the name of EVEN ONE Bishop who reported a child abusing priest to the police AS REQUIRED BY LAW. Neither you nor your "friend" (if he exists) can do so. Not even one. I would think you two would be eager to supply that information if it existed, to bolster your argument and prove me wrong.

"What I would share with my friend is that the most important thing is that WHEN THE GREAT MAJORITY OF BISHOPS DISCOVERED HOW SERIOUS THIS MATTER WAS, THEY IMMEDIATELY TOOK ACTION....TO PUNISH THE PERPETRATOR,...AND TO MAKE AMENDS TO THE VICTIMS."

Hey, remember when I said that admitting to the problem after it was public knowledge was NOT the same thing as doing what the law requires, which is to REPORT THE ABUSE TO THE AUTHORITIES? You and your "friend" (if he exists) did exactly what I was asking you NOT to do: equate taking action to contain the public relations problem with complying with the law. Sorry, not even close to the same thing. The Bishops who hid this information from the police broke the law. Just admit it.

"What I would share with my friend is that the most important thing is that WHEN THE GREAT MAJORITY OF BISHOPS DISCOVERED HOW SERIOUS THIS MATTER WAS, THEY IMMEDIATELY TOOK ACTION....TO PUNISH THE PERPETRATOR,...AND TO MAKE AMENDS TO THE VICTIMS."

So, if they "immediately took action to make amends," why did they have to be taken to court? Why didn't they just do what was morally and legally called for WITHOUT being sued?

Also, please give us all the name of even ONE priest who was punished by a Bishop prior to the Church having to pay his victims. It isn't "immediate" if you don't take action until you're FORCED to.

"He should know that the education was very, very poor when it came to social responsibility in general, and sexual responsibility in particular."

Seriously? You're claiming that a priest said this? Don't Catholic priests have any familiarity with a little book called the Bible? Isn't there quite a bit in there about expected behavior and responsibility? Even putting that aside, is your "friend" (assuming he exists) REALLY saying that prior to 1970, a Catholic priest wouldn't have been aware that it's IMMORAL and ILLEGAL to have forced sex with a child???? (Yes, it was illegal even prior to 1970 to rape a child.)

If a priest really said that, it's a greater condemnation of the Catholic clergy than anything I could come up with.

I have a couple of things to say and then I'm done for good.First off a Franciscan is NOT a priest he is a disciple of Christ and has most likely a wife and kids and a second job in the secular world.Here are some links on Protestant sex abuse scandals/cases from NON- Catholic sites-
1.http://www.christianpost.com/article/20070618/28035_Released_Figures_Offer_Glimpse_into_Protestant_Sex_Abuse_Problems.htm
2.http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2007/06/18/80877.htm
3.http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/16/us/16protestant.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
4.http://www.stopbaptistpredators.org/article07/three_insurers_shed_light.html
5.MY PERSONAL FAVORITE ONE-http://www.catholicleague.org/research/abuse_in_social_context.htm
6.http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,286153,00.html

It's just pathetic excuse after pathetic excuse with this Priest using shit excuse after shit excuse, a classic Munchausen left hemisphere half brain Catholic Church that think's they can keep hiding their child abuse's under their dirty skirt's. We all know the Vatican's involvement with the Mafia, money laundering, prostitution, and arm's and drug dealing for decade's, and the prostitution of women and children is the Vatican's interpretation of the Whore Of Babylon, which is Edinbourgh in it's true translation, "babylon is burning", Home of the tobacco industry, the Rothschild's!
funny how the Vatican has been one of the biggest financial contributor's to Stem Cell Research in the last 20 year's, and then they come out with their bullshit 7 deadly sin's concerning genetic engineeering, so can't anyone see what fucking half brain Munchausen's the entire Vatican Church is, and stop giving them shit to play with like petty argument's about statistic's that the media and authority's fabricate to hide to fact's anyway! Even Nato slammed a 100 year gag order on the UK media in 2005 about the German Government's deal with Abdicated King Edward and Freemason Hitler in 1936, which involve's the British M.O.D. Ketamine Experiment on troop's children to introduce the German Peadophile Society into Britain, and that's a fact! I have evidence that Labour Party MP's are involved in a British M.O.D. peadophile ring within the Council Public Service's system, just like what's been discovered in Jersey, where all the Police are all Freemason member's with a Fama Fraturnitatis Deal with the Vatican to hide their sexual abuse's of children, same as the Police in the UK, and I've got evidance to prove it too!
So stop farting about with statistical crap that is just a pathetic argument that this fucked up half brained Peadophile Catholic Priest love's to change the subject just like a true Munchausen, the 'Proxy' is when their Freemason Police fabricate the evidance in reverse to blame the victim for being greedy for a Fiver, and that's how they got 4 of my kid's! Anyone that use's freezing water on anyone's forehead, and call's it Baptism, is practicing Wayko Abuse, as this is how they Bleach the right hemisphere Bosse to cut off the coherent neural connectivity between both hemisphere's of the brain, which is known as Syneasthesis, which is suposed to last a man all his life, not to the age of 5 year's old! The Vatican is obsessed with 'Youth', and envy innocence, that's all the Vatican is, and if you think i'm going to believe any shit that come's out of their Ratarsed Pope, they've got another thing comming! No one with all 6 natural human sense's would want to tollerate the very existence of the Vatican organisation, cus it's not a Church, it's a Peadophile cult using the Bible as a Scapegoat, and using the Police and Military to cover up for their shit, and that's all they are!

Some more sites-
1.www.goodwininsuranceagency.com/pdf/Report%20on%20Sex%20Abuse.pdf -
2.news.public.findlaw.com/ap/o/51/06-14-2007/aeae0051d0d52331.html
Now I hope that's enough to prove my statistics on the Protestant Church (33,800 denominations combined) are correct. If you would like more sites on the Protestants/other religions please just ask.
The Franciscan I talked to told me (you were the "friend" he mentioned in the paper Media guy though I have no idea why he called you that.)that Catholic priests are only human and DO make mistakes but not all priests nor the majority of them molest children or have sex with adults. By the way there are currently 43,941 American priests not "24,000" as you incorrectly told us.

To Kanut:I was talking to Cranky Media Guy, he asked me to show my stastistics on the protestant "church's" sex abuse cases and I did- I am not trying to "cover up" for ANY child abuser sexually or otherwise that has worked in a Catholic Church they should be punished and all I was doing was telling Cranky that Catholics are not the only ones with these problems. he asked me to show proof of this and I did. My cuurent stance on this situation is just simply:Don't let one bad apple spoil the whole bunch." (obviously it isn't just one priest but you get what I am trying to say. If you don't though let me restate that: If a couple of priests screw up (they are just human after all) and molest some children that does not mean the Catholic church is false, it just means people that work in the Catholic Church screwed up big time . Jesus Christ founded the Catholic Church and it survives today through apostolic succession. It IS the one true Church of God but it has human's working in it so problems are inevitable when it comes to some priests making moral errors and poor judgment.Thanks

Also KAnut are you sure your real name on here isn't KAOS and you didn't get booted from the server and so changed your name, because you seem to act a lot like he did?

William said:

"I have a couple of things to say and then I'm done for good.First off a Franciscan is NOT a priest he is a disciple of Christ and has most likely a wife and kids and a second job in the secular world."

Um, is "Franciscan" NOT an order of priest in the Catholic Church? If there are Franciscans who aren't priests, I'm not aware of them. What exactly are they?

So, which of the news stories you gave us links to back up the contentions that Catholic Bishops DIDN'T cover up for sex abuse by priests or that "In 500 years the Portestant [sic] church has had an average of 282 sex abuse cases a year."

Your take on this seems to be that if you can show that there has been sex abuse by some Protestant ministers, that somehow lessens the evil of the abuse caused by Catholic priests. Have you ever heard the saying, "Two wrongs don't make a right"?

I didn't make up the 24,000 priest number; it came from the article I cited. The article seems to say that the 24,000 number came from the Church itself.

It looks to me that, since you can't prove that Bishops didn't cover up for priests who raped young children, you want to change the argument to "everyone does it."

I say lock 'em up and throw away the key. If there's an afterlife (a HUGE "if"), that will take care of itself.

William said:

"[A]ll I was doing was telling Cranky that Catholics are not the only ones with these problems. he asked me to show proof of this and I did."

Nope, sorry. I never asked you any such thing. I've never said that people other than Catholic priests don't molest children. What I HAVE said is that there seems to be a rather high percentage of Catholic priests who sexually molest young kids and that higher-ups in the Church have gone out of their way to protect them from the law. Both of those things are, unfortunately, true.

'Jesus Christ founded the Catholic Church'. No, that is utter Bullshit, some half brained crim idiot looking for a scapegoat in the Bible founded your Organisation called the Vatican, so stop calling yourselve's by the name of 'The Scapegoat', cuz you're already in the shit cuz the whole planet's lost the Auroura Borialis, so how are you going to save your Ass now that you can't jump on any apprentice Winding Pillar on any Lay Line Conjunction to get off this planet when it split's in half for the last time!
Don't tell me after so many hundred's of year's of GLOBAL PUBLIC report's and evidence about the Vatican and Catholic Church's involvement with crim's all over the Globe, you decided it was the right Religion/Organisation for you, and that mean's your a fucking crim hiding your guilty backside behind a Public Religious Farce, and you fucking know it! Stop using the Spirit of a Woman to hide behind, cuz you havn't got the fucking brain's to reverse Hebrew back into Gaelic Welsh, cuz you havn't got the right hemsiphere Syneasthetic Bosse for it, you fucking Pavlov!
oh, by the way, my name's the Black Rose called Mohammet, cuz i'm a Copy of an Original, and the Yeoman's have got a Sterling Silver Bulach Press Plate, which belong's to me, to prove it! But you can call me Many, dear!

If Jesus didn't found the CATHOLIC CHURCH then kaos pray tell, who did found the Catholic Church. And to Cranky: I find it funny you ask for my proof that there are 282 cases of sex abuse w/Protestants I prove my point and you change the subject on me. If you remember senile old man you aked for proof on that

By the way Cranky I agree with you when you say ALL child molestors deserved to be locked away. What we disagree on is whether or not The Catholic Church covers up for the molestors. Please can you tell me, since you find it to be so true,when and where did this occur. Can I have sites saying "the catholic church covered up for so and so here and here" preferably from sites not called something like "skeptic forum" but from good relaible news sites. Thanks.

William said:

"What we disagree on is whether or not The Catholic Church covers up for the molestors. Please can you tell me, since you find it to be so true,when and where did this occur."

I've given that to you previously. Go back and find the link to the Boston Globe. It talks about the Bishop from Boston and how he did NOT report the molestation by priests to the police, AS REQUIRED BY LAW.

William said:

"And to Cranky: I find it funny you ask for my proof that there are 282 cases of sex abuse w/Protestants I prove my point and you change the subject on me. If you remember senile old man you aked for proof on that"

William, here's what you actually said:

"In 500 years the Portestant [sic] church has had an average of 282 sex abuse cases a year."

Would you kindly show us all exactly where you provided proof of that ridiculous claim?

People who make up absurd statistics really ought to lay off the personal attacks.

I think it's past time for you to simply admit that you can't mount a rational defense of your position on this subject. Making up nonsense is pretty much an admission of that, whether or not you realize it.

ARE YOU INSANE CRANKY?????????????? On the page before this and this current page I have stats showing this statistic from Fox, ny times and many more. YOU ARE CRAZY. Look man I'm not trying to be rude but you need serious help.We have had this conversation recently before and you might need to take Alzheimers medication or something because it's almost like you keep repeating your arguments and I have to keep telling you I've already showed my proof with websites. But maybe you missed them look on the top of this page and the bottom of the previous page for my proof. And one article about a Cardinal does not show there is a serious cover-up of molestors in the Catholic Church.

By the way Cranky I thought you would like this, read carefully, there is a pedophilia no tolerance comment in there: you are a drug addict, an oligarch, a scientist doing a stem cell research, if you pollute the environment, then it means that you will spend your life after death burning in hell. The Roman Catholic Church decided to expand the list of mortal sins against the background of the era of globalization.
The list runs as follows: pollution, genetic engineering, obscene riches, addiction to drugs, abortion, PEDOPHILIA and social injustice. All these sins join the original seven deadly sins defined by Pope Gregory the Great in the sixth century: pride, envy, gluttony, greed, lust, wrath and sloth.

What no comments? Hmmm... Maybe your Alzheimers disease made you forget Cranky.

William said:

"Look man I'm not trying to be rude but you need serious help.We have had this conversation recently before and you might need to take Alzheimers medication or something because it's almost like you keep repeating your arguments and I have to keep telling you I've already showed my proof with websites."

William, you need to stop with the absurd personal insults. They aren't helping you make your point and only serve to show that you CAN'T make your point.

OK, you claim you've given me evidence to back up what you've said? Please tell me which link or links support this:

"In 500 years the Portestant [sic] church has had an average of 282 sex abuse cases a year."

That's all I really want to know at this point. You say there's proof of that out there. OK, show us all.

Now, as for repeatedly calling me "old," if you think that's justified, then you must know my age. What is it?

Or is this another one of those "typos" of yours?

Oh, by the way, did you know that higher-ups in the Catholic Church actually VOTED not to discipline a priest after the first incident of child abuse? Yup, a priest has to be caught doing it at least TWICE before any action will be taken.

But the Church is "very concerned" about the problem. Uh huh.

This news story (along with others) says in plain language that the Bishops voted AGAINST a "no tolerance" policy for sex abuse of children by priests.

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2002/06/14/priest_abuse020614.html

If that policy has changed since then, please
provide links to anything that proves that.

William said:

"The Roman Catholic Church decided to expand the list of mortal sins against the background of the era of globalization.
The list runs as follows: pollution, genetic engineering, obscene riches, addiction to drugs, abortion, PEDOPHILIA and social injustice."

According to Catholic doctrine, the Pope speaks directly for God. So, did God just decide recently that pedophilia is a mortal sin?

If so, does that mean that the priests who sexually molested young children PRIOR TO this proclamation are off the hook and NOT condemned to go to Hell for all eternity? I wonder why God didn't say something about this sin sooner.

What does this has to do with "globalization" by the way?

I told you, the Freemason/Nazi peado ring founded your man made Catholic Church, and use's the Bible as a Scapegoat for their Dog-ma religion, which is why Mohammed The Prophet called them Infidel's.

I already told you Catholic's take lesson's in reverse psychology, and that's what they think is oliver Cromwell's 'Self Denying Ordinance', which is suposed to be used when your physically dead, not mentally Cranky! And yes, he does keep repeating himself over proving statistic's, cuz that's what Munchausen half brain Schitzo's looking for a scape rout do when they can't overcome Stockholm Syndrome, the 'Shut your gob for a

It's funny, cuz Cranky already admitted he was a peadophile a while back when he mentioned being persecuted, and that's where the Vatican's Which Hammer 'Condemnation of Jeannette', ie; Jean, ie, Sine, as 'Nothing' is in my name! The Vatican think they have the right to take everything from anyone they call by the name of the Scapegoat, as in, 'Jeannette', is related to the name of the Holy Ghost in the form, 'Djinn', short for 'John Of The Summer', ie; John The Baptist in Beaux, ie; a Tomboy; Book of Revelation 22: the Spirit and the Bride, and we all know what getting something out of nothing mean's!
So come on then Cranky, tell the truth the way it is, cuz all we have to do is shove you through a CAT Scanner to see if your talking with your left hemisphere 'Fake Pride' Munchausen Super Id, ie; out of your shitty arse', or your right hemisphere 'Conscience Coherent' Bosse, ie; out of the Devil of an Asses Jawbone, ie; the 'Mute' nerve between both hemisphere's of the brain that the Vatican have been trying to kill off in children around the Globe for decade's, cuz they can't control their Envy over the Son's love for the Mother, ie; the Oedipus Pubescent Reversal Syndrome, and that's what the Vatican is, an Institution for the 'Criminally Oedipal Fear Syndrome Insane', that don't want to grow up and be accountable as adult's, and have no distinction's between 'Love' and 'Sex'! Just like the British Prime Minister Gordon Brown's conference statement made at Bournmouth, November 2005; "This is a SEXUAL ISSUE, not a National Issue', and blatently opening his gob on Public TV, that the Mastrict Treaty is a Sex Experiment that involve's children for the Dutch Nazi Pharmasutical Industry, of which the Vatican has been involved in for year's, and Nato know's all about it, cuz they slapped a 100 year gag order on the Media about it, and I ain't a Carnigie with my eye's and ear's shut for my Daddy and a whack on the back of my head for a Majik Circle that ain't got any Black Art's other than to fuck about in Public Record's, hold eachother to ransom with prostitute's, and threaten to behead everyone that squeel's, and that's the Fama Fratunitatis deal the Vatican's had with the Freemason, AKA, Skull N' Bone's Half Brained Pavlov Society, to reverse anyone attempt's to persecute them for their abuse's in any Public Judicial system on this planet, and that's all they have as their rendition of the Holy Ghost Dogma of Freemasonry, which leave's them with 'No Escape' from the consequencies!

So tell us Cranky, what's this so called secret of Redemption you state Your Church has, cuz all I got out of your foundation's is your deal with the Freemason's to keep your public record's clean, your involvement in the Nazi Ketamine Experiment on Kid's in Public School's in the UK since 1936 , which involved abdicated King Ed, and Hitler to move their Manley Piss-up Beer Hall Organisation to the UK, of which the Jersey satanic cult worshipping Social Service's is just the tip of the Iceburgh in the realm of Pitcairn Society's brought up on fake Medi(c)eva(i)l reverse psychology history. Here, work out why a father named his son, a 'nanny goat's pleasure', then you might be able to work out that all the sex ed you got at medical college is the reversed psychology of a drugged girl on Ketamine in the name of Zeigmond Freude! So come on then Cranky, where's your Vatican's Special Redemption that you keep saying your Church/Man Made Religious Organisation, is suposed to have that you got from God? Cuz I know your involved in Nasa's big Alaska Antenna Satalite Array Project, that's due to go off in 2012, another rerun of the Nazi War Of The World's/"Devil's Night (a conscious planet), is once upon us again, let's start a few fire's to distract the Public, throw a few party's at the Public's expense, and make plenty of profit out of the Public Purse, as our arses are exposed, and were gona die at Dawn!", in which the Vatican is going to play a major acting part in pretending to save the World! And I know there aint anyone in the Vatican that can Bow/Beaux, their Back's on any Winding Pillar on Any Lay Line on this planet to empty their Cup's, cus they aint got the Long$hank$, or the Iron$ide'$ for it!

Learn to tell yourself the truth Cranky, cuz your bullshit reverse psychology you got from a 5 year old for your Schitzophrenic Munchausen escapsism dosn't work on me, and your Alzheimer's is blatently showing up in your reply's!

Kaos I really think you are one of the funniest people I have ever met. You made me laugh for about ten minutes afterr I read your postings to Cranky Media Guy. Even if you don't believe in him God Bless you Kaos.hahahaha- You're a character man, you are funny. Anway TO CRANKY:
1. That paragraph I gave to you states that God through his divine intercession told the Pope to make those sins that I showed you in my last comment part of the deadly sins...aka- there are now more than seven deadly sins. Pedophilia was already a mortal sin but now God had decided it is time for the world to know Pedophila is a very serious mortal sin and that is all that comment to you meant.
2.YOUE ARE A MORON- LET ME GIVE YOU MY LINKS PROVING MY STATISTIC FOR THE THIRD FRIGGIN TIME-1.http://www.christianpost.com/article/20070618/28035_Released_Figures_Offer_Glimpse_into_Protestant_Sex_Abuse_Problems.htm
2.http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2007/06/18/80877.htm
3.http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/16/us/16protestant.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
4.http://www.stopbaptistpredators.org/article07/three_insurers_shed_light.html
5.MY PERSONAL FAVORITE ONE-http://www.catholicleague.org/research/abuse_in_social_context.htm
6.http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,286153,00.html

Some more sites-
1.www.goodwininsuranceagency.com/pdf/Report%20on%20Sex%20Abuse.pdf -
2.news.public.findlaw.com/ap/o/51/06-14-2007/aeae0051d0d52331.html
Now I hope that's enough to prove my statistics on the Protestant Church (33,800 denominations combined) are correct.
NOW FOR THE LOVE OF CHRIST PLEASE STOP ASKING FOR THIS STATISTIC. I AM STARTING TO THINK YOU ARE TRYING TO BE FUNNY.Look man if you are trying to be funny plese go to another site and if you aren't well then WOW, just WOW.
Cranky said:"o, by the way, did you know that higher-ups in the Catholic Church actually VOTED not to discipline a priest after the first incident of child abuse? Yup, a priest has to be caught doing it at least TWICE before any action will be taken." Your proof of this comes from a webiste saying (in 2002 when a different Pope was the Pope)"nder the new policy, those who abused children in the past or who commit sexual abuse in the future would remain priests.
They would be prohibited, however, from any work dealing with the public, from celebrating Mass, to teaching in parochial schools, to serving in a Catholic soup kitchen."
WOW, Cranky sounds to me like they were allowed to be priests but were NOT allowed to do any Catholic sacraments, and attend any Catholic events etc... Sounds like they were allowed to call themselves "priests" but not allowed to be a priest in the technical sense.Gee I think that disproves your theory.OOPS GUESS YOU WERE WRONG...AGAIN.
Oh and "by the way" a preist does not have to molest someone twice before they are in trouble,thanks for maiking that up thought, once again good try.It's up to the Cradinal what to do with a priest when he gets accused of molesting anyone but if they make a bad choice they usually get demoted from being a Cardinal- like what happened to ex-Cardinal Law.

William, it's SO entertaining debating with you as you continue to demonstrate how irrational fanatics can be.

I asked you where you got this statistic:

"In 500 years the Portestant [sic] church has had an average of 282 sex abuse cases a year."

In response, you gave me several links to articles. So, I went and looked at all of them. Funny story, William, NONE of them says anything like that. No mention of

HEHEH...Your stupidity makes you so interesting Cranky.First off A WHILE BACK in these posts, I informed you that I was not accurate in the statistic that in 500 years the Protestant Church has had an average of 282 sex cases a year. I told you when you questioned my statistic that it was in the past 70 years of doing theses studies that it was concluded the Protestant church had an average of 282 sex cases a year. AND that was what I backed up with those webistes.Yes I did give you two Christian sites to back up my claims but I also gave you links to sites such as the NEW YORK TIMES and FOX NEWS. Also Cranky if you were to ask a Protestant, let's say a Methodist, if he considered an Episcopal to be a fellow Protestant and part of his faith he would say yes.Do some research on the history of Protestantism and you will find that all Protestans, even with all of their contradictng doctrines, believe thmeseves to all be of the one true faith, just simply because they all call themseles Protestant.So to compare The Catholic Church with it's 1.3 billion members and the Protestant Church with it's 750 million members is not a bad or unfair thing to do as you believe Cranky. Just because the Catholic sect of Christianity has remained one in unity and doctrines and the Protestant Church has created multiple denominations does not change the validity and truth of my aformentioned statement.They both:The one Catholic Church and the many Protestant denominations- which claim to all be ONE in faithand name have problems with molestation, namely due to the fact HUMANS mere mortals works in their churches,. All I am saying is that if you want to point fingers let's point them at someone who's actually having a very serious problem,not The Catholic Church which, except for the sometimes slow prosecution of it's corrupt employees has no problem at all.

To Kaos: I think you are pretty funny and you seem pretty cool so I want to ask this question but please do not be offended.If , as you say, the Catholic Church was founded by a Nazi then why do history books, theologians and historians all agree it was founded around 70 A.D.? Are you calling them liars? Also where did you supposedly learn this from? Thanks Kaos and have a good day.

William said:

Here's how normal, non-corrupt organizations punish someone: they report them to the police (as the law requires in the case of child abuse) and let the justice system handle things.

Dear Cranky, I see much more clearly now how irrational and biased you are regarding this topic.I don't know hat happened in your past to make you hate Catholic's and think that there is a massive cover-up there, as your only evidence of this is from a site entitled "skeptic forum" But please leave us Catholics and other non- biased people alone. It's fine to have your own beliefs, everyone is entitled to that as a human beingbut DO NOT think for a second that gives you the right to shove your ideas on us. That least time that happened a certain man named Hitler killed millions of innocent people because he was convinced the Jews were also involved in a massive cover-up and were out to kill and brainwash all non-Jews into believeing their beliefs.Leave everyone alone and quit picking on a church that you have not ties to at all. You have not told us you have witnessed or been involved in one of these cases and have no substantial concrete evidence to back up your claim that there is a major cover-up within the Catholic Church regarding pedophiles.You keep changing your arguments, you keep spreading complete bullcrap, and you keep trying to brainwash all of us here into believeing what you have to say. Look believe what you want but at least logically think about the proof you have to back up your claims and where you got that proof from. One site called skeptic forum written by people exactly like you? That's not good enough evidence. One site saying an ex-Cardinal didn't have a priest prosecuted as fast as he should have? That's not good enough either to support your claims that there is a massive cover-up within the Catholic Church.Get a life man, and for Christ's sake leave all of us alone and spread your hate on another site.

From Wikipedia:

"Godwin's Law (also known as Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies)is an adage formulated by Mike Godwin in 1990. The law states:

"'As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.'"

This discussion isn't taking place on Usenet, but I think Godwin's Law applies here.

Yes, William, only a Nazi would have the nerve to point out that the Catholic Church has a bit of a problem with priests who like to stick their penises into small boys and higher-ups who hide that fact from the police. That makes sense to you? O-kay.

The reason you believe that I have "no substantial evidence" about that is because when I link to something like a skeptic organization's website, you say that it is automatically invalid, presumably because you think the group can't possibly be objective (even though you have yet to prove that ANYTHING it said is incorrect). Then when I link to the Pulitzer Prize-winning Boston Globe, the newspaper probably most on top of the child molesting priest scandal, you have a problem with the mainstream press. I'll ask again: how can you dismiss a skeptics' group as a non-objective source for information about this story when YOU repeatedly quote from the Catholic League. Like Godwin, William has a rule, too: If A Source Disagrees With William, It Is Automatically Invalid.

Your zeal to defend what the Church has done is so extreme in fact that you've put yourself in the bizarre position of arguing with the numbers in a study PAID FOR BY THE CHURCH (4,400 priests accused of molestation out of a total of 24,000 American priests).

Then you call what the priests did a "mistake." As I've pointed out to you, that's an attempt to minimize terrible crimes perpetrated against children.

"One site saying an ex-Cardinal didn't have a priest prosecuted as fast as he should have?"

Nice try, William. As you know perfectly well, I've linked to more than one news story which says that higher-ups in the Church went out of their way to hide the crimes from law enforcement. I've asked you more than once to give us the name of even ONE Bishop who told the police what he knew about the priests under him who were harming children. Apparently, even the Catholic League's website couldn't supply you with that information, as you have never produced such a name.

"Get a life man, and for Christ's sake leave all of us alone and spread your hate on another site."

Nice try. It isn't "hate" to disseminate accurate information about an organization which condones child abuse.

Hey, while I'm at it, are you EVER going to tell me how old I am, since you've repeatedly accused me of being old and having Alzheimer's? I mean, you wouldn't want to look as if you're SPREADING HATE toward the allegedly elderly, would you?