[dsc]

I didn't see you denying that abuse took place on his watch, or that he had a swimming pool put in.

[Notwithstanding]

Because there is no credible evidence to the contrary:

I deny he covered up abuse or was negligent in trying to prevent it.

I deny he did anything the least bit improper as to his new residence.


Whereas, without any credible evidence, you assume he is a pervert and big-spender.

Where is your evidence? Please let us all know about it.

[sitetest]

Dear dsc,

"I didn't see you denying that abuse took place on his watch, or that he had a swimming pool put in."

That he had a swimming pool put in at his new residence doesn't justify comments about inviting over young boys. As for the cases of abuse, perhaps you haven't read this thread carefully. Please refer to post #56, where AlguyA explains thusly:

"Actually, there is nothing coincedental about it at all. Myers left our diocese in Sept. of 2001. In Jan. of 2002, the Boston Globe launched the series of articles which drew national attention to the scandal. At that point, the victims came forward.

"Also, in each instance (with the exception of the one case I outlined before) the abuse took place years before Myers was appointed Bishop. It was the national attention, which even the victims admit, caused them to come forward. And they didn't come forward until after Myers had already left."

It seems that the circumstances of these cases support the assertion that Archbishop Myers did nothing wrong here, had no knowledge of these cases, and cases of abuse didn't actually occur during his time in this archdiocese. The one case referred to here as occuring during his reign was explained by AlguyA as follows, in post #21:

"In the other case, the priest in question made a remark to two young men. Even the young men didn't consider it abuse, but they did tell their parents. When the parents reported it, the priest in question was moved to an administrative position in which, trust me, there was absolutely no way he would come into contact with kids."

Thus, your comment about why he might have a pool installed at his new home was out of line. It would have been out of line, even if Archbishop Myers had mishandled these cases, as it is one thing to misadminister cases of child abuse, it is entirely another thing to actually commit acts of child abuse, and to suggest that someone guilty of the former is also guilty of the latter is a low and base thing. However, that the abuse didn't occur during his reign, nor was it reported until after he left, makes your comments all the more egregious.

But, I'm sure now that the facts have been pointed out to you, you'll stop saying ugly, false things about a Catholic bishop of good reputation.


sitetest