| 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 These men are rightly indignant, and furious about the unjust accusations that cannot be proven but are never withdrawn.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!
What’s “sick?” You changing the topic from age of consent for sexual activity to the age of consent for marriage?
What prison, and how many former priests are in it, convicted of pedophilia or child rape or child sexual abuse? What are their names?
You be sure and tell us when you find a pederast priest who decides to marry the 13-year-old boy he's raping.
Not enough.
Evidently you didn't read any of the flds threads. The crime wasn't pederasty, it was bigamous marriage of underage females, which violated the age of consent. Otherwise, marriage of underage females is a defense for sexual activity.
Flinging around something as toxic as NAMBLA on this thread, and implying that those who defend priests against baseless accusations are members, is sick.
Aside from the fact that's not what I said, sadly, after reading some of your comments on this thread, I cannot say the same for your posts. Each one seems to be more appalling than the last.
More sick, vicious, devious, deceitful lies. YOU be sure and tell us when you find a pederast priest who has raped a 13 yo. Oh, and provide a link please. The credibility of bigots is in question.
129 posted on Monday, April 19, 2010 2:42:15 PM by Judith Anne 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?
You specifically mentioned "sexual activity" and then went on to assert the possibility of sex with 14 and 15-year-olds as being legal.
Oh really? Are any of them as appalling as equating my posts with NAMBLA membership?
What about idol worship? Are any of my posts as apalling as equating the ROSARY to idol worship? What about the crucifix? Are any of my posts as apalling as equating a crucifix with keeping Christ hanging on the cross?
Okay, how serious is a misdemeanor?
Now, how about telling us how many convicted former priests are in that prison near you. And how about telling us the name of ANY priest who raped a 13 yo. How about a 14 yo?
Can’t do it.
And the crucifix does keep Christ on the cross when, in fact, He has risen. Rejoice in that gift instead of keeping Him bleeding on the cross.
And it is equally true that comments like yours tonight are often voiced by NAMBLA.
Posted on Thursday, April 25, 2002 12:18:29 PM by Notwithstanding
Church uncovers file on Shanley NAMBLA activity
by Maggie Mulvihill and Robin Washington
Thursday, April 25, 2002
In the latest example of the Boston archdiocese's chaotic record-keeping on problem priests, church officials acknowledged yesterday their discovery of new records detailing allegations of the Rev. Paul R. Shanley’s involvement in NAMBLA - the North American Man-Boy Love Association.......
The above is from an FR post as per the date. And as posted here on FR, it was a priest that co-founded the Gay/Lesbian Task Force.
Egad. Anything to deflect the discussion away from pederast priests.
Yes it is legal when they are married. See, that's what happens when presbyterians try to twist other people's statements. They get hoist by their own petard.
Got a link?
Until then, your posts reveal an ineptitude I had only heretofore assumed.
Oh, no, bring it on. Name one priest who has raped a 13 yo. I have asked that repeatedly, and there seems to be no answer. How about naming a priest who has raped a 14 yo? How about naming, or numbering, the priests who supposedly are in that prison less than a hundred miles from you?
Maybe he was just engaged to all those boys.
Who is raping a 13 yo? Got a name? One name?
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.