Sexual abuse and allegations involving the clergy (renamed)

[Capablanca-Fan]

George Pell recently took on Twitter over a tweet by Catherine Deveny that took a gaffe by Pell during his generally awful performance in his debate with Dawkins out of context.

Pell had said:

"When in England, we were preparing some young English boys..[long pause]..for Holy Communion."

The audience cracked up during the pause.

Deveny was one of many to reproduce Pell's quote minus the Holy Communion bit.

According to Pell's claim:

"The publication ridicules Cardinal Pell and conveys to Australian readers the false and seriously defamatory imputation that Cardinal Pell is associated with the sexual abuse of young boys"

Given that sexual abuse in the Roman Catholic church was always very rare, much rarer than in government schools, and even the worst cover-ups were following the accepted practice of the day to treat it as a psychological rather than criminal activity, the accusations is tiresome. Then Dawkins himself says that he was mildly sexually abused, and caused outrage by claiming that such mild abuse did no lasting harm.

[Sir Cromulent Sparkles]

Given that sexual abuse in the Roman Catholic church was always very rare, much rarer than in government schools, and even the worst cover-ups were following the accepted practice of the day to treat it as a psychological rather than criminal activity, the accusations is tiresome. Then Dawkins himself says that he was mildly sexually abused, and caused outrage by claiming that such mild abuse did no lasting harm.

"and even the worst cover-ups were following the accepted practice of the day to treat it as a psychological rather than criminal activity ?"

That is some brilliant kind of bullshit excuse you've concocted there gormless wonder.

[Sir Cromulent Sparkles]

Hoorah for sexual assault victims !!!!!

Now they dont have to feel as much anguish against the catholic church because resident halfwit capablanca-fan has stated that the crime perpetrated on them was conducted in an environment which considered this activity to ONLY be a psychological activity. I guess that somehow exonerates the church to some degree in the mind of extremely heartless sociopaths.

Thank goodness we have been able to clarify this matter.

[Sir Cromulent Sparkles]

Just a few questions for capablancafan because we all enjoy his usual salient input ..............

Which particular individuals do you believe considered sexual assault to be a psychological activity only ?
Which period in time do you consider sexual assault changed from being a psychological activity to a criminal activity ?
Do you believe that the impact on the victim was immediately intensified simply because it was deemed criminal ?
Why did the church bother "covering up" sexual assault cases if like you say they were ONLY perpetrated in an environment that deemed them psychological ? Why did it matter for the catholic church to conceal an activity that was not considered criminal ?

[Capablanca-Fan]

Bubblebrain manages to confuse himself but I trust not others. One of the cited articles includes:

What criticisms remain regarding the Church’s handling of these cases?

Much of the public criticism of the Church’s early handling of cases stems from a lack of knowledge about the historical context of this phenomenon.

I have seen newspaper articles criticizing officials for not reporting acts of abuse to the civil authorities during years when there were no child protective services and the particular behaviors involved were not criminalized yet. It is fair for criticism of decisions made in the ’60s and ’70s to focus on interpretation of moral behavior, weakness in the resolve of leaders or even the disregard of procedures set out in canon law. By the same token, it is essential to separate this from expectations that are based on the laws and standards of today.

We began studying sexual abuse in the 1970s, discovered it caused real harm in 1978, and realized perpetrators were difficult to rehabilitate in the 1990s. During the ’70s when we were sending offenders to treatment, the criminal justice system was doing the very same thing with convicted offenders — sending them to treatment instead of prison.

At the time, it was believed they could be cured with relative ease. This is a very young body of knowledge, and as we sort through both valid and questionable criticisms, we must consider the historical context of any given episode.

Regarding the work that remains to be done, the most pressing concern for me is the lack of protocols to guide the supervision and accountability for priests and religious who have been accused or found to have sexually offended in the past or who have completed their obligations to the criminal justice system.

There continues to be a belief that aging and the passing of time will render these men safe. I understand we cannot supervise them if they are no longer a priest or religious, but as long as they are, we should strive to know how they spend their time and whether they are upholding the limits that have been placed on them.

And of course, he is still fixated on the errors in the Roman Catholic Church of decades ago, which were far less prevalent than in the government schools he loves. And your hero Dawkins has rightly been under fire for underplaying the evil of sexual abuse of children.

[Sir Cromulent Sparkles]

Resident sociopath apologist Capablanca-fan still has not been able to grasp the concept that describing the media coverage of Catholic Church sexual assault cases as simply "tiresome", due to the act being performed in an environment that had not fully developed legislation to criminalise this activity, is extremely demeaning to those victims who were affected by the churches actions.

When will the scarecrow ever receive a brain ?
When will the tin man ever find a heart ?

[Capablanca-Fan]

Resident atheopathic hypocrite Bubblebrain can't grasp the fact that it's hypocritical to cover abuse that is mostly decades old while ignoring the far greater incidences of abuse in the government schools now. Nor has he grasped the problem with dealing with abusers decades ago was not confined to the Catholic Church, but was unfortunately the practice of the secular justice system at the time. Thus abuse victims within and without the Church were dealt a severe double injustice: first of being abused, and second that their abusers were not punished as they deserved. Some of its victims, like Bubblebrain's hero Dawkins, have adopted a Stockholm Syndrome attitude that it really wasn't so bad.

[Sir Cromulent Sparkles]

Resident atheopathic hypocrite Bubblebrain can't grasp the fact that it's hypocritical to cover abuse that is mostly decades old while ignoring the far greater incidences of abuse in the government schools now. Nor has he grasped the problem with dealing with abusers decades ago was not confined to the Catholic Church, but was unfortunately the practice of the secular justice system at the time.

Not once have I mentioned that that the Catholic Church is more culpable than any other institution in relation to sexual abuse occurrences. You were the one who decided to defend them. I am only arguing against your willingness to defend them, not because its a church, but because your excuses are designed to diminish responsibility thus insulting and demeaning those who fell victim. Try not to make the incorrect assumption that simply because I am disagreeing with your argument relating to the Catholic Church, I am defending secular institutions. You seem to have a habit of jumping to conclusions without the necessary facts. You are clearly lazy, stupid, heartless and dishonest.

Thus abuse victims within and without the Church were dealt a severe double injustice: first of being abused, and second that their abusers were not punished as they deserved. Some of its victims, like Bubblebrain's hero Dawkins, have adopted a Stockholm Syndrome attitude that it really wasn't so bad.

Not once have I ever mentioned that I like Richard Dawkins. In fact I have categorically stated previously that I have never been impressed with his verve to argue against religion. I know this may shock you, but once again, just because I disagree with you does not mean that all your mortal enemies are my heroes. Again, try not to make foolish assumptions. It makes you look like even more of an idiot than you usually are (although you really cant plumb the depth of stupidity much lower).

You really are the most unscrupulous charlatan Yosemite Sam. Sociopath apologist Capablanca-fan is truly hypocritical to finally decide to feign concern for Catholic church victims having previously decried the poor treatment that the church had supposedly received.

[Capablanca-Fan]

More nonsense as usual from Bubblebrain. I leave it to Dawkins to deny that sexual abuse victims really are victims. Despite Bubblebrain's mendacity, the main problem I had was the Leftmedia and atheopaths for singling out the Catholic Church while ignoring the far greater abuse at government schools, and the double standards of attacking the Church for treating the abuse as a psychological problem when this was the norm in the secular world as well at the time. As the christophobic rag Newsweek admits in Priests Commit No More Abuse Than Other Males (7 April 2010):

The Catholic sex-abuse stories emerging every day suggest that Catholics have a much bigger problem with child molestation than other denominations and the general population. Many point to peculiarities of the Catholic Church (its celibacy rules for priests, its insular hierarchy, its exclusion of women) to infer that there's something particularly pernicious about Catholic clerics that predisposes them to these horrific acts. It's no wonder that, back in 2002—when the last Catholic sex-abuse scandal was making headlines—a Wall Street Journal-NBC News poll found that 64 percent of those queried thought Catholic priests "frequently'' abused children.

Yet experts say there's simply no data to support the claim at all.
…
Since the mid-1980s, insurance companies have offered sexual misconduct coverage as a rider on liability insurance, and their own studies indicate that Catholic churches are not higher risk than other congregations. Insurance companies that cover all denominations, such as Guide One Center for Risk Management, which has more than 40,000 church clients, does not charge Catholic churches higher premiums.
…
The only hard data that has been made public by any denomination comes from John Jay College's study of Catholic priests, which was authorized and is being paid for by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops following the public outcry over the 2002 scandals. Limiting their study to plausible accusations made between 1950 and 1992, John Jay researchers reported that about 4 percent of the 110,000 priests active during those years had been accused of sexual misconduct involving children. Specifically, 4,392 complaints (ranging from "sexual talk" to rape) were made against priests by 10,667 victims.
…
Experts disagree on the rate of sexual abuse among the general American male population, but Allen says a conservative estimate is one in 10. Margaret Leland Smith, a researcher at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice, says her review of the numbers indicates it's closer to one in 5. But in either case, the rate of abuse by Catholic priests is not higher than these national estimates. The public also doesn't realize how "profoundly prevalent" child sexual abuse is, adds Smith.
…
"The fundamental premise here is that those who abuse children overwhelmingly seek out situations where they have easy and legitimate access to children," he said. "These kinds of positions offer a kind of cover for these offenders."
…
A single predator priest with ongoing access to children might be responsible for an immense raft of abuse cases. (Marie Fortune of the Faith Trust Institute, which focuses on clerical-abuse issues, says Roman Catholics tend "to have many more schools and other programs that involve children." "Plenty of other congregations have these problems, for instance, if they have a youth ministry.") That helps explain the 200 children who were abused at a school for the deaf. It didn't happen because the school was full of rapists; it happened because one man was never stopped. Overall, the John Jay study found that 149 priests were responsible for more than 25,000 cases of abuse over the 52-year period studied.

Obviously, that is 25,000 cases too many. No one doubts that, but it suits Bubblebrain to claim otherwise.

It also fails to help past and future victims by singling out an organization that has largely repented of its failures in that area and reformed its approach.

[Sir Cromulent Sparkles]

More nonsense as usual from Bubblebrain. I leave it to Dawkins to deny that sexual abuse victims really are victims. Despite Bubblebrain's mendacity, the main problem I had was the Leftmedia and atheopaths for singling out the Catholic Church while ignoring the far greater abuse at government schools, and the double standards of attacking the Church for treating the abuse as a psychological problem when this was the norm in the secular world as well at the time. As the christophobic rag Newsweek admits in Priests Commit No More Abuse Than Other Males (7 April 2010):

Your initial argument was that the Catholic Church should receive leniency in media reporting due to the fact that treating sexual abuse as a psychological problem was normal practice in ye olden days. But if this was the prevailing environment for the entire community including secular institutions, why then are you relaying to us all this aspect of history for the Catholic church's defence ? You are clearly not differentiating between secular and religious institutions if the practice of treating sexual assault as a psychological problem was universal.

Oh, again with the Dawkins obsession. You really are a hopeless case.

{Prodigious bullshit snipped} ...........................
…
A single predator priest with ongoing access to children might be responsible for an immense raft of abuse cases. (Marie Fortune of the Faith Trust Institute, which focuses on clerical-abuse issues, says Roman Catholics tend "to have many more schools and other programs that involve children." "Plenty of other congregations have these problems, for instance, if they have a youth ministry.") That helps explain the 200 children who were abused at a school for the deaf. It didn't happen because the school was full of rapists; it happened because one man was never stopped. Overall, the John Jay study found that 149 priests were responsible for more than 25,000 cases of abuse over the 52-year period studied.

Obviously, that is 25,000 cases too many. No one doubts that, but it suits Bubblebrain to claim otherwise.

Where have I claimed otherwise you moron ? Direct us all to this elusive information !!

You really are a dishonest clown.
Maybe one day scientists will study the scant matter inside your cranium to finally understand how simple folk function.

[Capablanca-Fan]

Your initial argument was that the Catholic Church should receive leniency in media reporting due to the fact that treating sexual abuse as a psychological problem was normal practice in ye olden days. But if this was the prevailing environment for the entire community including secular institutions, why then are you relaying to us all this aspect of history for the Catholic church's defence ? You are clearly not differentiating between secular and religious institutions if the practice of treating sexual assault as a psychological problem was universal.

No, they should receive fairness, not singling out for a crime that was never as prevalent as in the secular schools, and was largely eradicated decades ago. It is also evidently pointless reminding the low-information atheopathic bigots like you that much of the (rightly) attacked cover-ups were following the practice of secular psychology and jurisprudence of the time, which should also be just as attacked.

Oh, again with the Dawkins obsession. You really are a hopeless case.

Hardly my fault that you share his warped world view.

Maybe one day scientists will study the scant matter inside your cranium to finally understand how simple folk function.

Simplicity is often a virtue when it comes to science, finding "natural laws" that explain a multitude of apparently complex phenomena. But I don't expect low-IQ folk like Bubblebrain to understand.

[antichrist]

It is reported in today's Sun Herald that the RCC knew years before admitting of the paedophilia. It took out a lot of extra insurance, yet Pell may have been denying knowledge of such at the same time. He did not comment when asked about it.

Jono, For years I taught chess in secular schools and every year I had to let them do a FOI on me checking me out. If the same had been done in private schools there would not have been so many scandals.

[Desmond]

[Desmond]

I must admit that I haven't really kept up with the latest in video conferencing technology. Are remote shankings possible?

[Patrick Byrom]

Given that sexual abuse in the Roman Catholic church was always very rare, much rarer than in government schools, and even the worst cover-ups were following the accepted practice of the day to treat it as a psychological rather than criminal activity, the accusations is tiresome.

The claim that sexual abuse in Catholic schools is rarer than in government schools seems to be derived from one estimate of the rate in government schools, and doesn't (of course) excuse sexual (or other) abuse in Catholic schools.

But based on the recent evidence from the Royal Commission, Pell and the Church hierarchy didn't treat the problems as psychological - they simply ignored them:

We already knew Searson had been reported to church authorities for toting a gun, bashing kids across the face with clipboards, sending little girls screaming from the confessional, showing the kids at Holy Family primary a body in a coffin and one day stabbing a bird to death in front of them with a screwdriver.
...
But now we know that Searson had little girls kneel between his legs at confession. We know of many more complaints of touching. And we know that none of these complaints provoked action by the church. After futile delegations of teachers and parents had gone to Pell begging him to get rid of the priest and the Catholic Education Office had sent fruitless complaints to the hierarchy for a decade, the office sent the bishops awful testimony of Doveton children in their own words.