Look. The point is not really that more priests rape or that priests rape more often, but that there is an entire institutional culture dedicated to fomenting, suborning, obfuscating, and encouraging rape. That, you know, is really the issue. I mean, when it turns out that some fifteen-year-old knocked up his art teacher, we all recoil in lurid horror, and the poor hussy gets dragged through mud and tar and then thrown in the clink, but when a priest rapes 200 deaf kids, the church is all like, "Whoops, sorry, uh, yeah. Uh, his immediate supervisor definitely will address this issue at his upcoming annual review. A note may be placed in his personnel file. Did you guys call HR? Cause, uh, this isn't really our department." No institution this side of the American penal system seems to me to have so cavalier an attitude toward nonconsensual sex. And that's saying something.
14 comments:
Sorry to state the obvious, however, that is my task in life.
So, are you equating the rape of deaf boys (somewhat amazing that Murphy wasn't at least "defrocked") with nonconsensual sex?
Prof. Obvious
Prof Obvious,
What do you think "non-consensual sex" means, exactly?
G
Not to get all set theory on you, but isn't rape of deaf boys a possible and valid subset of nonconsensual sex?
Oh,
So we soon shall see papist bishops and higher doing the perp-walk courtesy of the 'Merkin Justice System?
Capt'n Obvious
I dunno much 'bout this 'Merkin fella, but Whoopie said that non-consensual ain't rape-rape.
And in other news:
Eight-year-olds, Dude.
According to a radio report I heard this morning some boy-scout troop covered up their counselors molesting the little campers to protect the children. What about that? Huh?
I mean, they call the young ones weblows. QED
These men are cowards.
What's with the wheelchair-bound protagonist thing IOZ?
Are you going to start using fucking lost references next?
See the NYT story on the problems of NY haredim:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/14/nyregion/14abuse.html
So (per NYT, so take with grain of salt):
ultra-Orthodox Jews, long forbidden to inform on one another without permission from the rabbis who lead them,
...
the rabbinical courts, which in several high-profile cases have exonerated people who were later criminally convicted of child abuse
...
Ben Hirsch, founder of Survivors for Justice, a New York group whose members include haredi Jews molested as children in communities nationwide, said the clandestine handling of molestation cases had kept leaders from dealing with the problem and made it easier for predators.
And I can get the same meme from the boyscout-LDS business, and the SoBaptist brouhaha.
No to mention if the CHILUNS! would really be the issue, the nationwide failures of government's foster care system should elbow anything else out of primetime/front page.
Common, is a propaganda campaign so hard to spot?
Capt'n Obvious
seconding cap'in obvs above, check out the letters to the editor in today's (friday) NYT on this subject.
how many times can "forgiveness," "reconciliation," "atonement," "bastion of faith," ad nausea be used? i bet they got one or two letters whose project wasn't to exonerate the perp.
So...I remain confused. This stuff comes out in the media...for whatever reason (propaganda or whatever) and the first response is to defend the Church? is the Good Capn's point that we need to exonerate the rapists, because Leviathan and all that and you know there were a couple of encyclicals against war?
first should be bold, large font, and in caps, of course.
@BrianM
My point is that pederast deviants will find their way in any organization tasked with dealing with kiddos. Be it straightforward ("there's where the money is"), or chicken and egg type thing - crimes of opportunity (vague inclinations to phantasizing to action).
So when it happens in papist organizations is not more or less rape-a-licious than when it happens in other government, government affiliated, government allied, or outright nongovernmental organizations.
Like the latest BoyScout debacle: 1,000 pervs, and the BoyScout honcho arguing that the little biotcheez were practically asking for it.
So when I see the papists being singled out as some sort of pederastoid sons of Beelzebub, I wonder: Qui bono? To what end?
And also it pisses me off seeing IOZ falling for such an obvious propaganda campaign, just because it jibes with the old jewish meme of Catholics-as-Satan's spawn.
I mean after two centuries of alternative and/or simultaneous assraping to Jews and papists courtesy of the nation state, one would think we are beyond:
Hey, LagerKommandant ucase sez Others get flogged today. Let's get out and laugh at Others' vailing.
Capt'n Obvious
Post a Comment