Were the news reporting of priests (molestaions) a liberal media conspiracy?
The media was directed by the Gay & Lesbian Alliance, through their "pro gay" media kits, to label the molestation of teenagers as "pedophilia" instead of "gay rape", to prevent negatvity associated with the gay rights movement. Pedophilia is children, like 4 year olds; the priests attacked teens and pre-teens, not correct to label as pedophilia. It appears the harm to the Catholic Church (something liberal want badly) could affect another liberal partner- the promotion of homosexuality. Who in the socialist army engineered this directive to misrepresent the crimes ?
Answers:
Of course it wasn't you dork, ask the children involved who have to live with it. You sodding sponge brain
yeah, and Iraq is like Disney World right now even though the lib conspiracy tries to convince people that we are losing...
/sarcasm
Are you kidding? I want to know where you live. I'm not interested in your name. I just want to know where you live, so I can make sure that I never move there with my family.
I don't care what age bracket the kids were. They were KIDS, get it? Children were molested by priests. Fact. It's like saying it isn't as bad that instead of a .44 Magnum used to kill someone, you only use a .38 Special to kill them. Big deal. They are still dead and they are still murdered and it's still a crime.
I can believe that the Gay and Lesbian Alliance might have had some interest in making sure that these priests (rightfully) got the media attention they so RICHLY deserved. The reason is that they are good, honorable decent people and they don't want their sexual inclinations lumped in with these disgusting pederasts as if it were an aberration. Disgusting religious fanatics probably think it's OK to molest teens and pre-teens but it's not OK for people to have loving homosexual relationships.
This is why I no longer practice any kind of organized religion. Because of people like you.
Well, first of all, I don't think that the media, however liberal it may be, takes orders from the Gay & Lesbian Alliance. And there's plenty of negativity surrounding the gay rights movement that has little, if anything, to do with abusive priests. I've also never seen any group "promote homosexuality."
Secondly, the victims of sexual abuse by priests are about half male and half female (look it up), thereby negating anything about "gay rape" and making it, in fact, pedophilia.
Thirdly, despite what your opinion of the word may be, the word "pedophilia" applies to any child, which under United States law, is anyone under 18. And FYI, according to the reported cases, the average age of a child when he or she was abused by a priest is 9. That sure seems like pedophilia, even under your skewed view of the world.
And lastly, in every published report and study about pedophiles, or even those who sexually prey on adults, therapists and experts agree that the abuse is rarely, if ever, about sex. It's about power, and power was something that these priests had over everyone, particularly impressionable children -- Catholic priests were and are in a very unique position and for a long time (still now as well, some would argue) they had a set-up where they could abuse multiple children without ever worrying about being caught or prosecuted or even losing their jobs.
So, I'm afraid that your argument has no merit.
How is it that wanting to have sex with pre-teens isn't pedophilia? And most of them were not teenagers at the time of the abuse.
Edit - Ok, now i better understand your point. Hopefully you will find this more responsive:
It is probably not true that the attacks were reported as pedophilia in order to not damage the gay rights agenda.
They were reported as pedophilia because the PRIMARY aspect of the attacks was authority figures raping children, not authority figures raping people of the same gender.
Further, it was only rape BECAUSE it was pedophilia. Had the victims been of consensual age, they would have either refused the priests, in which case no act at all, or they would have consented, in which case gay sex, but not gay rape.
Also, it is not liberals specifically but politicians and/or people with causes that exploit tragedies etc to advance their causes. Eg, at major speeches Bush almost always has on hand and draws attention to a family member of a 9/11 victim.
What in the world is the matter with you? Many of these priest admitted it! Do you think the Roman Catholic church would willing part with many millions of dollars in these cases because of a gay conspiracy? And what in the world do any political labels have to do with this? Have you forgotten the conservative offenders like Foley or Haggard (spelling?) This is not a political question. Go peddle your ignorance elsewhere.
As a liberal, I am not against organized religion.
I am not religious but I was not brought up that way. That doesn't mean that I'm immoral or don't have values.
Liberals are critical thinkers, well at least some of us are.
Some people use organized religion as a way to ostracize others or to fuel their hatred of diversity. I could give personal examples.
Let me just say this: one side of my new family is religious and the other side is not. The side that is not religious is more generous, kinder, more compassionate, and less dysfunctional than the other. I have heard more stories that support what I have personally experienced.
I am tolerant. I know that my experiences cannot necessarily be generalized to the population as a whole.
Gays are not the problem. People are the problem.
The way the Catholic church handled the problem is abominable and criminal. They exercised no morality!!
They are total and complete hypocrites.
I do not agree with the Catholic church on most issues, I'm sure. But I am not against them. I don't necessarily want to see them abolished.
Liberal thinkers live in the real world. We are not blinded by our ideology. We realize that our beliefs may not be reflected in the real world. We are fact seekers. We are not in love with our opinions. We do not always believe we are right. We are willing to change our mind if there is good reason and the facts point out our flaws. We recognize that no one can possibly know everything and be right always.
We practice so-called religious beliefs. We are not hypocrites. But we are also not perfect. All liberals are not equal. I support the highly educated, intelligent, and smart liberals.
The answers post by the user, for information only, FreeLawAnswer.com does not guarantee the right.
Answer question:
More Law Questions and Answers: