Political Crossfire Forums

[Jimmy Madison]

Quote: If you had not had sex perod for a long time and you saw a young supple boy come along, would you rape him? Yes or no are the only two avialable options here. If yes, that's quite disturbing. If no it shows two things. One, people can control themselves. Two, you're not attracted to young boys.


I agree with you. I have two choices. Which is why I find Callous' assertion the oath of celibacy is the problem to be absurd.

However, we all know homosexuality is an attraction to the same sex. So it should come to no surprise a gay male priest is attracted to members of the same sex, such as boys and men. Just as heterosexuals are attracted to members of the opposite sex and so it should not come as much of a surprise to find a heterosexual pedophile to be attracted to young women.

The question is what is the link between homosexuality and the attraction to children. Pedophilia is the sexual attraction to children. What is it about homosexuality that makes a person more or less likely to be sexually attracted to children. That is the issue.

Quote: This studywas commissioned by the American Bishops and I believe was quite confidential on the specifics. It is from last year.


Well I will have to get my hands on it. I would like to know the specifics of the data leading to the "4 out of 5" claim. As I said if the 4 out of 5 were exclusively around male altar workers then this weakens the claim homosexuality is the cause whereas opportunity may be just as much a cause.

Quote: considering that 80% are boys and that from what I've read from various websites, about 0.5% of priests, and 1% of the nation as a whole (these numbers both include post-pubescents though so it might be "consensual" or whatever.And that also includes those NAMBLA perverts), are perverted pedophiles, one can see there is no link between celibacy and pedophelia

I agree there is no link between celibacy and pedophilia. My question is whether or not there is a causal link between homosexuality and pedophilia. At this time I have seen no evidence to indicate there is such a relationship.

Quote: but somethingcould be drawn between homosexuality in the priesthood and the resulting sex scandal.

Yes I agree. However, there are several conclusions to be drawn at this point. One conclusion there is a link. The other conclusion there is no link. The other conclusion is that opportunity played a role and the priests exploited the opportunity as opposed to going down to the gay bar to find a consenting man. Something more than statistics is needed to establish a link between homosexuality and pedophilia. Simply throwing out numbers such as 4 out of 5 does not tell me anything about a causal link or relationship between homosexuality and pedophilia. There are several conclusions to be drawn from such a number.

I think at this point I am of the opinion pedophilia is a sexual perversion which does not have a link to sexual preference. Pedophilia plagues both homosexuals and heterosexuals and I find it most curious why there is a presumed causal link between homosexuals and pedophilia but not between heterosexuality and pedophilia. I have seen little to no evidence to explain such a disparity much less to support a notion the sexual perversion of pedophilia has any link to sexual preference.

I just wish there were more evidence on this topic. I am very curious to know if there is any link.

[Winchester]

Jimmy Madison wrote: Quote: If you had not had sex perod for a long time and you saw a young supple boy come along, would you rape him? Yes or no are the only two avialable options here. If yes, that's quite disturbing. If no it shows two things. One, people can control themselves. Two, you're not attracted to young boys.


I agree with you. I have two choices. Which is why I find Callous' assertion the oath of celibacy is the problem to be absurd.

However, we all know homosexuality is an attraction to the same sex. So it should come to no surprise a gay male priest is attracted to members of the same sex, such as boys and men. Just as heterosexuals are attracted to members of the opposite sex and so it should not come as much of a surprise to find a heterosexual pedophile to be attracted to young women.

The question is what is the link between homosexuality and the attraction to children. Pedophilia is the sexual attraction to children. What is it about homosexuality that makes a person more or less likely to be sexually attracted to children. That is the issue.

Quote: This studywas commissioned by the American Bishops and I believe was quite confidential on the specifics. It is from last year.


Well I will have to get my hands on it. I would like to know the specifics of the data leading to the "4 out of 5" claim. As I said if the 4 out of 5 were exclusively around male altar workers then this weakens the claim homosexuality is the cause whereas opportunity may be just as much a cause.

Quote: considering that 80% are boys and that from what I've read from various websites, about 0.5% of priests, and 1% of the nation as a whole (these numbers both include post-pubescents though so it might be "consensual" or whatever.And that also includes those NAMBLA perverts), are perverted pedophiles, one can see there is no link between celibacy and pedophelia

I agree there is no link between celibacy and pedophilia. My question is whether or not there is a causal link between homosexuality and pedophilia. At this time I have seen no evidence to indicate there is such a relationship.

Quote: but somethingcould be drawn between homosexuality in the priesthood and the resulting sex scandal.

Yes I agree. However, there are several conclusions to be drawn at this point. One conclusion there is a link. The other conclusion there is no link. The other conclusion is that opportunity played a role and the priests exploited the opportunity as opposed to going down to the gay bar to find a consenting man. Something more than statistics is needed to establish a link between homosexuality and pedophilia. Simply throwing out numbers such as 4 out of 5 does not tell me anything about a causal link or relationship between homosexuality and pedophilia. There are several conclusions to be drawn from such a number.

I think at this point I am of the opinion pedophilia is a sexual perversion which does not have a link to sexual preference. Pedophilia plagues both homosexuals and heterosexuals and I find it most curious why there is a presumed causal link between homosexuals and pedophilia but not between heterosexuality and pedophilia. I have seen little to no evidence to explain such a disparity much less to support a notion the sexual perversion of pedophilia has any link to sexual preference.

I just wish there were more evidence on this topic. I am very curious to know if there is any link.

Here is a link to the report.

www.usccb.org/nrb/johnjaystudy/

I would certainly like to see more difinitive information on whether priests had more access to boys vs girls and whether that had some impact on the numbers.

John is right, there have been girl alter servers for quite some time, even though the Vatican did not offically allow them until 1994. I just don't know how many dioceses allowed them before 1994 or when it became common practice for the majority of dioceses to allow female servers.

Its an interesting topic, but until I can see more diffinative study's on a link between homosexuality and pedophelia and some concrete proof that priests had equal access to boys and girls, I'll continue to have a hard time accepting that their is a link.

[Stevethereal]

A few priests have been proven to be pedophiles; therefore all priests are homosexual. Is that the logic? I read an article that the Pope was going to do something about all this sh!t.

Someone said - and I'm too lazy to give proper provenance - that the vows of celibacy might have something to do with the priests' tendencies. Could be. Possibility is, to that priests are just around boys more. I know that many altar servers are now girls, and the priests don't seem to bother with them much.

I'm not taking the side of pedophiliac priests, but it seems like everybody and his brother (or in rare cases - sister) is jumping on this particular bandwagon. Seems like a few specifics have been turned into a general rule = all priests are faggy pedophiles. Nothing, I feel, could be further from the truth.

One of the problems is that the good Fathers never lie. "Yes, I f***ed 96 boys in 1989. It was a good year!" Your ordinary lay pedophile will say, "Prove it!".

We've had this argument before, and I still say that pedophilia and homosexuality are different, and not directly related. The former is a psychosis and the latter may not even be a neurosis. A homosexual can be a pedophile, but it is somewhat rare. A pedophile can be a homosexual, but again it is rare. The two syndromes (if that is what either can be called) are not intertwined as many 'straights' tend to believe. Any reputable literature will disclose this and agree with my conclusions. (I have a masters in 'Industrial' Psychology [along with a JD] with many hours in aberrant (or deviant) psychology.) (I also have lengthy experience in determining [or deciding] if a specific psychosis would render an individual [as being] unfit to get or maintain a Top Secret security clearance.) (For instance a panel of psychologists and psychiatrists were asked to determine [I was not on the panel; I was the investigator] if Dr. _ _ _ _ _ _, a prominent physicist who liked to display his privates to young school girls and the like, would be able to continue his work, which required a Top Secret clearance, with special access. It was eventually determined that his clearance was to be continued; and that his tendencies, if known to his employer, family and police authorities, would not render him liable to blackmail. His neurosis was likened to 'peeping'; not harmful. I did not agree with their findings, but my job at the time was simply to present the 'facts'.) The janitor would have been fired immediately.

I must conclude that the damages done to the boys or girls (by the priests) should be of primary consideration. No one really knows the short and long term effects of these violations (to the kids), but it must be considerable. Every violation to each child would differ experientially, and on how he/she processed it. (Just as in battle survivors.)

I, by the way, am a 'jack' Catholic. If I should appear for mass or confession the cathedral would collapse. I'm reminded of Jerry Seinfeld complaining to the priest that his dentist was telling Jewish jokes. In the Confessional I wouldn't know how to start off. Well, I do remember that you're supposed to say, 'Bless me Father, for I have sinned.'. Then, I would hand him my computerized list of sins, two feet thick without the bindings. I'd have to say 'Hail Marys' until I die - at least...

[Jimmy Madison]

Winchester and Stevethereala:

I obviously agree with much of what both of you have to say. As my posts demonstrate I do believe there is a difference between homosexuality and pedophilia. That is why I said the question is what is the link between homosexuality and pedophilia? What is it about being homosexual that makes one more likely to find children sexually attractive?

At this point I have not seen any evidence to demonstrate there is a link. The 4 out of 5 statistic is not sufficient. There could be a host of factors which explain this 4 out of 5 numbers other than being homosexual.

So as I said at this point I am inclined to hold the belief homosexuality does not make one more likely to be a pedophile any more than being heterosexual. There are of course both heterosexual and homosexual pedophiles and I find it most curious some draw a causal link between homosexuality and pedophilia but we hear nothing about there being such a link between heterosexuality and pedophilia.

The fact is I have some gay friends which do not find children sexually attractive at all. This is but one piece of evidence which demonstrates to me there may not be a link at all.

At this time I am inclined to believe there is not. I will continue in this belief until I see some good evidence indicating otherwise.

[F'losrix]

John Galt wrote: Would a straight male have sex with another male? No.
Proof that you really don't know much about human sexuality. Sexual orientation and sexual behavior are far from being absolute matches. Where do you think all those jokes about sex in prison come from?

The question here is one of access. Historically at least, altar servers were boys (and probably most still are, though I can't offer you proof).

Who do you think is more malleable when it comes to being persuaded to experiment sexually - a teenage boy or a teenage girl?

[00timh]

Skeptical Mystic wrote: John Galt wrote: Would a straight male have sex with another male? No.
Proof that you really don't know much about human sexuality. Sexual orientation and sexual behavior are far from being absolute matches. Where do you think all those jokes about sex in prison come from?

The question here is one of access. Historically at least, altar servers were boys (and probably most still are, though I can't offer you proof).

Who do you think is more malleable when it comes to being persuaded to experiment sexually - a teenage boy or a teenage girl? Sorry skept but Prison and priesthood cannot be lumped together. Being a priest is a choice. In prison there is no choice with whatever sexual behavior evolves. no choice for those who wish to engage in it. Adult males of the worst kind or nothing. As a preist they do have a choice, if they feel they cannot conrol their urges and cannot honor their oath of celibacy they can quit the priesthood. Heck at least they could have sex with an adult. I personally do not directly connect them to homosexuality but since boys are the primary target they are more inclined to be homosexual than hetereosexual.

[Winchester]

Jimmy Madison wrote:
At this time I am inclined to believe there is not. I will continue in this belief until I see some good evidence indicating otherwise.

Jimmy, that is exactly the position I have taken.

[F'losrix]

00timh wrote: Skeptical Mystic wrote: John Galt wrote: Would a straight male have sex with another male? No.
Proof that you really don't know much about human sexuality. Sexual orientation and sexual behavior are far from being absolute matches. Where do you think all those jokes about sex in prison come from?

The question here is one of access. Historically at least, altar servers were boys (and probably most still are, though I can't offer you proof).

Who do you think is more malleable when it comes to being persuaded to experiment sexually - a teenage boy or a teenage girl? Sorry skept but Prison and priesthood cannot be lumped together. Being a priest is a choice. In prison there is no choice with whatever sexual behavior evolves. no choice for those who wish to engage in it. Adult males of the worst kind or nothing.
Certainly there is - one can choose not to prey on a weaker inmate.

Quote: As a preist they do have a choice, if they feel they cannot conrol their urges and cannot honor their oath of celibacy they can quit the priesthood.
I think you're underestimating the strength of commitment some make to being a priest. Let me be clear - if they can't honor their vows of celibacy, they have no business being a priest in the Catholic church, period. That doesn't mean that those who give into the temptation of sex are just going to chuck their entire commitment to being a priest so easily.

Quote: Heck at least they could have sex with an adult. I personally do not directly connect them to homosexuality but since boys are the primary target they are more inclined to be homosexual than hetereosexual.
If homosexuality were the issue, why wouldn't they have sex with an adult male, rather than a child? Pedophilia is not the same thing as sexual orientation, access to the child and the difference between male/female sexuality being key factors in this specific scenario. Sex with an opposite-sex adult who is more likely to feel empowered to rat you out vs. taking advantage of an impressionable child of the same sex who you can more easily persuade into participation in the act and can coerce into silence...

You have to make some effort here to get inside the head of the priests involved to understand why they're engaging in that behavior, beyond just assuming that they're all gay. No doubt some are, but probably some of them aren't. I don't think we're at a place where we can accurately assess what the percentage between the two might be.

[F'losrix]

It's very easy to look at the surface details and form the conclusion that priests molesting boys are all or mostly gay. But just because a conclusion is easy to draw, that doesn't mean it's the right one.

The sexual predator problem in the Roman Catholic church is a lot more complex than sayng gay priest + boys = molestation. The church has its math wrong on this one, IMO.

[Stevethereal]

I think I mentioned that the Monsignor at the orphanage where I resided during WW II was also a physician. (I wasn't an orphan, nor was my sister - my mother was off welding airplanes somewhere, and my dad was chasing -ah-Nipponese.) A priest-physician was unheard of in those days, and I understand that it is quite rare now.

The Monsignor was given to group inspections (of the privates), and one on one with the boys (he only worked boys). One day I had a large and festering boil on my penis. Since the 'doc' was not there I took it to Sister Konstancia. She matter of factly took the organ into her hand, and popped the boil with a sewing needle. Being eleven or twelve I became erect. She looked upon this with equanamity. The good sister then said, 'that's a natural thing to happen - but whatever you do don't take it to the Monsignor'. They knew what was happening, even then...

PS: When we went to bed, our hands had to be 'outside' the blankets..

[Protostar]

Stevethereal wrote: I think I mentioned that the Monsignor at the orphanage where I resided during WW II was also a physician. (I wasn't an orphan, nor was my sister - my mother was off welding airplanes somewhere, and my dad was chasing -ah-Nipponese.) A priest-physician was unheard of in those days, and I understand that it is quite rare now.

The Monsignor was given to group inspections (of the privates), and one on one with the boys (he only worked boys). One day I had a large and festering boil on my penis. Since the 'doc' was not there I took it to Sister Konstancia. She matter of factly took the organ into her hand, and popped the boil with a sewing needle. Being eleven or twelve I became erect. She looked upon this with equanamity. The good sister then said, 'that's a natural thing to happen - but whatever you do don't take it to the Monsignor'. They knew what was happening, even then...

Why didn't they do anything of they knew it was happening? It makes no sense.

Quote: PS: When we went to bed, our hands had to be 'outside' the blankets..



:lol: :lol: :lol:

[Stevethereal]

Protostar wrote: Stevethereal wrote: I think I mentioned that the Monsignor at the orphanage where I resided during WW II was also a physician. (I wasn't an orphan, nor was my sister - my mother was off welding airplanes somewhere, and my dad was chasing -ah-Nipponese.) A priest-physician was unheard of in those days, and I understand that it is quite rare now.

The Monsignor was given to group inspections (of the privates), and one on one with the boys (he only worked boys). One day I had a large and festering boil on my penis. Since the 'doc' was not there I took it to Sister Konstancia. She matter of factly took the organ into her hand, and popped the boil with a sewing needle. Being eleven or twelve I became erect. She looked upon this with equanamity. The good sister then said, 'that's a natural thing to happen - but whatever you do don't take it to the Monsignor'. They knew what was happening, even then...

Why didn't they do anything of they knew it was happening? It makes no sense.

Quote: PS: When we went to bed, our hands had to be 'outside' the blankets..



:lol: :lol: :lol:

The priest was the boss. And a Monsignor? At the time - and now, too - the Catholic heirarchy was all male. Nuns have behind the scenes power, but little overt strength. I didn't think anything about it at the time, but the strangeness of Sister Konstancia telling me the skinny on the Monsignor was quite surprising. (Plus not telling to refrain from passing the info along.)

[Eternal]

JoeTrumps wrote: 1. We all know their are gay priests.
2. Finding them, and removing them(which the catholic religion is within their right to do) would stop all pedophile accusations against future priests.

I'm not advocating this, but I wanted to know what others thinks about it.

1) Agreed.
2) Disagree.

First and foremost is the announcement by the pope regarding a more focused purging of homosexuality within the church. Whilst it is true that the bible clearly states that homosexuality is a sin, in nearly all the verses where it is mentioned it is also grouped with fornicators and adulterers - actions that the bible deems just as sinful. Therefore if the Catholic church wishes to be true to the biblical message then it must equally purge all those members who are either divorced or who have had sex before marriage with a person who was not their partner. An action which should see church numbers in the Western world dwindle even further.

Secondly is the correlation between peodophilia and the sex of the children they abuse. According to the report Sexual Assault of Young Children as Reported to Law Enforcement: Victim, Incident, and Offender Characteristics compiled by the US Department of Justice - Bureau of Justice Statistics 86% of all victems of child sexual assult are female. Facts like that kind of put to rest any notion that homosexuals are more than likely to be peodophiles than heterosexuals. More importantly though is trying to understand the fact that child sexual abuse, like prison rape, is not always about sex but about power and control.

Finally, as for the notion of celebacy being the cause of child sexual abuse, we need to appreciate that the reason why some priests abuse children is the same reason that some firefighters becomes arsonists and some police officers become criminals. It is simply the fact that some professions attract people who are the exact opposite of what the institution requires.


Cheers, Eternal

[00timh]

Skeptical Mystic wrote: 00timh wrote: Skeptical Mystic wrote: John Galt wrote: Would a straight male have sex with another male? No.
Proof that you really don't know much about human sexuality. Sexual orientation and sexual behavior are far from being absolute matches. Where do you think all those jokes about sex in prison come from?

The question here is one of access. Historically at least, altar servers were boys (and probably most still are, though I can't offer you proof).

Who do you think is more malleable when it comes to being persuaded to experiment sexually - a teenage boy or a teenage girl? Sorry skept but Prison and priesthood cannot be lumped together. Being a priest is a choice. In prison there is no choice with whatever sexual behavior evolves. no choice for those who wish to engage in it. Adult males of the worst kind or nothing.
Certainly there is - one can choose not to prey on a weaker inmate.

Quote: As a preist they do have a choice, if they feel they cannot conrol their urges and cannot honor their oath of celibacy they can quit the priesthood.
I think you're underestimating the strength of commitment some make to being a priest. Let me be clear - if they can't honor their vows of celibacy, they have no business being a priest in the Catholic church, period. That doesn't mean that those who give into the temptation of sex are just going to chuck their entire commitment to being a priest so easily.

Quote: Heck at least they could have sex with an adult. I personally do not directly connect them to homosexuality but since boys are the primary target they are more inclined to be homosexual than hetereosexual.
If homosexuality were the issue, why wouldn't they have sex with an adult male, rather than a child? Pedophilia is not the same thing as sexual orientation, access to the child and the difference between male/female sexuality being key factors in this specific scenario. Sex with an opposite-sex adult who is more likely to feel empowered to rat you out vs. taking advantage of an impressionable child of the same sex who you can more easily persuade into participation in the act and can coerce into silence...

You have to make some effort here to get inside the head of the priests involved to understand why they're engaging in that behavior, beyond just assuming that they're all gay. No doubt some are, but probably some of them aren't. I don't think we're at a place where we can accurately assess what the percentage between the two might be. First of all, a person who has sexual contact with children regardless of the gender of the child is a pedophile first. I do think however that by choosing children of your own sex is a connection to homosexuality but I'm not saying that homosexuals are more inclined to be pedophiles.

Back to the original topic, The catholic church condemns homosexuality, that is their right to do so. People choose to be catholic, or to remain catholic based on the positions the church takes. For priests to be gay sends mixed signals to its parishoners.

There are many congregations which are open to homosexuality. For those who are gay or are more comfortable with the openess of these churches, that is where they should go to express and rejoice their religious faith.

[Demonic Spoon]

...Really? From every Christian I've talked to, being gay is fine, it's just acting on those feelings that is wrong. It's fricking rediculous. In Christianity, it's well known that all people are not sinless. SO WHY IS THE SIN OF HOMOSEXUALITY BEING SINGLED OUT (even though the feelings themselves are not sinful) hmm?

[F'losrix]

00timh wrote: I do think however that by choosing children of your own sex is a connection to homosexuality...
and all I'm saying is don't be so quick to make that assumption. In a great many instances it may not be the case.

On the rest we mostly agree. That said, purging the church of gay priests won't stop the pedophilia - which appears to be what the Church thinks on this issue.

I'm not arguing their right to maintain a set of beliefs regarding homosexuality. I simply think they're pretty misguided if they think a purge is the solution to their pedophile problem.

[F'losrix]

And now we have this story:

On Friday, Corriere della Sera, a major Italian newspaper with close ties to the Vatican, reported that a total ban on gay priests may be relaxed to permit gays to take their vows if they can prove they have been celibate for at least three years. It does not say how gay, or suspected gay priests, would be expected to prove they were celibate.

The paper also says that men who "publicly manifest their homosexuality" or show an "overwhelming attraction" to homosexual culture [even if only intellectually]" would be banned.

http://www.365gay.com/newscon05/10/100705vatican.htm

Sounds suspiciously like the Vatican is considering a policy where it will let celibate homosexual priests continue their ministries so long as they hide in the closet? What kind of message does that send?

[John Galt]

Skeptical Mystic wrote: John Galt wrote: Would a straight male have sex with another male? No.
Proof that you really don't know much about human sexuality. Sexual orientation and sexual behavior are far from being absolute matches. Where do you think all those jokes about sex in prison come from?

The question here is one of access. Historically at least, altar servers were boys (and probably most still are, though I can't offer you proof).

Who do you think is more malleable when it comes to being persuaded to experiment sexually - a teenage boy or a teenage girl?

Oh how did I miss this?

A striaght male or female would never have sex witha member of the same sex. So-called bisexuals would, but I tend to agree with many gays when they say, "you're either gay, straight, or lying" and think most bisexuals are half-way-out-of-the-closet homsexuals (which has been shown with some research to be true, research I have posted here a few months back). And it's called ****-me-in-the-*** prision because people get raped, not that they like it. Geez.

But anyway, this is all beside the point.

If you're "maleable" is homosexuality genetic?

Answer? NO.

[F'losrix]

John Galt wrote: Skeptical Mystic wrote: John Galt wrote: Would a straight male have sex with another male? No.
Proof that you really don't know much about human sexuality. Sexual orientation and sexual behavior are far from being absolute matches. Where do you think all those jokes about sex in prison come from?

The question here is one of access. Historically at least, altar servers were boys (and probably most still are, though I can't offer you proof).

Who do you think is more malleable when it comes to being persuaded to experiment sexually - a teenage boy or a teenage girl?

Oh how did I miss this?

A striaght male or female would never have sex witha member of the same sex.
Care to try to prove the 'truth' of that statement? Hint: You can't, because it's false.

Quote: So-called bisexuals would, but I tend to agree with many gays when they say, "you're either gay, straight, or lying" and think most bisexuals are half-way-out-of-the-closet homsexuals (which has been shown with some research to be true, research I have posted here a few months back).
This is your theory: Heterosexuals only ever have sex with a person of the opposite gender, but homosexuals will have sex with a person of the opposite sex before they complete the transition into becoming exclusively homosexual in their behavior. Any person who experimented with consensual homosexual sex in their youth and went on to lead a heterosexual life is lying - they're really just a homosexual pretending to be heterosexual.

How can you not see what a total crock of s**t your theory is?

Quote: And it's called ****-me-in-the-*** prision because people get raped, not that they like it. Geez.
So you're asserting that all prison sex is either rape or consensual sex between persons of an homosexual orientation. How do you explain men who have consensual homosexual sex while imprisoned and then revert to heterosexual sex once they return to the outside world?

Quote: way, this is all beside the point.
Not really.

Quote: re "maleable" is homosexuality genetic?
I've never claimed the question of genetics was proved one way or the other, but nice try. You're mixing apples and oranges here. Persuading a child to engage in sexual behavior with a person of the same sex doesn't turn the child gay. Will you deny that many of the men accusing priests of misconduct have gone on to live heterosexual lives?

What you're doing is trying to make a stealth argument here that homosexuals recruit - which is not only false, but impossible.

Quote: Answer? NO.
Answer - you still don't know what you're talking about.