I just watched the strangest debate on CSPAN.
One side hated the New York Times and the other side defended Gotham’s greatest newspaper. http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/298066-1
It starts off as your normal debate.
The pro side was represented by Michael Tomasky from the Guardian. He pointed out that NYT has its problems, pays its management too much damn money, has lost some circulation in these days of paperless readers….
Then Tomasky notes that NYT still has a million readers and outpaces its main competitor—the Washington Times (read Sun Myung Moon)–five to one.
The anti-NYT proponent William McGowan, notes that NYT has lost readers over the last quarter, that readership is under a million for the first time in a hundred years, that the NYT’s real competitor is the Wall Street Journal…
Like that. Blah blah blah…
So I am dozing off and then the subject of the Roman Catholic Church comes up.
The conservative Roman Catholic Organizations are mad at the NYT. Big surprise there!
But I am told by the McGowan that the Catholic Church is not harboring pedophiles. No it is harboring pederasts. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pederasts
I mean the NYT gives its readers the misconception that priests are not assaulting babies or even prepubescent boys, but rather post pubescent boys 13 and up—90% of the time.
Then McGowan refers to Donohue, the head of the Catholic League saying that the problem with the Catholic Church priests is not pedophilia, but homosexuality!
I was stunned. I mean I have not been following this story at all.
I will read the bigger stories from MSM of course reciting scores of localities where priests have committed statutory rape; stories about bishops relocating accused priests before ‘things get out of hand’; stories demonstrating the Pope would like to hit the issue head on.
But I had no idea that the major defense to these horrendous charges, demonstrating sexual misconduct on the part of priests for decades and most probably centuries was that children 13 years of age and older should know better!
And then they couple that defense with the charge that the Roman Catholic Church is not doing enough to keep homosexuals out of the priesthood.
I have witnessed denial in all of its forms over my years on this planet.
I have seen the politicians caught with their hands in the cookie jars months after those same politicians have lambasted others for graft. http://articles.cnn.com/2005-11-28/politics/cunningham_1_mzm-mitchell-wade-tax-evasion?_s=PM:POLITICS
I have seen politicians jump on the ‘family & faith’ wagon and then read disclosures about charges relating to sexual misconduct by these hypocritical bastards. http://www.kolotv.com/home/headlines/Ensign_Resigns_What_Happens_Next_120523244.html
I have seen politicians bragging about how capitalism is lifting individuals in third world countries out of extreme poverty and subsequently discover that the corporations funded by our government were running sweat shops, houses of prostitution and forced mandatory abortions upon their workers. http://articles.cnn.com/2005-05-09/politics/real.delay_1_delay-staff-wage-saipan?_s=PM:POLITICS
I have seen ministers preaching conservative values caught with their pants down with male masseuses. http://www.dumpbachmann.com/2007/05/ted-haggards-masseuse-to-visit.html
But I swear to Almighty God I have never heard a defense for priests who statutorily rape children in their congregations and in their schools.
I vaguely recall hearing about how the Catholic Church wishes to ban homosexuals from its priesthood but I never understood that movement either. I never understood because I figured that since heterosexuals and gays were not supposed to have sex anyway, what the hell is the difference?
Except for some small percentage of priests, in my opinion, celibacy is an unnatural state for gays or heterosexuals.
I mean even the late Falwell professed a love for ‘gays’ as long as they did not engage in his idea of the ultimate sin.
And I suppose the real reason that I ignored most stories concerning priestly misconduct was that the Church will not admit women into the priesthood and the Church is in denial about the human being’s basic need for some sexual outlet. And echoes from my readings tell me that the Church hierarchy has been aware of this fact for centuries. I mean sons of Popes became Popes for Chrissakes and those sons were not created under the sanctity of marriage.
These basic tenets of the Roman Catholic Church that have been around for at least 500 years are silly to me.
I did take my children to church when they were little; but I took them to an Anglican Church where the priest was married and had children. There was no way I would permit my children to be part of the denial that is the Roman Catholic Church.
Bill Donohue is the president of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights. That is the man referred to on the CSPAN presentation. So I thought I would take a look at exactly what he has been saying on this subject.
Well in this 8 minute radio show focusing on some real abuse by priests in Ireland, Uncle Bill is caught minimizing.
I was slapped once in awhile in Catholic School, it did not hurt me that much, Donohue says.
Rape never really happens. Just because a priest stares to hard at a boy in the shower, does not mean there has been abuse!
State run institutions and Protestant institutions are not any better than the Catholic institutions.
Almost all ‘incidents’ were not rape.
Physical abuse is over-emphasized.
And check out this review of a book concerning abuse of Irish lads decades and decades ago! http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2011-04-06/meg-wolitzer-ann-packer-and-other-new-books-reviewed/3/?cid=topic:bookbag1-3
My next stop was a link to Matthews show sometime ago. Donohue debates Hitchens.
Now this debate was had during the period when Hitchens wrote that mean book about Mother Theresa.
This debate has little to do with my concerns today, but I include it just because Hitchens is good comic relief. Hahahah
With all of the truly evil people in the world to spend a bunch of time attacking a nun who dedicated her life to the poor is not something I admire.
The next link is a tape of Hitchens talking to that fascist Dennis Miller and discussing how the Catholic Hierarchy covered up the felonies committed by priests all over the world.
There are many ways cultural nihilists are busy trying to sabotage America these days: multiculturalism is used as a club to beat down Western civilization in the classroom; sexual libertines seek to upend the cultural order by attacking religion; artists use their artistic freedoms to mock Christianity; Hollywood relentlessly insults people of faith; activist left-wing legal groups try to scrub society free of the public expression of religion; elements in the Democratic party demonstrate an animus against Catholicism; and secular-minded malcontents within Catholicism and Protestantism seek to sabotage their religion from the inside.
Yesterday’s radicals wanted to tear down the economic structure of capitalism and replace it with socialism, and eventually communism. Today’s radicals are intellectually spent: they want to annihilate American culture, having absolutely nothing to put in its place. In that regard, these moral anarchists are an even bigger menace than the Marxists who came before them.
Sexual libertines, from the Marquis de Sade to radical gay activists, have sought to pervert society by acting out on their own perversions. What motivates them most of all is a pathological hatred of Christianity. They know, deep down, that what they are doing is wrong, and they shudder at the dreaded words, “Thou Shalt Not.” But they continue with their death-style anyway.
The ACLU and Americans United for Separation of Church and State harbor an agenda to smash the last vestiges of Christianity in America. Lying about their real motives, they say their fidelity is to the Constitution. But there is nothing in the Constitution that sanctions the censorship of religious speech. From banning nativity scenes to punishing little kids for painting a picture of Jesus, the zealots give Fidel a good run for his money.
Catholics were once the mainstay of the Democratic Party; now the gay activists are in charge. Indeed, practicing Catholics are no longer welcome in leadership roles in the Party: the contempt that pro-life Catholics experience is palpable. The fact that Catholics for Choice, a notoriously anti-Catholic front group funded by the Ford Foundation, has a close relationship with the Democrats says it all.
I include this link from mediamatters because it underlines this weird hatred and fear for anything sexual by the Church. Hollywood and liberals and gays and Democrats and I suppose, even the Green Party are all assaulting the tenets of the Holy Roman Catholic Church and attempting to give all children condoms and dirty magazines.
See, sex is at the heart of the HRCC. Sex is the fruit from the forbidden tree of knowledge.
And this is what denial is all about, from a sociological/psychological standpoint. You accuse everyone else of committing your sins, of harboring your own deep seated desires. I believe this phenomena is known as projection.
Here is a wonderful quote from Donohue furthering his assault upon Hollywood (whatever Hollywood is):
“Hollywood is controlled by secular Jews who hate Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular.” Donohue defended the statement http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/200702100005
He turns this Hollywood sexual thing into an international Jewish conspiracy. And, of course, any international Jewish conspiracy has to be communist in nature.
I mean, this guy is incapable of feeling any shame either for either himself or his church.
But one year ago, Donohue gets to the point that I heard on CSPAN this morning:
Bill Donohue, president of the Catholic League, has emerged as one of the most vigorous defenders of Pope Benedict XVI, formerly Cardinal Ratzinger, as the Catholic Church reels from revelations that Ratzinger was made aware of a priest who molested more than 200 deaf boys in Wisconsin, and yet declined to punish him.
Donohue’s method has been to attack the source of the story, the New York Times, accusing the paper of waging a concerted campaign to discredit the Vatican’s authority.
Perhaps Donohue’s most controversial claim is that this is not a pedophilia crisis but a homosexual crisis; since most victims of molestation were “post-pubescent”,” that means the priests were not child molesters but some kind of gay predators. Donohue wrote in a full page ad in the New York Times:
The Times continues to editorialize about the “pedophilia crisis,: when all along it’s been a homosexual crisis. Eighty percent of the victims of priestly sexual abuse are male and most of them are post-pubescent. While homosexuality does not cause predatory behavior, and most gay priests are not molesters, most of the molesters have been gay.It’s unclear where Donohue is getting his statistics, but this is sure to increase the belief among critics that the church is more interested in protecting its own interests and reputation than innocent children. In a heart-wrenching Times follow-up story, it was revealed that the deaf boys tried for decades to report the sexually abusive priest, but no one would listen
The single biggest sin that priests could commit, under the Church’s own laws and folks like Donohue had to figure out a defensive strategy.
I would have assumed that minimization would be used as a rhetorical device.
I would have assumed that “lame stream media’” and the NYT and other liberal institutions would have been blamed for blowing these things up. Oh but there are only a few instances of misconduct and the NYT makes it seem…..
I would have assumed that victims would be victimized by the Donohues of this world.
And of course he would claim that everybody else is doing it. Really, everybody else perpetrates rape and torture so why is everyone pointing their fingers at the HRCC and leaving every other institution alone. What the hell kind of defense is that?
I even would have predicted that ultimate blame for sexual misconduct on the part of priests would be laid upon Gays and Gay lifestyles and Gay Jewish Hollywood….
But to defend statutory rape as not that bad an offense where a 13 year old is involved stops me in my tracks.
I never ever saw this coming.
This attitude is sociopathic in nature.
NO WONDER DONOHUE IS PROUD TO BE A REPUB!