Sex abuse scandal. Guess the religion?

[Ben Kenobi]

And Ben, I've done my research and looked at multiple sources. Your only source seems to be your faith... with no facts what so ever. Maybe if you did your homework you would see reality instead of just sticking your head up the ass of the RCC and standing on FAITH.

I asked a legitimate question. Where are you getting your information from?

Are you really denying that the Church did cover up for abusing priests instead of exposing them and bringing them to justice?

One, I'm contesting the statement that this was policy approved by Ratzinger. Two, I'm doubting the existence of a 'secret coverup document' as asserted by your source. Three, I'm convinced by sources and my own research that the USCCB was particularly determined to close ranks and protect their own, and are continuing to resist reforms instituted by the Vatican. This statement is corroborated by you, myself and DanS, so I'm pretty sure this is true.

So I both agree and disagree with you here. I see no evidence suggesting that Ratzinger was aware of this particular case which occurred after, not before he was transferred. Suggests to me that it's got nothing to do with him.

[Wezil]

Really? Well good to know.

Do you write the 'Chicken soup' books? You have a talent for inspiring others.

Unlike some others here I realise serious debate with you is pointless. You are so full of **** it's oozing out your ears. The worst part is that you seem oblivious to the smell.

I don't debate you Ben. I call you for the turd you are.

[Ben Kenobi]

You never know till you try to reach them how accessible men are; but you must approach each man by the right door.

[Asher]

You never know till you try to reach them how accessible men are; but you must approach each man by the right door.

Look at you all grown up...encouraging people to experiment with homosexuality.

[DaShi]

That's how I read it from Ben as well.

[Zevico]

Again, it's Slate. This is hardly a neutral source.

Did you bother to actually click the links?

First, the Slate merely referred to the Globe coverage.

Second, the London Observer quotes a Vatican official in that article. It appears at the bottom of the article:
"A spokeswoman in the Vatican press office declined to comment when told about the contents of the letter. 'This is not a public document, so we would not talk about it,' she said."

[rah]

Hmm good to see that Ben's has shifted from denying all the abuse occurred and is now back stepped to who knew what and who did or didn't cover it up.

[Ming]

Why would Ben bother to click on links that would prove him wrong... He will continue to ignore facts, and believe what he wants to believe, or just make crap up. No surprise.

He simply can't believe that the institution that he looks towards for moral guidence is simply lacking in morals.
They are more interested in protecting their own and the church, then the real victims... children.
It's shamefull.

[Wezil]

You know what they say Ming - "Every village needs one."

[MrFun]

You never know till you try to reach them how accessible men are; but you must approach each man by the right door.

Oh my god. THIS is going in my sig. I finally have something to put in my sig line.

Thank you, Ben.


EDIT: Why did Asher have to beat me to this?

[DanS]

Hmmm... as early as 2003. What was the church doing before that?

My point is that the memo wasn't relevant to the church in the US, if it was being wholly ignored all of two years after it was issued. Further, I doubt it has relevance to the rest of the world because the church is not as centralized as people sometimes believe.

Of course, this is assuming that the memo was as the author of the article characterized.

[Nikolai]

These priests should be flogged and kicked in the nuts.

By the way, in the context of disturbing things: A friend of mine is in the military in Afghanistan. He told me a saying the Afghans have: "Wifes are for childen, boys for pleasure."

[Ming]

My point is that the memo wasn't relevant to the church in the US, if it was being wholly ignored all of two years after it was issued.

Yeah... a whole TWO years before the US Chuch had to stop following it and had no choice but to address the problem... not relevant at all

Further, I doubt it has relevance to the rest of the world because the church is not as centralized as people sometimes believe.

Yeah... and this problem is a global one for the church, with cases STILL coming up... I'm sure they didn't get the "memo"

Of course, this is assuming that the memo was as the author of the article characterized.

Yeah... but we don't have to "assume" that priests were violating children. That is a FACT. And the Church covered it up... and that is a FACT... and the church did nothing except give many of them a chance to do it again by moving the priests around... and that is a FACT.

[Ben Kenobi]

My point is that the memo wasn't relevant to the church in the US, if it was being wholly ignored all of two years after it was issued. Further, I doubt it has relevance to the rest of the world because the church is not as centralized as people sometimes believe.

WTF?

Ok, lets get your reasoning here.

Pope tries to get to the heart of the matter in the US.

USCCB ignore his attempt to clean things up, and you are blaming the pope?

I don't get you, DanS. It's absolutely unacceptable for the USCCB to pass the buck to him.

[Ben Kenobi]

"A spokeswoman in the Vatican press office declined to comment when told about the contents of the letter. 'This is not a public document, so we would not talk about it,' she said."

Who? This is just as accurate as saying, "an unidentified source within the Vatican said X."

How do we know that the Globe isn't just making this up?