And The Vatican Does It Again...
Apr. 14th, 2010 04:32 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
nekosenseiThis is the reason why I'm now good and pissed off this afternoon. The Vatican is now trying to say that the reason priests are abusing children is because of homosexuality, not celibacy. And this excerpt really takes the cake:
"VATICAN CITY — The Vatican on Wednesday tried to defuse growing anger over remarks by the pope's top aide that the problem behind the pedophile priest scandals is homosexuality and not the church's celibacy requirement.
Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the Holy See's secretary of state, outraged gay advocacy groups, politicians and even the French government with his remarks Monday in Chile.
'Many psychologists and psychiatrists have demonstrated that there is no relation between celibacy and pedophilia,' the Italian cardinal said. 'But many others have demonstrated, I have been told recently, that there is a relation between homosexuality and pedophilia. That is true. That is the problem.'"
Um...no...in fact, most pedophiles are not homosexuals; the majority of them are heterosexuals. And it's a known fact that many pedophiles look for jobs where they can get easy access to children. What's one of those jobs? (ding! ding! ding!) You guessed it! The priesthood!
The Catholic Church not only needs to re-think the whole celibacy requirement, but they also need to consider letting women join the priesthood too. It may not solve the problem entirely, but it would most certainly help. Once you've got more priests who are parents themselves, you'll see a whole lot less of this turning a blind eye to what one's colleagues are doing / moving offending priests from parish to parish where they can re-offend again. But of course, they're never going to open up the priesthood to women and married people. And why is that? The institution is headed by old farts who are unwilling to change. Cardinal Bertone's remarks are proof that that's exactly the case.
Oh...and never mind that priests used to be allowed to marry until, I forget...when was it? The 1000s? The reason why they stipulated that they had to remain celibate? Money, land, and more importantly power. They didn't want the children of priests inheriting their father's assets, thereby removing them from Church hands.
So yeah...blame it on the gays. That's right. What ever happened to a little saying called, "Love thy neighbor?" I guess that doesn't apply if you so happen to be gay. The bigotry of some people who claim to call themselves Christian astounds me.
Sack them. Sack them all.
(wanders off to go break things)
"VATICAN CITY — The Vatican on Wednesday tried to defuse growing anger over remarks by the pope's top aide that the problem behind the pedophile priest scandals is homosexuality and not the church's celibacy requirement.
Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the Holy See's secretary of state, outraged gay advocacy groups, politicians and even the French government with his remarks Monday in Chile.
'Many psychologists and psychiatrists have demonstrated that there is no relation between celibacy and pedophilia,' the Italian cardinal said. 'But many others have demonstrated, I have been told recently, that there is a relation between homosexuality and pedophilia. That is true. That is the problem.'"
Um...no...in fact, most pedophiles are not homosexuals; the majority of them are heterosexuals. And it's a known fact that many pedophiles look for jobs where they can get easy access to children. What's one of those jobs? (ding! ding! ding!) You guessed it! The priesthood!
The Catholic Church not only needs to re-think the whole celibacy requirement, but they also need to consider letting women join the priesthood too. It may not solve the problem entirely, but it would most certainly help. Once you've got more priests who are parents themselves, you'll see a whole lot less of this turning a blind eye to what one's colleagues are doing / moving offending priests from parish to parish where they can re-offend again. But of course, they're never going to open up the priesthood to women and married people. And why is that? The institution is headed by old farts who are unwilling to change. Cardinal Bertone's remarks are proof that that's exactly the case.
Oh...and never mind that priests used to be allowed to marry until, I forget...when was it? The 1000s? The reason why they stipulated that they had to remain celibate? Money, land, and more importantly power. They didn't want the children of priests inheriting their father's assets, thereby removing them from Church hands.
So yeah...blame it on the gays. That's right. What ever happened to a little saying called, "Love thy neighbor?" I guess that doesn't apply if you so happen to be gay. The bigotry of some people who claim to call themselves Christian astounds me.
Sack them. Sack them all.
(wanders off to go break things)
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2010-04-16 07:37 pm (UTC)that that caused my family and I to find out PUBLICLY that the person that we loved and trusted was really a monster? Can you IMAGINE the vulnerably that we felt knowing that it could have been one of us? Can you IMAGINE how my parents must have felt knowing that they trusted this poor excuse of a human being with us kids??? I don't think you would really understand it unless you've been through it.
By the way, these aren't just allegations. He's admitted doing this in a conversation with my parents. I've also heard that the number of children he acted inappropriately with *far* exceeds the number of victims who have come forward. Worse, nobody can prosecute him criminally because the statute of limitations has expired. So…he's a free man unless someone comes forward with a more recent accusation. So very fucking sad.
And that brings me to another point. I think what you've done by huffing off and defriending me has been really shitty. Yes, people have written stuff that I haven't agreed with both in their journals and my personal journal. But that's what they believe. I might try to politely debate them, but I'm not rude and if they don't show any signs of changing their views, I stop. And I definitely don't go on their personal journals and tell them they're ignorant or don't have all the facts. If they've told me that it's a sensitive topic, I don't even bother. I just scroll by because: A) what's the point of causing unnecessary drama? and B) they're entitled to believe what they want to believe. You could have just shaken your head and said, "there goes
So yeah. You claim to be a good Christian, but in my book, you haven't acted like one. I guess the only thing left I have to say to you is GOOD-bye and GOOD-riddance.
no subject
Date: 2010-04-16 09:24 pm (UTC)I didn't tell you not to write about it, it is your right,I tried to point out a few elements, as it is my right too, since your entries are open to comments and I tried to be polite about it.
I realize that you are hurt and angry from what happened to your relative and I would be too, but going against the church en masse and throwing all of it in the same heap is something I'm very unconfortable with and makes *me* very angry, and I can't just ignore it.
Besides, in the time we have been on each other's friends list I realized we have very little in common.
Most thing you enjoy, I don't (and i suppose the same goes for you), most of your goals I don't share (and I suppose the same goes for you) I found myself more scrolling than reading.
The only entries of yours that jump out at me are your rants, to whom I can't help but react. Why should we keep pushing each other's buttons?
I'd rather leave you in peace and be let in peace myself.
no subject
Date: 2010-04-16 09:43 pm (UTC)