How much quoque would a tu quoque quoque if a tu quoque could quoque tu?

Walking along New Street in Birmingham and hearing this Jamaican Christian preacher talking about some "Cover your breasts! Cover your legs!"

I was kind of appalled but wanted to laugh at the same time.

(August 20, 2015 at 6:10 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: Interesting. I wonder why professional psychologists use these different terms then.

Why are you appealing to psychology to excuse a moral failing? It is irrelevant whether the victim was 8 or 14. The facts are 1) Priests are supposed to be moral guides, and in molesting their flock, they fail on the job, and 2) those same priests have taken a vow of celibacy, before your god, and that the church you call your own, rather than turning them over to law-enforcement officials for appropriate displacement, shuffle them off to Buffalo -- or some other archdiocese where they may continue their depredations.

And you don't seem to have a problem with that, as shown below.

(August 20, 2015 at 6:10 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: Still, have to ask...would you make any distinction between a college senior having sex with a 18-year-old co-ed v. an eight-year-old girl?

Why are you talking about college seniors, rather than padres? You realize that college seniors don't have the same moral leadership as priests, right?

Right?

This is simply you trying to muddy the waters in order to minimize the rightful criticism of the church you follow.

Aside from that, the majority of molestation victims who have sued, and got settlements from, your church, were not 18 when they got raped. You're dodging the point. If a priest has sworn celibacy, and has assumed moral leadership of a congregation, then he is not only bound to his vow of celibacy, he has a moral duty to not use his position of power in order to satiate his own lusts.

Did you really need to have that explained to you? Really?

(August 20, 2015 at 6:10 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: As you know (but fail to acknowledge), I have said repeatedly in multiple threads that the priests who committed the crimes should be prosecuted and sent to jail. The bishops who failed to act appropriately in their handling of these cases should be retired.

"Retired"?

I say they should be prosecuted for aiding and abetting. If you know a priest is a molester, and you cover his tracks for him, don't you think you own some culpability in his offenses?

(August 20, 2015 at 6:10 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: The ONLY reason I have invoked a tu quoque defense at all is to point out the hypocrisy of those (well, you actually) who absolutely lose all sense of reason when it concerns the Catholic Church, but you're silent as the grave when it comes to secular leaders who commit the same crime in greater numbers.

Nonsense. You deploy tu quoque in order to exculpate the behavior of the Catholic leadership. They, too, did the wrong thing, and you and I both know that.  The recently retired pope headed a commission that actively sheltered molesters.  The leader of your church! And I'm sure he broke tradition with his retirement for unconnected reasons ... sure.

(August 20, 2015 at 6:10 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: I just did a quick search...the Jared/Subway scandal got a whopping 14 posts.

If a Catholic priest had done what he did, y'all would be going hundred for hundreds of pages....

Probably because this isn't a sandwich forum. I'm sure you'll figure it out one day.

(August 20, 2015 at 11:37 pm)Parkers Tan Wrote: <cut for clarity>

Parkers-

I'm going to ask you one time, straight up: Do you acknowledge that the rate of pedophilia within the Catholic priesthood is lower than in the general population?

Yes or no?

(August 20, 2015 at 5:57 pm)Randy Carson Wrote:

(August 20, 2015 at 2:05 am)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote: Circumcision got started because some guy like giving BJs on baby boys and he needed an excuse.  So he claimed that it was a religious practice and he was able to keep sucking boys' bloody penises throughout time, even to this very minute.

Source, please.

I love the hypocrisy of Randy requesting evidence from others.

(August 21, 2015 at 12:03 am)SnakeOilWarrior Wrote:

(August 20, 2015 at 5:57 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: Source, please.

I love the hypocrisy of Randy requesting evidence from others.

Why?

I provide references in my posts...to the point that people start criticizing me for "quote-mining" and telling me to stop quoting Ehrman and others.

Wouldn't it be reasonable then, for me to ask others to provide some references to back up what they are otherwise merely asserting?

(August 20, 2015 at 6:10 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: I just did a quick search...the Jared/Subway scandal got a whopping 14 posts.

If a Catholic priest had done what he did, y'all would be going hundred for hundreds of pages....

Jared hawked sandwiches, cathy-lick priests are presented as having the moral high ground. Subway cut ties with Jared, popes have actively protected the rapists.

Yes, Randy. When someone who is presented to the world as a paragon of morality is caught diddling kiddies there's going to be more outcry than when the spokesman for a restaurant get caught with kiddy porn. To bad your defense of rapists will continue regardless.

(August 21, 2015 at 12:09 am)Randy Carson Wrote:

(August 21, 2015 at 12:03 am)SnakeOilWarrior Wrote: I love the hypocrisy of Randy requesting evidence from others.

Why?

I provide references in my posts...to the point that people start criticizing me for "quote-mining" and telling me to stop quoting Ehrman and others.

Wouldn't it be reasonable then, for me to ask others to provide some references to back up what they are otherwise merely asserting?

Quote mining is precisely the opposite of providing evidence it's providing misinformation.  Quote mining is misrepresenting the views of others by selectively quoting them.  That is the accusation.  Or is that okay in order to convince others of Christianity too?

(August 21, 2015 at 12:13 am)Jenny A Wrote:

(August 21, 2015 at 12:09 am)Randy Carson Wrote: Why?

I provide references in my posts...to the point that people start criticizing me for "quote-mining" and telling me to stop quoting Ehrman and others.

Wouldn't it be reasonable then, for me to ask others to provide some references to back up what they are otherwise merely asserting?

Quote mining is precisely the opposite of providing evidence it's providing misinformation.  Quote mining is misrepresenting the views of others by selectively quoting them.  That is the accusation.  Or is that okay in order to convince others of Christianity too?

Any lie is ok if it's told for jeebus!

(August 21, 2015 at 12:10 am)SnakeOilWarrior Wrote:

(August 20, 2015 at 6:10 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: I just did a quick search...the Jared/Subway scandal got a whopping 14 posts.

If a Catholic priest had done what he did, y'all would be going hundred for hundreds of pages....

Jared hawked sandwiches, cathy-lick priests are presented as having the moral high ground. Subway cut ties with Jared, popes have actively protected the rapists.

Yes, Randy. When someone who is presented to the world as a paragon of morality is caught diddling kiddies there's going to be more outcry than when the spokesman for a restaurant get caught with kiddy porn. To bad your defense of rapists will continue regardless.

Please cite the post in which I defended pedophile priests.