Yes it does. In the vast majority of those cases, the perpetrator is caught and convicted. In the vast majority of cases involving The Church, the perpetrators are shielded and shuffled around to new parishes and fresh victims. See the difference? In fact, about three years ago the RCC in Ireland (iirc) issued an injunction of sorts against a list of the accused priests being revealed not only to the press but to the community in general. Apart from suggesting heavily that the heirarchy is terrified and embarrassed about the inevitable public backlash, it also had the unintended effect that any priest, guilty or not, was on that list and what's more was prevented even from denying it.
I don't always agree with the person I'm about to quote, that's the nature of atheists I'm afraid. However, when (in 2010!) he said
I applauded.
I don't always agree with the person I'm about to quote, that's the nature of atheists I'm afraid. However, when (in 2010!) he said
P. Z. Myers Wrote:The "they do it, too!" excuse simply does not work. That some teachers are pedophiles does not mean it is unfair to pick on the poor child-raping priests. Catholics claim a greater virtue, so they don't get to shuck all their guilt when they're caught red-handed, and in fact ought to be held to a higher standard, according to their own views; and there's also a significant difference between a priest and a secular professional. When a teacher gets caught diddling children, he will be arrested, fired, and banned from the profession. What we've learned is that when a Catholic priest fondles children, he'll get sheltered, paid off, and transferred to a new parish and a fresh collection of kids.
I applauded.
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist. This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair. Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second. That means there's a situation vacant.'
