(May 31, 2013 at 10:03 am)Esquilax Wrote: Mere quibbling: the fact is, it happened at all.
Sorry, pointing out that you lied about the existence of a new case of abuse isnt "quibbling".
(May 31, 2013 at 10:03 am)Esquilax Wrote: That's probably because connecting the two things is factually incorrect.
I didnt say "gays are paedophiles".
I said homosexual men committed the vast majority of the Catholic absue cases, which is the truth.
Arte you able to distinguish the obvious difference between those two statements?
(May 31, 2013 at 10:03 am)Esquilax Wrote: Oh, well that's perfectly fine, then.
I didnt suggest it was "perfectly fine", I was questioning why the media and others are concealing facts and attempting to give a false impression.
(May 31, 2013 at 10:03 am)Esquilax Wrote: Or, because homosexuality isn't connected to pedophilia at all; something the scientific consensus and research bears out. Merely asserting that it does doesn't constitute evidence and you should ask yourself: why doesn't the scientific and psychological community agree with you?
I made no comment on any possible connection between homosexuality and paedophilia.
I made a truthful statement regarding the fact that homosexual men were responsible for the majority of the abuse cases.
These men were ephebophiles - ie attracted to teenage boys - not paedophiles (attracted to children).
Older homosexual men who are attracted to young, but still sexually mature, males have long been recognised and celebrated in the gay community. "Chicken hawks".
Chicken Hawk (slang): a man who pursues boys or young men for sexual purposes.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/chicken+hawk
No-one is suggesting all gay men are predators - they are not - you need not be so defensive. But we must be able to openly discuss the reality behind the abuse cases, if we are to learn from / understand them.
Quite ironic some are happy to tar all priests as abusers, but go mental at the thought of gay men being abusers
