A question for parents

[Esquilax]

Strawman.. Want to give it another shot?

A strawman is putting forward a position that you don't believe. So are you admitting that when you said this:

Otherwise explain how you know 'all black people don't organize their rape robbery and murders. What makes black robbers so much more disorganized than white or yellow robbers?

You were just being your usual obtuse bullshit artist?

[Drich]

Strawman.. Want to give it another shot?

A strawman is putting forward a position that you don't believe. So are you admitting that when you said this:

Otherwise explain how you know 'all black people don't organize their rape robbery and murders. What makes black robbers so much more disorganized than white or yellow robbers?

You were just being your usual obtuse bullshit artist?

Ahh, no.
Strawman;
The so-called typical "attacking a straw man" implies an adversarial, polemic, or combative debate, and creates the illusion of having completely refuted or defeated an opponent's proposition by covertly replacing it with a different proposition (i.e., "stand up a straw man") and then to refute or defeat that false argument, ("knock down a straw man,") instead of the original proposition.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man.

I am obtuse in that I will not be using your own personal terminology or have this discussion on your terms.

[Esquilax]

Ahh, no.
Strawman;
The so-called typical "attacking a straw man" implies an adversarial, polemic, or combative debate, and creates the illusion of having completely refuted or defeated an opponent's proposition by covertly replacing it with a different proposition (i.e., "stand up a straw man") and then to refute or defeat that false argument, ("knock down a straw man,") instead of the original proposition.

Oh my fucking god, you are entirely too stupid to talk to. That's what I said. A strawman fallacy relies upon debating a position that you don't hold in order to have the appearance of winning. The first part of that is that you need to not hold the position I asked you about.

But all I did was ask you if your question was serious or not. So, to sum up, you asked a person for evidence in favor of a position you already agree with, which clearly means you have some factors that convinced you of this. So you asked for evidence of a position you already agreed with and were in possession of evidence, in order to give the other guy a hard time.

That sure as fuck sounds obtuse and contrarian to me!

Oh, and incidentally? Your fucking link is broken, so good work there, too.

[Bad Wolf]

I have not missed the lack of response to my post...

[Urizen]

After numerous accounts of child sexual abuse that has been reported WHY continue letting your children be alone with religious officials?

Because children will be safe under the supervision of the average clergyman. Now, what do you make of the fact that teachers are more likely to be child molesters than Catholic priests? No parent should ever allow his child to be left alone with teachers, correct?

[Bad Wolf]

Because children will be safe under the supervision of the average clergyman. Now what do you make of the fact that teachers are more likely to be child molesters than Catholic priests?

I did not know that. If you produce the study that collected the data, I may even believe it....

[Wyrd of Gawd]

Because children will be safe under the supervision of the average clergyman. Now what do you make of the fact that teachers are more likely to be child molesters than Catholic priests?

I did not know that. If you produce the study that collected the data, I may even believe it....

There are more reports of child molesting teachers in the news than there are such reports about child molesting clergymen. The teachers, especially women ones, get off with just a slap on the wrist.

The victims of clergymen usually wait until the priest is dead before filling a claim. That way they can score some easy money.

[Fromper]

I did not know that. If you produce the study that collected the data, I may even believe it....

There are more reports of child molesting teachers in the news than there are such reports about child molesting clergymen. The teachers, especially women ones, get off with just a slap on the wrist.

The victims of clergymen usually wait until the priest is dead before filling a claim. That way they can score some easy money.

Given that teachers outnumber clergy, and children spend more time with teachers than with clergy, it's not surprising that there are more reports of problems with teachers than clergy. Does anyone have some solid statistics so we can draw conclusions, rather than just guessing based on the number of cases we've each personally noticed in the news?

[thesummerqueen]

There are more reports of child molesting teachers in the news than there are such reports about child molesting clergymen. The teachers, especially women ones, get off with just a slap on the wrist.

The victims of clergymen usually wait until the priest is dead before filling a claim. That way they can score some easy money.

Given that teachers outnumber clergy, and children spend more time with teachers than with clergy, it's not surprising that there are more reports of problems with teachers than clergy. Does anyone have some solid statistics so we can draw conclusions, rather than just guessing based on the number of cases we've each personally noticed in the news?

Yes, please.

But without waiting for them - teachers are licensed and bound by law. Clergy aren't when their organization protects them - not until mounting evidence forces secular officials to move in. Child-care facilities here in the US usually have to also have licenses...unless they're religiously based. People assume religion makes you more likely to NOT be a molester. I'd argue that molesters are more likely to be drawn to jobs in which they're given unfettered access to victims...like religious organizations in which a divine authority can be appealed to in order to get what they want.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

Given that teachers outnumber clergy, and children spend more time with teachers than with clergy, it's not surprising that there are more reports of problems with teachers than clergy. Does anyone have some solid statistics so we can draw conclusions, rather than just guessing based on the number of cases we've each personally noticed in the news?

Yes, please.

But without waiting for them - teachers are licensed and bound by law. Clergy aren't when their organization protects them - not until mounting evidence forces secular officials to move in. Child-care facilities here in the US usually have to also have licenses...unless they're religiously based. People assume religion makes you more likely to NOT be a molester. I'd argue that molesters are more likely to be drawn to jobs in which they're given unfettered access to victims...like religious organizations in which a divine authority can be appealed to in order to get what they want.

Well, both the Bible and the Babylonian Talmud condones baby raping. So the clergymen do have that going for them as a defense or justification for their actions.