Why no outrage or multiple threads about this?

[Syferus]

It's a ŵonder you weren't all over the cover story on this weeks Sunday World, Tony.

[Eamonnca1]

So it's all down to percentages? How does anyone even know this

Would you prefer to use absolute numbers instead? I still think you'll find your beloved mother church coming out ahead in the child abuse stakes.

[muppet]

Tony is right that we should be outraged at the inaction regarding a known pedophile. The cover-ups referred to mirror Sean Brady's silencing of victims and Tony is absolutely correct to be enraged at the emergence of yet another bunch of moral cowards.

[tonto1888]

So it's all down to percentages? How does anyone even know this

Would you prefer to use absolute numbers instead? I still think you'll find your beloved mother church coming out ahead in the child abuse stakes.

Do the numbers really matter? One is too many

[T Fearon]

So you have to be high up the league table in terms of known or assumed numbers of child abusers in your ranks to merit condemnation and outrage,seems to be the message coming from this thread.That is truly pathetic.

The fact is (and I am not condoning child abuse or those who failed to deal with it in any era) child abusers have existed,in larger numbers than we imagine,throughout history,but it is only in recent times that protocols and adequate protection measures have been developed and implemented in society and in institutions and organisations.

Previously,whether it be in all Churches,the BBC,NHS and all other organisations there seems to have been a hands off approach when the subject of child abusers arose,with no protocols to guide,and turn a blind eye and remove the cause of the problem to somewhere else in the hope that it is dealt with.Perfectly human if inexcusable reaction but to single out one group or organisation for its failings, is a mark simply of personal bias.

[No wides]

So you have to be high up the league table in terms of known or assumed numbers of child abusers in your ranks to merit condemnation and outrage,seems to be the message coming from this thread.That is truly pathetic.

The fact is (and I am not condoning child abuse or those who failed to deal with it in any era) child abusers have existed,in larger numbers than we imagine,throughout history,but it is only in recent times that protocols and adequate protection measures have been developed and implemented in society and in institutions and organisations.

Previously,whether it be in all Churches,the BBC,NHS and all other organisations there seems to have been a hands off approach when the subject of child abusers arose,with no protocols to guide,and turn a blind eye and remove the cause of the problem to somewhere else in the hope that it is dealt with.Perfectly human if inexcusable reaction but to single out one group or organisation for its failings, is a mark simply of personal bias.

The only truly pathetic thing is yourself, you have constantly defended the church and Sean Brady in particular for covering up and facilitating child abuse, blaming the parents of the victims and the victims themselves rather that accepting that people like Smyth would not have had free reign if people like Brady and the church hadn't facilitated his abuse.  You then try to deflect further starting these threads to justify somehow that Brady and his cohorts weren't that bad in the whole scheme of things, you really are some piece of work, to call yourself a christian is the most truly pathetic thing of all.

[Itchy]

So you have to be high up the league table in terms of known or assumed numbers of child abusers in your ranks to merit condemnation and outrage,seems to be the message coming from this thread.That is truly pathetic.

The fact is (and I am not condoning child abuse or those who failed to deal with it in any era) child abusers have existed,in larger numbers than we imagine,throughout history,but it is only in recent times that protocols and adequate protection measures have been developed and implemented in society and in institutions and organisations.

Previously,whether it be in all Churches,the BBC,NHS and all other organisations there seems to have been a hands off approach when the subject of child abusers arose,with no protocols to guide,and turn a blind eye and remove the cause of the problem to somewhere else in the hope that it is dealt with.Perfectly human if inexcusable reaction but to single out one group or organisation for its failings, is a mark simply of personal bias.

The only truly pathetic thing is yourself, you have constantly defended the church and Sean Brady in particular for covering up and facilitating child abuse, blaming the parents of the victims and the victims themselves rather that accepting that people like Smyth would not have had free reign if people like Brady and the church hadn't facilitated his abuse.  You then try to deflect further starting these threads to justify somehow that Brady and his cohorts weren't that bad in the whole scheme of things, you really are some piece of work, to call yourself a christian is the most truly pathetic thing of all.

+1

[seafoid]

So you have to be high up the league table in terms of known or assumed numbers of child abusers in your ranks to merit condemnation and outrage,seems to be the message coming from this thread.That is truly pathetic.

The fact is (and I am not condoning child abuse or those who failed to deal with it in any era) child abusers have existed,in larger numbers than we imagine,throughout history,but it is only in recent times that protocols and adequate protection measures have been developed and implemented in society and in institutions and organisations.

Previously,whether it be in all Churches,the BBC,NHS and all other organisations there seems to have been a hands off approach when the subject of child abusers arose,with no protocols to guide,and turn a blind eye and remove the cause of the problem to somewhere else in the hope that it is dealt with.Perfectly human if inexcusable reaction but to single out one group or organisation for its failings, is a mark simply of personal bias.

Switzerland, the US, Scotland, Ireland, Australia/ what links the Catholic church and children in these countries? Singling out or systematic ?

[Main Street]

Is sex abuse more prevalent amongst the catholic priests? 
No, the figure is about 4%, similar to male school teachers.

However the catholic priests were more predatory
eg, in the USA  some 149 priests were responsible for more than 25,000 cases of abuse over the 52-year period studied

Why the focus on the sex crimes of the catholic church?

The Church's unpopular positions on sexual ethics (e.g., masturbation,  contraception, homosexuality, divorce) make sex crimes committed by priests even more scandalous.
Eg.- their  hypocritical position on homosexuality, considering that 22% to 45% of priests who are homosexual in orientation according to a variety of studies and reports.

All that has put more focus on the criminal and immoral conduct of the Catholic Church.
There is the sex abuse,
the institutionalised cover up which  came  from the very top, downwards.
The refusual to hand over known paedophiles  to the legal process.
The stubborn refusal to cooperate with due process of the law.
The refusal to admit that these actions were paedophile enabling and at least as morally reprehensible as the sex abuse itself.

etc etc etc

[T Fearon]

The acts were committed by perverts masquerading as priests,and not endorsed by the Church.

The NHS failed to prevent a convicted paedophile from having access to children,the BBC and loads of other organisations didn't restrict Savile's access etc,there were paedophile rings at the heart of govt etc.

Why single out the Church and a junior note taker in particular?

In earlier decades paedophilia was the elephant in the room universally that no one,sadly,wanted to think about much less deal with.

[From the Bunker]

The acts were committed by perverts let masquerading as priests,and not endorsed reprimanded by the Church.

The NHS failed to prevent a convicted paedophile from having access to children,the BBC and loads of other organisations didn't restrict Savile's access etc,there were paedophile rings at the heart of govt etc.

Why single out the Church and a junior note taker in particular?

In earlier decades paedophilia was the elephant in the room universally that no one,sadly,wanted to think about much less deal with.

Fixed that!

[No wides]

The acts were committed by perverts masquerading as priests,and not endorsed by the Church.

The NHS failed to prevent a convicted paedophile from having access to children,the BBC and loads of other organisations didn't restrict Savile's access etc,there were paedophile rings at the heart of govt etc.

Why single out the Church and a junior note taker in particular?

In earlier decades paedophilia was the elephant in the room universally that no one,sadly,wanted to think about much less deal with.

What a load of horseshite, they didn't just put on a collar and rape children, they had to serve 7 years to become a priest.  They were therefore men of God armed with all the teaching and doctrines of the catholic church and with this armory they went off into parishes to rape and abuse kids, and when they were discovered their superiors moved them on to another parish to continue raping and abusing kids.

[T Fearon]

Yawn.Paedophilia in the church,nhs,bbc etc was mishandled not facilitated in past eras.It was wrong but sadly it was the culture of these times.No point in singling out one organisation just because you have an irrational hatred of it.

[Main Street]

There are most definitely rational reasons why the Church was and is still being singled out.
But rationality is not your thing Tony, is it? 

[No wides]

Yawn.Paedophilia in the church,nhs,bbc etc was mishandled not facilitated in past eras.It was wrong but sadly it was the culture of these times.No point in singling out one organisation just because you have an irrational hatred of it.

So moving a know rapist of children from one parish to another is not facilitating that individual to continue to rape and abuse children?