Topic: Serious question: why do Catholic priests molest boys?
Meta !PARAdoxiHw started this discussion 13 years ago #25,811
Why don't they just go gay with each other like in prison?
Walters poor computer chair joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 13 minutes later[^] [v] #391,783
because sexual preference is something that develops early in life and is very deeply embedded into a persons psyche.
however, in prison you have to make do with what you can get
however, in prison you have to make do with what you can get
squeegee joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 12 minutes later, 25 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #391,786
The incidents of pedophiles among priests is no higher than incidebts of pedophiles in any other organization, or the general population for that matter. Pedophiles are evenly distributed.
However, what is unusual was the covering up to protect priests from recrimination. We should be asking why they covered it up, thus tacitly allowing it to fester into a much larger problem that harmed many, many children.
However, what is unusual was the covering up to protect priests from recrimination. We should be asking why they covered it up, thus tacitly allowing it to fester into a much larger problem that harmed many, many children.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 28 minutes later, 54 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #391,795
@previous (squeegee)
I can think of two reasons. They're concerned about their image, and think that getting a priest to "confess his sins" is a much better solution than handing them over to the law and letting them be tried in court.
The ironic thing is that by covering it up instead of taking a hard line against it, they've damaged their reputation even more than the existence of pedo priests would have on its own.
I can think of two reasons. They're concerned about their image, and think that getting a priest to "confess his sins" is a much better solution than handing them over to the law and letting them be tried in court.
The ironic thing is that by covering it up instead of taking a hard line against it, they've damaged their reputation even more than the existence of pedo priests would have on its own.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
beckyderp !CATLDyPIBQ joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 15 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #391,797
@391,786 (squeegee)
> The incidents of pedophiles among priests is no higher than incidebts of pedophiles in any other organization, or the general population for that matter. Pedophiles are evenly distributed.
Is this really true? It certainly makes sense to me that pedos would choose jobs that give them power over and access to victims, but then again I haven't looked for sources on this. Do you have any?
> The incidents of pedophiles among priests is no higher than incidebts of pedophiles in any other organization, or the general population for that matter. Pedophiles are evenly distributed.
Is this really true? It certainly makes sense to me that pedos would choose jobs that give them power over and access to victims, but then again I haven't looked for sources on this. Do you have any?
Meta !PARAdoxiHw (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #391,798
@391,786 (squeegee)
That's a salient point. If there was a pedo working at, say, Chuck E Cheese they would be fired and turned over to the authorities immediately. They wouldn't be hidden and transferred and protected by Chuck E Cheese.
That's a salient point. If there was a pedo working at, say, Chuck E Cheese they would be fired and turned over to the authorities immediately. They wouldn't be hidden and transferred and protected by Chuck E Cheese.
buspup !!x+kkCmnF4 joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 11 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #391,801
@previous (Meta !PARAdoxiHw)
Remember that pedo priest that was sent to Alaska, and molested like 200 new children?
Remember that pedo priest that was sent to Alaska, and molested like 200 new children?
Meta !PARAdoxiHw (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 9 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #391,806
@previous (buspup !!x+kkCmnF4)
I don't remember that particular one, though I've heard about many others.
I don't remember that particular one, though I've heard about many others.
buspup !!x+kkCmnF4 replied with this 13 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #391,812
@previous (Meta !PARAdoxiHw)
I tried to get Mountainman to watch this documentary after he called priest molestation victims whiner babies, but he refused.
http://crosscut.com/2011/04/18/crime-safety/20801/Frontline-airs-documentary-on-clergy-sex-abuse-in/
"The Silence," a Frontline PBS documentary on sexual abuse in the village of St. Michael, Alaska, opens with scenes of one kind of silence. It is the vast silence of the snowy mountains of remote, far northern Alaska.
But the silence that is the broadcast's real focus is of a different type. It is the silence of shame, guilt and despair that descended on this 360-person village beginning in 1968. In that year, sexual abuse that would extend to 80 percent of the children of St. Michael began. It would not end until 1983. An entire generation of St. Michael’s children were devastated by a Catholic priest, George Endal, and his assistant, Deacon Joseph Lundowski.
Though Lundowski was caught in the act of abuse and removed from St. Michael in 1975, Father Endal, "revered and above suspicion," remained in St. Michael until 1983, continuing to molest the boys and girls of the village. When the children spoke of what was happening, no one, including their parents, would listen. The children retreated into silence.
"The odds of being abused as a little Catholic boy or little Catholic girl in that diocese (the Diocese of Fairbanks) was staggeringly high," says attorney Ken Roosa, "higher than anyother place in the United States that has been investigated to date." Roosa serves as an attorney for many of the victims and brought a class action suit against the Fairbanks Diocese in 2002.
When legal action was begun and victims did begin to speak, the Catholic Church initially denied knowledge of Lundowski's abuse or any responsibility for what he had done. Attorney Roosa used internal church records to build a case which, in time, the diocese could no longer deny. The silence was broken.
Meanwhile, other victims of other priests, including "the radio priest," Jim Poole, once profiled by People Magazine as "One of Alaska’s Hippest DJ’s," came forward. In all, according to "The Silence," 112 victims of Lundowski would come forward, 26 victims of Endal, while 18 victims would name Father Jim Poole. "Ultimately, several dozen priests and church workers would be named as abusers," reports Frontline, "not just in St. Michael but in Alaska native villages across the state."
I tried to get Mountainman to watch this documentary after he called priest molestation victims whiner babies, but he refused.
http://crosscut.com/2011/04/18/crime-safety/20801/Frontline-airs-documentary-on-clergy-sex-abuse-in/
"The Silence," a Frontline PBS documentary on sexual abuse in the village of St. Michael, Alaska, opens with scenes of one kind of silence. It is the vast silence of the snowy mountains of remote, far northern Alaska.
But the silence that is the broadcast's real focus is of a different type. It is the silence of shame, guilt and despair that descended on this 360-person village beginning in 1968. In that year, sexual abuse that would extend to 80 percent of the children of St. Michael began. It would not end until 1983. An entire generation of St. Michael’s children were devastated by a Catholic priest, George Endal, and his assistant, Deacon Joseph Lundowski.
Though Lundowski was caught in the act of abuse and removed from St. Michael in 1975, Father Endal, "revered and above suspicion," remained in St. Michael until 1983, continuing to molest the boys and girls of the village. When the children spoke of what was happening, no one, including their parents, would listen. The children retreated into silence.
"The odds of being abused as a little Catholic boy or little Catholic girl in that diocese (the Diocese of Fairbanks) was staggeringly high," says attorney Ken Roosa, "higher than anyother place in the United States that has been investigated to date." Roosa serves as an attorney for many of the victims and brought a class action suit against the Fairbanks Diocese in 2002.
When legal action was begun and victims did begin to speak, the Catholic Church initially denied knowledge of Lundowski's abuse or any responsibility for what he had done. Attorney Roosa used internal church records to build a case which, in time, the diocese could no longer deny. The silence was broken.
Meanwhile, other victims of other priests, including "the radio priest," Jim Poole, once profiled by People Magazine as "One of Alaska’s Hippest DJ’s," came forward. In all, according to "The Silence," 112 victims of Lundowski would come forward, 26 victims of Endal, while 18 victims would name Father Jim Poole. "Ultimately, several dozen priests and church workers would be named as abusers," reports Frontline, "not just in St. Michael but in Alaska native villages across the state."
Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 6 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #391,815
bishop-accountability.org is an interesting site for tracking abuse. They have estimated incidence of pedophilia in the Catholic Church to be around ten percent based on listings of accused priests, but I don't know if I trust their math. They pretty clearly have an agenda, but the site is a good starting point for collecting figures.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Anonymous B replied with this 13 years ago, 9 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #391,817
@391,798 (Meta !PARAdoxiHw)> They wouldn't be hidden and transferred and protected by Chuck E Cheese.
thats what theyd like you to think
buspup !!x+kkCmnF4 replied with this 13 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #391,818
squeegee !first/o5zA joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 4 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #391,819
@391,797 (beckyderp !CATLDyPIBQ)
well according to this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia#Prevalence_and_child_molestation
> The prevalence of pedophilia in the general population is not known,[4][63] but is estimated to be lower than 5% among adult men.[4]
and according to this http://dorigo.wordpress.com/2007/07/15/pedophile-priests-one-in-45/
> 113 out of 5000. That is 2.26 +- 0.21 %: the fraction of priests who served in the Los Angeles area between 1940 and 2003 and were accused or convicted of pedophile acts.
i guess from that you could extrapolate out to double that at least to almost 5% to include closeted ones, which is average.
they don't really know the exact numbers, so it'd be hard to say. one can only make assumptions. i will say that it seems like there are less pedophiles in other groups, because other groups tend to be inclusive of women who have a much lower incidence of pedophilia and contribute to further diminish it's appearance as a norm.
church policy allowed individuals to victimize many children across many different and separate congregations.
Vatican handling of internal problems is a tradition within the church that goes back a thousand years.
The Church, as an organization, is older than any government on earth, and they've never had this level of scrutiny cast upon them. the last 100 year has changed the way everyone in the world communicates, and these giant silence barriers Churches and Politicians try to erect are... just broken.
there are no more secrets. everything is just a cover up.
the Catholic Church needs to wake up and recognize the jurisdiction of the international community.
They are not immune anymore from our laws, and they cannot hide their abuses behind holy robes any longer.
well according to this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia#Prevalence_and_child_molestation
> The prevalence of pedophilia in the general population is not known,[4][63] but is estimated to be lower than 5% among adult men.[4]
and according to this http://dorigo.wordpress.com/2007/07/15/pedophile-priests-one-in-45/
> 113 out of 5000. That is 2.26 +- 0.21 %: the fraction of priests who served in the Los Angeles area between 1940 and 2003 and were accused or convicted of pedophile acts.
i guess from that you could extrapolate out to double that at least to almost 5% to include closeted ones, which is average.
they don't really know the exact numbers, so it'd be hard to say. one can only make assumptions. i will say that it seems like there are less pedophiles in other groups, because other groups tend to be inclusive of women who have a much lower incidence of pedophilia and contribute to further diminish it's appearance as a norm.
church policy allowed individuals to victimize many children across many different and separate congregations.
Vatican handling of internal problems is a tradition within the church that goes back a thousand years.
The Church, as an organization, is older than any government on earth, and they've never had this level of scrutiny cast upon them. the last 100 year has changed the way everyone in the world communicates, and these giant silence barriers Churches and Politicians try to erect are... just broken.
there are no more secrets. everything is just a cover up.
the Catholic Church needs to wake up and recognize the jurisdiction of the international community.
They are not immune anymore from our laws, and they cannot hide their abuses behind holy robes any longer.
(Edited 2 minutes later.)
buspup !!x+kkCmnF4 replied with this 13 years ago, 4 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #391,820
@previous (squeegee !first/o5zA)
Some of this priests might be situational offenders, instead of true pedophiles.
Some of this priests might be situational offenders, instead of true pedophiles.
Anonymous G replied with this 13 years ago, 26 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #391,825
@391,819 (squeegee !first/o5zA)
Some more numbers from the site I just mentioned.
> The U.S. bishops have reported receiving allegations of abuse by 6,115 priests in 1950-2011, or 5.6% of the 109,694 U.S. priests active since 1950.
>
> Other percentages:
> - After the March 2009 release of audit documents by the NH AG, the names of 74 accused Manchester priests are known, or over 8.9% of the 831 diocesan priests, which extrapolates to 9,768 nationally
> - Covington diocese states that 9.6% of its priests have been accused, which extrapolates to 10,531 nationally
> - Over 10% of Providence RI priests have been accused, which extrapolates to over 10,969 nationally
> - Richard Sipe estimates that 9% of U.S. priests have offended, which extrapolates to 9,872 priests nationally
@previous (buspup !!x+kkCmnF4)
> Some of this priests might be situational offenders, instead of true pedophiles.
What about situational abuse that only later becomes a habit? Where to do we draw the line? I'm sure most priests don't go into the Church specifically to be around children to molest.
Some more numbers from the site I just mentioned.
> The U.S. bishops have reported receiving allegations of abuse by 6,115 priests in 1950-2011, or 5.6% of the 109,694 U.S. priests active since 1950.
>
> Other percentages:
> - After the March 2009 release of audit documents by the NH AG, the names of 74 accused Manchester priests are known, or over 8.9% of the 831 diocesan priests, which extrapolates to 9,768 nationally
> - Covington diocese states that 9.6% of its priests have been accused, which extrapolates to 10,531 nationally
> - Over 10% of Providence RI priests have been accused, which extrapolates to over 10,969 nationally
> - Richard Sipe estimates that 9% of U.S. priests have offended, which extrapolates to 9,872 priests nationally
@previous (buspup !!x+kkCmnF4)
> Some of this priests might be situational offenders, instead of true pedophiles.
What about situational abuse that only later becomes a habit? Where to do we draw the line? I'm sure most priests don't go into the Church specifically to be around children to molest.
buspup !!x+kkCmnF4 replied with this 13 years ago, 6 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #391,827
@previous (G)
I dont know where the cut off is. Do you think that lifting the celibacy rules would help this?
Also maybe some are already religious, feel very guilty about their sexual feelings and immerse themselves in the church as a way to compensate?
I dont know where the cut off is. Do you think that lifting the celibacy rules would help this?
Also maybe some are already religious, feel very guilty about their sexual feelings and immerse themselves in the church as a way to compensate?
squeegee !first/o5zA replied with this 13 years ago, 11 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #391,833
@391,825 (G)
interesting. i wonder what the stats would be in education. Plenty of creepy old teachers "married to the job" running around out there.
i wonder how teachers stack up to the old wikipedia theorized 5%
@previous (buspup !!x+kkCmnF4)
i believe the church needs to allow women into the clergy. they should be allowed to lead mass.
members of the clergy should be allowed to marry.
and they should do something about the gays.
interesting. i wonder what the stats would be in education. Plenty of creepy old teachers "married to the job" running around out there.
i wonder how teachers stack up to the old wikipedia theorized 5%
@previous (buspup !!x+kkCmnF4)
i believe the church needs to allow women into the clergy. they should be allowed to lead mass.
members of the clergy should be allowed to marry.
and they should do something about the gays.
(Edited 26 seconds later.)
Anonymous G replied with this 13 years ago, 3 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #391,836
@previous (squeegee !first/o5zA)
Interesting. I would love to see the stats for gym teachers, specifically.
@391,827 (buspup !!x+kkCmnF4)
I can only hope that this is a problem which, in time, can be solved with the help of Internet porn.
Interesting. I would love to see the stats for gym teachers, specifically.
@391,827 (buspup !!x+kkCmnF4)
I can only hope that this is a problem which, in time, can be solved with the help of Internet porn.
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 2 hours later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #391,995
@391,786 (squeegee)
> The incidents of pedophiles among priests is no higher than incidebts of pedophiles in any other organization, or the general population for that matter. Pedophiles are evenly distributed.
>
> However, what is unusual was the covering up to protect priests from recrimination. We should be asking why they covered it up, thus tacitly allowing it to fester into a much larger problem that harmed many, many children.
I understand not handing them over to the state, but why were they not laicized? I think the liberal attitude dominating the church after Vatican II has a lot to do with the laxity of punishment for sexual sins amongst the clergy.
> The incidents of pedophiles among priests is no higher than incidebts of pedophiles in any other organization, or the general population for that matter. Pedophiles are evenly distributed.
>
> However, what is unusual was the covering up to protect priests from recrimination. We should be asking why they covered it up, thus tacitly allowing it to fester into a much larger problem that harmed many, many children.
I understand not handing them over to the state, but why were they not laicized? I think the liberal attitude dominating the church after Vatican II has a lot to do with the laxity of punishment for sexual sins amongst the clergy.
HaikerensGuide !0VegJ9Jl.Q joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 3 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #392,000
buspup !!x+kkCmnF4 replied with this 13 years ago, 49 seconds later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #392,002
@391,995 (I)
idk, they were just sent to other precincts, with no warning to the people that a pedo was coming. Seems dangerously irresponsible.
idk, they were just sent to other precincts, with no warning to the people that a pedo was coming. Seems dangerously irresponsible.
Anonymous I replied with this 13 years ago, 55 seconds later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #392,005
buspup !!x+kkCmnF4 replied with this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #392,007
Anonymous I replied with this 13 years ago, 2 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #392,010
@391,825 (G)
> accused
but that's literally meaningless. I've been accused of child abuse or something of the sort. all it means is someone doesn't like you.
convictions mean something.
> accused
but that's literally meaningless. I've been accused of child abuse or something of the sort. all it means is someone doesn't like you.
convictions mean something.
buspup !!x+kkCmnF4 replied with this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #392,011
Anonymous I replied with this 13 years ago, 45 seconds later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #392,014
@392,002 (buspup !!x+kkCmnF4)
Imagine if the priest had had an affair with a woman of age in the church. Moving him to another diocese may be a successful method of dealing with that, assuming the priest had fallen in love with a particular woman, and was attached to her. Perhaps that is what they thought they were dealing, instead of a paraphilia.
Imagine if the priest had had an affair with a woman of age in the church. Moving him to another diocese may be a successful method of dealing with that, assuming the priest had fallen in love with a particular woman, and was attached to her. Perhaps that is what they thought they were dealing, instead of a paraphilia.
buspup !!x+kkCmnF4 replied with this 13 years ago, 29 seconds later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #392,016
Anonymous I replied with this 13 years ago, 2 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #392,019
@392,007 (buspup !!x+kkCmnF4)
> get called out for lying
> accuse the other person of lying
NO YOU
lol anything new? or just your same old shit-tier trolls
> get called out for lying
> accuse the other person of lying
NO YOU
lol anything new? or just your same old shit-tier trolls
Anonymous I double-posted this 13 years ago, 50 seconds later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #392,020
@392,011 (buspup !!x+kkCmnF4)
Well you seem what happens is the police come and arrest someone. You don't actually have to "hand them over".
Well you seem what happens is the police come and arrest someone. You don't actually have to "hand them over".
buspup !!x+kkCmnF4 replied with this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #392,023
buspup !!x+kkCmnF4 double-posted this 13 years ago, 59 seconds later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #392,024
@392,020 (I)
They dont call police! lololol They just send these men to new places. Benedict even sent off some memo telling everyone to keep these things hush hush. It was uncovered by his personal butler. Let me look for it.
They dont call police! lololol They just send these men to new places. Benedict even sent off some memo telling everyone to keep these things hush hush. It was uncovered by his personal butler. Let me look for it.
Anonymous I replied with this 13 years ago, 16 seconds later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #392,025
@392,016 (buspup !!x+kkCmnF4)
No, not every time. Other times they would send the abuser to therapy, and thought they had fixed him. Other times they thought it was a terrible lapse that would never happen again.
No, not every time. Other times they would send the abuser to therapy, and thought they had fixed him. Other times they thought it was a terrible lapse that would never happen again.
Anonymous I double-posted this 13 years ago, 27 seconds later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #392,026
Anonymous I triple-posted this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #392,028
@392,024 (buspup !!x+kkCmnF4)
how many cases exactly do you think are brought by the perp's employer instead of by the victim? what a stupid answer
how many cases exactly do you think are brought by the perp's employer instead of by the victim? what a stupid answer
buspup !!x+kkCmnF4 replied with this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #392,030
@392,025 (I)
Since when can pedophilia be fixed? Arent the religious elite supposed to have enough resources, and life skills to know these things?
Since when can pedophilia be fixed? Arent the religious elite supposed to have enough resources, and life skills to know these things?
buspup !!x+kkCmnF4 double-posted this 13 years ago, 27 seconds later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #392,031
buspup !!x+kkCmnF4 triple-posted this 13 years ago, 22 seconds later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #392,032
buspup !!x+kkCmnF4 quadruple-posted this 13 years ago, 32 seconds later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #392,033
Tell me MM, after someone re offended even once, would you have handled the situation differently?
Anonymous I replied with this 13 years ago, 17 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #392,047
@392,030 (buspup !!x+kkCmnF4)
> Since when can pedophilia be fixed? Arent the religious elite supposed to have enough resources, and life skills to know these things?
There was a greater belief in the efficacy of therapy in the 70s and 80s. Now these things are believed to be biologically and hormonally decided. They are not experts in science.
> Since when can pedophilia be fixed? Arent the religious elite supposed to have enough resources, and life skills to know these things?
There was a greater belief in the efficacy of therapy in the 70s and 80s. Now these things are believed to be biologically and hormonally decided. They are not experts in science.
Anonymous I double-posted this 13 years ago, 2 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #392,049
Anonymous I triple-posted this 13 years ago, 29 seconds later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #392,050
Anonymous I quadruple-posted this 13 years ago, 3 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #392,052
@392,033 (buspup !!x+kkCmnF4)
I would like to get rid of them after one infraction. But if I was convinced toward "clemency", I could understand giving someone a second chance, but only after public penance for their actions, as well as a mark on their "file" (I don't think such a file exists, but I would attempt to create something like it) marking them out for special attention. I would laicize them after a second infraction.
I would like to get rid of them after one infraction. But if I was convinced toward "clemency", I could understand giving someone a second chance, but only after public penance for their actions, as well as a mark on their "file" (I don't think such a file exists, but I would attempt to create something like it) marking them out for special attention. I would laicize them after a second infraction.
buspup !!x+kkCmnF4 replied with this 13 years ago, 2 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #392,055
buspup !!x+kkCmnF4 double-posted this 13 years ago, 2 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #392,058
@392,049 (I)
You are required to turn them in. In many places not reporting claims of child sexual abuse, is a crime itself.
You are required to turn them in. In many places not reporting claims of child sexual abuse, is a crime itself.
buspup !!x+kkCmnF4 triple-posted this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #392,059
Anonymous I replied with this 13 years ago, 2 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #392,062
@392,055 (buspup !!x+kkCmnF4)
cant comment dont really know about them
@previous (buspup !!x+kkCmnF4)
> After the first offense would they be allowed to work with children again?
yep
cant comment dont really know about them
@previous (buspup !!x+kkCmnF4)
> After the first offense would they be allowed to work with children again?
yep
buspup !!x+kkCmnF4 replied with this 13 years ago, 57 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #392,074
@previous (I)
Maybe you should read up on them.
@previous (I)
Would they be able to stay in the same church or school?
Maybe you should read up on them.
@previous (I)
Would they be able to stay in the same church or school?
Anonymous G replied with this 13 years ago, 2 hours later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #392,096
@392,010 (I)
> I've been accused of child abuse or something of the sort.
LOL Saying shit like that doesn't help, MM.
> I've been accused of child abuse or something of the sort.
LOL Saying shit like that doesn't help, MM.
Anonymous I replied with this 13 years ago, 5 hours later, 16 hours after the original post[^] [v] #392,159
@392,074 (buspup !!x+kkCmnF4)
sorry I read that wrong I mean No they wouldn't be allowed, they could only serve as an assistant priest, not the only one in a parish, so that they wouldn't have the responsibility to care for children.
@previous (G)
but like I'm a permavirgin, the idea of me doing something with anyone, let alone a minor, is laughable
sorry I read that wrong I mean No they wouldn't be allowed, they could only serve as an assistant priest, not the only one in a parish, so that they wouldn't have the responsibility to care for children.
@previous (G)
but like I'm a permavirgin, the idea of me doing something with anyone, let alone a minor, is laughable