Hey, look on the bright side. Rank idiocy is what passes for public discourse, but at least there’s gin.

Ahhh, to be fair of face again.

Jesus…how can you be too crazy for “Concerned Women for America”? And did she get some kinda wingnut grant to do an in-depth study of modern gay magazines?

I’m pretty sure that the set called “Teh Stupid” is much too small.

Otherwise?

Carry on…

mikey

…further enforces the persuasive myth of activists that it is “just another lifestyle.”

She has it wrong every possible way. Teh gay activists are trying to persuade people that this is NOT a ‘lifestyle’. This is a ‘life’ and the only choice we made was whether to live in sickness and denial in the closet or to accept ourselves and get on with daily life.

The fact is, Hey, There, Shitty-Shitty Fag-Fag, Shitty-Shitty Fag-Fag, How-do-ya-do.

gbear. I think you need to recognize that the narative that “you’re evil because of who you love” will die.

It will die due to the fact that everyone KNOWS you. We know you and your partner. We cannot build a society that doesn’t include you.

So many of us have, in our extended family, a gay couple, perhaps with a kid, and we just know we are richer to have you in our lives.

The toxic bigots, the people who hate everything that scares them, that’s different, that their leaders tell them to hate, will become fewer. Their hatred will carry less power. Their children will wonder what it is they hate.

It’s sad you’ve had to go thru what they get to put you thru.

Let’s face it. The only “legitimate” hate at this point is muslims, gays and illegal immigrants. I’m ashamed and embarrassed that americans are so desparate for groups to hate, but they are.

Know what? I’m pretty sure their children are not…

mikey

Oh.

And for whatever the hell it’s worth.

I’m happy and proud to stand with you.

And whoever you love….

mikey

Sandy Rios… serves as President of Culture Campaign…

I loved “Karma Chameleon”.

a non-profit dedicated to awakening a sleeping army of concerned citizens…

I liked this concept better when it was directed by Ed Wood.

The moral law established by our Creator brings clarity.

Absolutely! Especially the part about ‘Thou shalt not kill, unless thine enemy is a dirty Arab, a cocksucker, or a Negro.’

And all white women are child killers because some white mothers kill their kids.

I’m delighted to know that as an exception to the almost exclusively male children pedophile priests preyed on, I can be safely ignored. I suppose it explains why, as a bisexual woman, I apparently still don’t exist in Sandy’s world.

Man, I love Venn Diagrams. Seriously. I have no idea why.

And for whatever it’s worth, a dude who persued your younger type lady was called a “chicken chaser”. Matter of fact, such habits were the source of Leonard Marx’s famous stage name.

You know…
Mary, mother of Jesus, the dude y’all profess to be down with so much, while conveniently ignoring his teachings you don’t like?
Yeah. She was 14, tops. Joseph, her husband? (The one who “wasn’t” the father of Jesus out of wedlock, nudge nudge wink wink) Probably late 40s.
Suck on that for a bit before you get high and mighty about gays, Christian Right.

Now, I may not be as familiar with the advertisements in modern Gay magazines as Ms. Rios (sounds like a fucking Aztlanian, too me. Some one check her purity papers!) here is, but I have flipped through the Washington Blade a few times over the years, and I don’t recall once ever seeing any ads for underage boys. This may well be because that would be what could be known to the DA as “Easiest. Case. Ever.”
However, I AM a highly well-versed connoisseur of your heterosexual (and, by proxy, lesbian) pornographic material. And I can tell you from experience that “underage” and “teen”, 99% of the time means, “We got a 20 year old college girl, put her in pigtails, and threw a bunch of stuffed animals around the set”. (The fake and manufactured feel of the Retail porn world is why I’ve long since abandoned it in favor of amateur work. But I digress) However, should we apply Sandy’s logic, all men under 35 and am good hunk of boys who have hit puberty, need to be arrested for statutory rape.

WordPress. That’s all I’m gonna say. Sorry to cuss like that, but you know.

Not all priests who abuse boys are gay; IIRC one of the iterations of pedophilia is otherwise heterosexual men who abuse boys, likely more because of availability than anything else. They want the power & control over the smaller people. Sex is just a vehicle, as it were.

In short, the stupid one is exactly wrong. Not exactly a surprise I am sure…

Ok, Some Guy, your expertise can answer a question for me.

My hair is much longer than most of those chix in pigtails.

So how come I’ve never run into a girl who grabbed me by the hair and shoved my face into their crotch.

‘Cause know what?

I just might LOVE that woman.

Maybe…

mikey

My hair is much longer than most of those chix in pigtails.

So how come I’ve never run into a girl who grabbed me by the hair and shoved my face into their crotch.

I be damned. I’ve had an experience mikey hasn’t. Maybe you’re hair isn’t long enough, dude.

Ah, goddamit…

It’s not like I’m going to the barber anytime soon.

So there’s hope, huh?

mikey

My friend, where there’s hair, there’s hope.

Excellent question, mikey, and perhaps one of the Great Questions of our time.

Without extensive study of your exact case and local culture, I can only summize that you’re either not wearing enough make up, or perhaps your skirt isn’t short enough. If your skirt IS short enough, make sure that it doesn’t clash too much with your underwear of choice. Also, there’s NO such thing as a button down blouse being too small, or knotted too high up.

Failing that, you might want to take up a habit of complaining (loudly) that you’re tongue is just TOO LONG, and how you can BARELY KEEP IN IN YOUR MOUTH, because of HOW LONG AND MUSCULAR IT IS. Be sure to mention your disbelief about, no matter how many decades it’s been since you’ve hit puberty, your face and lips still refuse to grow any facial hair, and as such, your skin is smooth and soft like a baby’s ass.*

Beyond that, the only rational explanation is that you’re simply too hot and sexy, and women are intimidated by your pure animalistic magnetism and raw sexual aura. I find that happens to me all the time, nay, constantly.

*Do not try this if you current have facial stylings. The female creature is a crafty one, and will not be fooled by your ruse for long.

My friend, where there’s hair, there’s hope.

Oh great. Another reason to feel bitter.

Mikey, thanks for 3:23 and 3:25. Appreciated.

I can’t even *put myself into* the kind of thought process, that produces this idea:

“….the root problem among the priests was homosexuality,…Pedophilia is the attraction by adults to children, both boys and girls and the priest scandals have been, with few exceptions, man to boy.”

I mean, huh?

It’s not even bad logic. It’s *no* logic. It’s, “Accidents are caused by people driving cars. Truckers drive. Therefore all car accidents are due to truckers driving cars.”

It’s harder to find a plainer example of trying to justify something you’ve already decided…the question for me is: why would someone even ***think*** this way?

I mean, survival requires ***some*** level of logical distinction-making. How does she eat? Does she go to the store looking for cheese, and come back with Snapple?

We will remake this culture, or we will be forced to create our own.

The path we are on cannot be sustained.

And I suspect, STRONGLY, that people are going to want to join with people who believe in freedom and liberty, and the judgement against those that exercise that freedom will be less effective, and less accepted.

We will pretty much judge the rule by it’s inclusiveness.

Will blood be shed unnecessarily and futile in the course of trying to advance an agenda? Without a doubt. But the path is clear. We will change our society. And to any extent that I can see that happen?

I’m in….

mikey

My friend, where there’s hair, there’s hope.
The top of my head is particularly hopeless these days.
I keep expecting to find a shiny new coin beside my pillow in the morning, but the Hairloss Fairy doesn’t seem to work like that.

Well, I looked it up on urbandictionary.com and Ms Rios’s definition was listed, along with others such as:

“5) – A woman who gives lots of oral sex, in this sense it’s short for “chicken-head” or “chicken-neck””

Damn, those bisexual singles columns must be a cryptographic nightmare, especially if they dabble in cookery (yep, that’s in there too)

Oh, and for shits and giggles I looked up ‘chicken-hawk’. Now that definition is simply divine.

Gay men, of course, are still completely influenced by ancient Greek culture which is why so many of them prance around in linen tunics, keep slaves and consult the Oracle of Delphi before making important decisions.

I am so totally turning gay.

I think it bears repeating that the vast majority of man/boy pedophiles are otherwise heterosexual. Pedophelia is generally much more correlated to power and control than to our traditional notions of sex. Not to mention that incest and pedophelia is generally more prominent in straight adults. Andrew Sullivan has banged these facts into my head too many times for me to pass up such an opportunity.

It almost sounds to me like you’re saying that the rape of boys by Catholic priests was not so bad if the priest-rapists in question were homosexual. I’m sure this is not what you meant to imply, right?

Also, the Venn diagram of “Teh Stupid” as a subset of “Teh Republicans” does not overlap enough.

Now although the intersection between teh gay and teh pedophiles should be smaller than the one between teh straight and teh pedophiles, this diagram is an otherwise accurate representation.

You can always use the caveat on SATs:

* Diagrams not drawn to scale.

trizzlor said,

Andrew Sullivan has banged these facts into my head too many times

Do tell.

I’ve always heard he was a “power bottom,” but if you have first-hand information to the contrary…

The fact is, any suggestion that Horatio Alger stories were twink porn and not a how-to for budding capitalists is full of gayness and hate USA.

Boy, those wingnuts sure are VERY interested in homosexuality, huh?
I mean, like, kind of OBSSESSIVELY interested.

Please note the proprtion of pedophilia charges/convictions in the GOP vs. those among Democrats.
OOPSY-DAISIES!
Wow – I smell something rotten in the state of Denmark!
Some folks looking to, ahem, cover their ass, mayhap?

Maybe this poor lady just needs to munch some rug & get it out of her system.

Wow.

She ain’t too fuckin’ bright, is she?

Someday, some glorious day in this country, the only discrimination will be against the absolutely, willingly bumfuck stupid.

“Modern gay magazines have regularly advertised for “Chickens,” defined by Bruce Rogers in “Gay-Talk: A Dictionary of Gay Slang” as “any boy under the age of consent … heterosexual … fair of face and unfamiliar with homosexuality.””

Of course, if these “chickens” are “unfamiliar with homosexuality,” then we don’t have to really worry about them getting seduced by advertisements in “modern gay magazines,” do we?

Or have I missed something?

Okay, we can either laugh, cry, slam down three martinis, resort to Venn Diagrams,

Those are the choices? Your countrymen threaten to kill you all the time, assassinate your political leaders when they can, parade, in the national media, death threats (Ann Coulter: liberals can be killed) and generally, are rather indifferent to murder as a whole, and the most active thing you can suggest is to get drunk?

Go luck, America. You’re gonna need it.

Andrew Sullivan has banged these facts into my head too many times for me to pass up such an opportunity.

Didn’t you see that episode of “Family Guy”? Ear sex is NOT safe sex and will NOT preserve your virginity.

Clif–

Are you sufficiently well-informed about pedophilia that you would be able to assure me that men who like boys are also men who like men?

It seems plausible that men who like boys might also be men who like women, but do not like men.

But then again, I can tell you with some certainty that I am not an expert on pedophilia.

Oh, and

“All Republicans aren’t stupid, but all stupid people are Republicans.”

How does this account for Lyndon LaRouche? By all accounts, a Democrat.

As has been said above, pedophilia is more about power than about sex. But then, the Church in all its wisdom and infallibility has made it nearly impossible to live up to the requirements of the priesthood, creating a witches brew of sexual tension. Excellent judgement, there, Council of Elvira.

Speaking of power, there appears to be very little between the ears of our Ms. Rios.

And wordpress pushed D.B. Cooper out the airplane and took his parachute and money.

Uh, is this gonna be on the final?

(Unfortunately) I noticed “Related Stories”

& found shorter Mike Adams. Apparently, to him “Please don’t hate teh gays.” = ” NAMBLA (is) coming to a campus near you. “ He knows that ’cause he spent a good amount of time perusing the NAMBLA site . (????!)( Clif , pleeeeazzzzzzze send him some Venn diagrams)(adams_mike@hotmail.com))
He then makes some tongue-in-cheek ass comments , and dares anyone to not get the “satire” stoopid , comparing himself to J. Swift in the process .

As his column is from 2003, and both are on TSFWIA, is it possible that Shorter Sandy copied Mike’s homework? Do we know who she divorced? Mike? Did she get the wingnut rights in the settlement?

“All Republicans aren’t stupid, but all stupid people are Republicans.”
—————————–
How does this account for Lyndon LaRouche? By all accounts, a Democrat.

I would never call Lyndon LaRouche stupid. Grotesque, malevolent, manipulative, callous, insanely egomaniacal, weirder than a two-headed toad on acid… but not stupid.

I believe that these are Euler diagrams, not Venn diagrams.

Carry on…

According to that, the 1st one here , is Venn, the next two are Euler.

I would never call Lyndon LaRouche stupid. Grotesque, malevolent, manipulative, callous, insanely egomaniacal, weirder than a two-headed toad on acid… but not stupid.

Fair enough.

Which, of course, requires me to respond in this manner:

LaRouche may be a lot of things, but he is not dumb.

He may be a liar, a pig, dumb, a communist, but he is not a porn star.

For your reading pleasure, here’s a passage I wrote in my blog about Sandy based on a profile of Rabbi Yechiel Eckstein in the NYT Magazine:

One of the most telling incidents in Chafets’ story occurs during a conference call with Gary Bauer involving Eckstein, a staff member named Sandy Rios and Chafets. Here’s how the latter recounts it:

”Jews tend to demonize evangelicals,” Eckstein said sadly.

”And not the other way around?” I asked.

Eckstein shrugged. ”Not really. No.”

Throughout this conversation, Rios was clearly eager to join in. And as soon as there was a pause in the discussion, she did. ”You know,” she said, ”the truth is, Christians do want to convert Jews.”

Eckstein and Mamo exchanged glances. ”Not by some bait-and-switch trick,” she said. ”But we believe it’s part of God’s plan.” Eckstein winced the way he had when Pastor Munsey called him a born-again Christian.

”Anyway,” Rios said, ”we love Jews, notwithstanding their rudeness and hatred for us.”

Poor Sandy, she picked the wrong place in which to announce her anti-Semitic views. But it makes you wonder who’s great idea was it to hire her in the first place?

More hair than brains, I’ll say.

I may be way off here, however, what if the “root problem” here is that these dooods are actually not allowed to have sex EVAH? Just throwing out an idea, that’s all…

The fact is, liberals would support faggots to the end, even if they were terrorists.

Since 34% of Republicans believed “Forrest Gump” was a documentary, that Stupid circle within the Republican party needs to be so much larger.

My bad. That was 34% of voters. You and I both know they were all repugs, but since I can’t document that claim, we’ll go with this:

70% of American women have never had an emotionally satisfying relationship with a Republican.

Gary Ruppert said,

April 19, 2008 at 14:34

The fact is, liberals would support faggots to the end, even if they were terrorists.

You’re very clever, young man, but you can’t fool me. It’s terrorist priests the whole way down.

You know…
Mary, mother of Jesus, the dude y’all profess to be down with so much, while conveniently ignoring his teachings you don’t like?
Yeah. She was 14, tops. Joseph, her husband? (The one who “wasn’t” the father of Jesus out of wedlock, nudge nudge wink wink) Probably late 40s.

Traditional Christian iconography portrayed Joseph as being much older than Mary to emphasize that he was not the biological father of Jesus. Modern portrayals (such as in TV and movies) make the age difference much smaller, if non-existant. If we assume they married according to the customs of the time, they were both teenagers.

About two years ago I actually had a car accident due to a bumpersticker. It was in stop-and-go traffic in the midst of a tornado warning. The entire city of Louisville was evacuating. So maybe it wasn’t JUST the bumpersticker. But at any rate we’re in this lurching mess of traffic and I happen to glance up and see affixed to some gap-toothed redneck’s filthy truck the legend “AIDS Cures Fags.” It so distracted me that I ran into the car in front of me when we all lurched to a halt again.

That kind of thinking set me on a path. First of all, I submit that some people live larger than life. They are the great leaders and the ones who move us with works of art or great scientific discoveries. They leave behind tremendous legacies and are written about for decades afterwards. There are a great many of the rest of us who live the size of our lives. We do ordinary things and leave behind us family and friends who fondly remember us.

Then, there are the useless people who are in fact smaller than life. They obsess over things that are meaningless and small-minded, and when they are dead nobody really cares because they were hateful bitter and angry people and made everyone around them miserable.

In 50 years I think one of the most profound regrets of that future society will be that our election of 2004 seemed to be fixated entirely on the trivial issue of gay marriage, rather than the rapidly-approaching crises that would define the next half-century such as global warming, world poverty, energy sustainability, and a livable environment. In 50 years one of the most profound regrets of U.S. historians will be that the United States political system, in collusion with the media, focused all of its heated energies of distraction upon flag pins, phony patriotism, and the antics of ditzy white girls, rather than worry about the international standing of the leader of the free world. It will be our shame and regret that our national discourse was so wilfully vapid and imbecilic.

Of course she’s bitching about teh ghey. No one’s hitting that any more.
.

Yeah, another vote here for “pederasts aren’t necessarily gay.” Those youth pastors, little league coaches and boy scout leaders you hear about are almost always married, so it’s more likely power, opportunity, and/or re-enacting something from their own childhoods.

A pederast IS a homosexual. A pedophile is someone who likes to rape children.

I was wondering where the expression, “dumber than a bag of hair” came from, Thanks, Sadly, No! You deliver once more.

If a pederast is married, are they straight? Bisexual? It’s usually as much about sex as child abuse is about discipline.

Foreigner said,
April 19, 2008 at 7:07
… and the most active thing you can suggest is to get drunk?
Go luck, America. You’re gonna need it.

Ouch, Foreigner, that was cold as ice. To be fair, he chose the Venn Diagram option; no one here has suggested getting drunk — that was yesterday.

er said,
April 19, 2008 at 18:13

Teh major stoopid checks in. Thanks. You can go back to the TV now.

I don’t know, gbear, I’m assuming he meant it more like what Clif was saying, making it more a semantic disagreement than anything. My own feeling is that those sorts of relationships are too much out of the norm to use the same terms, but that’s just my opinion and I can see where others might honestly and in good conscience disagree – meaning they are just as likely to talk about “heterosexual” pedophilia as “homosexual,” and just as ready to admit the fraction doesn’t tarnish the whole in either case.

And I recognize that the words actual meanings of “same-sex” or “other-sex” fit fine, it’s more the societal baggage that folks like Ms. Hair Asplode bring to the table that make it more inadvisable than incorrect. Again, just one kitten’s opinion, which with a dollar or so would get you a cup of coffee.

Everything I’ve read (including some blunt analysis by A. Vachss) would indicate pedophiles are in it (no pun intended) for the power. The fact that in the RCC the expression is male on male is a matter of opportunity. No female priests in power positions (again NPI) and, although I’ve been dissociated from holy mother church for going on 35 years, I’m not aware of many opportunities available for participation by young girls. If young women express a desire for a vocation, they are segregated away from the general populace.

No big mystery that the victims are little boys. The little girls are less available.

“….the root problem among the priests was homosexuality,…Pedophilia is the attraction by adults to children, both boys and girls and the priest scandals have been, with few exceptions, man to boy.”

Um, isn’t pedophilia also kind of a crime of opportunity? There weren’t too many altar GIRLS serving in Catholic churches, so that could easily be the reason boys were more likely to be abused by a person in power they trusted.

Oh, fuck, while WordPress was screwing me over Moon Dragon beat me to it.

Many, many altar servers are now girls, so the opportunity is there. Plus in some churches the priests have contact with the kids in the religious education classes. The girl molestations have been ignored in comparison, probably both because there are fewer of them and they destroy the argument that it’s all the fault of the gays. Many of these molestations aren’t from when only boys served.

Molestation isn’t just for the power. There are many ways to weild power over children. Some psychiatrists says most if not all sexual abusers were also sexually abused, and sexual abuse of children is how they try to gain sexual intimacy, since it’s all they know. They very frequently tell themselves the child loves them and wanted it.

The Catholic Church covered it up so they wouldn’t lose money. American contributions keep the Vatican afloat. The guilty should be in prison, and it’s a sign of how messed up this country is that we would let them get away with this. Americans are desperate to believe we are incapable of error becasue we are Godly, and will excuse almost anything in the name of religion..

I’m pretty sure that most men who rape women are heterosexual. Yet it’s funny how we never see sweeping condemnations of heterosexuality or straight men from these people.

Every single mass murdered, spree killer and genocidal war criminal throughout history has been homo sapiens. And yet, you never hear a single condemnation of the species.

Why the silence?

mikey

I stumbled in here this morning when there were 69 comments. Coincidence?

Anyway, I’m waiting for some middle aged self-defrocked priest, or young ex-seminarian, or whoever to start the anti-movement – the Catlick Choich turned me gay, into a latent pedophile whatever.

My point of course is that almost no one ever asks the obvious questions, to wit:
What is it about the priesthood that attracts gays and/or pedophiles?
Does the church bring out latent homo and/or pedophile tendencies through seminary training?

und so weiter….

She may be even less smart than WordPress.

Also, how izzit that no one is mentioning Papa Ratslinger’s memo telling the bishops to cover up sex abuse cases?

Just askin.

molestations

why do I read this as Mole Stations?

Does the church bring out latent homo and/or pedophile tendencies through seminary training?

I’ve heard or read that at least in the past the priesthood was where a closeted gay could go to “hide” or, rather, suppress themselves and not have to explain why they didn’t get married. I’m not saying it well but what I mean is that it was used as a refuge by men who didn’t want to or couldn’t admit they were gay.

Which, I imagine, left a whole bunch of people with all kinds of sexual tensions, frustrations and confusion in a position where they could act out in a “safe” (for them) way.

Just one more way the Catholic Church is fucked up. The ways, let me count them!

And of course, wordpress whispered in Rasputin’s ear. The rest was just a game of telephone.

Okay, here’s what I don’t get. This lady seems to be all up in arms about the fact that people are primarily identifying the priests in question as pedophiles, and not gay. Seriously, if they’d been molesting female minors, would that have made the situation any better?

I mean, even if you’re vehemently anti-ghey – like Rios – you should be willing to admit that sex between two adults of the same sex isn’t as bad a scene as sex with a kid who is supposed to be one of your “flock”… right?

You LIE-bruls just don’t get it, do you? Here, in the heartland of the USA of America, pedophilia is mixed in with homosapienxuality because the LIE-brul media is filled with political erotocism, ergo, LIE-brul commentator Gordon Liddy’s perverse fixation on our beloved President’s (George Willard Bush, jet pilot hero of the battle of Iraq) engorged flight suit, much like G.I. Joe, a doll that American boys are FORCED to play with, making then like girls and causing a subconcious confusion of sexual identity that can only be remedied by the acquisition of a fully erect M1 Battle Rifle™.

Thus the subtle interplay of vamipirical imagery brought about by Shinto wood spirits and their American counterpart, the pelican.

From religionfacts.com:

Pelicans

According to legend, in a time of famine a mother pelican would draw blood from her own chest and give the blood to her chicks.

Thus the pelican symbol in Christianity, also called pelican-in-her-piety, symbolizes the sacrifice of Christ on the cross (because he gave his blood for others) as well as the Eucharist (because it represents Christ’s blood and provides spiritual nourishment).

The legend of the pelican is an ancient one and had a few variations. It was adopted into Christianity by the 2nd century, when it appears in the Physiologus, a Christian adaptation of popular animal legends and symbols.

“The little pelicans strike their parents, and the parents, striking back, kill them. But on the third day the mother pelican strikes and opens her side and pours blood over her dead young. In this way they are revivified and made well.

So Our Lord Jesus Christ says also through the prophet Isaiah: ‘I have brought up children and exalted them, but they have despised me’ (Is 1:2). We struck God by serving the creature rather than the Creator. Therefore He deigned to ascend the cross, and when His side was pierced, blood and water gushed forth unto our salvation and eternal life.”
The legend became popular in Christian art and was taken up by many later writers, including Shakespeare:

“To his good friend thus wide, I’ll ope my arms
And, like the kind, life-rendering pelican
Repast them with my blood.” (Hamlet, 1616)
Relevant Bible Verses
“This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.” (Matthew 26:28)

“Jesus said to them, ‘I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink.Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him.'” (John 6:53-56)

Sources
Fr. William P. Saunders, “The Symbolism of the Pelican.” Catholic Herald, November 10, 2003.
“birds, symbolic.” Peter and Linda Murray, Oxford Dictionary of Christian Art (2004).
Patricia S. Klein, Worship Without Words: The Signs and Symbols of Our Faith (2000).
Symbols in Christian Art and Architecture by Walter E. Gast. Top illustration of pelican-in-her-piety by Mr. Gast.

**********************************************************************************************

I hope things are crystal clear to you commies, now that you’ve had it properly explained to you.

I’m pretty sure that most men who rape women are heterosexual. Yet it’s funny how we never see sweeping condemnations of heterosexuality or straight men from these people.

That’s because they probably think so many rapes wouldn’t happen if those slutty women would keep their legs shut and dress modestly (or better yet, never go out of the house without their husband/male relatives).

kobie said,
April 19, 2008 at 6:31

Someday, some glorious day in this country, the only discrimination will be against the absolutely, willingly bumfuck stupid.

I’m with kobie. Wouldn’t it be glorious if that could come to pass?

Quite frankly I don’t think there are any more pedophiles in the priesthood than there are among coaches or Jesuscamp ministers or any other group that has power over children. The reason that things got so bad was that the church covered it up, wrongly thinking – oh how wrongly – that they were protecting the church. Any authoritarian power structure is dangerous to children. Most priests don’t molest children. Most teachers don’t either. But when teachers do so, they are much more likely to be reported. The teachers’ union doesn’t try to buy off the parents. The church tried to hide it, and as a result, the problem grew.

I’m an ex-Catholic and an atheist, but I do get a little tired of the relentless Catholic bashing that goes on. The vast majority of Catholics are not Bill Donohue nutbars. The laity in the U.S. tends to be anti-war, pro helping the poor, and there are an awful lot of leftist priests and nuns who do seriously dangerous work trying to help people. Other than the Quakers, who else works harder for peace and poverty elimination?

Check out the Catholic Worker, one of the few truly Leftist organizations in this country. Also, how many Christian sects in this country have ministers like Andrew Greeley, supporter of Obama, anti-war, anti-Bush? A Stupid, Unjust, and Criminal War. I’m not defending the church’s self-created problems and I hate the current pope’s stand on women’s issues and birth control/abortion and opposition to LGBT issues. (Also, frankly, I think almost all the spiritual beliefs of all religions are simply silly.) Remember, though, the church is also anti-war, anti-death penalty, anti-poverty, and as a whole not opposed to the idea of evolution. At least the so called “pro-life” stand of the Catholic church is consistent. How many protty churches can say that?

I heard the problem was a priest shortage: even when priests did something Really Wrong like molest a child, the Church couldn’t kick them out because it would be too hard to find a replacement.

HW, that is probably a big part of it, alright.

Zzzzzz! {Fuck you Sandy Rios} Zzzzzz!

Although every priest who abuses boys is gay, not every gay priest abuses boys

I enjoyed the post, but I take issue with this. Sexuality, to simplify the argument, is about attraction to a similarly situated individual, i.e. one that is sexually ripe. Being attracted to a boy, or a male goat, or a tree with a branch that looks like a penis, does not make you gay. It makes you mentally ill.

Being attracted to a boy, or a male goat, or a tree with a branch that looks like a penis, does not make you gay. It makes you mentally ill.

And being attracted to Sandy Rios makes you Teh Devil.

Or possibly a goat with a poor sense of smell.

___

Wahooo, WordPress of London!

Seriously, if they’d been molesting female minors, would that have made the situation any better?

Of course it would have been at because then at least they weren’t infected with they gay and there would be no danger of the children being exposed to the gay. That is what keeps them awake at night.

As you can see in many of the most fanatical nutter communities, it’s perfectly fine to force little kids into marriage or set up some polygamy fun, as long as there are no two penises involved.

Well, Clif, as someone who spent twelve years in parochial schools, I am sorry to inform you (or remind you) that the unwritten doctrine of the modern Catholic church rests largely upon the thesis that “Women Have Cooties”. This is why, for instance, us non-penis-bearers are barred from leadership positions, and also why all effective forms of birth control are anathema (because a woman who controls her own cootie corridor body is a woman not properly cognizant of her inescapable inferiority under ‘natural law’. Therefore (according to the “reasoning” of Ms. Rios and her many fellow pedophile-enablers) any non-penis-bearers abused by priests (or other good Catholic men) lack standing to pursue their grievances, because cooties are a pre-existing condition. And besides, the little sluts were probably asking for it, what with the schoolgirl uniforms and the knee socks and so forth…

Of course, Rios is officially against the existence of gay men, especially but not exclusively within her Sacred Church. But while gay men are in willful violation of the Real Men codes, at least their sacred genitals protect them from the horrors of inate Cootie-dom; there is always the pious hope that a gay priest may embrace celibacy instead of other penis-bearers. (In practical terms, his superiors hope that increasing age and an incipient alcohol addiction will decrease the gay priest’s sexual drive, or at least make it difficult for him to trap those speedy young altar boys in a dark corner of the sanctuary.)

It’s pretty clear that Pope Ratzenfuhrer XIII intends to lead “his” church down the FLDS route — defending an increasingly dysfunctional set of authoritarian codes to an ever-smaller but more fanatical “flock”. When I was old enough to leave Teh Church, I didn’t expect the institution to last out my lifetime. But that was post-Watergate and pre-Reagan, and I didn’t expect nearly as fierce and abiding a Conservative Revolt Against Rationalism as we’ve all been forced to live through over the past thirty-plus years…

I’m an ex-Catholic and an atheist, but I do get a little tired of the relentless Catholic bashing that goes on…

Candy, much of the most bitter “Catholic bashing” here is from ex-Catholics, like me, who lived through the 1950s/60s Bad Times when the influx of old-style European-trained priests fleeing ‘Communism’ (read, ex-Nazi/Franco supporters fleeing retribution), combined with the native-born seminarians trained at the peak of the Irish-Jansenist tendencies (Father Coughlin’s boyos, like Bernie Law), met the cresting wave of the baby boom. Men who were excessively authoritarian and anti-physical even by the standards of the authoritarian and anti-body Vatican were put in charge of parishes where there were fewer nuns and lay adults per child. It’s not really surprising that some of these men took advantage of their new freedom / access, but what they did then turned a significant percentage of Americans raised ‘in the church’ between 1945 an 1975 into ex-Catholics, and sometimes into Catholic-bashers. Basically, it’s the same thing we’re starting to see among ex-Republicans: there’s a whole rising generation of voters whose personal experience of Republicanism is of greedy hypocrites mouthing pius sentiments while breaking all ten of the commandments they demand should be posted in every public building.

(P.S. WordPress is a tool of Opus Dei!)

What Rios and others her appear to believe is that homosexuality isn’t completely about sex any more than heterosexuality is. Also, most heterosexuals basically do all the same things in bed that gays and lesbians do– have oral and anal sex.

Although maybe Rios is one of those sad creatures who thinks of sex as something dirty that is to be done in the dark in missionary position only. Perhaps this explains why she is divorced.

As for the area of rape and child abuse? Don’t most people sort of understand that those acts really aren’t about sex? They’re neither homosexual or heterosexual acts– they’re cohersive or violent crimes of power and domination.

By the way, WordPress totally blows.

Ugh. I royally screwed up the first sentence. What it should say:

What Rios and others like her appear to believe is that homosexuality is completely about sex and heterosexuality isn’t.

Sandy WAS a very attractive brunette in the 80’s at WCCC but had been dumped by somebody and left with something like 3-4 kids and she was MAD. She was always a bible thumper and it was hard to not feel sorry for her back then because I believe she was trying to be a good mother, and she was a knockout. But even then, the scale of getting involved with her was NOT worth it if you had any sense of how much she hated men.
I am afraid she has not learned much in all those years, and I hope has not passed on that hatred to her kids. We can just change the station.

Sandy WAS a very attractive brunette in the 80’s at WCCC but had been dumped by somebody and left with something like 3-4 kids and she was MAD.

I feel sorry for her. As sorry as I feel about, say, Anita Bryant or Betsy Hart.

Annie laurie why don’t you have a blog? I’d love to hear more from you, you have a unique voice.

aimai

I’m reading backwards up the thread–what a sick contrarian I am–and I wanted to second Susan of Texas’s point up above:

#

_Susan of Texas said,

April 19, 2008 at 20:41

Many, many altar servers are now girls, so the opportunity is there. Plus in some churches the priests have contact with the kids in the religious education classes. The girl molestations have been ignored in comparison, probably both because there are fewer of them and they destroy the argument that it’s all the fault of the gays. Many of these molestations aren’t from when only boys served.

Molestation isn’t just for the power. There are many ways to weild power over children. Some psychiatrists says most if not all sexual abusers were also sexually abused, and sexual abuse of children is how they try to gain sexual intimacy, since it’s all they know. They very frequently tell themselves the child loves them and wanted it.

The Catholic Church covered it up so they wouldn’t lose money. American contributions keep the Vatican afloat. The guilty should be in prison, and it’s a sign of how messed up this country is that we would let them get away with this. Americans are desperate to believe we are incapable of error becasue we are Godly, and will excuse almost anything in the name of religion.._

The fact that there have been no good, big, historically informed studies of priest/congregation sexual interactions, rape of girls, boys and women, is a scandal. It is what allows the apologists to keep pretending the problem is “the gays” and not ” the authoritarian fake celibates with access to kids.” In other parts of the world, notably africa, priests don’t bother with pedophilia because they simply go straight to having multiple wives. The catholic church hierarchy has tried to suppress this information. In Ireland there were plenty of long term priest/parishioner relationships. My own belief, having looked at this issue locally, is that priests in america choose children because they were having a harder time gaining access to girls and women. And because the hierarchy perceived molestation of boys as *less problematic* than molestation of girls and women. Less problematic because less likely to produce blowback, pregnancies, and law suits. Let us remember that the original rationale for transforming a married clergy into a celibate clergy was to keep church property in the church’s hands.

aimai

Two problems:

Male pedophiles who abuse males are not necessarily homosexual, and in fact are not usually categorized as homosexual – since homo means ‘same’ and it is usually this difference between adults and children which makes predatory pedophiles.

Secondly:

I think the Stuart is wrong. I think the stupid encompasses Republicans now instead of vice-versa.

In the words of years upon years of Esquire magazine’s “Dubious Achievement” awards:

You made teh stupid too small, Sam.

If teh gay is the church’s main problem, the Pope should command the priests to get busy with each other instead of the young’uns.

Problem solved. Next!

And did she get some kinda wingnut grant to do an in-depth study of modern gay magazines?

Didn’t have to. Found ’em in her husband’s sock drawer.

Holy crap, she found a dictionary from 1972. Now that’s the first place I would want to look for slang!

Hey, don’t knock it, Dan-it’s one groovy book for a chick who’s really happening in a far-out way.
If they lifted the mandatory celibacy rule, you might not eliminate pedophiles altogether, but you WOULD get more applicants to the priesthood, so you wouldn’t have to keep the child-rapers around.

Fail

Hello, I enjoy reading through your article. I wanted to write a little comment to
support you.