William T Goodall wrote:
On 3 Sep 2006, at 10:53PM, William T Goodall wrote:
It seems pretty obvious to me, but it's not a subject I find important
enough to put any extra effort into. If you want to prove me wrong go
ahead and knock yourself out. Otherwise we'll just have to differ on
the matter.
Just to clarify that: since they are quite obviously an active and
dangerous pedophile organisation *now* the only part you could disprove
is that they were in the past also. Since it's a clear pattern of
ongoing behaviour that's documented for the past half century or so as
victims have begun to come forward you'd have to come up with some
reason that pattern *shouldn't* be expected to continue further back
into the past.
Given the Church's ongoing efforts to cover up the issue any lack of
published scandal prior to the well-known present day cases can't show
that molestation wasn't going on then too.
William--
I half-way agree with you about the burden of proof here.
I don't think you've actually established that the Catholic
Church is a "pedophile organization". All you can get most
of us to agree with is that there were/are pedophile priests,
and that the Church used to be fairly systematic about covering
this up. Reliable figures on incidence may be hard to get...
I do agree that it's a fair assumption that the Church was
at least as supportive of pedophilia in the past five centuries
as it was in the last 50 years, and that if anyone wants to
claim otherwise, the burden of proof is on them.
---David
Suffer the little children, Maru
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
