why do our church groups have the highest percentage of pedophiles ?

[heycal]

Originally Posted by mtommer

I am (and BTW I wasn't criticizing you so apologies if it came across like that). I'm suggesting that it happens far more than reported. I can think of about ten women just in my own circle of associates that were abused before they were ten by their family members and/or friends of family members. There have even been groups that have tried to push for getting rid of age of consent laws and making it legal for adults to have sex with children.

No question that sexual abuse is a big problem, and more prevalent than most want to realize. I also agree that the greatest danger to children comes not from priests or strangers but from their very own relatives or friends of the family. Uncle Frank is a much bigger threat than Father Frank.

That said, to think the number of pedophiles is anywhere near the number of people who have run red lights is just plain nuts.

[max]

Yeah, re: above. The frightful thing is that we're perhaps less attentive to the possibilities of family danger than danger from non-family members.

This said, I think it mistaken to teach children to be automatically fearful of strangers.

[mtommer]

Originally Posted by heycal

That said, to think the number of pedophiles is anywhere near the number of people who have run red lights is just plain nuts.

Of course, although direct parallel numbers aren't available......or even researched, not that I'm implying I think they are similar, but I think the point that poster was trying to make is that many, many serious life changing accidents have come about because of red lights. In my own lifetime I can think of four red light running accidents resulting in death that I've been a witness to with no outside contributing conditions (like alchohol). All were a result of just not paying attention. And this happens ALL the time. To use the justification, that pedophiles seriously mess up their victim's lives, isn't in and of itself a good justification for "frying them" (or however you put it - to lazy to go look ) as the same justification can be used for multiple things.

In short, just because most people find something abhorrent shouldn't necesarily be the criteria for "judging". You have to understand that to many pedophiles, their urges are as natural as a gay man's urging to lay with another man. Why one then and not the other? What if these people didn't need to hide and their urges weren't seen as taboo? How damaged would children be if the behavior by the offender adults no longer had to be manipulative and secret?

Anyway, I'm not trying to suggest that laws should be changed, views changed, etc. Please to don't misunderstand me in this. I merely point that out because it's easy to "demonize" what most people don't inherently understand. It's much harder to have compassion for these people who may not be able to "help" themselves. Also, there's a big difference from pedophiles and predators who only care about themselves and have no qualms about inflicting physical, mental and spiritual damage on others for their own self reasons. One shouldn't characterize all pedophiles as being like this, though it's very easy to do so.

[heycal]

Originally Posted by mtommer

In my own lifetime I can think of four red light running accidents resulting in death that I've been a witness to with no outside contributing conditions (like alchohol). All were a result of just not paying attention. And this happens ALL the time.

And how many acts of pedophilia did you experience? You're really just reinforcing my point here about the level of incidence, my "many" versus "few" position.

In any event, I really didn't take much of a position on the larger question of how much harm is done by each or how society should address each. It's a fairly interesting question though.

[Omega_7000]

Maybe the priests should stick to giving Christian side hugs...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nss-mREqdfg

[CanadianChic]

OH! This so reminds me of a joke, but I suppose it is in too much bad taste for this forum.

[Fedace]

Originally Posted by CanadianChic

OH! This so reminds me of a joke, but I suppose it is in too much bad taste for this forum.

Please Tell us......

[CanadianChic]

Originally Posted by Fedace

Please Tell us......

Ha! Nice try little buddy, but I was there the last time you burned someone the exact..same...way. Watch the movie My Best Friend's Girl (it's in there near the end).

[Docalex007]

Originally Posted by Omega_7000

Maybe the priests should stick to giving Christian side hugs...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nss-mREqdfg

^^ It almost looks like a parody video of how ridiculous Christianity is. Hilarious though. If it's real... sad.

[mg.dc]

Pedophilia is a societal problem.

[Omega_7000]

I see aphex is keeping his trap shut on this topic Hypocrisy? I think so!

[WillAlwaysLoveYouTennis]

I believe so many church groups have a higher percentage of paedophiles than some others because of a certain combination of factors:

1) The supposed suppression of the natural biological process and desire for sex. NOT saying, it is natural one has feelings towards children, but the unwillingness to accept sex as completely natural need such as eating and drinking, not allowing some to marry, for example.

2) The overly trusting blindness that such things might happen. "Oh, such and so would never do such a thing! See how sincere he is in his preaching!" They delude themselves, and often have been known to say or suggest, even if a child comes forward, that maybe the child interpreted wrong.

3) This is actual a statement made to me by a person who knew of another church members molestation of children, yet they were unwilling to go to police about the matter: "Everyone has their problems, but we still have to treat them as human. God forgives everything you know." OK, wtf ever, was my reply. Their god might forgive, but you need to protect the children NOW and STOP looking the other way.

4) The insistence with higher ups knowing of the problems and looking the over way, keeping it an internal "matter", not wishing any embarassment or outside intervention. Using their terms, "a sin of pride", which allows the molestors to continue and more and more children to be scarred and abused.

Originally Posted by mtommer

Wow, there's so much unsubstantiated opinion being passed off as fact it's almost too funny. Try to educate yourself. And before you bring it up, no, I'm not going to be the one to do that. Unless you want to pay me for my time.

Although presented as an opinion. Many of the things the person same was similar to my own comments above. Again this is seems to be someone who deludes themselves about a very prevalent and virulent problem. I worked in law enforcement for several years directly relating to such situations, so I know what they said was for the most part true. Additionally, in cooperation with a child psychiatrist I know, the majority of whose patients have been abused in this way, we log the information, the interviews, read the reports and compile statements, so such opinions can be substantiated by clear facts. It's our choice to try to help other victims and even if we cannot bring to justice those who commit the crimes, we try to help educate people to not look the other way, but be pro-active in protecting their own or any children from such predators, to bring to necessary attention such acts.

It's easy to mock someone else, and dismiss comments as mere opinion, but it is rather stupid to blind oneself to truth in statements just the same, even if you laugh at the source. In a way, its the same as the people in these churches and religious groups who "look the other way" saying, "oh surely that can't be so!" That is the exact reason why these things continue to happen. This dismissive and careless attitude.

[Kobble]

One of these priests should come out and say they molested Tiger.

[mtommer]

Originally Posted by WillAlwaysLoveYouTennis

It's easy to mock someone else, and dismiss comments as mere opinion, but it is rather stupid to blind oneself to truth in statements just the same, even if you laugh at the source.

My comment was not meant to be mocking. The OP merely posted "talk show" opinions as their thoughts. As is typical with talk shows, ratings come at the cost of complete presentations of facts mixed with the host's purposeful refusal to see facts as they are presented versus what one wants them to say, like taking quotes from a book "pointing" something out that isn't valid when the entire context of the book is considered. In the OP's case, there are good, scientifically accepted studies of pedophilia within religious and other organizations. Regarding the Church specifically, one can start with the study commissioned by the Church itself, subjected to peer review, and accepted as extremely well done and thorough.

[albino smurf]

Most molesting is done by family members so your premise is wrong.

Also the idea that they are molesters because they can not have sex with women is clearly wrong. If they wanted to have sex with a woman and sex is prohibited, why would a kid make a good second option. Surely they would find a woman if they wanted a woman. The prohibition on sex is not the issue, it is their wanting freaky sex that is the real issue.

[Camilio Pascual]

Originally Posted by 35ft6

Can you think of any other legitimate mainstream group or organization that has had as many documented sex scandals as as the Catholic Church?

Sorry for the late response, I just noticed it.
No, I can't.
But, I'm not going to accept the premise, which concerned "church groups", without some foundation or proofs. If one can submit some statistics or proofs to support this premise, there's nothing that would prevent me from accepting it as true.
I'm a little leery of relying too much on my own personal experiences when generalizing. If I did, I'd think Protestant ministers are violent, ex-Marines are immature & highly emotional, black people are much nicer than white people, Asians are intellectually superior to Americans by a LONG shot while being the world's WORST drivers, and that all white racists are now Republicans. Now, all of these assertions might be "true", but I wouldn't go around making these claims publicly without some proofs external to my personal experiences.

[35ft6]

Originally Posted by Camilio Pascual

Sorry for the late response, I just noticed it.
No, I can't.
But, I'm not going to accept the premise, which concerned "church groups", without some foundation or proofs. If one can submit some statistics or proofs to support this premise, there's nothing that would prevent me from accepting it as true.
I'm a little leery of relying too much on my own personal experiences when generalizing.

Who's relying on personal experience? There were plenty of news stories about the abuse, the coverups, the extent of the abuse and the coverup, and the legal settlements.

[35ft6]

Originally Posted by Puma

First, I haven't looked at the link yet. But, claiming sex starvation leads to pedophilia is, well, dead wrong.

No, but a job that requires young men to denounce ever having sex is going to attract a certain type. It's like the police. Sure, they attract a lot of people who want to help, but it also attracts a lot of people who should NOT be cops. The promise of having power, of being able to carry around a gun and arrest people attracts a certain type of person. In a book I read about the FBI's profiling unit, they said the stereotypical serial killer often drives a car that is used as police cars, and in fact many of them try to become police officers.

The whole no sex policy was started in the middle ages by the church so that holy men couldn't leave their possessions to their children. It was an economic decision. For most men, not ever being able to have sex is unnatural. They should just get rid of this rule. I think it would allow them to attract a higher caliber of person. And let females be priests while they're at it.

[Camilio Pascual]

Originally Posted by 35ft6

Who's relying on personal experience? There were plenty of news stories about the abuse, the coverups, the extent of the abuse and the coverup, and the legal settlements.

So, what are the differences in percentages of pedophiles in church groups as opposed to the rest of the population?
I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm asking for the stats that would cause me to agree with your hypothesis.

[David_Is_Right]

Originally Posted by 35ft6

For most men, not ever being able to have sex is unnatural.

Not ever being able to have sex is unnatural for all animals that reproduce sexually, including men and women.