"The Man Who Slapped a Female Reporter’s Butt on TV is a Christian Youth Leader"

[Skwim]

Well, since you brought up numbers let's talk numbers.

There were a total of 414,582 priests recorded in the Catholic Church as of 2017. I couldn't find a total number of "clergy", but let's stick with just priests for this argument.

That would mean: 1,700/414,582 = .41% of the clergy are suspected of being sexual predators.

Not statistically significant, in my opinion.

On the other hand, according to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, as of 2016 there were 859,500 registered sex offenders in United States.

The most recent US census data claims that there were 151.8 million men in the US.

That would mean: 859,500/151,800,000 = .57% of men in the US have been convicted of sexual offenses.

Also not statistically significant, in my opinion.

So, according to numbers, Catholic priests worldwide are less likely to be sexual predators than any man in the U.S.

I don't see any evidence of causation.

Ya got your figures wrong.

The 1,700 figure was of Catholic priests and other clergy members credibly accused of child sexual abuse in the USA. (see HERE

So, with the number of Catholic priests and clergy in the USA being:

36,580 presbyters (priests)
18,291 ordinary (permanent) deacons
39,651 lay ecclesial ministers
_______
94,522​

the percentage of Catholic priests and other clergy members credibly accused of child sexual abuse is 1.8 %. which, using your figures, is over three times as many as the percentage of men in the US who have been convicted of sexual offenses, .57%

.

.

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

Ya got your figures wrong.

The 1,700 figure was of Catholic priests and other clergy members credibly accused of child sexual abuse in the USA. (see HERE

So, with the number of Catholic priests and clergy in the USA being:

36,580 presbyters (priests)
18,291 ordinary (permanent) deacons
39,651 lay ecclesial ministers
_______
94,522​

the percentage of Catholic priests and other clergy members credibly accused of child sexual abuse is 1.8 %. which, using your figures, is over three times as many as the percentage of men in the US who have been convicted of sexual offenses, .57%

.

.

Yet, correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the article claim that this updated list of 1,700 accused (not convicted) clergymen date back to the 1950's?

I don't think I'm going to be able to get a complete number of all men accused and convicted of sexual crimes in the U.S. dating back to the 1950s in order to make an accurate comparison.

 

[Skwim]

Yet, correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the article claim that this updated list of 1,700 accused (not convicted) clergymen date back to the 1950's?

I see no reason to think so. The list was made up after an AP investigation.

"The list was first released Monday, roughly three weeks after The Associated Press published an investigation revealing that nearly 1,700 priests and other clergy members that the Roman Catholic church in the U.S. considers to be credibly accused of child sexual abuse are living under the radar with little or no oversight."

.​

 

[columbus]

Physically assaulting women, on tape, in public, is a mere SJW entitlement issue to you?

Call it whatever you want.
How about if I just refer to "physical assault" as unimportant?

If smacking the rump of a fellow marathon runner during a race qualifies as physical assault, then it's not important.

If criticizing US/Israeli military policies qualifies as antisemitism, then antisemitism isn't important anymore.

If driving yourself to a guy's house, asking for drugs, then having sex qualifies as rape, then rape isn't important anymore.

If a dismissive internet post about a public figure qualifies as bullying, then bullying isn't important anymore.

If ignoring a guy pounding a drum in your face qualifies as harassment, then harassment isn't important anymore.


Yeah. Physical assault isn't important anymore. It's just something SJWs squeal about to prop up their culture of victimhood and entitlement.
Tom

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

It's almost as if such deviants are part and parcel of religion. The Christian religion anyway.

While that man's behavior was disgusting and he should be punished for it, your statement is out of line. You'll find such cretins in all groups as all groups are made up of what? Flawed humans. There's sexually abusive atheists, agnostics and irreligious people, too. I'm ashamed that this even has to be said.

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

I see no reason to think so. The list was made up after an AP investigation.

"The list was first released Monday, roughly three weeks after The Associated Press published an investigation revealing that nearly 1,700 priests and other clergy members that the Roman Catholic church in the U.S. considers to be credibly accused of child sexual abuse are living under the radar with little or no oversight."

.​

The article is focused on a list that dates back to the 1950s that has been continually "updated".

True, it does not mention that the list of 1,700 spans that same amount of time, but it does not claim that all those cases happened yesterday either.

Catholic Church leaders in Idaho are keeping a running list that dates back to the 1950s. Why assume that other Catholic Church leaders in the U.S. do not do the same?

I mean, how could anyone determine that any of these supposed predators are "living under the radar" unless time has passed?

I am inclined to believe that these Catholic Church leaders in Idaho are operating under the same policies as the rest of the Catholic Church leaders in the U.S. and that these 1,700 cases are on a running list dating back to the 1950s.

That is what this article has led me to believe.

 

[Skwim]

While that man's behavior was disgusting and he should be punished for it, your statement is out of line. You'll find such cretins in all groups as all groups are made up of what? Flawed humans. There's sexually abusive atheists, agnostics and irreligious people, too. I'm ashamed that this even has to be said.

First of all, I did qualify my statement by saying "It's almost as if," which separates it from an absolute. But that aside, can you name any other organization in modern history

The article is focused on a list that dates back to the 1950s that has been continually "updated".

True, it does not mention that the list of 1,700 spans that same amount of time, but it does not claim that all those cases happened yesterday either.

Catholic Church leaders in Idaho are keeping a running list that dates back to the 1950s. Why assume that other Catholic Church leaders in the U.S. do not do the same?

I mean, how could anyone determine that any of these supposed predators are "living under the radar" unless time has passed?

I am inclined to believe that these Catholic Church leaders in Idaho are operating under the same policies as the rest of the Catholic Church leaders in the U.S. and that these 1,700 cases are on a running list dating back to the 1950s.

That is what this article has led me to believe.

From the AP itself:

"Nearly 1,700 priests and other clergy members that the Roman Catholic Church considers credibly accused of child sexual abuse are living under the radar with little to no oversight from religious authorities or law enforcement, decades after the first wave of the church abuse scandal roiled U.S. dioceses, an Associated Press investigation has found.

These priests, deacons, monks and lay people now teach middle-school math. They counsel survivors of sexual assault. They work as nurses and volunteer at nonprofits aimed at helping at-risk kids. They live next to playgrounds and day care centers. They foster and care for children."
source​

.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Call it whatever you want.
How about if I just refer to "physical assault" as unimportant?

If smacking the rump of a fellow marathon runner during a race qualifies as physical assault, then it's not important.

If criticizing US/Israeli military policies qualifies as antisemitism, then antisemitism isn't important anymore.

If driving yourself to a guy's house, asking for drugs, then having sex qualifies as rape, then rape isn't important anymore.

If a dismissive internet post about a public figure qualifies as bullying, then bullying isn't important anymore.

If ignoring a guy pounding a drum in your face qualifies as harassment, then harassment isn't important anymore.


Yeah. Physical assault isn't important anymore. It's just something SJWs squeal about to prop up their culture of victimhood and entitlement.
Tom

Wow.

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

First of all, I did qualify my statement by saying "It's almost as if," which separates it from an absolute. But that aside, can you name any other organization in modern history

From the AP itself:

"Nearly 1,700 priests and other clergy members that the Roman Catholic Church considers credibly accused of child sexual abuse are living under the radar with little to no oversight from religious authorities or law enforcement, decades after the first wave of the church abuse scandal roiled U.S. dioceses, an Associated Press investigation has found.

These priests, deacons, monks and lay people now teach middle-school math. They counsel survivors of sexual assault. They work as nurses and volunteer at nonprofits aimed at helping at-risk kids. They live next to playgrounds and day care centers. They foster and care for children."
source​

.

I never said that these people did not still live. That is not what I am trying to draw attention to.

What I am trying to point out is that this list of 1,700 supposed predators seems to be a running list that spans decades.

I am confident that if we were able to compute how may sexual offenders there have been in the U.S. over that same span of time that it would be more statistically significant than those 1,700.

Who, by the way, were never convicted of anything, unlike most sex offenders.

 

[columbus]

Wow.

It's not that I don't think that bullying and rape and such are appalling. I do. Very much so.

That's why I object to diluting the words by throwing in every event that someone doesn't like. When I was younger, rape was a horrible, violent, crime. It was barely short of murder, on the immorality scale.

Now it isn't. Someone can agree to sex, over and over, even cadge drinks and such by promising sex. But if they get too drunk to remember to change their mind, they achieve "victim" status. Using the same word to describe that and also someone who is violently assaulted in their own bed by an armed intruder looks entirely like celebrating the culture of victimhood and entitlement to me.

I'm not okay with that.
Tom

 

[columbus]

Wow.

Let's go on to physical assault.

Mathew Sheppard was beaten so badly that he died. He didn't die immediately, he hung on a barbed wire fence, in the cold, for awhile before he died.

That's just one episode of an event I consider physical assault. There's lots of others. Google Raif Badawi or something.

Using the same term to describe what happened to a reporter, who got smacked on the butt during a race, is to lose the importance of real physical assault.
Those are just a couple of the ugly events that happen all the time.
Literally, every day.

Comparing what happened to real victims of physical assault to this is to reduce the importance of physical assault to an unimportant concept.
Tom

 

[ImmortalFlame]

It's not that I don't think that bullying and rape and such are appalling. I do. Very much so.

That's why I object to diluting the words by throwing in every event that someone doesn't like. When I was younger, rape was a horrible, violent, crime. It was barely short of murder, on the immorality scale.

Now it isn't. Someone can agree to sex, over and over, even cadge drinks and such by promising sex. But if they get too drunk to remember to change their mind, they achieve "victim" status. Using the same word to describe that and also someone who is violently assaulted in their own bed by an armed intruder looks entirely like celebrating the culture of victimhood and entitlement to me.

I'm not okay with that.
Tom

"In my day, we had REAL racism. People used to go out and lynch whole black families. Now THAT was racism. Anything less than that dilutes the word!"

Y'know, if you gave one nanosecond more consideration to actual human beings than you do to "words", you might realize the ridiculousness of everything you have written here.