• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Cardinal says paedophilia 'not a criminal condition'

Muddy Creek said:
Exactly. This is way beyond rationalizing. This is twisted and contorted justification.
Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong, I'm no fan of the Pope. I'm an American and I believe it's morally wrong to participate into elevating a human being to a social status above other humans, and I'm a Protestant and I believe it's morally wrong to participate in elevating a person to spiritual status above other humans. But he is right about this and you are wrong. It is a fact that Pedophilia is an incurable medical condition, not a crime. Pedophilia isn't ever a person's action, and only person's actions can be crimes. Sexual attraction is a chemical reaction, not a choice. Choices can be wrong but chemical reactions are just science. (Not that the Pope wouldn't throw science in Prison if he could, But then I'm no fan of the Pope anyway.) Child Molestation is not a medical condition. Child Molestation is a crime. It's always a crime because it's always an action which hurts another person. There are varying degrees to which it is wrong because there are e varying degrees to which it hurts another person. Raping a child is more wrong than sexually fondling a child. You're creepy if you don't agree with the Pope that there are varying degrees. It would take a creepy person to see sexually fondling a child as being no different than raping a child. The Pope is right and you're wrong. Looking at live-action video or still photographs of Child Pornography is less wrong than raping a child. It's still wrong, and it's still a crime. Looking at it, creates a market demand for raping or sexually fondling a child. But it takes more than one customer to create enough demand to cause a child to be raped or sexually fondled, so it's less wrong than raping a child. .Looking at Live-Action or Photograph-stills of Child Pornography is therefore equally wrong as sexually fondling a child. Looking at animations and drawings depicting Child Molestation is wrong. It's wrong because it creates a market demand for Live-Action and Photograph Stills of Raping or sexually fondling a child. It takes more than one customer of animation or drawings of raping or sexually fondling a child, to create a demand for Live-Action and Photograph Stills of Raping or sexually fondling a child. So it's less wrong than Looking at Live-action video of Raping or sexually fondling a child, and it's less wrong than sexually fondling a child. Don't get me wrong, I recommend the death penalty for all of the above, including Pedophilia. Maybe the Pope does too, have you asked him? Or were you too busy mentally exaggerating his true statements, into him cheering for hurting children? Killing all Pedophiles would prevent all Child Rape and Child Sexual fondling. Killing in self-defense is okay, and to quote Michael Jackson (Ironic?) We Are The Children. There is no self-defense truer than that of killing all Pedophiles. Pedophilia isn't a crime and it isn't wrong, we just should kill them all, that's all.
 
AmericanWoman76 said:
He's not a baby, he's been an adult for 2,028 years (he was 33 at the edge between B.C. and A.D.) Adults can man-up and read the wall of text.
Click to expand...

Adults can hit the enter key every now and again, separating paragraphs into bit sized chunks that more effectively and cleanly express what they're trying to say.
 
AmericanWoman76 said:
Don't get me wrong, I'm no fan of the Pope. I'm an American and I believe it's morally wrong to participate into elevating a human being to a social status above other humans, and I'm a Protestant and I believe it's morally wrong to participate in elevating a person to spiritual status above other humans. But he is right about this and you are wrong. It is a fact that Pedophilia is an incurable medical condition, not a crime. Pedophilia isn't ever a person's action, and only person's actions can be crimes. Sexual attraction is a chemical reaction, not a choice. Choices can be wrong but chemical reactions are just science. (Not that the Pope wouldn't throw science in Prison if he could, But then I'm no fan of the Pope anyway.) Child Molestation is not a medical condition. Child Molestation is a crime. It's always a crime because it's always an action which hurts another person. There are varying degrees to which it is wrong because there are e varying degrees to which it hurts another person. Raping a child is more wrong than sexually fondling a child. You're creepy if you don't agree with the Pope that there are varying degrees. It would take a creepy person to see sexually fondling a child as being no different than raping a child. The Pope is right and you're wrong. Looking at live-action video or still photographs of Child Pornography is less wrong than raping a child. It's still wrong, and it's still a crime. Looking at it, creates a market demand for raping or sexually fondling a child. But it takes more than one customer to create enough demand to cause a child to be raped or sexually fondled, so it's less wrong than raping a child. .Looking at Live-Action or Photograph-stills of Child Pornography is therefore equally wrong as sexually fondling a child. Looking at animations and drawings depicting Child Molestation is wrong. It's wrong because it creates a market demand for Live-Action and Photograph Stills of Raping or sexually fondling a child. It takes more than one customer of animation or drawings of raping or sexually fondling a child, to create a demand for Live-Action and Photograph Stills of Raping or sexually fondling a child. So it's less wrong than Looking at Live-action video of Raping or sexually fondling a child, and it's less wrong than sexually fondling a child. Don't get me wrong, I recommend the death penalty for all of the above, including Pedophilia. Maybe the Pope does too, have you asked him? Or were you too busy mentally exaggerating his true statements, into him cheering for hurting children? Killing all Pedophiles would prevent all Child Rape and Child Sexual fondling. Killing in self-defense is okay, and to quote Michael Jackson (Ironic?) We Are The Children. There is no self-defense truer than that of killing all Pedophiles. Pedophilia isn't a crime and it isn't wrong, we just should kill them all, that's all.
Click to expand...

What's the definition of pedophile if not someone who molests children?

And if they should be killed, then why do you say it's a medical condition? Should we kill all schizophrenics according to your definition of a pedophile?

I'm not understanding your leaps. Sorry.
 
AmericanWoman76 said:
Don't get me wrong, I'm no fan of the Pope. I'm an American and I believe it's morally wrong to participate into elevating a human being to a social status above other humans, and I'm a Protestant and I believe it's morally wrong to participate in elevating a person to spiritual status above other humans. But he is right about this and you are wrong. It is a fact that Pedophilia is an incurable medical condition, not a crime. Pedophilia isn't ever a person's action, and only person's actions can be crimes. Sexual attraction is a chemical reaction, not a choice. Choices can be wrong but chemical reactions are just science. (Not that the Pope wouldn't throw science in Prison if he could, But then I'm no fan of the Pope anyway.) Child Molestation is not a medical condition. Child Molestation is a crime. It's always a crime because it's always an action which hurts another person. There are varying degrees to which it is wrong because there are e varying degrees to which it hurts another person. Raping a child is more wrong than sexually fondling a child. You're creepy if you don't agree with the Pope that there are varying degrees. It would take a creepy person to see sexually fondling a child as being no different than raping a child. The Pope is right and you're wrong. Looking at live-action video or still photographs of Child Pornography is less wrong than raping a child. It's still wrong, and it's still a crime. Looking at it, creates a market demand for raping or sexually fondling a child. But it takes more than one customer to create enough demand to cause a child to be raped or sexually fondled, so it's less wrong than raping a child. .Looking at Live-Action or Photograph-stills of Child Pornography is therefore equally wrong as sexually fondling a child. Looking at animations and drawings depicting Child Molestation is wrong. It's wrong because it creates a market demand for Live-Action and Photograph Stills of Raping or sexually fondling a child. It takes more than one customer of animation or drawings of raping or sexually fondling a child, to create a demand for Live-Action and Photograph Stills of Raping or sexually fondling a child. So it's less wrong than Looking at Live-action video of Raping or sexually fondling a child, and it's less wrong than sexually fondling a child. Don't get me wrong, I recommend the death penalty for all of the above, including Pedophilia. Maybe the Pope does too, have you asked him? Or were you too busy mentally exaggerating his true statements, into him cheering for hurting children? Killing all Pedophiles would prevent all Child Rape and Child Sexual fondling. Killing in self-defense is okay, and to quote Michael Jackson (Ironic?) We Are The Children. There is no self-defense truer than that of killing all Pedophiles. Pedophilia isn't a crime and it isn't wrong, we just should kill them all, that's all.
Click to expand...

Being a lover of porn doesn't make you a pedophile. It makes you creepy. But a pedophile molests children. I don't care if they come from being a victim, they are adults who molest children. To try to make this okay because you label it a medical condition is wrong.
 
Somerville said:
When those in charge have covered up crimes time and time again, when those in charge refuse to accept that actions of some of their members are criminal - what should governments do?




Denying reality is not the way for the Church to move forward.
Click to expand...

It may not be just about the church. South Africa has one of the highest incidences of child sex abuse in the world. It might be worth considering how this may also be a factor in his making this statement.
 
Muddy Creek said:
What's the definition of pedophile if not someone who molests children?

And if they should be killed, then why do you say it's a medical condition? Should we kill all schizophrenics according to your definition of a pedophile?

I'm not understanding your leaps. Sorry.
Click to expand...

1) You're the one leaping. 2) leap one: you made up your own definition instead of Looking up the definition of Pedophilia in a dictionary ( noun Psychiatry. ped·o·phile
[ped-uh-fahyl or, esp. British, pee-duh-fahyl]
an adult who is sexually attracted to young children.)
3)leap two: your ignorance of schizophrenia. Schizophrenics are not more likely than you or I, to be attracted to children , nor to molest them. 4) leap three; there is no logical connecting between determining whether a person has a medical condition, and determining whether they should be killed. yet you used one to define the other.
 
Last edited:
Muddy Creek said:
Being a lover of porn doesn't make you a pedophile. It makes you creepy. But a pedophile molests children. I don't care if they come from being a victim, they are adults who molest children. To try to make this okay because you label it a medical condition is wrong.
Click to expand...


ped·o·phile
[ped-uh-fahyl or, esp. British, pee-duh-] Show IPA
noun Psychiatry.
an adult who is sexually attracted to young children. ___
It's a medical condition. It's not an action. There are plenty of pedophiles that don't molest children. You would be able to hide your stupidity better if you look words up before using them. ____ Justifying Child Pornography makes you a creepy person. You tried to make it okay, and that is wrong. It also indicates a strong likelihood that you're a pedophile. ________ You falsely accused me of making it okay, and that is slander, which is wrong. Unless you really misread my words to the very opposite of what I said. Big walls of text can be so hard for small minds. _____ You put words in my mouth that I am calling Pedophiles victims, and that is deceit, which is wrong. Unless you really misread my words that badly. Big walls of text can be so hard for small minds.
 
AmericanWoman76 said:
ped·o·phile
[ped-uh-fahyl or, esp. British, pee-duh-] Show IPA
noun Psychiatry.
an adult who is sexually attracted to young children. ___
It's a medical condition. It's not an action. There are plenty of pedophiles that don't molest children. You would be able to hide your stupidity better if you look words up before using them. ____ Justifying Child Pornography makes you a creepy person. You tried to make it okay, and that is wrong. It also indicates a strong likelihood that you're a pedophile. ________ You falsely accused me of making it okay, and that is slander, which is wrong. Unless you really misread my words to the very opposite of what I said. Big walls of text can be so hard for small minds. _____ You put words in my mouth that I am calling Pedophiles victims, and that is deceit, which is wrong. Unless you really misread my words that badly. Big walls of text can be so hard for small minds.
Click to expand...

DSM is the source for what a mental illness is and how it is defined. SO let's look there: Pedophilia | BehaveNet

[h=1]Pedophilia[/h]




This Paraphilia is characterized by sexual activity with a child, usually age 13 or younger, or in the case of an adolescent, a child 5 years younger than the pedophile.

[h=3]Diagnostic criteria for 302.2 Pedophilia[/h]
(DSM IV - TR)

(cautionary statement)
A. Over a period of at least 6 months, recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving sexual activity with a prepubescent child or children (generally age 13 years or younger).
B. The person has acted on these urges, or the sexual urges or fantasies cause marked distress or interpersonal difficulty.
C. The person is at least age 16 years and at least 5 years older than the child or children in Criterion A.
Note: Do not include an individual in late adolescence involved in an ongoing sexual relationship with a 12- or 13-year-old.
Click to expand...

So using the criterion used by mental health professionals, in point of fact you have been wrong, as is the cardinal.
 
Redress said:
DSM is the source for what a mental illness is and how it is defined. SO let's look there: Pedophilia | BehaveNet



So using the criterion used by mental health professionals, in point of fact you have been wrong, as is the cardinal.
Click to expand...
Actually, that's the criteria for defining pedophilia as a mental disorder, not the criteria for defining whether or not the person has pedophilia. The criteria for defining anything as a mental disorder is that it must be something that causes a person to be a danger to oneself or to others. Mental health officials totally agree with me, your critical reading skills just suck.
 
AmericanWoman76 said:
Actually, that's the criteria for defining pedophilia as a mental disorder, not the criteria for defining whether or not the person has pedophilia. The criteria for defining anything as a mental disorder is that it must be something that causes a person to be a danger to oneself or to others. Mental health officials totally agree with me, your critical reading skills just suck.
Click to expand...

Actually, what you are using is the "popular usage" of the term, not the actual proper usage.
 
Redress said:
Actually, what you are using is the "popular usage" of the term, not the actual proper usage.
Click to expand...

No, I'm using the dictionary definition, you're using the popular usage. after you look up pedophile in the dictionary, look up popular usage in an English language textbook, you're using it wrong.
 
AmericanWoman76 said:
No, I'm using the dictionary definition, you're using the popular usage. after you look up pedophile in the dictionary, look up popular usage in an English language textbook, you're using it wrong.
Click to expand...

No, I am using the actual medical definition for diagnosis of pedophilia. That is what is known as going to the proper source for information.
 
Redress said:
No, I am using the actual medical definition for diagnosis of pedophilia. That is what is known as going to the proper source for information.
Click to expand...

no, you are using the actual medical definition for diagnosis of pedophilia AS A MENTAL DISORDER. The actual definition of mental disorder is abnormal psychology that causes a person to be a danger to themselves or others. That is known as going to the proper source for information and then USING THAT SOURCE INCORRECTLY. You are basing your incorrect definition of pedophilia as always being a danger to oneself and others, on incorrectly defining pedophilia as synonymous to, , pedophilia AS A MENTAL DISORDER, which is CIRCULAR LOGIC. You are compounding your suckish research skills and your circular logic, By telling me that I'm Incorrectly defining pedophilia as abnormal psychology by actually using the actual medical professionals' definition of pedophilia as abnormal psychology. That is known as going to the proper source for information, you are just calling it incorrect use.
 
Risky Thicket said:
LOL! Ahhh, here's a wild guess. If the Church is shucking and jiving as much you claim everyone else is, what's the point of Church?
Click to expand...

Exactly, to those in power or shall I say leadership positions, the rules do not apply. It is basically the same with our politicians. But those who very religious and supposedly observe the ten commandments along with other vows, should be held to a higher standard. Castration and ex-communications works for me.
 
danarhea said:
Now you did it. He's going to think you are a leftist atheist homosexual now. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

Yeah! Welcome to a very exclusive club, James! Delighted to have you...if y'know what I mean.
 
Going thru the thread, I see that some posters seem to think that I was posting about words that came from the man who is now Pope - others noted that they are two different people.

The comment about Africa having a high incidence of child abuse. Such cases may be related to societal differences, that is standards of what we call Western civilisation are not those of the tribal societies and groupings that still exist in much of Africa, the Middle East and Far East. What we call child abuse today would often not have been seen as illegal 150 years past in England and America. It was only in the 1880s-90s that the "age of consent" was raised to twelve.

While the vast majority of priests within the Holy Roman Catholic Church are good people who do much for their communities, the Church's problem today is a direct result of 'higher-ups', the cardinals, archbishops and bishops, who believed that covering up the sins of a few within their ranks was better for the Church than admitting there were problems. As is rather obvious from the words of the African Cardinal, there are many of those in charge today who continue to feel the same way.

The attempts to cover up the sins of priests and others within the church hierarchy continue today but governments even in those nations where the Church was once considered a branch of government are fed up and taking action.

2010 Vatican "indignant" over Belgian Police Raids In 2011, a superior court in Brussels ruled the raids were illegal.

Ireland unveils new report on Catholic child abuse - USATODAY.com

The government, which ordered the two-year probe into 1996-2009 cover-ups in the County Cork diocese of Cloyne, warned its findings suggest that parishes across Ireland could pose a continuing danger to children's welfare today.
Click to expand...
This report followed the 2009 release of the Irish Child Abuse Commission

2012 Australia's Catholic church acknowledges shame of child abuse | Reuters

Catholic sexual abuse cases in Canada - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

2013 Catholic Church thwarts child abuse investigation - The Local
 
Hatuey said:
It's not as if child molesting priests are a thing of this century. Children were regularly abused back in the 1500, 1600s, 1700s too. It just didn't get public view of was publicly acknowledged. It was just "life".
Click to expand...

while I was traveling in India, there was a big brew-ha over this high ranking hindu priest getting caught up in a molestation scandal. So it isn't something unique to catholocism.
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
while I was traveling in India, there was a big brew-ha over this high ranking hindu priest getting caught up in a molestation scandal. So it isn't something unique to catholocism.
Click to expand...

You are correct; however, the problem for the Catholic Church is due directly to the coverups carried out by the leaders of the Church. In most other cases of religious child abuse the perpetrator is handed over to the authorities, in the Church they were often sent to other parishes to continue their predation on children. It's the coverups more than the crimes that has caused so many to leave the Church.

The crimes were committed by a tiny number of really ****ed up people but the coverups were orchestrated in the highest levels of the Church.
 
Somerville said:
In most other cases of religious child abuse the perpetrator is handed over to the authorities, in the Church they were often sent to other parishes to continue their predation on children.
Click to expand...

What are you basing that on? From what I recall, the abuse allegations were going on for years in the case I cited above, but no actiona was taken
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
while I was traveling in India, there was a big brew-ha over this high ranking hindu priest getting caught up in a molestation scandal. So it isn't something unique to catholocism.
Click to expand...

I think the problem is mostly that this is institutionally hush-hushed. It's not as if this is some small church in Mexico committing the molestation and it being hushed by the local priests, there is involvement from higher-ups in the organization. Pointing out that the last pope himself was well aware of the issue and in his position did absolutely nothing to attack the issue. It was more important to instead focus on the sinners who use condoms.
 
Somerville said:
When those in charge have covered up crimes time and time again, when those in charge refuse to accept that actions of some of their members are criminal - what should governments do?

Denying reality is not the way for the Church to move forward.
Click to expand...

Unbelievable. Personally, I think pedophilia is a sexual orientation. But it doesn't make any difference what you call it. It's criminal behavior.

PS to the Cardinal: There's no such thing as a "criminal condition." WTF is that?? Is robbery a criminal condition? Is murder a criminal condition? What an idiotic statement.
 
Hatuey said:
I think the problem is mostly that this is institutionally hush-hushed. It's not as if this is some small church in Mexico committing the molestation and it being hushed by the local priests, there is involvement from higher-ups in the organization. Pointing out that the last pope himself was well aware of the issue and in his position did absolutely nothing to attack the issue. It was more important to instead focus on the sinners who use condoms.
Click to expand...

No doubt, but that seems to be well worn territory for any type of close-nit bureaucracy. ****, just look at the sandusky affair, and that only involved football.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom