Archbishop Claims SCOTUS Decision Is "Poisoning" The Future
- Thread starter vansau
- Start date
Ok seriously, I'm reporting everyone who calls this priest a pedophile on this thread despite having no evidence to back it up. I can't stand this guy's views but I don't start name-calling as a result. I can't believe that people get the suspended for saying something like 'I find homosexuality unnatural' (I don't, by the way, I really couldn't give a shit what you do in your spare time) but slander of certain individuals associated with other groups is completely fine. The obvious bias of the site is getting more obvious.
You're telling me. Apparently objective journalism and avoiding petty name calling is lost on them.Ace IV said:
As I said, it was a response to people saying that it was unfair for Mike to mention the child abuse scandals. My opinion of the Catholic church is so low I don't think there's much that can be considered unfair criticism.arsenicCatnip said:
If it were a member of NAMBLA complaining about the effect these games have on kids we would all be making the same remarks. Heck, not even that, it could be a member of Congress, since Congressmen are pretty much OK punching bags. It's sensitive because, you know, lots of people take the Catholic Church seriously.
No, it is like saying that video games are harmful while your fellows are fucking children and getting away with it. It is something he can directly oppose and try to stop instead of tilting at windmills and accomplishing nothing but actual harm to civil liberties.dyre said:
He is worried about children being harmed, yes? Well, guess where the closest harm he can address is... Instead, he wants to chase video games, an inanimate set of objects that he claims are making children into murderers. Big difference.
Hey vansau, ever read these?
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/codeofconduct
Especially this one part here:
"Don't Be a Jerk
This rule trumps any other. Any loophole you think you've found in any other rule is covered by this one. If you make our forums a less pleasant place to be, we don't want you here and we have no problem revoking your account. Here are a couple of the things you should stay away from:
Flaming
Calling people names (or groups who may visit The Escapist), this includes calling others a troll
Trolling
Posting inflammatory, extraneous or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion
Offensive Posts
Please read what you wrote before you post it and think if anyone else could find it offensive."
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/codeofconduct
Especially this one part here:
"Don't Be a Jerk
This rule trumps any other. Any loophole you think you've found in any other rule is covered by this one. If you make our forums a less pleasant place to be, we don't want you here and we have no problem revoking your account. Here are a couple of the things you should stay away from:
Flaming
Calling people names (or groups who may visit The Escapist), this includes calling others a troll
Trolling
Posting inflammatory, extraneous or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion
Offensive Posts
Please read what you wrote before you post it and think if anyone else could find it offensive."
His organization is known for harboring, relocating, and abetting child molesters, IE perpetrators of actual harm to minors. Full stop. He is a representative of that organization. An organization that has only recently acknowledged that the shit was going on. Yes, that is a level of hypocrisy that is staggering. You don't get to do that and then call an inanimate object the harbinger of child murder.Ace IV said:
No. I disagree. Ignorance is a tool politicians use time and time again, as history has shown. Strong singular voices have come up throughout history to instigate the wheels of change, slowly swaying a majority. A people is what composes of and creates the power of a nation, including the vesting of power to its leaders.Blind Sight said:
"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."
- Edmund Burke.
If this guy was involved in the pedophilia coverups I'd completely agree that it calls into question any comments he makes about child welfare. A quick google search showed that Denver did have several abuse cases but I didn't see anything offhand that suggested Chaput is another Bernard Francis Law.theultimateend said:
Assuming he didn't try to cover these scandals up, I don't think merely being a member of the Catholic clergy is sufficient to mar his comments on child welfare. In fact being open about this problem might even support his child welfare stance.
It just seems to me that it was an unnecessary comment to throw at the end of the article. If Chaput has been involved in these scandals that fact should have been clearly stated. If he hasn't been involved I don't see why it's worth bringing up - we're all aware that these events happened.
OK, folks, let's address the elephant in the room: I was not claiming that all priests are sex offenders, nor was I claiming that there's anything wrong with being Catholic. That parting comment was meant to showcase that it was ridiculous how this man had such a problem with videogames "harming" kids (when there's been no definitive proof of the lasting effects that some experts claim) while he's a part of an organization that has had a number of very public scandals about how SOME (again, note, not all) of its members have mis-used their power and authority to victimize children.
I think Chaput is overlooking some major issues, such as how many studies that attack violent games are flawed and one-sided, not to mention the fact that the industry prides itself on preventing kids from getting their hands on M-rated games.
Now, do you want a specific argument about members of the church doing more harm than videogames? How about this? [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7930380.stm]
Do I think this is commonplace? No. But is Chaput a part of the organization that did this? Yes.
My goal was to make a counter-point, and if I did offend you, I apologize.
I think Chaput is overlooking some major issues, such as how many studies that attack violent games are flawed and one-sided, not to mention the fact that the industry prides itself on preventing kids from getting their hands on M-rated games.
Now, do you want a specific argument about members of the church doing more harm than videogames? How about this? [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7930380.stm]
Do I think this is commonplace? No. But is Chaput a part of the organization that did this? Yes.
My goal was to make a counter-point, and if I did offend you, I apologize.
Fourth or whatever it is up to.Eri said:
I have met the Archbishop and he is a good person, wrong, but good. In fact i have met a rather large number of priests and know and have friends in the seminary. Its is so not cool to claim every priest is a child molester. Hell statistically Catholic priest are no more likely to be a pedophile than any other person. [sup][URL="http://www.newsweek.com/2010/04/07/mean-men.html" (title,target)][1.][/URL][URL="http://pedophileophobia.com/10_myths_about_priestly_pedophil.htm" (title,target)] [2.][/URL][/sup]
[user]{vansau}[/user] Seriously that is so not classy. A user would likely be banned for something like that. Besides I though that the Escapist was moving to a more serious journalistic model, as a journalist you are allowed an opinion, but you are not supposed to shove your opinion into the content like that. Come on man!
Tl;Dr
Ad Hominem is petty and out of line. It makes me sad and makes a panda cry [sup][URL="http://www.digitalthinkbox.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/09/pandacutie.jpg" (title,target)] [3.] [/URL][/sup]
Edit: I did not see the above post. I don't think you should be trying to justify it, simply because this is your article not forum post. The big issue is not your opinion its your opinion in this context. [user]{vansau}[/user] thank you for responding to everyone.
Also its awesome to be part of a community where we can really interact with the article writers, and have awesome conversation as a community.
Singular voices emerged as a representation of a majority opinion, the majority opinion did not emerge as a result of a singular individual. Examples, in the case of black history: Martin Luther King or Malcolm X were the products of a dissatisfied population, not singular voices who shifted the majority to their side, Rosa Parks was merely the spark of an underprivileged class, Nelson Mandela was the figurehead of a massive, unhappy black majority in South Africa. When society did not have this group already responding in such a fashion, the responses were different: Marcus Garvey was kicked out of America, Nelson Mandela was thrown in jail for decades, etc. It is not the individual voice that shifts people's views, societal effects are what leads to the population accepting such values as rational. When those opinions are seen as unconventional or wrong the opposite happens.Still Life said:
Also, please tell me you've actually read Burke before you started using his quotes. Because this was a guy who defended oppressive, lower class child labour on the grounds that it was traditional.
I don't love him, but I like that he pointed out that nice little stigma the Catholic Church has regarding the "poisoning" of society.creationis apostate said:
OT: I don't care if it is considered "low", "ungentlemenly" or "unfair", if a leader of any institution that has a history like the Catholic Church's on "poisoning" society makes a remark so glaringly hypocritical and so utterly ignorant, then vansau is completely justified in making his statement regarding the hypocrisy in said remark. One forum article versus thousands of years of perversity by religion? Say what you want to about journalism and bias, vansau's statement spoke the truth and I'm glad he did bring that up.
