More on religion….

Here you go, balung.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19806068/

I don’t see how this is a liberal ploy when the CHURCH ELECTED TO SETTLE.

@balungaloaf:

and your terrible attempt to answer my questions didnt answer anything, it didnt add anything either.

My answers were appropriate in regards to the irrelevance of your “questions.”

so again, no proof, tons of money……in other cases (except the church for some reason)  people see a confilct.

Except that if there was no proof, there would be no settlement and the judge would dismiss the case.

again, why not huge money payouts for anybody else like rabbi’s, imams, shieks, pastors, reverends….etc?

Is anyone suing them?  Then I think that may be why…

and how did the church make its own bed.  seriously!  can you think beyond the daily show and trite liberal lines?

I’ve told you that I don’t even watch the Daily Show.  But as Switch and I both pointed out, this is what happens when you neglect an issue, thinking it will go away.

so if a priest is falsely accused b/c someone wants money, and the cardinal goes, this is a BS claim the person is clearly lying, lets just move you father to another place.  they know the person is a liar but just want to discreetly move the priest. (trust me this happens, a lot of people want to be rich but most of them wont.  this is an easy way and the church has to deal with it)

Why would the church do that if they were lying?  Seems absurd to me.  The case would still stand whether they moved the priest or not.

so the priest is moved, but the person keeps clamoring.  soon they open a case.  the whole case consists of “he did it”  vs. “no i didnt”.  the liberal jury sides with the plaintiff, b/c they have been indocrinated to hate the church b/c of its anti-liberal policies of no abortion, gay marriage, stem cells, etc.  so they punish the priest and parish b/c they dont like the church.  that happens.  and then the news can say he did it, b/c a jury said he did.  that doesnt make it true.

There is a reason why the jury isn’t just one person.  We don’t even know if this was a trial by jury or a bench trial, so don’t get into that.  It’s again irrelevant because the Church settled.

it happens……some times the plaintiff has a legit greivence, but GIVEN  that priests have a much lower percentage of abuses than anyone else, that legit plaintiff is in the minority.

Abuse is abuse, no matter what percentage of priests do it.  It’s not that hard to understand.

and why the HUGE SUMS OF MONEY?..…EASY!!!        thats all the liar’s were after anyways!  DUH!

When it involves multiple people going back decades, it doesn’t seem that huge.

@balungaloaf:

ever think the church moved them b/c they knew the complaint was BS?  why get rid of someone for something he didnt do.  so they can say, hey he didnt do anything, but a jury of liberals will screw them anyways, and then the media will say that it DID happen b/c the jury found them accountable.

doesnt make it so.

But the same priest moved over and over all because of BS allegations?

We are talking about charges back into the 1950’s here, long before the internet, and back when even long distance p[hone calls where prohibitively expensive.

You are asking us to believe that there was an orchestrated effort over vast geographic areas to show the same Priest molesting little boys in multiple states over a span of decades, just in the hopes that at some point 40 years in the future that the state legislature would repeal the statute of limitations on such allegations so that you would be able to collect money HALF A CENTURY LATER?

Wow Balung, that may be the best Conspiracy Theory I have ever heard!  Makes the Roswell cover-up look like a CERTAIN FACT!  :-P

You just keep dreaming of your 50 year conspiracy Balung.

The church never moved the Priests who happened to be the molesters… over an over.  It is just a 50 year conspiracy of the Liberals against the Catholic Church.  :roll:

Right…

Just a cash grab, filled with details such that the richest private enterprise on Earth feels that they do not want to defend themselves…

OK Balung, you just keep wishing in one hand and shiting in the other, and see which fills up first…

Now a practical question…
Who is MOST LIKELY to sign up for 100% celibacy (no sex with women)…
A)  A normal heterosexual male.
B)  A homosexual Pederast.

I for one would not.  “We will not lie steal or cheat, nor tolerate among us anyone who does.  Furthermore I resolve to do my duty and live honorably, so help me God”  United States Air Force Academy Honor Oath (Yes, I took it back when I was a Lutheran, so no religious conflict).

And if we accept your stat that 19 out of 20 Priests are good guys with no desire to molest little boys, are you aware that that means HUNDREDS if not thousands of child molesting priests?

I agree it is too many.

The problem is the Church Hierarchy did nothing to stop the few they had.

And now they are paying an economic price for it.

Had they acted and booted the molesters, this would NEVER have happened.

They DID know Balung.  Why else would there be that trail of reassignments for the molesting priests?

THAT is what fried the Church, and allowed for the judgments/settlements with the various Archdiocese…  the fact that there were all of these re-assignment records that matched up with all of these specific Priests.

In that case they should have defended themselves.

But they chose not to, which indicates that they were concerned that there was insufficient evidence of their defense…
SIX HUNDRED AND EIGHTY MILLION DOLLARS PLUS worth of concern…
They chose to settle rather than risk DISCLOSURE in open court.

@ncscswitch:

Amon, the reason the Church was sued and not the Priest is because those filing the charges claimed that the Church was responsible for failure to act on the transgressions by these priests over the years.

As has been shown in court filed documents in many of these cases already, there is a documented history of complaints against Priests over the years for these actions, and the response of the church was to RELOCATE the Priest to a new diocese.  This had the effect of FACILITATING the abuse instead of ending it (had the Priest been removed completely).

well considering the first part of your post, i asked this question earlier in my post ˝was it beacuse church was covering it?˝

if it is like you said, then i simply cant aprove those actions of the ones which failed to solve this problem, those priest had to be charged and sued by not only church, but state law. period.

but stil all this  money suing to ˝get even˝ thing is very questionable, if they really wanted to help, they could put money in some funds to help the victims, and to go to media with commercials… to prevent new cases,  making millionares wont help nobody

and just to link to balungaloaf post, i am sure that pedofilia in protestant ˝clergy˝ is much more present than in catholic one, but never saw someone sued protestant community for 600 mil $. or Switch you want to say that they dont cover it…

but altough this whole money thing is questionable still if its only one case of this evil beetwen catholic clergy than it must be severely punished, i am a catholic, i want all the crimes be punished no matter is it catholic or protestant clergy, but its my Church and certaintly its a problem of enormous dimension,

hope all will learn something from these, dont know what more to say

@balungaloaf:

they might as well settle.  why go to court, they’d lose anyways in LA.  you know LOS ANGELES.  LIBERAL TOWN.  if you go to court, it looks WORSE.  Jesus Christ.

Yes, and didn’t you just argue that liberal judges are lenient on pedophiles and rapists, presumably because they are liberal?
Make up your damn mind.

thats BS, you dont need proof to convict these priests all you need is the right jury, which you’d find in LA.

This shows you don’t know about jury selection.  Prosecutors AND defendants can object to any potential juror.

the question is……why isnt anyone suing these people?  they could…  but people only go after the church b/c of the $$$$$$.

I think it has to do more with who molested whom.
Besides, Jews have all the money (they love that stuff), and it would be logical to go after them first if you are just looking for a payout.

they’d do that b/c the church knows as soon as someone comes out with an allegation, the church is screwed.  its going to come down to a “they say, we say”  and the church will lose everyone of those hands down b/c the liar will go onto the stand and cry and put on theatrics for their big payoff at the end of the day.  It is the EASIEST way to a million dollars in america today.

That’s why the innocent defend themselves in a trial, or at least attempt to, and do not settle.
Actually, it won’t come down to a he said/she said, because the accusers will point to how the church mishandled the suspected abusers, and require the Church to release documents pertaining to the case.  The weight is on them because they didn’t address the situation appropriately for decades.  And now you see them, like you, saying “Well everyone else does it too!”  That’s a stand-up organization right there, you must be proud.

so they move the priest immediately hoping that no money shakedown will come, but the shakedowns come every time.  some times the priest has been a criminal, but again i’d say not half the time.
again, why dont these people try to put the priests in prison, where they belong if they did these things.  They put other molesters in prison, but not priests.  they only want millions of dollars.  660 million to be exact this time.

Some of these priests are dead.  And I think most people would feel it’s better to pay than spend time, so in that way, they ARE being lenient on the priests.  Any other pedophile/sex offender in this situation would have YOU calling for their head.  Again, hypocrisy.

a whole jury can be liberal idiots who hate the church.  they are in the big cities too.  and b/c the church settled didnt make the claims true.  its means they wanted the press to go away b/c the bad press hurts the church.  hurts them enough in liberal LA that they pay 660 million.  they want the little mexican kids feel like the priests there are friends, not pedophiles.  the media does its best to make people think all priests are bad nowadays.

If they wanted the press go away, why did they make a landmark settlement?  Why do they continue to comment on the case?
I think most people would agree that priests overall are good people trying to do good things.  This is why it’s so shocking that they molest kids, and you only hear about that.

i’d looooove to see the media even attempt to smear evangelicals the way they do priests.  and evangelicals have more reasons to smear them,  the pastors become stinking rich and its a farce.  but the evangelicals are a mean loud people, which scares the media.  catholics are quiet and humbe (except me) so they are easy pickings.

They have done so, it just got old, and they aren’t as prominent anymore.  The priest abuse cases are actually recent.

and switch, if they happened back in the 50’s……WHY didnt the accuser(s) bring it up for decades? ? ?

Why do some women not report rape?

i’ll answer that, b/c if they are liars just looking for money, there hasnt been a culture to get big payoffs until now.  so i think these so-called victims (sadly there might be a few honest victims)  but they would have been recent.  the so-called victims from the 50’s are liars in my opinion b/c they are old people and only would of been a child back in the 50’s.  they see an opportunity to get some cash for lies, so lie they do.  and instant cash is the reward.

I think the emotional scarring, abuse of trust, and general reaction to traumatic experiences explain this much better than your dumbass reason.

they had decades to bring up claims.  FUNNY how they show up only now when they can now get rediculous sums of money for accusations w/o proof.

Could it be that there was bias for the church, where they could do no wrong, and legitimate cases would be laughed away?  Yeah, I think so.
If you were raped by another man, balung, how quickly would you admit it?

@Amon-Sul:

and just to link to balungaloaf post, i am sure that pedofilia in protestant ˝clergy˝ is much more present than in catholic one, but never saw someone sued protestant community for 600 mil $. or Switch you want to say that they dont cover it…

You guys STILL can’t get over the schism, eh?

@balungaloaf:

no problem with the schism, we are still descendants of peter, while everyone else is not.  second, all the reasons people left have been fixed, except with the orthodox, but they are still cool.

My parents aren’t at all Catholic, and I’m definite peter was involved in my conception.  Just like everyone else.