# Paedophilia not criminal condition! **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [March 16, 2013, 11:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paedophilia-not-criminal-condition/653126 "2013-03-16T23:42:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Darth\_Panda](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ee7513/32.png) [@Darth\_Panda](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darth_Panda)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2013, 4:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paedophilia-not-criminal-condition/653126/41 "2013-03-17T16:36:13Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > No, I don’t see it that way. “Hate speech” has virtually always been understood as including speech invidiously painting an entire religious faith – even though religious belief is not an immutable characteristic. It’s not the entire religion or its beliefs, though - just the organization of the Roman Catholic Church. Note the focus on the organization and its actions, not on the religeon or its religious beliefs. The reason that this hatred isn’t thrust upon the Orthodox Catholic Church has nothing to do with the Filioque clause, I assure you. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2013, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paedophilia-not-criminal-condition/653126/42 "2013-03-17T18:50:43Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > the Church HAS taken necessary steps to stop molestation. Where is Bernard Law these days? :dubious: How about Roger Mahony? > [@Bricker](#): > > “Hate speech” has virtually always been understood as including speech invidiously painting an entire religious faith I’d like to believe you know better than to claim child rape is part of the faith you profess. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2013, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paedophilia-not-criminal-condition/653126/43 "2013-03-17T21:07:03Z")
> [@Darth\_Panda](#): > > It’s not the entire religion or its beliefs, though - just the organization of the Roman Catholic Church. Note the focus on the organization and its actions, not on the religeon or its religious beliefs. The focus is on all persons who are currently Catholic: > [@GawnFishin](#): > > . Anyone who can still support any god damned part of the fucking piece trash organisation is a vile and disgusting person, if your not part of the solution then your part of the problem. ---
**Author:** ![Darth\_Panda](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ee7513/32.png) [@Darth\_Panda](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darth_Panda)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2013, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paedophilia-not-criminal-condition/653126/44 "2013-03-17T21:40:38Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > The focus is on all persons who are currently Catholic: That statement applied to people supporting the organization, it made no mention of whether those people actually hold Catholic religious beliefs. I don’t see how it applies to all Catholics when it would clearly exclude all Orthodox Catholics (unless they happen to support the RCC) or Catholics who hate the current Church. It would, however, apply to atheists who support the church. On that basis, I believe your statement to be false. That said, however, I believe that if you look at my posts in this thread, youll see that I don’t support the point of view that you’re criticizing. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2013, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paedophilia-not-criminal-condition/653126/45 "2013-03-17T21:46:37Z")
> [@Darth\_Panda](#): > > That statement applied to people supporting the organization, it made no mention of whether those people actually hold Catholic religious beliefs. > > I don’t see how it applies to all Catholics when it would clearly exclude all Orthodox Catholics (unless they happen to support the RCC) or Catholics who hate the current Church. It would, however, apply to atheists who support the church. > > On that basis, I believe your statement to be false. > > That said, however, I believe that if you look at my posts in this thread, youll see that I don’t support the point of view that you’re criticizing. I see that. But in responding to your first point, one of the precepts of the church is to contribute to the support of the church. There is, in other words, no way to believe in the religious truths of the church without supporting it in some way. ---
**Author:** ![Darth\_Panda](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ee7513/32.png) [@Darth\_Panda](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darth_Panda)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2013, 9:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paedophilia-not-criminal-condition/653126/46 "2013-03-17T21:52:17Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I see that. > > But in responding to your first point, one of the precepts of the church is to contribute to the support of the church. There is, in other words, no way to believe in the religious truths of the church without supporting it in some way. Yes, that is problematic. But rejection of that precept would not amount to apostasy - it would be heresy at most. And in the view of the Church, heretics don’t stop being Catholic - so folks who violate that dictate of support, are still Catholic and yet wouldn’t be subject to that particular vitriol. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2013, 9:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paedophilia-not-criminal-condition/653126/47 "2013-03-17T21:58:52Z")
> [@Darth\_Panda](#): > > Yes, that is problematic. But rejection of that precept would not amount to apostasy - it would be heresy at most. And in the view of the Church, heretics don’t stop being Catholic - so folks who violate that dictate of support, are still Catholic and yet wouldn’t be subject to that particular vitriol. Granted. So let me amend my complaint: > [@Darth Panda](#): > > It’s not the entire religion or its beliefs, though - just the organization of the Roman Catholic Church. Note the focus on the organization and its actions, not on the religeon or its religious beliefs. The focus is on all persons who currently hold a specific Catholic religious belief: > [@GawnFishin'](#): > > . Anyone who can still support any god damned part of the fucking piece trash organisation is a vile and disgusting person, if your not part of the solution then your part of the problem. ---
**Author:** ![Darth\_Panda](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ee7513/32.png) [@Darth\_Panda](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darth_Panda)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2013, 10:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paedophilia-not-criminal-condition/653126/48 "2013-03-17T22:12:28Z")
I’ll grant that that’s overly broad - I certainly don’t share that view. But while you’ll find my view more nuanced, I doubt you’ll like it much better 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Cheshire\_Human](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/5f8ce5/32.png) [@Cheshire\_Human](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheshire_Human)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2013, 12:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paedophilia-not-criminal-condition/653126/49 "2013-03-18T00:12:51Z")
> [@GawnFishin](#): > > Don’t all conservatives promise austerity and humility though? Ok, you’re an idiot. Where the fuck you get “conservative”, I’ll never understand. You are an idiot, instead. Ok, it’s the pit. But I can’t _say_ what you deserve. You’re an idiot, who doesn’t understand the shit you’re railing against. OK. You’re demonstrably stupid. Do you have an actual point? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2013, 1:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paedophilia-not-criminal-condition/653126/50 "2013-03-18T01:00:08Z")
> [@Darth\_Panda](#): > > I’ll grant that that’s overly broad - I certainly don’t share that view. But while you’ll find my view more nuanced, I doubt you’ll like it much better 🙂 Look, I know the Church has had an abysmal response to these depredations, only addressed meaningfully in the last few years. I suspect I won’t like your view, but I probably won’t argue much against them, since I suspect they’ll be based on fact…and I don’t like the facts any more than you do. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2013, 1:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paedophilia-not-criminal-condition/653126/51 "2013-03-18T01:22:19Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > one of the precepts of the church is to contribute to the support of the church. There is, in other words, no way to believe in the religious truths of the church without supporting it in some way. So, if you adhere to the faith, you must support the institution. The institution supports child rape. Therefore … :dubious: Well, one way \*not \*to support child rape would be adhere to a different faith and a different institution. There are many to choose from, most of whom do not have that little flaw. Why, then, would a person choose this one? Why, then, would a person who so chooses feel offended by having the consequences of that choice pointed out to him? Hate speech indeed. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2013, 1:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paedophilia-not-criminal-condition/653126/52 "2013-03-18T01:29:41Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > So, if you adhere to the faith, you must support the institution. The institution supports child rape. I believe we’ve already gone over why that accusation is false. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2013, 1:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paedophilia-not-criminal-condition/653126/53 "2013-03-18T01:35:14Z")
The facts say otherwise. Their religious doctrine certainly does not condone it, no - but the \*institution \*supports it. ---
**Author:** ![panaccione](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/94ad74/32.png) [@panaccione](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/panaccione)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2013, 1:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paedophilia-not-criminal-condition/653126/54 "2013-03-18T01:48:41Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Now I’ll let the rest of the thread continue with the relentless and eager Catholic bashing that somehow fails to be hate speech. Thanks **Bricker.** I was almost worried you were going to set us straight. ETA: Shit, nevermind. ---
**Author:** ![Typo\_Negative](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/typo_negative/32/484_2.png) [@Typo\_Negative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Negative)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2013, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paedophilia-not-criminal-condition/653126/55 "2013-03-18T01:51:45Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Look, I know the Church has had an abysmal response to these depredations, only addressed meaningfully in the last few years. Can you tell me how they are addressing the issue meaningfully today? Because from outsider’s view, it’s ‘They address it meaningfully a few years after sitting on their hands about any one particular case and then, and only then, because the cat is already out of the bag’. Can we see an example within the last couple of years of a priest being defrocked and the church aiding a prosecution after finding out said priest has committed a heinous crime against a child or children? And is anything less than that really meaningful? And a question about criminal law…if you find out about a crime or have evidence that a crime has been committed, do you have any _duty_ to report that crime? Does it change if the alleged criminal is in your employ? ---
**Author:** ![Darth\_Panda](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ee7513/32.png) [@Darth\_Panda](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darth_Panda)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2013, 2:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paedophilia-not-criminal-condition/653126/56 "2013-03-18T02:10:35Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Look, I know the Church has had an abysmal response to these depredations, only addressed meaningfully in the last few years. I suspect I won’t like your view, but I probably won’t argue much against them, since I suspect they’ll be based on fact…and I don’t like the facts any more than you do. I can appreciate, and repect, that, but I think people like you are in a position to do more by choosing to cast their loyalty to a better organization that holds the same fundamental beliefs. You may not be the problem ( and I really don’t think you are), but you can do a lot more to be the solution. ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2013, 2:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paedophilia-not-criminal-condition/653126/57 "2013-03-18T02:29:58Z")
Y’know, I dropped out of active practice and participation in the RCC years ago – too many disagreements and it would have been bogus to just confess the same things week after week with no purpose of amends on my part – but ISTM a lot of people do not get that to the true faithful believer, changing churches is NOT something you can do as easily as changing what candidate you vote for or what insurance company you subscribe to. Absent some sort of road-to-Damascus moment, it’s a hard journey. The investment of self in it is not easily comprehensible to the more secularly minded. > [@Typo\_Negative](#): > > And a question about criminal law…if you find out about a crime or have evidence that a crime has been committed, do you have any _duty_ to report that crime? Does it change if the alleged criminal is in your employ? As a _general_ rule: No. There are _specific cases_ in which you are required to, and those vary by jurisdiction. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2013, 1:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paedophilia-not-criminal-condition/653126/58 "2013-03-18T13:58:40Z")
> [@Typo\_Negative](#): > > Can you tell me how they are addressing the issue meaningfully today? > > Because from outsider’s view, it’s ‘They address it meaningfully a few years after sitting on their hands about any one particular case and then, and only then, because the cat is already out of the bag’. > > Can we see an example within the last couple of years of a priest being defrocked and the church aiding a prosecution after finding out said priest has committed a heinous crime against a child or children? And is anything less than that really meaningful? Yes. These scandals that you’re hearing about now are ones where the underlying crimes were committed in the 1980s or 1990s. In the early 2000s, the US Conference of Catholic Bishops adopted very stringent new reforms involving treating any accusation as credible until fully investigated, removing an accused priest from active ministry until any charges were investigated, and reporting charges to the police. For example, Mark Stewart Bullock, formerly assigned as parochial vicar of Church of the Immaculate Conception in Towson, was immediately dismissed from his priestly duties and his faculties as a priest were removed by his bishop after being accused – not convicted, mind you, but accused – of [exposing himself in an adult bookstore.](http://www.baltimoresun.com/explore/baltimorecounty/news/ph-tt-priest-arrest-0125-20120123,0,6545377.story) Rev. Uriel Ojeda, who had served as a parochial vicar in Redding for Our Lady of Mercy Church, was accused of abusing a 13-year-old. When informed of the allegations, the diocese [contacted the police, suspended Ojeda’s priestly faculties](http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Tte0PuhkrCAJ:media.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/other/Ojeda%2520priest%2520fact%2520sheets%2520rtf+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us), and – going farther than required by the USCCB’s guidelines – refused to post bail for the accused. > [@](#): > > And a question about criminal law…if you find out about a crime or have evidence that a crime has been committed, do you have any _duty_ to report that crime? Does it change if the alleged criminal is in your employ? No, and no, as general principles, although some states are beginning to create such laws. But as a general rule, no. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2013, 2:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paedophilia-not-criminal-condition/653126/59 "2013-03-18T14:04:19Z")
> [@Darth\_Panda](#): > > I can appreciate, and repect, that, but I think people like you are in a position to do more by choosing to cast their loyalty to a better organization that holds the same fundamental beliefs. You may not be the problem ( and I really don’t think you are), but you can do a lot more to be the solution. There is no other organization that holds the same fundamental beliefs. Christ said, “I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it.” That means something fundamental: that Christ intended to found a church, and that Peter was to serve as His Vicar on Earth, and that Church would be the true faith. There is no other organization. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2013, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paedophilia-not-criminal-condition/653126/60 "2013-03-18T15:55:39Z")
Do you wish to claim that your adherence to that doctrine is not of your own _choice_? :dubious: [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paedophilia-not-criminal-condition/653126.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/paedophilia-not-criminal-condition/653126.md?page=4)