# The RCC now has zero tolerance for child abuse. Well, except... **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [August 25, 2014, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rcc-now-has-zero-tolerance-for-child-abuse-well-except/696492 "2014-08-25T20:11:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 21
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2014, 1:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rcc-now-has-zero-tolerance-for-child-abuse-well-except/696492/401 "2014-09-08T13:07:06Z")
> [@Uzi](#): > > I think you are conflating conservative=religious and liberal=non-religious. No. **Steophan** is decidedly non-religious, and he clearly understands the dramatic error you’re making. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2014, 1:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rcc-now-has-zero-tolerance-for-child-abuse-well-except/696492/402 "2014-09-08T13:58:01Z")
> [@kaylasdad99](#): > > Just so you know, you’re coming off as being just as dogmatic and implacable as any representative of ISIS. I do think child rape is abhorrent, if that’s the charge you’re making. Don’t you? ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Economist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c89c15/32.png) [@Evil\_Economist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Economist)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2014, 2:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rcc-now-has-zero-tolerance-for-child-abuse-well-except/696492/403 "2014-09-08T14:22:20Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > No, I merely said that it seems like a liberal tactic to me. After all, the people that are posting here that are implying Law should be punished regardless of extant laws, or by the telling of a conscious and deliberate lie, are liberal in their outlook, targeting an institution that is hated by by liberals. It seems like a solid inference to me. > [@Evil\_Economist](#): > > List the posters who have explicitly stated that Law should be punished “regardless of extant laws, or by the telling of a conscious and deliberate lie,” along with their political affiliation, please. Let’s see the basis you have for this conclusion. > [@Bricker](#): > > As I said…Am I mistaken? Dear Bricker, In case you missed my post, here it is again. Let’s examine the evidence together and decide if you are mistaken. ---
**Author:** ![Uzi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/91b2a8/32.png) [@Uzi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uzi)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2014, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rcc-now-has-zero-tolerance-for-child-abuse-well-except/696492/404 "2014-09-08T14:28:16Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > Yep, the Pope can, but doesn’t. Just like the Queen can, but doesn’t. If they tried, they’d soon be de-poped, or de-queened. Or just ignored. Whatever makes you sleep at night. But it is nice to have someone who may actually know more than you do to refer to. There is no actual way to depope someone. [Linky](http://canonlawmadeeasy.com/2013/01/31/pope-removed-from-office/) So, it pretty much looks like the pope can make any law he wants to in whatever form he wants to as long as it doesn’t contradict what jesus or god has already said and it looks like if anyone objects they can go and pound sand. Unless you are suggesting they break the law to do it some other way like ignoring or trying to depose him? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2014, 2:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rcc-now-has-zero-tolerance-for-child-abuse-well-except/696492/405 "2014-09-08T14:31:35Z")
> [@Evil\_Economist](#): > > Dear Bricker, > > In case you missed my post, here it is again. Let’s examine the evidence together and decide if you are mistaken. I said: “After all, the people that are posting here that **are implying** Law should be punished regardless of extant laws…” You then asked: “List the posters who **have explicitly stated** that Law should be punished…” I invite you to examine the disconnect between the claim I made, and the one you’re now asking me to prove. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2014, 2:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rcc-now-has-zero-tolerance-for-child-abuse-well-except/696492/406 "2014-09-08T14:34:21Z")
> [@Uzi](#): > > So, it pretty much looks like the pope can make any law he wants to in whatever form he wants to as long as it doesn’t contradict what jesus or god has already said and it looks like if anyone objects they can go and pound sand. Unless you are suggesting they break the law to do it some other way like ignoring or trying to depose him? A pope cannot make any law he pleases. The Pope’s governance of the Church is guided by the Holy Spirit – or at least, that’s what the popes believe to be true. So your demand is that the Pope fabricate a message from God – that he lie about guidance from the Holy Spirit – in order to change church law. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2014, 2:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rcc-now-has-zero-tolerance-for-child-abuse-well-except/696492/407 "2014-09-08T14:37:28Z")
The Holy Spirit has commanded all of them to hide and protect Law and Wesolowski. :rolleyes: Convenient, huh? Convincing, not quite. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Economist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c89c15/32.png) [@Evil\_Economist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Economist)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2014, 2:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rcc-now-has-zero-tolerance-for-child-abuse-well-except/696492/408 "2014-09-08T14:46:15Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I said: > > “After all, the people that are posting here that **are implying** Law should be punished regardless of extant laws…” > > You then asked: > > “List the posters who **have explicitly stated** that Law should be punished…” > > I invite you to examine the disconnect between the claim I made, and the one you’re now asking me to prove. Very well, list the posters who are \*implying \*that “Law should be punished regardless of extant laws…”, along with their political affiliations, please. Oh, and also cite their specific language where they \*imply \*it, please. Because I don’t want anyone to think that you may be \*inferring \*in excess of the evidence. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2014, 2:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rcc-now-has-zero-tolerance-for-child-abuse-well-except/696492/409 "2014-09-08T14:53:53Z")
> [@Evil\_Economist](#): > > Very well, list the posters who are \*implying \*that “Law should be punished regardless of extant laws…”, along with their political affiliations, please. > > Oh, and also cite their specific language where they \*imply \*it, please. Because I don’t want anyone to think that you may be \*inferring \*in excess of the evidence. (1) Uzi, liberal > [@Uzi](#): > > Who says the Church can’t apply rules retroactively? Last I heard the Vatican wasn’t in the US. > [@Uzi](#): > > I’m saying popes have always lied when they says god spoke to them. So, when he lies he may as well do it for a good reason. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Economist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c89c15/32.png) [@Evil\_Economist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Economist)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2014, 3:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rcc-now-has-zero-tolerance-for-child-abuse-well-except/696492/410 "2014-09-08T15:00:09Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > (1) Uzi, liberal Uzi, not a Liberal: > [@Uzi](#): > > I’m not a Liberal. That’s 0-1 so far. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2014, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rcc-now-has-zero-tolerance-for-child-abuse-well-except/696492/411 "2014-09-08T15:05:34Z")
> [@Evil\_Economist](#): > > Uzi, not a Liberal: > > That’s 0-1 so far. Uzi is a liberal. Uzi claims to not be a liberal, of course, but Uzi’s political positions are indistinguishable from a liberal’s. Therefore, Uzi is a liberal. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Economist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c89c15/32.png) [@Evil\_Economist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Economist)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2014, 3:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rcc-now-has-zero-tolerance-for-child-abuse-well-except/696492/412 "2014-09-08T15:06:21Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Uzi is a liberal. He says he isn’t, and you don’t get to decide his political affiliation for him, so no. And I don’t care what your edit says, score stands, 0-1. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2014, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rcc-now-has-zero-tolerance-for-child-abuse-well-except/696492/413 "2014-09-08T15:17:04Z")
> [@Evil\_Economist](#): > > He says he isn’t, and you don’t get to decide his political affiliation for him, so no. > > And I don’t care what your edit says, score stands, 0-1. That’s not for you to decide. My point is that he’s a liberal by virtue of his political positions, not by virtue of his self-identification. A liberal isn’t merely someone who claims to be a liberal. A far-left liberal might demur and say, “I’m a radical,” or “I’m in the conservative wing of the far-left,” or some equally obfuscating nonsense. But it’s the sum of their political positions that makes them liberal. In **Uzi** ’s case, he argues for traditionally liberal positions against traditionally conservative positions. That makes him liberal, and he cannot change that merely by denying that he is. Of course, if you (or he) could show his arguing for traditionally conservative positions, that would be good evidence that I am mistaken. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Economist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c89c15/32.png) [@Evil\_Economist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Economist)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2014, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rcc-now-has-zero-tolerance-for-child-abuse-well-except/696492/414 "2014-09-08T15:22:37Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > That’s not for you to decide. My point is that he’s a liberal by virtue of his political positions, not by virtue of his self-identification. > > A liberal isn’t merely someone who claims to be a liberal. A far-left liberal might demur and say, “I’m a radical,” or “I’m in the conservative wing of the far-left,” or some equally obfuscating nonsense. But it’s the sum of their political positions that makes them liberal. > > In **Uzi** ’s case, he argues for traditionally liberal positions against traditionally conservative positions. That makes him liberal, and he cannot change that merely by denying that he is. > > Of course, if you (or he) could show his arguing for traditionally conservative positions, that would be good evidence that I am mistaken. I’m not going to continue this conversation. You don’t get to pretend that he’s a secret liberal after he has told you \*directly \*and \*explicitly \*that he’s not. Judges have ruled: You’re wrong. Move on. Here’s the score so far: you have judged all liberals (millions and millions of people) based on the postings of one person who isn’t a liberal. This is not an impressive performance so far. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2014, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rcc-now-has-zero-tolerance-for-child-abuse-well-except/696492/415 "2014-09-08T15:25:37Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > > [@kaylasdad99](#): > > > > Speaking as a proud liberal who is equally proud to be taking your side in this debate, I cordially invite you to stick your head up a duck’s bottom. 🙂 > > As I said: > > > [@Bricker](#): > > > > Those people, so far as I can tell, are fairly described as liberal, and this mindset unites them. Obviously this view is not held by all liberals, but _ **only** _ liberals seem to have it, so far as I can discern. > > Am I mistaken? emphasis coding added by me - **kd99** On the face of it, I suppose not, especially if one reads your qualification as “_so far as I am inclined to attempt to discern_.” [I’m sure you’ll see this as a false equivalency, but I did manage to come up with it within about two minutes, and I find myself too diffident to spend much more time and energy searching for a more exact example of a non-liberal demonstrating the “mindset.”](http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/boehner-irs-targeting/2014/04/07/id/564210/) 😛 ---
**Author:** ![Uzi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/91b2a8/32.png) [@Uzi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uzi)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2014, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rcc-now-has-zero-tolerance-for-child-abuse-well-except/696492/416 "2014-09-08T15:52:30Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Uzi is a liberal I’ve voted Conservative in every election I’ve been able to vote in. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2014, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rcc-now-has-zero-tolerance-for-child-abuse-well-except/696492/417 "2014-09-08T15:57:55Z")
Ah, maybe that’s it. A Conservative almost anywhere else in the world \*looks \*like a liberal to a loyal-to-the-core US Republican. Which still doesn’t explain why \*\*Bricker \*\*thinks dispensing with the rule of law is a liberal idea. That is best explained by his using the word as a simple epithet for anyone who disagrees with him about anything. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Economist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c89c15/32.png) [@Evil\_Economist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Economist)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2014, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rcc-now-has-zero-tolerance-for-child-abuse-well-except/696492/418 "2014-09-08T16:06:26Z")
No doubt \*\*Bricker \*\*is preparing a devastating comeback. While he’s busy preparing that, I submit the following piece of evidence: > [@](#): > > According to a summer poll conducted by ABC News and [Beliefnet.com](http://Beliefnet.com), eight out of 10 Americans believe bishops who failed to act on abuse allegations should be prosecuted criminally. By \*\*Bricker’s \*\*reckoning, 8 of 10 Americans is therefore a dirty Liberal. Hard to explain election results given that piece of information, but I’m sure he’ll find a way. By the way, **Bricker** : > [@Bricker](#): > > If I offer up a confident declaration, with no caveats about possible error, and I am wrong, you are welcome to skewer me. I will deserve it. I’m not going to start in on this one yet, but rest assured I’m keeping track. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2014, 4:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rcc-now-has-zero-tolerance-for-child-abuse-well-except/696492/419 "2014-09-08T16:08:35Z")
> [@Evil\_Economist](#): > > I’m not going to continue this conversation. You don’t get to pretend that he’s a secret liberal after he has told you \*directly \*and \*explicitly \*that he’s not. Judges have ruled: You’re wrong. Move on. > > Here’s the score so far: you have judged all liberals (millions and millions of people) based on the postings of one person who isn’t a liberal. This is not an impressive performance so far. What judges? You? Look, you don’t get to pretend he’s not a liberal simply because he refuses to admit he’s a liberal. Why is his self-serving claim of more probative value than his actual, voiced opinions. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2014, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rcc-now-has-zero-tolerance-for-child-abuse-well-except/696492/420 "2014-09-08T16:11:45Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Uzi is a liberal. > > Uzi claims to not be a liberal, of course, but Uzi’s political positions are indistinguishable from a liberal’s. Therefore, Uzi is a liberal. He’s a Canadian, so placing him on the liberal-conservative spectrum might be a bit more complex than usual. He certainly stands on your side of the debate over on the Voter ID/Voter suppression thread. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rcc-now-has-zero-tolerance-for-child-abuse-well-except/696492.md?page=20) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-rcc-now-has-zero-tolerance-for-child-abuse-well-except/696492.md?page=22)