Texsox Posted September 28, 2005 Share Posted September 28, 2005 QUOTE(JUGGERNAUT @ Sep 27, 2005 -> 06:34 PM) My GM here at home chewed me out to no ends the last time I got involved with time-consuming debate. I'm on a 1 post per thread per day limit now. I'm on the honor system & already violated it. That's weighing on my conscience already. I'll weigh in again tomorrow. Take care. Maybe we could have your wife post instead? I think there are many of us that like her already. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted September 28, 2005 Share Posted September 28, 2005 QUOTE(Texsox @ Sep 27, 2005 -> 12:52 PM) But there are no chastity belts, and anyone could, if they wanted, lead a chast lifestyle regardless of their occupation. Not to cheapen the debate or anything.... Ummm Tex, search chastity belts on google and see what happens. There are chastity belts. Not that I've been to these sites or have entirely too much time on my hands lately to surf the internet or anything.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxy Posted September 28, 2005 Author Share Posted September 28, 2005 QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Sep 27, 2005 -> 10:31 PM) Not to cheapen the debate or anything.... Ummm Tex, search chastity belts on google and see what happens. There are chastity belts. Not that I've been to these sites or have entirely too much time on my hands lately to surf the internet or anything.... I think the point he was making more was, they could be a Ralph de Bricassart and unless they totally flaunted it, they probably couldn't be caught. And, to continue my gender based b****ing, why are female chastity belts so much more common? Men seem to be the ones with more problems keeping it in the pants, so why make ladies where the uncomfortable garments more? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted September 28, 2005 Share Posted September 28, 2005 Just so you know.... the homosexual/pedophile connection seems strong because that is what gets reported in the news. I'm willing to bet that heterosexual molestation is way more common in the priesthood than anyone realizes but it doesn't get reported nearly as often because it's less taboo than homosexual pedophilia. Also, the boy scouts while considering their no gay policy did do some studies on those people most likely to take part in pedophile activities and found that the majority of them were not people who were open and honest enough to admit their homosexuality. In fact the opposite was the case. I don't have the data to back it up, because I'm typing drunk at the moment - but take my word for it, it's there. The other thing that I can tell you honestly is that banning "homosexual" priests like the Vatican will be doing before the end of the year will do nothing to curtail this issue. It just makes the big C catholic tent a little less small C catholic. That's fake reform. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted September 28, 2005 Share Posted September 28, 2005 QUOTE(ChiSoxyGirl @ Sep 27, 2005 -> 09:35 PM) I think the point he was making more was, they could be a Ralph de Bricassart and unless they totally flaunted it, they probably couldn't be caught. And, to continue my gender based b****ing, why are female chastity belts so much more common? Men seem to be the ones with more problems keeping it in the pants, so why make ladies where the uncomfortable garments more? Again, I'd like to direct you to the wonderful world of the internet... not that I would know or anything... but I'd disagree - at least those that seem to have a current interest in the matter. Again not that I would know or anything.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxy Posted September 28, 2005 Author Share Posted September 28, 2005 QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Sep 27, 2005 -> 10:37 PM) Again, I'd like to direct you to the wonderful world of the internet... not that I would know or anything... but I'd disagree - at least those that seem to have a current interest in the matter. Again not that I would know or anything.... I just briefly looked at the first couple sites and they seemed more female orientated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted September 28, 2005 Share Posted September 28, 2005 Ok then... well. um. *awkward pause* so ummm. how about that local sports team? And that weather... ummm... weathery enough for you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxy Posted September 28, 2005 Author Share Posted September 28, 2005 QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Sep 27, 2005 -> 10:41 PM) Ok then... well. um. *awkward pause* so ummm. how about that local sports team? And that weather... ummm... weathery enough for you? Okay, looked a little further into it, and I'll be damned. Some of that made ME blush, and well, yeah. . . Weather, yep, it sure is, uh, um, I think I left my iron on, I gotta go. . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted September 28, 2005 Share Posted September 28, 2005 This is why I heart you Soxygirl. RALLY CHOMSKY! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted September 28, 2005 Share Posted September 28, 2005 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxy Posted September 28, 2005 Author Share Posted September 28, 2005 QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Sep 27, 2005 -> 10:55 PM) OMG! That's amazing! Can someone PLEASE make that my avatar!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted September 28, 2005 Share Posted September 28, 2005 It did indeed grab the "Rex Kickass Seal of Approval." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercy! Posted September 28, 2005 Share Posted September 28, 2005 Bear in mind, that Trib article didn’t say sex with children; it didn’t say men with boys. But that was where this thread went immediately. I guess we shouldn’t be surprised. Any time this topic comes up, there seems to be no distinction in the discussions between pedophilia and sex with older teenagers/young adults. There is a BIG difference. In Illinois, as in most states, a person is a minor until the age of 18. But it does range all the way up to 21 in a couple of states. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted September 28, 2005 Share Posted September 28, 2005 QUOTE(ChiSoxyGirl @ Sep 27, 2005 -> 09:44 PM) Okay, looked a little further into it, and I'll be damned. Some of that made ME blush, and well, yeah. . . Weather, yep, it sure is, uh, um, I think I left my iron on, I gotta go. . . I have to ask, your iron what on? My God, I can't believe they are made of iron, they could rust! I figured by now, maybe kevlar? Titanium? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted September 28, 2005 Share Posted September 28, 2005 QUOTE(Mercy! @ Sep 27, 2005 -> 10:36 PM) In Illinois, as in most states, a person is a minor until the age of 18. But it does range all the way up to 21 in a couple of states. http://www.webistry.net/jan/consent.html Not over 18 anywhere in the US. Sadly.. 14 in Hawaii, Iowa, and some circumstances in South Carolina. 15 in several also. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted September 28, 2005 Share Posted September 28, 2005 QUOTE(Steff @ Sep 28, 2005 -> 08:03 AM) http://www.webistry.net/jan/consent.html Not over 18 anywhere in the US. Sadly.. 14 in Hawaii, Iowa, and some circumstances in South Carolina. 15 in several also. WTF Mississipppi? Only applies to virgins?? OMG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted September 28, 2005 Share Posted September 28, 2005 QUOTE(Texsox @ Sep 27, 2005 -> 11:25 AM) Please don't think I am excusing this behavior, I was just offering for thought the perspective of the victims that want the Church to keep it quiet while removing the offending Priest. We should also balance the 50 year history with societies handling of sex crimes. Rape victims were routinely discredited, their clothes, their mannerisms, suggestions that they "wanted it". Churches weren't the only institutions that swept these things under the rug. I believe we have to address the full range of the problem, not just think we can dump it all on one doorstep. It isn't up to the church to make judgements about whether their victim is better off with or without being reported. Their job is to report the crime. Any organization that deals with children extensively is under strict guidelines to report anything suspicious to the proper authorities if they think something is happening to a kid, and the church isn't any different. To me I think the Catholic church is getting a bye because they are a religious organization. Imagine the outcry if there were Boy Scouts troop leaders molesting kids, and instead of taking action, they just transfered them to a different pack, in a different state? Or if teachers were just sent to another school system after having sex with one of their kids? Governments wouldn't stand for it. But the church has had no repercussions from the governence, as a matter of a fact, the only thing that has forced REAL change was getting the crap sued out of them in jury after jury case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercy! Posted September 28, 2005 Share Posted September 28, 2005 http://www.webistry.net/jan/consent.html Not over 18 anywhere in the US. Sadly.. 14 in Hawaii, Iowa, and some circumstances in South Carolina. 15 in several also. Thanks. I was looking at an "Age of Majority Chart" that showed 21 for DC and Mississippi. Out of date maybe? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JUGGERNAUT Posted September 28, 2005 Share Posted September 28, 2005 :rolly What we have here in this thread is a lynch mob mentality. These are just allegations. They are NOT crimes. There needs to be sufficient evidence before they can be called that. But I'm not surprised at all this mentality exists at SOXTALK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted September 28, 2005 Share Posted September 28, 2005 QUOTE(Mercy! @ Sep 28, 2005 -> 03:16 PM) Thanks. I was looking at an "Age of Majority Chart" that showed 21 for DC and Mississippi. Out of date maybe? Maybe... my search was specific to sexual relations. Maybe it's 21 for some things still in some places..? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercy! Posted September 28, 2005 Share Posted September 28, 2005 :rolly What we have here in this thread is a lynch mob mentality. These are just allegations. They are NOT crimes. There needs to be sufficient evidence before they can be called that. But I'm not surprised at all this mentality exists at SOXTALK. Juggs, I take it that you fashion yourself a fisher of men. Is that why you always seem to be trolling (or, better, chumming) the waters here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted September 29, 2005 Share Posted September 29, 2005 I tried to fish men once. They kick you out of gaybars when you walk in with rod and reel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted September 29, 2005 Share Posted September 29, 2005 /spittake Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted September 29, 2005 Share Posted September 29, 2005 *Rex Kickass Seal of Approval* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted September 29, 2005 Share Posted September 29, 2005 QUOTE(JUGGERNAUT @ Sep 28, 2005 -> 05:42 PM) :rolly What we have here in this thread is a lynch mob mentality. These are just allegations. They are NOT crimes. There needs to be sufficient evidence before they can be called that. But I'm not surprised at all this mentality exists at SOXTALK. Actually the church NOT reporting crimes against children to the proper authorities IS a crime. As is aiding and abetting a felony by sending them somewhere else to avoid potentially facing a procecution/investigation. But then again why let facts start getting in the way now :rolly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.