What the fucking fuck
I wish I had written this Matt Taibbi blog post. It is so nasty, and so well-deserved.
But even worse - what does Dolan’s whiny deflecting and excuse-making say about the church as an arbiter of ethical values? These pompous assholes run around in their poofy robes and dresses shaking smoke-filled decanters with important expressions on their faces and pretending to great insight about grace and humility, but here we have the head of the largest Diocese in America teaching his entire congregation that when caught committing a terrible sin, the appropriate response is to blame the media and pull the “All the other kids were doing it, too!” stunt!
The fact that the RCC is virtually an employment agency for pedophiles is not making it any harder for me to hate organized religion, let me tell you internets.
Oh, and then I saw this shit.
WHAT. THE. FUCK.
So it's not enough to ignore the problem, protect the perpetrators, blame and stigmatize the victims, and try to play the "woe is me" card when you get caught at your dicketry. Now you're going to blame it on gay people.
Where the fucking fuck do you get off taking out an ad in the NYT telling people that child molestation is caused by gays, and that because most of the victims of molestation were boys that means the perpetrators were gay? Never mind that there is absolutely no evidence that those who molest boys are necessarily gay, much less evidence that the specific priests who molested boys were gay. Never mind that all credible evidence shows that the primary factor in pedophile victim selection is in fact accessability, and boys were often and undoubtedly easier for the predator-priests to abuse.
Not only is this reprehensible ad another example of apologists trying to make the RCC the victim, it's a nasty, dishonest attack that injects a bigoted fantasy into a discussion it absolutely does not belong in.
God, I hate Bill Donahue so fucking much. I would personally fund the creation of hell just to make sure that he spent the rest of eternity boiling alive in a stew of his own urine and feces.
To whom it may concern:
I was appalled to read the Catholic League advertisement in the pages of the New York Times. I understand that this was a paid ad, and I appreciate the New York Times' nondiscrimination in accepting ads and its willingness to air the grievances of people unhappy with the paper's coverage of events.
However, the final bullet point in the ad is alarming. It states "The Times continues to editorialize about a 'pedophilia crisis' when all along it's been a homosexual crisis. Eighty percent of the victims of priestly sexual abuse are male and most of them are post-pubescent. While homosexuality does not cause predatory behavior, and most gay priests are not molesters, most of the molesters have been gay."
Comments about the sexual orientation of the priests who molested boys in their care might be justified if that data was actually known. However, the ad makes this leap to judgment based simply on the gender of the victims. All available and credible research shows that pedophiles select their victims based on accessability, and that their own sexual orientation does not play a significant role. These comments in the ad are merely a rehash of a thoroughly discredited, bigoted fantasy that is presented as fact only by those intent on proving the evil of homosexuality. The myth that homosexuals prey on children has led to attempts to stop gay people from teaching, adopting, or mentoring children- even from parenting their own, as many court cases where openly gay parents were stripped of their custody rights during divorce clearly show. Gay people are still fighting the results of this persistent and vile slander today.
The statements of this Catholic League-sponsored ad are outrageous because they present a false stereotype about gay people as if it was fact, and seek to reframe the problem of pedophiles in the Roman Catholic Church as the result of an infiltration by homosexual men. This is hate speech, plain and simple, and the New York Times should not countenance it on its pages whether in the form of an editorial or a paid advertisement. The NYT website claims that the company has an advertising policy which allows it to decline an ad that, among other possibilities, "fails to comply with its standards of decency and dignity." I believe strongly that this particular bullet point in the Catholic League ad violated that policy, and the New York Times should have demanded that it be altered to remove the baseless slander against gay people that it contains.
The Catholic League certainly has the right to defend the Catholic Church. However, it does not have the right to indoctrinate New York Times readers with spurious anti-gay propaganda. I ask that you please be mindful of these concerns going forward.
Thank you,
Etc.
But even worse - what does Dolan’s whiny deflecting and excuse-making say about the church as an arbiter of ethical values? These pompous assholes run around in their poofy robes and dresses shaking smoke-filled decanters with important expressions on their faces and pretending to great insight about grace and humility, but here we have the head of the largest Diocese in America teaching his entire congregation that when caught committing a terrible sin, the appropriate response is to blame the media and pull the “All the other kids were doing it, too!” stunt!
The fact that the RCC is virtually an employment agency for pedophiles is not making it any harder for me to hate organized religion, let me tell you internets.
Oh, and then I saw this shit.
WHAT. THE. FUCK.
So it's not enough to ignore the problem, protect the perpetrators, blame and stigmatize the victims, and try to play the "woe is me" card when you get caught at your dicketry. Now you're going to blame it on gay people.
Where the fucking fuck do you get off taking out an ad in the NYT telling people that child molestation is caused by gays, and that because most of the victims of molestation were boys that means the perpetrators were gay? Never mind that there is absolutely no evidence that those who molest boys are necessarily gay, much less evidence that the specific priests who molested boys were gay. Never mind that all credible evidence shows that the primary factor in pedophile victim selection is in fact accessability, and boys were often and undoubtedly easier for the predator-priests to abuse.
Not only is this reprehensible ad another example of apologists trying to make the RCC the victim, it's a nasty, dishonest attack that injects a bigoted fantasy into a discussion it absolutely does not belong in.
God, I hate Bill Donahue so fucking much. I would personally fund the creation of hell just to make sure that he spent the rest of eternity boiling alive in a stew of his own urine and feces.
To whom it may concern:
I was appalled to read the Catholic League advertisement in the pages of the New York Times. I understand that this was a paid ad, and I appreciate the New York Times' nondiscrimination in accepting ads and its willingness to air the grievances of people unhappy with the paper's coverage of events.
However, the final bullet point in the ad is alarming. It states "The Times continues to editorialize about a 'pedophilia crisis' when all along it's been a homosexual crisis. Eighty percent of the victims of priestly sexual abuse are male and most of them are post-pubescent. While homosexuality does not cause predatory behavior, and most gay priests are not molesters, most of the molesters have been gay."
Comments about the sexual orientation of the priests who molested boys in their care might be justified if that data was actually known. However, the ad makes this leap to judgment based simply on the gender of the victims. All available and credible research shows that pedophiles select their victims based on accessability, and that their own sexual orientation does not play a significant role. These comments in the ad are merely a rehash of a thoroughly discredited, bigoted fantasy that is presented as fact only by those intent on proving the evil of homosexuality. The myth that homosexuals prey on children has led to attempts to stop gay people from teaching, adopting, or mentoring children- even from parenting their own, as many court cases where openly gay parents were stripped of their custody rights during divorce clearly show. Gay people are still fighting the results of this persistent and vile slander today.
The statements of this Catholic League-sponsored ad are outrageous because they present a false stereotype about gay people as if it was fact, and seek to reframe the problem of pedophiles in the Roman Catholic Church as the result of an infiltration by homosexual men. This is hate speech, plain and simple, and the New York Times should not countenance it on its pages whether in the form of an editorial or a paid advertisement. The NYT website claims that the company has an advertising policy which allows it to decline an ad that, among other possibilities, "fails to comply with its standards of decency and dignity." I believe strongly that this particular bullet point in the Catholic League ad violated that policy, and the New York Times should have demanded that it be altered to remove the baseless slander against gay people that it contains.
The Catholic League certainly has the right to defend the Catholic Church. However, it does not have the right to indoctrinate New York Times readers with spurious anti-gay propaganda. I ask that you please be mindful of these concerns going forward.
Thank you,
Etc.