The Instigator
Pro (for)
5 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
4 Points

A crackdown on paedophile Catholic priests: it"s time for a good old fashioned witch hunt

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/29/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 608 times Debate No: 55660
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (1)
Votes (2)




In 1450 witch hunts began in earnest in many western European countries after the Roman Catholic Church created an imaginary evil religion, using stereotypes that had circulated since pre-Christian times. They said that pagans were evil witches who kidnapped babies, killed and ate their victims, sold their soul to Satan, were in league with demons, flew through the air, met in the middle of the night, caused male impotence and infertility, etc. [1]

Of course, there is no such thing as witches but if Catholics really want to hunt down evil people all they have to do is knock on the door of their local Parochial House and speak to the resident priest. Odds-on he will be a depraved, kiddie-fiddling closet homosexual who has been queering-up the choirboys for years.

The Vatican has consistently refused to co-operate with police investigations into the hundreds of thousands of incidents of sexual abuse of children committed by Catholic priests and the United Nations has slammed the Catholic Church"s "efforts to cover up and obscure these types of cases" and is pressing the Holy See about its failure to provide reports for almost two decades on the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child, which it ratified in 1990. [2]

With this being the case, the public should assist the police through the auspices of neighbourhood watch schemes to mount surveillance and interrogation operations to monitor, observe, follow, investigate and question all Catholic priests everywhere they go, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

This will ensure they are either forced to abandon their vile sexual pursuits of young boys or face justice in a court of law.

Thank you.



Look, friend. Catholic priests are not all pedophiles. Maybe a few of them did what you said they did, but not all of them. You are stereotyping and making generalizations. For example, you said if you knocked on any old catholic priest's door, that he will be a depraved, kiddie-fiddling closet homosexual who has been queering-up the choirboys for years. That is in no way true. Good day to you sir.
Debate Round No. 1


I would like to thank Bhawksfan234 for accepting this challenge.

I assume my opponent is familiar with racial profiling in the fight against terrorism. In the UK this means people of Middle Eastern appearance are five times more likely to be stopped and searched by the transport police than white people. [1]

That's because most, though not all, of the non-Irish Republican terrorist attacks in the UK are committed by people of Middle Eastern origin.

Of course, that does not mean all people in the UK from the Middle East are terrorists but it makes sense to keep a close eye on them, just in case.

Because of the Catholic Church's cover-up of the child sex abuse scandal we don't know how many priests are involved in molesting underage boys but while it is possible that not all of them are practicing homosexual paedophiles, it makes sense to keep a close eye on them, just in case.

Thank you.



I know that asians are more likely to be stopped than white person but that's just how it is. in asia white people are just as likely to be stopped as asians are here. Regarding the catholic priests, the MAJORITY are non-paedophiles.

Thanks for reading
Debate Round No. 2
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by CentristX 2 years ago
The Catholic church has always been like that, and always will be deceptive and corrupt.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Wylted 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro was the only side to source his arguments. Con needed to address why racial profiling is bad or ineffective and he fails to do so. Pro's point about racial profiling being a good tool for law enforcement went unaddressed.
Vote Placed by neutral 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro's case was always going to be a tough one. However, he is not advocating separating the wheat from chafe, and Con's simple point that not all priests are pedophiles is even acknowledged by Pro. Any pretense that this issue was about holding child abusers accountable is eliminated in that failure. When Pro used racial profiling, a tactic that is illegal (it lets all the criminals of a different ethnicity off - as it would all other pedophiles who were not priests - the majority of whom are not) we are left with the inescapable conclusion that Pro's position is one of prejudice and not one of concern for child abuse. No honest man could possible support prejudice.