The Instigator
girbrother2
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
libertarian
Pro (for)
Winning
9 Points

Society's Take On the Catholic Priest Harrassment Scandal

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/15/2008 Category: Society
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 804 times Debate No: 4045
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (3)

 

girbrother2

Con

Society's outrage on the priest scandal is rather pathetic. First, they decide to turn their heads away from other religeous figures, I don't know, Reverend Wright, who do equall damage to society, and decide to put the spotlight on Catholic priests, who conveniently are rather conservative, the direct opposite of American society today. Second, they paint ALL Catholic priests as demented little buggers and shun them. Third, this will most likely lead to general abhorment of all Catholics, because obviously their religious leaders, including His Holiness, are demented little buggers, so they must be demented little buggers. I believe that this is just another diversion from the real issues at hand, e.g. the war, and yet one more facet of the socialist agenda to eliminate religion from our "free" country. Resolved, the priest ilemma is an attempt at religious persecution, something that our liberal friends scream at the top of their lungs about, and should be swept under the rug as all the rest are.
libertarian

Pro

>>> "First, they decide to turn their heads away from other religeous figures, I don't know, Reverend Wright, who do equall damage to society, and decide to put the spotlight on Catholic priests, who conveniently are rather conservative, the direct opposite of American society today.

+++ Wright obviously did not do equal damage as these priests. Wrights said some mean things, but these priests molested innocent little boys! Those to acts are incomparable. Obviously, America did not turn their heads on Rev. Wright. We all know who he is and that is due to the fact that every news organization spent all of their news coverage on the man. The clips ran 24/7. But the Cahtolic priests molested little boys. Molestation is bad. To prove this I use the American Psychiatric Association: The American Psychiatric Association states that "children cannot consent to sexual activity with adults",[17][18] and condemns any such action: "An adult who engages in sexual activity with a child is performing a criminal and immoral act which never can be considered normal or socially acceptable behavior." The attention on these molesters was well deserved. They each deserved much stricter a punishment.

>>> Second, they paint ALL Catholic priests as demented little buggers and shun them.

+++ Well, this is evidently untrue. When the pope can to town the entire nation was excited. All the shows were talking about it, they gave him a parade, he spoke publicly at many places, the president even came to meet him. America was obviously excited to see the pope. America dispises, rightfully, the molesters not all Catholics.

>>> Third, this will most likely lead to general abhorment of all Catholics, because obviously their religious leaders, including His Holiness, are demented little buggers, so they must be demented little buggers.

+++ Well, my second rebuttal proved this incorrect. America was excited about the pope. And nobody will abhorn Catholics. And your conspiracy theory. That is just stupid. Shame on you.

The fact is:
MOLESTERS ARE BAD!!!

They cause psyhcological damage and force children to make decisions they are unprepared to make or unwilling to. I showed earlier the APA's take on it. The American Psychiatric Association states that "children cannot consent to sexual activity with adults",[17][18] and condemns any such action: "An adult who engages in sexual activity with a child is performing a criminal and immoral act which never can be considered normal or socially acceptable behavior."

If you think it is justified to dislike and/or dispise molesters, vote PRO.
Debate Round No. 1
girbrother2

Con

Of course molestation is abominable, I never denied that (next time try not to read between the lines, you don't do it very well!), what I meant was that society, through ignorance or hypocracy, overblows a pure minority of a group and represents the entire group as the few! While Catholics aren't abhored, I apologize I got more than a little passionate and I tend to exagerate when that happens, may I ask the question of the take on the Morman poligamist sects? How did people react? Oh wait, now we seem to think that all Mormans are poligamists! Or what about Islam? Now all Muslim people will kill you as soon as look at you!It's outrageous what the media will do! ( Jesus, how many exclamation points can I use?) But who gets it most? The Catholic Priests, the conservative Catholic priests. It isn't a conspiracy theory, a theory about corrupted higher powers, but a hypocracy theory, one of corruption of the lowest scum on earth, the media. I am not defending molestors! I am saying "SMALL POTATOES!"! It is an overblown scandal, a scandal that the church should have fixed years ago, that the media and liberals eschew with such a ferocity that it got old long ago. Instead of going for issues of extreme importance, they skip merily to the weakest issue in school and mirthily pound the dickens out of it. It is sad how low our news networks have become.

Oh, yes, and don't try to accuse me of defending the vile pieces of blank that somehow crawled from their cruddy little hole in the ground into the church, it makes you look like you don't have an arguement that's better than a personal insult.

Thanks for taking the topic, I'll enjoy debating with you.
libertarian

Pro

>>> what I meant was that society, through ignorance or hypocracy, overblows a pure minority of a group and represents the entire group as the few!

+++ No! If any prominent group molested anybody, there would and will be a social explosion among American people. News travels fast. The Catholic priest molesters should be held accountable for their actions. These priests did not pay enough. They should have been publicly humiliated, arrested and fired. Only some of them have managed to be fired by this point. Society's reaction was not too much, if anything those molesters, that you admitted were abominable deserved more!

>>> While Catholics aren't abhored, I apologize I got more than a little passionate and I tend to exagerate when that happens,

+++ Well, please, for the sake of debate, tell the truth. And be reasonable.

>>> may I ask the question of the take on the Morman poligamist sects? How did people react? Oh wait, now we seem to think that all Mormans are poligamists! Or what about Islam? Now all Muslim people will kill you as soon as look at you!It's outrageous what the media will do! ( Jesus, how many exclamation points can I use?) But who gets it most? The Catholic Priests, the conservative Catholic priests.

+++ Most Americans believe that modern Mormons are not polygamists and if anybody thinks they are, it is not the fault of the recent case. Catholic priests do not get the most scrutiny. Most priests are well-respected. Look at the pope. Islamists have it the worst. And there are sone casual jokes about priests, which is bound to happen. But you are really over-exaggerating!

>>> It isn't a conspiracy theory, a theory about corrupted higher powers, but a hypocracy theory, one of corruption of the lowest scum on earth, the media. I am not defending molestors! I am saying "SMALL POTATOES!"! It is an overblown scandal, a scandal that the church should have fixed years ago, that the media and liberals eschew with such a ferocity that it got old long ago. Instead of going for issues of extreme importance, they skip merily to the weakest issue in school and mirthily pound the dickens out of it. It is sad how low our news networks have become.

+++ ...

Look, the molesters comitted vile, hypocritical acts. They potentially harmed these people psychologically permanently. They deserve the American societal scrutiny they got and they deserve more. You saw what I showed you earlier about what the American Psychiatric Association says about molestion. It is morally wrong and will damage those children forever. They deserve to be severely punished for what they did to these children. Do not defend these priests and plea for a lighter sentence. They deserve the scruitiny and more.

Thank yuo for reading the debate. Vote PRO.
Debate Round No. 2
girbrother2

Con

My Apology for the Roman Catholic Church

I am not defending the priests. I am defending the Church, which is my duty. The Catholic Church has gone through quite a bit of reformation in the last four decades in order to appeal to the change in times. What happened was that there were changes in selection in priests. This changed their role from being the leaders of the conregation to being showmen(and now Fr. Brown and the Churchettes, dududududaaaa!). Originally, the Catholic church was an extremely conservative organization, and this worked well for us, but then, to attract more people to the faith (this part is regretable, but understandable.)they changed to become more "happy clappy". This caused an unshown schism in the faith, one side, traditonal latin masses etc., found the other childish, trumpets and tamborines. The trumpets and tamborine crowd recruted a heck of a lot of "dynamic" priests to attract more people. So to do this quickly, they laxxed their standards, a bit. This allowed creeps, who I have never ever defended nor ever have said I defended, to slip in. Priests were trusted members of the community back then, so parents trusted their kids with them, that's why the creeps wanted in. Parents back then also had a bit of common sense, a defficiency in today's world it seems, and if there was someone in the town who was a creep, they told thier kids, who back then had some ammount of intelligence, another defiiciency, not to go around them. It's pretty easy to tell a creep from a normal person, it's not rocket science and creeps are, in my eyes, complete retards, and they would be reported to the authorities, in this case, the Church, who would kick them out and report him to the cops. Now today, we have a big problem, because instead of throwing them out, the new and "improved" church justs lets the problem stagnate. While we can blame the church, a viable means of shifting the blame, they did not know, there was no way of knowing the results of their small changes over time, a better way of doing things would be to blame the individuals themselves, no? But instead, the media decides to condemn the church and push the individuals off to the side. Why? Because everybody deserves a second, or third, or fourth, chance, but by all means, let's blame the church, this is the first time in history that this has happened.

About Reverend Wright, he did not just say mean things, a mean thing would be to say "nappy headed ho" on radio. Wright said down right traitorous things, geez I don't know "Goddamn America" during a time of war? But everybody should get their second, or third, or fourth chance, so let's sweep him under the rug, even though he's been saying things like that for twenty or so years.

Now I'm sorry that I am passionate some times and that I can't be a mindless automaton with no emotions, but if one can't be passionate at times, who will?
Now can I take this rod out of my ?
libertarian

Pro

My opponent tried to change the subject 3 times in this debate. First, he was debating the scandal and society's take. Then, the molesters. Now, he is defending the church. He has to debate the topic and not shift out of the topic, because it is easier for him. His point is already flawed. He doesn't have to shift the topic 3 times to loose.

>>> "While we can blame the church, a viable means of shifting the blame, they did not know, there was no way of knowing the results of their small changes over time, a better way of doing things would be to blame the individuals themselves, no? But instead, the media decides to condemn the church and push the individuals off to the side."

+++ They did know. They had the right and responsibility to remove those child molesters. The church allowed the problem to stagnate, which is dispicable. Any dumb person knows to remove a child molester from children. Your defense for the church is completely weak, unsubstantiated and just doesn't make sense. Any respectable organization will remove a child molester from its children. Your defense is not a justification for the church's allowing of molestation.

+++ The media does not have control over America's opinions. Look at Clinton. She still has votes despite the media. The polygamist raids have a lot of opponents despite the media. Americans are free-thinkers and your media conspiracy theory is a crackpot theory that wasnot researched and is not only unsubstantiated by any evidence at all, but is just untrue. Why? Because everybody deserves a second, or third, or fourth, chance, but by all means, let's blame the church, this is the first time in history that this has happened.

>>> About Reverend Wright, he did not just say mean things, a mean thing would be to say "nappy headed ho" on radio. Wright said down right traitorous things, geez I don't know "Goddamn America" during a time of war? But everybody should get their second, or third, or fourth chance, so let's sweep him under the rug, even though he's been saying things like that for twenty or so years.

+++ Wright has the freedom of speech. Wright said treacherous things in a time of war. He has the right. It is his first ammendment right to free speech to say what he wants about his government. He is not hurting anyone. Maybe offending them, but he is not permanantly psychologically damaging them. Those child molesters did an unjustifiable act and to try to justify it is dispicable, which is what you are doing.

>>> Now I'm sorry that I am passionate some times and that I can't be a mindless automaton with no emotions, but if one can't be passionate at times, who will? Now can I take this rod out of my ?

+++ whats your problem?

+++ I get passionate. Obama gets passionate. But we say the truth. You can too. Don't pull this card.

+++ My opponent is either trying to defend the molesters or the church for not removing the molesters. These acts are both unjustifiable and are and should be punishable by law. They often were not, however, punished by law. Neither of them can be justified. Molesting is immoral and downright evil. And protecting a molester, not even distancing your organization from them, and allowing them to visit other children, that is just as immoral as molesting the children.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by BeatTheDevil89 9 years ago
BeatTheDevil89
Does the Pro really beleive that what reverend wright said did just as much damage as the many many priest who molested kids...unreal.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by BeatTheDevil89 9 years ago
BeatTheDevil89
girbrother2libertarianTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by brian_eggleston 9 years ago
brian_eggleston
girbrother2libertarianTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by libertarian 9 years ago
libertarian
girbrother2libertarianTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03