“My flirtations with children soon acquired an erotic character … On several occasions certain kids (5-8 years of age) would open my fly and start to stroke me. I reacted differently according to circumstances, but their desire posed a problem for me. I asked them: 'Why don't you play together? Why have you chosen me, and not the other kids?' But if they insisted, I caressed them still. … The problem with liberals is that they only tried to recognize sexuality in then, whereas I was aiming at this sexuality. (Daniel Cohn-Bendit, Le Grand Bazar, 1975).

Daniel Cohn Bendit (certainly not a Catholic) is currently a EU parliamentarian, co-president of the group European Greens–European Free Alliance, and except for the extremist Le Pen Party nobody seems to hold his self-confessed "non-violent" pedophile past against him.

As abhorrent as pedophiles are - and perhaps even more so those who covered them - they inherently knew - certainly the Catholics invoved did - what they were doing was wrong - they certainly would never think of boasting about it like this.

Some German, also Green, politicians actually pleaded for the decriminalization of pedofilia in the 1970s and 1980s. Most often the article “Changing the Criminal Law? A Plea for a New, Realistic, Orientation of Sexual Politics” by Volker Beck is beeing quoted, c.f. http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debatte_um_Abschaffung_des_Sexualstrafrechts_in_Deutschland - sorry I do not know of an English version.

Well, the majority of males are attracted to females but obviously only a minority of them are even potential rapists. Does the same apply to the difference between “soft” (the child a “willing” partner) and “hard” (violent) pedophilia? Does a “soft” only pedophilia experience of a child/minor leave lasting effects on the victim (as the “hard” version obviously does)? Or is "soft" pedophilia just a victimless "orientation" like homosexuality? Would decriminalization (or even encouragement as in the quote above) of "soft" pedophilia lead to an increase in the occurance of its “hard” form?

I do not know the sociologically, psychologically, legally and morally sustainable answers. I only know that preconceived hatreds and emotions are not a good guide.

.

Alkali metals + water = Explosion!

.

There is ample evidence to prove that catholic priests plus children is an explosive mixture.

It is obviously just as stupid and irresponsible to sit back and wait for the explosion to occur before allowing the police to come in and clean up the mess as it would be to do nothing to prevent alkali metals such as potassium and sodium mixing with water.

For reasons best known to themselves, the Catholic nomenklatura stubbornly refuses to admit that both should be kept apart, totally isolated and securely insulated, one from the other.

The Church constantly insists on choosing to ignore the laws of nature. It is like turning a blind eye to the fact that, under no circumstances or for whatever reason, wolves should ever be allowed into the sheep enclosure or the chicken roost.

Risk? What risk? Of course there is no risk. It is of the order of absolute certainty! Proven many times over, beyond all doubt.

The evidence is so flagrant, there must be a very valid reason for such illogical behaviour on the part of those who pretend to be ardent defenders of the faith and aspirants of the highest moral values.

Of course we should forgive them "...for they know not what they do ..." (Luke 23:34). Was it not Satan with a flowing beard, disguised in the casual attire of Jesus, who cunningly ordained: " Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me". (Matthew 19:14, King James Bible, Cambridge Ed.).

It is the triumph of evil and, though it is a terrible tragedy of Christian history, there is, regrettably, absolutely nothing we can do to open the eyes of those who have blind faith, and who stubbornmly refuse to see the naked truth.

They would rather die with their (false) beliefs intact. Otherwise, they know they would be lost forever. And that, they cannot accept.

.

.

Alkali metals + water = Explosion!

.

There is ample evidence to prove that catholic priests plus children is an explosive mixture.

It is obviously just as stupid and irresponsible to sit back and wait for the explosion to occur before allowing the police to come in and clean up the mess as it would be to do nothing to prevent alkali metals such as potassium and sodium mixing with water.

For reasons best known to themselves, the Catholic nomenklatura stubbornly refuses to admit that both should be kept apart, totally isolated and securely insulated, one from the other.

The Church constantly insists on choosing to ignore the laws of nature. It is like turning a blind eye to the fact that, under no circumstances or for whatever reason, wolves should ever be allowed into the sheep enclosure or the chicken roost.

Risk? What risk? Of course there is no risk. It is of the order of absolute certainty! Proven many times over, beyond all doubt.

The evidence is so flagrant, there must be a very valid reason for such illogical behaviour on the part of those who pretend to be ardent defenders of the faith and aspirants of the highest moral values.

Of course we should forgive them "...for they know not what they do ..." (Luke 23:34). Was it not Satan with a flowing beard, disguised in the casual attire of Jesus, who cunningly ordained: " Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me". (Matthew 19:14, King James Bible, Cambridge Ed.).

It is the triumph of evil and, though it is a terrible tragedy of Christian history, there is, regrettably, absolutely nothing we can do to open the eyes of those who have blind faith, and who stubbornmly refuse to see the naked truth.

They would rather die with their (false) beliefs intact. Otherwise, they know they would be lost forever. And that, they cannot accept.

Too bad for all those innocent child victims !

.

As I wrote, “preconceived hatreds and emotions are not a good guide” to … actually to anything, especially a rational debate. The two posts above are a good illustration of that.

>> ""During this interview, I asked '...what was the reason you decided to touch-up this lad...' or language to that effect ?

"He said he didn't know, and I believed him ? It doesn't in anyway remove culpability, but I've often asked other offender's the same question, receiving the same answer.

"And I've often asked myself, and other detectives working similar matters -

"Are these blokes actually 'sick' or, are they just vile criminals, or is it possible, they're both ?

"If they are sick, isn't it possible science may, one day be able to cure 'em .....

"The Royal Commission, may well uncover a veritable monster, in some of the most respected public institutions in the country ?

"And then what ? "" <<

Posted by o sung wu, Thursday, 15 November 2012 7:49:45 PM

It's probably a lack of cognition in many cases - an inability to "think before acting".

I think religious inculcation reduces cognition - people inculcated in religion are more likely 'to be robotic' in their thinking-action dynamic.

Hopefully, aspects of 'why' will be elucidated by a Royal Commission and psychology studies that come out of this.

"...an inability to think before acting."

It's probably more likely to be a case of a lack of constraint where the usual social controls against such actions are mitigated by the contrived setting and circumstances. Added to this may be the notion that the institution, under whose auspices one is operating, has a reputation to uphold - and that this reputation is paramount to its ongoing patronage and survival. Under these circumstances it's a dubious proposition that an accused pedophile would be swiftly dealt with. As is now being revealed in the Saville case concerning the BBC...almost unbelievably, that such blatant pedophilia was rampant and unchecked for so long....it's the culture of cover up at the top of the institution that provides fertile ground for pedophilia to flourish.