Question:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> > Abortion Mills Abet Pedophiles > > This won’t get even 1 percent of the media attention devoted to the > > homosexual priest scandals, of course, but pro-abortion outfits > > nationwide are covering for pedophiles. > > Life Dynamics Inc., a pro-life group in Texas, phoned more than 800 > > abortuaries and birth-control centers across the country. A caller > > claimed to be a 13-year-old girl impregnated by a 22-year-old man. In > > 91 percent of the cases, employees agreed to conceal the crime, > > WTIC-TV in Hartford, Conn., and the Associated Press reported today. > Women don’t seek medical help unless they can be guaranteed of > confidentiality. Medical reasons supercede any other concern. > Bullshit.
Nope. The medical safety of your imagined victim takes precedence, or else you’re disingenuous regarding your concern for your supposed "victim". Oh, I take it back you don’t care what happens to the TEEN you just want to punish people for abortions, and you imagine a slug is a human being! > That’s in the law. > And "it’s the law" that 22 year old men don’t bang 13 year old girls…. > when they do they are to be reported "IT’S THE LAW"
IF someone who WANTS to or someone who KNOWS anything (AND DOESN’T HAVE A CONFIDENTIALITY OBLIGATION) tells anyone. There is NO law requiring report of teen sexual activity, only of pre-pubescent sexual abuse, which this is NOT!! You’re just trying to stretch disingenuously to try to make it fit your sick anti-abortion agenda!! > > A 22-year-old man who has sex with a 13-year-old girl would be guilty > > of statutory rape, child abuse and second-degree sexual assault. And > > of course the media would refer to a priest having sex with a > > 13-year-old boy as a pedophile. > They have no way of knowing whether the girl is telling the truth, and it > isn’t even a concern, it isn’t their business. > Gee, we thought pedophilia was EVERYBODY’S BUSINESS—- Tell it to > Danny Blather, he’s been pounding on the Catholic church for months now.
Now if only teen sex was somehow pedophilia, you might have a leg to stand on, but of course you don’t! > Don’t like it when the laws cut both ways, do ya, sporty? Abortion > uber alles, right?
Yes, you assholes should be rounded up and shot and tossed in a ditch! > Girls often have consensual > sex, even at that age. That our society is so INSANE as to deny this is > ludricrous, which is one reason why our society ALSO short circuits its own > silly little blue nose with medical exemptions for sex re: teens. > Sure, sure, and some of those little 13 year old gay boys loved getting > it up the ass too, undoubtedly. Make up your mind. Either both are > wrong or neither are wrong. BOTH are wrong.
Neither are wrong, actually, unless they are non-consensual. And the law was made by a majority who were, in fact, in their hearts wanting to have it cut that way! So among the majority the spirit of the law will be enforced, and THAT WASN’T YOUR SICK AGENDA! People in the USA are 69% PLUS in favor of the abortions that people are having!! And in Europe and Japan it is MUCH HIGHER, near 90%! Nobody will let the law be twisted by you bigots! > > A Planned Parenthood employee in Willimantic, Conn., was caught on > > tape telling the caller not to bring up the "boyfriend" when she goes > > for her abortion. (In Texas, it’s legal to tape a call without the > > other party’s knowledge.) > Then why is Texas important here? > Probably because libbies, true to their ken, will whine that "it’s > against the law" if it was necessary for both sides to know of the > taping.
In any federal case it is, as that is the default statute. > > "Haul them into court and put them in jail. That’s exactly where > > people who protect pedophiles ought to be, and that’s true whether > > it’s a bishop or a cardinal or a priest, or a counselor at Planned > > Parenthood," he noted. > Nobody is protecting any "pedophiles", because people who fuck girls who > ARE OLD ENOUGH TO EVEN GET PREGNANT CANNOT ALSO BE PEDOPHILES BY > DEFINITION! All this is is a plot to try to confuse the issue around > abortion by the you fundies in the BIGOT RIGHT!!! > Ahhh…..yes, 13 year old girls can make the decision to > have sex with a 25 year old man—but let a 13 year old BOY > make that same decision to have sex with a 25 year old man (who > happens to be a priest) and the priest gets thrown in jail—
No, that shouldn’t happen. The teens who are pushing for LARGE CASH SETTLEMENTS and pretending they didn’t LIKE those 50 blowjobs make me sick! Juries bend that way too! The awards to teens have been very small or have been rejected by juries. > "PRove" that the 13 year old DIDN’T want it. You libbies are > so stupid you don’t know your own arguments HANG yourself when > you apply them across the board if it gets in the way > of your sacrament of abortion.
Abortion is sacred to us because sex is sacred to us. There is NO cause greater than the right to seek sexual satifaction without downside, as long as the fetus does not remember, and it does not. That IS the actual drum that liberals bang for abortion, so know that well! They are the LAST people who are going to let a 16 y/o boy collect when he was fucking cheerleaders and getting blowjobs from his priest. Leftists see that as wrong even if they’d like to see the Catholic church confiscated and burned to the ground in every city, and most of us DO!! > It won’t work, the courts have upheld the need for ABSOLUTE confidentiality > for teens so that they WILL seek medical help, or else this nation would > explode with STDs and your populace would roast you fucking fundy bigots > ALIVE in the press just to get rid of it! Just keep it up and YOU’LL find > out!! > Steve > Snicker, snicker—put ALL the abortionists and their co-horts in > jail and you’ll be havin’ a "boyfriend" in prison yourself!!!!
You’re delusional! I don’t need to be active in an underground abortion movement since Roe v Wade. But I would again, and so would half the country, you’re asking for the ’60’s to be REBORN!!! You’d see what little you still value further destroyed! You’d see this country rip itself to pieces and you bigots would be hated for centuries when we are done with you shits! They’ll sooner change the law on sexual consent than lose the right to abortion! Be careful what you bigots ask for, you might get MUCH WORSE! Steve
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->In alt.parenting.solutions Richard Steven Walz >:> >:> NewsMax.com >:> >:> May 25, 2002 >:> >:> >:> [spacer.gif] Thursday, May 23, 2002 >:> >:> Abortion Mills Abet Pedophiles >:> >:> This won’t get even 1 percent of the media attention devoted to the >:> homosexual priest scandals, of course, but pro-abortion outfits >:> nationwide are covering for pedophiles. >:> >:> Life Dynamics Inc., a pro-life group in Texas, phoned more than 800 >:> abortuaries and birth-control centers across the country. A caller >:> claimed to be a 13-year-old girl impregnated by a 22-year-old man. In >:> 91 percent of the cases, employees agreed to conceal the crime, >:> WTIC-TV in Hartford, Conn., and the Associated Press reported today. >: Women don’t seek medical help unless they can be guaranteed of >: confidentiality. Medical reasons supercede any other concern. >Except, of course, if mommy needs to sign a note before the 13 year >old can have her ears pierced……snicker, snicker……
Ear piercing is a mutilation, not a medical procedure. >so remind >me again why a Christian scientist can refuse to sign a release form >for a child of theirs to be medically assisted? Oh, right—the >sacrament of abortion isn’t involved.
Medically assisted is not a needed medical treatment, for which they are NOT allowed to "opt out"!! >: That’s in the law. >Sure, sure…and we all know how consistent the laws are….
It’s as consistent as it has to be to defeat you bigots! >:> A 22-year-old man who has sex with a 13-year-old girl would be guilty >:> of statutory rape, child abuse and second-degree sexual assault. And >:> of course the media would refer to a priest having sex with a >:> 13-year-old boy as a pedophile. >: They have no way of knowing whether the girl is telling the truth, and it >: isn’t even a concern, it isn’t their business. Girls often have consensual >THEN THEY HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING THE BOY WASN’T LYING YEARS LATER >WHEN HE SAYS THE SEX HE HAD WITH THE PRIEST WASN’T CONSENSUAL. MAYBE >HE ENJOYED IT, AND NOW JUST WANTS THE MONEY.
I agree, they should take all the classes of students in the schools and the church and have an all-day assembly. In it they announce that no one can legally make them have sex, but that the state now recognizes their right to consent, and that they only have a claim against such a person if they come immediately from where they are assaulted in a way they said they do not want, and report it directly to the police at that time and no other! >Can’t have it both ways, jackass.
Since I don’t need it but one way, I’m not such. >: sex, even at that age. That our society is so INSANE as to deny this is >: ludricrous, which is one reason why our society ALSO short circuits its own >: silly little blue nose with medical exemptions for sex re: teens. >Let me get your "logic" [snicker] right: > 13 year old girls can consent to sex with men over 21. > 13 year old boys can’t consent to sex with grown men.
No, you’re inventing things you WISH I had said. I believe in the right of children to consent at any age, and their right to be supported and defended by the body politic and the police, so that they need have no fear of any larger person who might threaten them, because that person would be taken instantly and caged till the matter is resolved and him punished, upon the child’s report, to be interpreted for him if he is below the age of communication. Namely, if you make a child cry you had better run away very very rapidly! >Do you see a wee bit of a double standard here?
I don’t use or believe in such a thing. >:> A Planned Parenthood employee in Willimantic, Conn., was caught on >:> tape telling the caller not to bring up the "boyfriend" when she goes >:> for her abortion. (In Texas, it’s legal to tape a call without the >:> other party’s knowledge.) >: Then why is Texas important here? >To stop liberal abortion lovers from whinging that it was illegal >to make the tape–that’s why.
We need to do whatever we have to do assure the Good and Right prevail, whether that is using law to advantage till a better one can be arranged, or merely killing our enemies who wish to oppress our freedoms. >:> "Haul them into court and put them in jail. That’s exactly where >:> people who protect pedophiles ought to be, and that’s true whether >:> it’s a bishop or a cardinal or a priest, or a counselor at Planned >:> Parenthood," he noted. >: Nobody is protecting any "pedophiles", because people who fuck girls who >: ARE OLD ENOUGH TO EVEN GET PREGNANT CANNOT ALSO BE PEDOPHILES BY >: DEFINITION! All this is is a plot to try to confuse the issue around >: abortion by the you fundies in the BIGOT RIGHT!!! >Oh REALLY—- 13 year old girls are old enough to get pregnant—therefor >they can consent to sex……well, guess what—13 year old BOYS are >just as old as the same girls that supposedly get banged "consensually" >—therefor the burden should be on THEM as well that they didn’t >want it up the ass from some priest.
If they like, then that’s fine with me, unless they don’t like and are merely being abused. Even if I would like the Roman Catholic church and all Xtian churches and Jewish and Muslim organizations to be destroyed by fire and sent straight to hell tonight, I still don’t like it that these teens who were surely enjoying the blowjobs should get compensated when they could easily have ended anything they didn’t like. >If you’re going to argue that the girl said "I wanted it" because >she doesn’t want to inform on the person who preyed on her for sex >so she can have her little abortion without mommy and daddy knowing >[intereting here---you ASSUME the girl is telling the truth that >it was consentual, because you ASSUME that the "boyfriend" is exerting >NO pressure himself on the girl to have the abortion----he could have >slipped her some ecstasy, got her pregnant, then said "if you tell on >me" I'll tell your parents that you wanted sex willingly and you >got an abortion---but if you shut up, I'll pay for the abortion.... >(and they'll never know their daughter was given ecstasy and had sex >with a man she didn't want to). ---does this hold up? NO.
I don't care whether she is being pressured or not, nobody can force her to get an abortion, and if she is so easily pressured as that she should DEFINITELY be aborted so that no child has to depend on such a stupid little fool as her! >You're too stupid and let your sacrament of abortion get in the >way of why there ARE statuatory laws for age of consent in the first >place.
I hold the right to sex without fetter or downside to be the only human sacrament, and abortion merely serves that end by backstopping the consequent right to contraception. I hold it to be a human right because we all know that no fetus remembers anything, nor is any person at that time, and we are free to disregard it. If it was demonstrable that a fetus does remember, so that we all remember having been one, well, then the ground would lay very differently, but it does NOT! >You wanna argue that 13 year old girls "old enough to get pregnant" >can consent---then you're going to have to extend the same "Right >to consent" to 13 year old boys too. How do you "know" the 13 year >old boy isn't just SAYING he DIDN'T consent to a 25 year old priest >sticking his dick up the boy's butt...because 30 years later he >wants a big bucks settlement?
I assume that any child who knew his right to consent or not to consent and to be defended by the body politic and who did not immediately file charges or make complain to police, should be assumed to have consented, but the problem is that no child is now currently treated properly in that manner and apprised of his rights, both before the law, AND against priest, church, and his parents, and his right to police protection from either buttraping priests or his own parents' stupidity and viciousness. As soon as you afford ALL children THAT, THEN they can be held strictly responsible for their consent, and this sort of thing won't happen without material reason and never in the distant past. >Your "logic" shows you for the hypocritical jackass you are.
I don't agree with any of the positions you have tried to have me mouth, so jam your jackass back up your ass for a time. >If it's wrong for a 26 year old stick his dick up a 13 year old boy, >then it's WRONG for a 26 year old guy to stick his dick up a 13 year >old girl's vagina.
It's not unless it is non-consensual and the child is aware of his right to consent or not consent and to be defended in his choice by the public. >If you say 13 year old GIRLS can consent...then so can 13 year old boys.
I agree, once they are apprised of their rights and the promise of the public's support for their decisions, whichever they are! >Do you REALLY want to make a 13 year old PROVE that it's not >a "he said-he said" case? If you're not a dirtbag, you wouldn't. >You'd follow the law and PROTECT BOTH the boy and the girl by >applying the stuatory laws.
That young children ... read more »
Response:
:> :> NewsMax.com :> :> May 25, 2002 :> :> :> [spacer.gif] Thursday, May 23, 2002 :> :> Abortion Mills Abet Pedophiles :> :> This won’t get even 1 percent of the media attention devoted to the :> homosexual priest scandals, of course, but pro-abortion outfits :> nationwide are covering for pedophiles. :> :> Life Dynamics Inc., a pro-life group in Texas, phoned more than 800 :> abortuaries and birth-control centers across the country. A caller :> claimed to be a 13-year-old girl impregnated by a 22-year-old man. In :> 91 percent of the cases, employees agreed to conceal the crime, :> WTIC-TV in Hartford, Conn., and the Associated Press reported today. : Women don’t seek medical help unless they can be guaranteed of : confidentiality. Medical reasons supercede any other concern. Except, of course, if mommy needs to sign a note before the 13 year old can have her ears pierced……snicker, snicker……so remind me again why a Christian scientist can refuse to sign a release form for a child of theirs to be medically assisted? Oh, right—the sacrament of abortion isn’t involved. : That’s in the law. Sure, sure…and we all know how consistent the laws are…. :> A 22-year-old man who has sex with a 13-year-old girl would be guilty :> of statutory rape, child abuse and second-degree sexual assault. And :> of course the media would refer to a priest having sex with a :> 13-year-old boy as a pedophile. : They have no way of knowing whether the girl is telling the truth, and it : isn’t even a concern, it isn’t their business. Girls often have consensual THEN THEY HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING THE BOY WASN’T LYING YEARS LATER WHEN HE SAYS THE SEX HE HAD WITH THE PRIEST WASN’T CONSENSUAL. MAYBE HE ENJOYED IT, AND NOW JUST WANTS THE MONEY. Can’t have it both ways, jackass. : sex, even at that age. That our society is so INSANE as to deny this is : ludricrous, which is one reason why our society ALSO short circuits its own : silly little blue nose with medical exemptions for sex re: teens. Let me get your "logic" [snicker] right: 13 year old girls can consent to sex with men over 21. 13 year old boys can’t consent to sex with grown men. Do you see a wee bit of a double standard here? :> A Planned Parenthood employee in Willimantic, Conn., was caught on :> tape telling the caller not to bring up the "boyfriend" when she goes :> for her abortion. (In Texas, it’s legal to tape a call without the :> other party’s knowledge.) : Then why is Texas important here? To stop liberal abortion lovers from whinging that it was illegal to make the tape–that’s why. :> "They won’t ask anything about him?" the caller asks. :> :> "I’m going to pretend I didn’t hear that, OK?" the employee says. :> "Don’t even bring that up, OK?" :> :> An employee at Bridgeport Planned Parenthood tells the caller that the :> relationship is illegal, but fails to mention her mandated reporting :> responsibility. :> :> "If you’re 14 and he’s 22, that’s illegal," the employee says. :> :> The girl asks about the consequences. :> :> "Nothing, if you don’t want to press charges. It’s just, it’s not :> legal," the employee says. :> :> Planned Parenthood refused to appear on camera but issued a statement :> to WTIC saying it "questions the reliability" of the tapes. However, :> WTIC says it called every facility Life Dynamics claims are heard on :> the tapes, and "the tones heard on the tapes matched the tones its :> reporter heard while dialing," AP reported. :> :> Connecticut "Child Advocate" Jeannie Milstein said the tapes were :> troubling. :> :> "Never, ever tell a child to lie. That’s just scandalous," she told :> AP. :> :> Assistant State’s Attorney Steve Sedensky told WTIC, "The very fact :> that a 13-year-old is pregnant is an indication that she falls under :> the definition of abuse, regardless of how old she says the :> perpetrator is." :> :> Crutcher says Life Dynamics is considering lawsuits nationwide. :> :> "Haul them into court and put them in jail. That’s exactly where :> people who protect pedophiles ought to be, and that’s true whether :> it’s a bishop or a cardinal or a priest, or a counselor at Planned :> Parenthood," he noted. : Nobody is protecting any "pedophiles", because people who fuck girls who : ARE OLD ENOUGH TO EVEN GET PREGNANT CANNOT ALSO BE PEDOPHILES BY : DEFINITION! All this is is a plot to try to confuse the issue around : abortion by the you fundies in the BIGOT RIGHT!!! Oh REALLY—- 13 year old girls are old enough to get pregnant—therefor they can consent to sex……well, guess what—13 year old BOYS are just as old as the same girls that supposedly get banged "consensually" —therefor the burden should be on THEM as well that they didn’t want it up the ass from some priest. If you’re going to argue that the girl said "I wanted it" because she doesn’t want to inform on the person who preyed on her for sex so she can have her little abortion without mommy and daddy knowing [intereting here---you ASSUME the girl is telling the truth that it was consentual, because you ASSUME that the "boyfriend" is exerting NO pressure himself on the girl to have the abortion----he could have slipped her some ecstasy, got her pregnant, then said "if you tell on me" I'll tell your parents that you wanted sex willingly and you got an abortion---but if you shut up, I'll pay for the abortion.... (and they'll never know their daughter was given ecstasy and had sex with a man she didn't want to). ---does this hold up? NO. You're too stupid and let your sacrament of abortion get in the way of why there ARE statuatory laws for age of consent in the first place. You wanna argue that 13 year old girls "old enough to get pregnant" can consent---then you're going to have to extend the same "Right to consent" to 13 year old boys too. How do you "know" the 13 year old boy isn't just SAYING he DIDN'T consent to a 25 year old priest sticking his dick up the boy's butt...because 30 years later he wants a big bucks settlement? Your "logic" shows you for the hypocritical jackass you are. If it's wrong for a 26 year old stick his dick up a 13 year old boy, then it's WRONG for a 26 year old guy to stick his dick up a 13 year old girl's vagina. If you say 13 year old GIRLS can consent...then so can 13 year old boys. Do you REALLY want to make a 13 year old PROVE that it's not a "he said-he said" case? If you're not a dirtbag, you wouldn't. You'd follow the law and PROTECT BOTH the boy and the girl by applying the stuatory laws. BY DEFINITION 13 year old girls can't consent. : It won't work, the courts have upheld the need for ABSOLUTE confidentiality : for teens so that they WILL seek medical help, or else this nation would : explode with STDs and your populace would roast you fucking fundy bigots : ALIVE in the press just to get rid of it! Just keep it up and YOU'LL find : out!! : Steve Ha-ha----HANG by the laws you jackasses can't overturn. The statuatory laws are there for a reason and they cut BOTH WAYS.....you wanna have Dan Blather bang on the catholic church for priests who stuck their dicks up 13 year old boys? Well and good.....but your smug laughter should turn you ashen because the laws should apply equally to 26 year old men taking advantage of girls too. You can't fucking have it both ways, and it burns your ass. GOOD. The "boyfriends" your abortion mill operators are protecting can take a seat in the jail cell next to creeps like Shanley and Geoghan...they all deserve each other. Karen
Response:
- Hide quoted text -- Show quoted text -> In alt.parenting.solutions Richard Steven Walz > :>Vatican: Priests Responsible for Abuse > :>Vatican Official: No Need to Tell Churchgoers of Sex-Abuse Priest > :> > "Haul them into court and put them in jail. That's exactly where > people who protect pedophiles ought to be, and that's true whether > it's a bishop or a cardinal or a priest, or a counselor at Planned > Parenthood," >(though in my opinion, jail is far too lenient a punishment) >Bill T.
Now how DID we ever guess that you were just another pig-ignorant reactionary bigot who thinks slugs are human beings?? Steve
Response:
- Hide quoted text -- Show quoted text -> NewsMax.com > May 25, 2002 > [spacer.gif] Thursday, May 23, 2002 > Abortion Mills Abet Pedophiles > This won’t get even 1 percent of the media attention devoted to the > homosexual priest scandals, of course, but pro-abortion outfits > nationwide are covering for pedophiles. > Life Dynamics Inc., a pro-life group in Texas, phoned more than 800 > abortuaries and birth-control centers across the country. A caller > claimed to be a 13-year-old girl impregnated by a 22-year-old man. In > 91 percent of the cases, employees agreed to conceal the crime, > WTIC-TV in Hartford, Conn., and the Associated Press reported today.
Women don’t seek medical help unless they can be guaranteed of confidentiality. Medical reasons supercede any other concern. That’s in the law. > A 22-year-old man who has sex with a 13-year-old girl would be guilty > of statutory rape, child abuse and second-degree sexual assault. And > of course the media would refer to a priest having sex with a > 13-year-old boy as a pedophile.
They have no way of knowing whether the girl is telling the truth, and it isn’t even a concern, it isn’t their business. Girls often have consensual sex, even at that age. That our society is so INSANE as to deny this is ludricrous, which is one reason why our society ALSO short circuits its own silly little blue nose with medical exemptions for sex re: teens. > A Planned Parenthood employee in Willimantic, Conn., was caught on > tape telling the caller not to bring up the "boyfriend" when she goes > for her abortion. (In Texas, it’s legal to tape a call without the > other party’s knowledge.)
Then why is Texas important here? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> "They won’t ask anything about him?" the caller asks. > "I’m going to pretend I didn’t hear that, OK?" the employee says. > "Don’t even bring that up, OK?" > An employee at Bridgeport Planned Parenthood tells the caller that the > relationship is illegal, but fails to mention her mandated reporting > responsibility. > "If you’re 14 and he’s 22, that’s illegal," the employee says. > The girl asks about the consequences. > "Nothing, if you don’t want to press charges. It’s just, it’s not > legal," the employee says. > Planned Parenthood refused to appear on camera but issued a statement > to WTIC saying it "questions the reliability" of the tapes. However, > WTIC says it called every facility Life Dynamics claims are heard on > the tapes, and "the tones heard on the tapes matched the tones its > reporter heard while dialing," AP reported. > Connecticut "Child Advocate" Jeannie Milstein said the tapes were > troubling. > "Never, ever tell a child to lie. That’s just scandalous," she told > AP. > Assistant State’s Attorney Steve Sedensky told WTIC, "The very fact > that a 13-year-old is pregnant is an indication that she falls under > the definition of abuse, regardless of how old she says the > perpetrator is." > Crutcher says Life Dynamics is considering lawsuits nationwide. > "Haul them into court and put them in jail. That’s exactly where > people who protect pedophiles ought to be, and that’s true whether > it’s a bishop or a cardinal or a priest, or a counselor at Planned > Parenthood," he noted.
Nobody is protecting any "pedophiles", because people who fuck girls who ARE OLD ENOUGH TO EVEN GET PREGNANT CANNOT ALSO BE PEDOPHILES BY DEFINITION! All this is is a plot to try to confuse the issue around abortion by the you fundies in the BIGOT RIGHT!!! It won’t work, the courts have upheld the need for ABSOLUTE confidentiality for teens so that they WILL seek medical help, or else this nation would explode with STDs and your populace would roast you fucking fundy bigots ALIVE in the press just to get rid of it! Just keep it up and YOU’LL find out!! Steve
Response:
> In alt.parenting.solutions Richard Steven Walz > :>Vatican: Priests Responsible for Abuse > :>Vatican Official: No Need to Tell Churchgoers of Sex-Abuse Priest > :> > "Haul them into court and put them in jail. That’s exactly where > people who protect pedophiles ought to be, and that’s true whether > it’s a bishop or a cardinal or a priest, or a counselor at Planned > Parenthood,"
(though in my opinion, jail is far too lenient a punishment) Bill T.
Response:
:>Vatican: Priests Responsible for Abuse :>Vatican Official: No Need to Tell Churchgoers of Sex-Abuse Priest :> :> :>congregations their parish priests sexually abused someone if the :>bishops believe the priests will not abuse again, a Vatican official :>said. :> :>The Rev. Gianfranco Ghirlanda also said in an article to be published :>Saturday that church leaders have no legal or moral responsibilities :>if such abuse does occur. : Haul your bloody asshole out of here, you whining inflammatory creep. : We can’t help it if you believed in Catholicism and let them buttfuck you! : They’d been doing the same thing mentally for 2000 years! What’s the : difference, really? : Steve : : Of course you won’t say anything when it’s your own ox, Steviewonder…. NewsMax.com May 25, 2002 [spacer.gif] Thursday, May 23, 2002 Abortion Mills Abet Pedophiles This won’t get even 1 percent of the media attention devoted to the homosexual priest scandals, of course, but pro-abortion outfits nationwide are covering for pedophiles. Life Dynamics Inc., a pro-life group in Texas, phoned more than 800 abortuaries and birth-control centers across the country. A caller claimed to be a 13-year-old girl impregnated by a 22-year-old man. In 91 percent of the cases, employees agreed to conceal the crime, WTIC-TV in Hartford, Conn., and the Associated Press reported today. A 22-year-old man who has sex with a 13-year-old girl would be guilty of statutory rape, child abuse and second-degree sexual assault. And of course the media would refer to a priest having sex with a 13-year-old boy as a pedophile. A Planned Parenthood employee in Willimantic, Conn., was caught on tape telling the caller not to bring up the "boyfriend" when she goes for her abortion. (In Texas, it’s legal to tape a call without the other party’s knowledge.) "They won’t ask anything about him?" the caller asks. "I’m going to pretend I didn’t hear that, OK?" the employee says. "Don’t even bring that up, OK?" An employee at Bridgeport Planned Parenthood tells the caller that the relationship is illegal, but fails to mention her mandated reporting responsibility. "If you’re 14 and he’s 22, that’s illegal," the employee says. The girl asks about the consequences. "Nothing, if you don’t want to press charges. It’s just, it’s not legal," the employee says. Planned Parenthood refused to appear on camera but issued a statement to WTIC saying it "questions the reliability" of the tapes. However, WTIC says it called every facility Life Dynamics claims are heard on the tapes, and "the tones heard on the tapes matched the tones its reporter heard while dialing," AP reported. Connecticut "Child Advocate" Jeannie Milstein said the tapes were troubling. "Never, ever tell a child to lie. That’s just scandalous," she told AP. Assistant State’s Attorney Steve Sedensky told WTIC, "The very fact that a 13-year-old is pregnant is an indication that she falls under the definition of abuse, regardless of how old she says the perpetrator is." Crutcher says Life Dynamics is considering lawsuits nationwide. "Haul them into court and put them in jail. That’s exactly where people who protect pedophiles ought to be, and that’s true whether it’s a bishop or a cardinal or a priest, or a counselor at Planned Parenthood," he noted.
Response:
>Vatican: Priests Responsible for Abuse >Vatican Official: No Need to Tell Churchgoers of Sex-Abuse Priest >congregations their parish priests sexually abused someone if the >bishops believe the priests will not abuse again, a Vatican official >said. >The Rev. Gianfranco Ghirlanda also said in an article to be published >Saturday that church leaders have no legal or moral responsibilities >if such abuse does occur.
Haul your bloody asshole out of here, you whining inflammatory creep. We can’t help it if you believed in Catholicism and let them buttfuck you! They’d been doing the same thing mentally for 2000 years! What’s the difference, really? Steve
Response:
Vatican: Priests Responsible for Abuse Vatican Official: No Need to Tell Churchgoers of Sex-Abuse Priest The Associated Press R O M E, May 17
If you like this post and would like to receive updates from this blog, please subscribe our feed.