Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Lacipyt

(58 posts)
27. No,
Wed Jan 30, 2013, 10:17 PM
Jan 2013

I'm afraid you're dwelling on those criteria, and as I mentioned, I really don't care about any points beyond a callous apathy towards child abuse. You are absolutely right that the courts of the state of New York did not engage in all nine of your criteria, but I don't think that makes their actions any more or less appalling in allowing abusers to not only receive slight punishment but in some cases returned the victims to the custody of the criminal. All, by the way, in a manner that was perfectly legal!

The Catholic Church itself is unique as a religious institution, so it's not surprising it's transgressions should allow one to create (in this case) nine particular criteria for judgment. I don't feel that necessarily means they should be singled out over say, the educational or legal systems. I'd rather we, as a society, deal with the entire octopus than one tentacle.

And as this thread is about gun control, I'd also rather deal with the specifics of their claims about that issue, and the substance of their arguments, than insist that their handling of the sexual abuse crisis, disgusting as it was, somehow negates their points on the current matter. Hypocrisy is such a lazy argument.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Have you considered how stupid that pedophilia remark is in this context? rug Jan 2013 #1
Your trying to suppress skepticscott Jan 2013 #2
Your bringing up the pedophilia mess Fortinbras Armstrong Jan 2013 #3
Speaking of logical bullshit skepticscott Jan 2013 #5
Obviously, you are not familiar with logic Fortinbras Armstrong Jan 2013 #8
Ah,yes...of course skepticscott Jan 2013 #9
Again, obviously you must not be familiar with logic Fortinbras Armstrong Jan 2013 #10
Sheesh, read your own link skepticscott Jan 2013 #11
Actually, a broader meaning of Tu Quoque is "your claim is not consistent with your behavior" Fortinbras Armstrong Jan 2013 #12
Pathetic skepticscott Jan 2013 #13
I'm sorry that you are unfamiliar with the phrase "broader meaning". Fortinbras Armstrong Jan 2013 #14
Are you familiar with the phrase skepticscott Jan 2013 #15
As I said, you are merely quibbling over which fallacy you used Fortinbras Armstrong Jan 2013 #16
An argument is or is not fallacious in the context of its conclusion Act_of_Reparation Jan 2013 #22
While it is Lacipyt Jan 2013 #24
But if you're not contending the argument is false... Act_of_Reparation Jan 2013 #28
"Suppress?" Lacipyt Jan 2013 #17
Yes, it is a larger issue skepticscott Jan 2013 #18
Clearly... Lacipyt Jan 2013 #19
Hundreds, maybe thousands? skepticscott Jan 2013 #20
If You're Going To Lacipyt Jan 2013 #23
Moving the goalposts? Nice try, but not even close skepticscott Jan 2013 #25
No, Lacipyt Jan 2013 #27
Vamping. Thank you. okasha Jan 2013 #26
B. F. Skinner okasha Jan 2013 #4
Good for them, but why attack them on a completely unrelated topic when cbayer Jan 2013 #6
The Vatican did everything within its power to defeat President Obama. Now it's time for some dimbear Jan 2013 #7
Not a fan of the Vatican nor the Catholic Church pauldemmd195j Jan 2013 #21
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»Vatican Sides With Obama ...»Reply #27