Skip to main content

Gay Marriage & Pedophile Priests

I am always fascinated by the way people think. Our ability to always find the flaws in other people's thinking while denying that our own ideas have any fatal flaws whatsoever, is perhaps the greatest act of self deception human beings have managed to produce.

Take gay marriage and pedophile priests, for example. For die hard Catholics who are convinced that homosexuality is a "sin," any group that supports same sex marriage is seen to be practically in league with Lucifer himself. If Catholic priests are caught raping children over the course of decades, around the world, and the Church works to not only protect those rapists from facing legal consequences, but actually facilitates that abuse by both moving the abusive priests around and working to keep the victims from seeking legal action, this does nothing to convince those same die hard Catholics that there is anything particularly evil about their own institutional church. 

I am not here trying to simply bash the Catholic Church as worse than any other institution, but merely pointing out that it is no better than any other institution. One of the defenses offered by those who seek to defend the Church regarding it's pedophile priests problem, for example, is that the percentage of pedophiles within the Church is the same as the percentage of pedophiles in society over all.

Some have argued that the Church has a greater percentage, but I think it is safe to say that, overall, the percentages are roughly the same. But that is the problem. If the percentages are the same, then the claim that the Catholic religion makes people better either means

1. that there is a greater than average number of pedophiles in the Catholic Church, but the Christian religion succeeds in reducing the number of incidences of their abuse to the level of the society it operates in in general, or

2. that the Christian religion does not, in fact, "make people better," since the same number of people who have not directly devoted themselves to working for God and his moral laws, engage in pedophilia as those that have.

Hence, if 1. is true, then Christianity can only boast to be as effective in curbing people's sinful desires and behaviors, to the same extent it is forced to admit it serves to attract (and still worse, apparently hire) an inordinate number of pedophiles overall.

If 2 is true, however, than the belief that religion and a belief in God makes people more moral than atheism is simply unfounded.

But in either case, what is truly interesting is not to attack Christianity, but to use it to illustrate how we see things not as they are, but as we are. We see things, in other words, as we want to see them.

Think about it, if you are a Democrat or a Liberal, it is most likely the case that whatever "sins" other Democrats and Liberals commit do nothing to dissuade you from the conviction that your own perspective is no doubt the morally superior one, even if those same "beliefs" are used in the most dastardly way imaginable.  Conservative Republicans are no different.

If one homosexual couple is found to have molested a child, Conservatives across the country may well demand that this one example proves that homosexuals should not marry, and that they should never be allowed to adopt children.  But if those Conservatives happen to be Catholic, and a few hundred priests in Boston are found to have molested hundreds if not thousands of children over the course of a few decades, that fact does next to nothing to dissuade such Catholics from  being Catholic themselves, and even wanting to raise their own children Catholic as well.

This would be true even if statistics showed that homosexuals molest children at a rate far below societal average and that Catholic priests molested children far more than societal averages.

(FULL DISCLOSURE: there are a number of arguments about the "pedophile priests" scandal which claim not only that the rate of abuse within the church are either the same or lower than society or even public schools, but also that the abuse was solely linked to homosexuality instead, which those who make this latter argument claim is responsible for far more child molestation than anything else. But I will discuss these claims in another post.)

Again, the point of this post is NOT to simply attack religion as being responsible for pedophile priests, since pedophiles are probably not "created" by Catholicism or even the celibacy requirements among the clergy.  It is simply to point out how often we see what we want to see, and how just as often, we deny we are doing as much, especially to ourselves.
   

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why Christianity is More Unnatural Than Homosexuality

I grew up in a family that is about as homophobic as Phil Robertson and the Westboro Baptists, only they're not quite as boisterous about it; at least not in public anyway. They have also conveniently convinced themselves  that their homophobia is really just their unique Christian ability to "hate the sin, but love the sinner" (even though these very same Christians adamantly refuse to accept that people can "hate Christianity, but love the Christian").  The sexual superiority complex necessarily relied on by such Christians is, of course, blanketed beneath the lambs wool of the Christian humility of serving "God." They interpret their fear of those who are different, in other words, as simply proof of their intimate knowledge and love of God. And the only thing such Christians are more sure about than that their own personal version of "God" exists, is that such a "God" would never want people to be homosexual - no matter how ma

Christianity: An Addiction of Violence Masquerading as Love: Part II

"But God by nature must love Himself supremely, above all else." Fr. Emmet Carter   This is part  two of a look at an article written about the "restorative and medicinal" properties of punishment, as espoused by Fr. Emmett Carter (https://catholicexchange.com/gods-punishment-is-just-restorative-and-medicinal/).  Ideas of this sort in Christianity go back to St. Augustine and Thomas Aquinas - two saints who saw the suffering of Christ as sure fire evidence that God needed humans to suffer to balance the cosmic scales of his love for us. Sure, he could've come up with a better game, or made better humans, but its apparently the suffering he really enjoys seeing. Carter's essay raises countless questions, especially about the true nature of God's blood lust, but lets stick to just four simpler ones. The first question deals with the idea of "free will." According to Christians, God designed us with the ability to freely choose to obey or offend h

Christianity: An Addiction of Violence Masquerading as Love: Part I

If the Holy Bible proves anything at all, it proves that the Christian God has a blood-lust like no other God in history. From Abraham to Jesus to the end times to eternal hell, the Christian God loves suffering even more than, or at least as much as, said God loves Himself. And if everything from the genocides in the Old Testament and God killing everyone on the planet with a flood, to Jesus being tortured and murdered (rather than the devil, who is the guilty one) and the fiery end of the world followed by the never ending fires of hell, are not enough to convince you that Christianity is really an addiction to violence masquerading as "love," just consider the psychotic rantings of a Catholic priest trying to convince his faithful flock that murder and mutilation - which he calls "punishment" -  are proof of just how much his "God" is pure love.  In an article published on https://catholicexchange.com/gods-punishment-is-just-restorative-and-medicinal/,