I'd like to strike out that whole idea. I get the feeling that if we engage in a discussion about weapons, everybody's just going to blow me out of the water. I want to shield myself from that kind of embarrassment.

guns do not give people ammunition to be more aggressive, let's just make that clear. the thought of blaming the weapon and not the person is a swordid affair.

Well this has got a bit off topic. Anyway what about the nukes? NO forget that! Lol (Someone should make a thread about 'Are guns good?' otherwise the mods might get mad for going off topic)

One little pun made you all go off. I've made this thread a cock-up.

Your wrong. The gun puns well died just like that skyrim joke did. Anyway it was doing well so far. :D

That's enough of the gun puns, thanks.
And yet so few atheists seem to make that distinction.

And that's where I fail to comprehend how these people think. You promise god not to have sex with women, you promise god never to masturbate. But hey they didn't promise not to have sex with children so that must be okay then!

At which point down the line do you think they decide that the promise to their god weighs heavier than the welfare of a child?

What is it with you and fucking kids Havoc?

Erm... Roman Catholic priests are not allowed to have sex with children. Even if the religious laws don't specify an age of consent, it would still be sex outside of marriage and/or buggery. And banned either way for a priest.

I think that the point is that guys, when horny, don't think particularly logically. Also, if I'm interpretting your post correctly, you're saying that the laws about celibacy should be changed in order to stop abuse of children. That's just plain silly; across the world there are hundreds of thousands of priests and nuns who are celibate with no problem whatsoever. Just because a small percentage are fucktards, doesn't mean that every single one of them should change.

What should happen is that better security checks should be made of priests before they're hired and if abuse occurs, they should be sent to the police immediately. That will stop problems from escalating.


What is it with you and not reading threads? Havoc is clearly responding to an on-going topic.

Oh, we're doing this again.

Okay, okay...um...bang?

Has anyone ever thought about how shitty it would be if we made first contact with another race across the stars, and we were the more advanced and ended up puking dogma all over them? That would just be so terrible.

Except that the sheer fact of making contact with a race of aliens will force us to reconsider our dogmas.

Actually I meant that I didn't get why, if they are going to break rules anyway, they don't just have sex with an adult. At least that way they get what they want without harming a child in the process.

Any numbers to back that up? I don't know what necessitates the attack on atheists in particular when you get the very same lack of distinction in discussions on politics and games consoles and football teams etc.

Because they're pederasts. Adults don't turn them on.

I also think that maybe it is something to do with a child being "easier" if you know what I mean.

I can't believe I just written that...

All so the child does not no RIGHT from WRONG. And because it's someone with high power. How does that child know if it's wrong. It just makes me MAD! :fuzmad:

Your spot on know. ):

Since when? I've met some pretty obstinate faithfuls in my time.

It's not about breaking the rules, they're not making some anarchist statement, they are paedophiles, fucking kids turns them on. Just because they dress up in a cassock and wear a dog collar doesn't suddenly put them in this unique echelon where the want to have sex with children because they 'want to break the rules'.

I don't think it's about knowing right from wrong, but of the child being "entised" or simply raped.

I'd like to believe that's true, but somehow I don't.

Entised then raped I think. Not sure.

I mean "enticed" in the sense that you can "encourage" a child to do "things" and then there is just full on rape.

You know what, again, I can't believe I'm writing this, I'm pulling out of this subject in this thread now.

If you have a point, argue it for fuck sake, man. Don't pull out just because you feel uncomfortable with the subject.

It is my view that the holy folk in question are highly repressed individuals who are unable to cope with the conditions they are subject to (or in this case, more likely the conditions they are not subject to). The way they go about relieving this tension is wrong, and I think that other contemptible traits of theirs are responsible for this, thus I do not have much sympathy for these detestable individuals, but it has remained my belief for a long time that a contributing factor is the sexual repression in the Catholic church. It is not natural behaviour to abstain from sexual conduct, and few individuals are asexual, so it has to have some negative psychological consequences.

You may disagree with me, but I have believed for a long time that the manipulation of a person's beliefs regarding sex is a way of controlling a person. I don't know if that kind of repression started out as some primitive set of beliefs, but somewhere along the line (if not to begin with), it has been used as a device to control other human beings, since sex is a highly influential factor in human behaviour (in fact, behaviour of all living organisms, to my knowledge). It is these kinds of beliefs and the reasons I think they continue to exist which exemplifies why I believe that a secular state should totally abandon the sexual beliefs of the last fuck knows how many centuries/millennia.

Well I don't see how these people can get away with it. And it feels like people do nothing about it in today world. ):

I don't think so. Could you ever envision yourself having sex with pre-pubescent people? No matter how desperate I am and how easy children are I simply wouldn't fornicate with them because I haven no sexual attraction to them. I would say that said priests have always had paedophilic urges. I don't think it has anything to do with them taking advantage of children because they're easy.

Only them in particular?

The fuck are you even trying to say there?

Actually, I worded that totally wrong, what I meant to say was, All priests are paedophiles?

As in the ones currently under discussion.

So no.

Urgh, I can't read...

Thanks for pointing that out for me.