Ex-student calls teacher over alleged sex abuse, posts talk on YouTube

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

Marv we seem to be in agreement, though I should point out, that three quarters of the boys molested by priests were into puberty, in many cases Young men.

So this is what is so odd to keep hearing this referred to as "pedophilia priests" by so many. And yet when teachers do the same thing, it never gets that label.

It's also been we noted that 3/4 of the victims were boys and not girls, wonder why that is, when priests have access to so many parishs and school children..... yet the primary desire was for boys and young men.

We are also told that priests getting married would solve this problem, yet I am not so sure.

I know of people in the military or contract workers who rarely see their wives due to deployment, yet we don't hear of that separation causing normal men to suddenly grow and interest in teens?

Post the stats showing the age level. If they're under the age of 16, it's pedophilia. If they're over 16, then it's like I said, it more of a choice, by the law.

A pedophile is a pedophile to me. I call them like I see it, I don't see the difference between a teacher and a priest.

Because it's a disorder. Some want boys, other want girls. The reason why you can't figure it out is because you're hell bent on blaming homsexuals for it. R kelly has a think for young girls, he's a pedophile in my mind. It's just as disgusting as it would be if he had a thing for young boys. If being gay was the root, why go for children in the parish? Why not online, where you can meet men your own age? Why not go to a gay bar outside your district? Where you can be you without the prying eyes?

You're trying to tie pedophile and gays in the same category. They don't mean the same thing. It's this type of lynch mob mentality that gets people killed.

[Danno 1,228]

16? Are you confessing that you did not start puberty until 16? Most boys go in around 12 or 13 I guess, girls sometimes younger which is why this teacher, in this case might not be a pedophile.

The term which might better fit these folks who like the young'uns is

Ephebophilia.

I noted that you called the sexual desire for 14 year olds a "disorder".... if it is a disorder, are we being harsh when we....

-Blame them for their condition?

-Slur them for the desires the disorder prompt them to have?

-Punish them for acting out in a way that is natural for them?

-Discriminate against them simply because they have a disorder?

We used to call people who had abnormal or unacceptable sex habits "Perverts" but now it is all clinical (if not celebrated).

Consequently, we now even seek to "understand" or "diagnose" those who prey on our kids.

[Peikko 1,575]

16? Are you confessing that you did not start puberty until 16? Most boys go in around 12 or 13 I guess, girls sometimes younger which is why this teacher, in this case might not be a pedophile.

The term which might better fit these folks who like the young'uns is

Ephebophilia.

I noted that you called the sexual desire for 14 year olds a "disorder".... if it is a disorder, are we being harsh when we....

-Blame them for their condition?

-Slur them for the desires the disorder prompt them to have?

-Punish them for acting out in a way that is natural for them?

-Discriminate against them simply because they have a disorder?

We used to call people who had abnormal or unacceptable sex habits "Perverts" but now it is all clinical (if not celebrated).

Consequently, we now even seek to "understand" or "diagnose" those who prey on our kids.

Confessing? Why would the age at which puberty started be subject to 'confession'? It rather looks like you place a premium on people who start puberty early. Why would you value something so, for want of a better word, absurd?

Edited January 22, 2014 by The Truth™

[Danno 1,228]

Confessing? Why would the age at which puberty started be subject to 'confession'? It rather looks like you place a premium on people who start puberty early. Why would you value something so, for want of a better word, absurd?

No you're right, if Marv was a late-bloomer.... it is nothing to kid about.

You seem sensitive to the issue, perhaps you "took your time" in development as well?

[Peikko 1,575]

No you're right, if Marv was a late-bloomer.... it is nothing to kid about.

You seem sensitive to the issue, perhaps you "took your time" in development as well?

You read too much into things. However, you still haven't explained why to you it's important to enter puberty early. What's the big deal? Why do you see it as something to boast about?

Or in this case try to use as an insult, a slur? You think Marvin is less of a man or more of a man depending on when he entered puberty? What kind of nonsensical stupidity is that Danno? Where did you get this from?

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

16? Are you confessing that you did not start puberty until 16? Most boys go in around 12 or 13 I guess, girls sometimes younger which is why this teacher, in this case might not be a pedophile.

The term which might better fit these folks who like the young'uns is

Ephebophilia.

I noted that you called the sexual desire for 14 year olds a "disorder".... if it is a disorder, are we being harsh when we....

-Blame them for their condition?

-Slur them for the desires the disorder prompt them to have?

-Punish them for acting out in a way that is natural for them?

-Discriminate against them simply because they have a disorder?

We used to call people who had abnormal or unacceptable sex habits "Perverts" but now it is all clinical (if not celebrated).

Consequently, we now even seek to "understand" or "diagnose" those who prey on our kids.

I would ask how did you get I didn't hit puberty until 16 from my quotes coming from the pedophile link, but I know you have trouble going in a straight line. So let's try again shall we:

As a medical diagnosis, it is a psychiatric disorder in persons 16 years of age or older. An adolescent who is 16 years of age or older must be at least five years older than the prepubescent child before the attraction can be diagnosed as pedophilia.

Ephebophilla would be more teenagers, young adults. Not in the case of the catholic church:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_sex_abuse_cases

The Catholic sex abuse cases are a series of allegations, investigations, trials and convictions of child sexual abuse crimes committed by Catholic priests, nuns and members of Roman Catholic orders against children as young as three years old with the majority between the ages of 11 and 14.

Clear and dry. Those were children, as young as 3 Danno.

To answer your questions. If you get help early on, before you abuse a child, I think there is a chance for you. It might be treatable, but I'm not a doctor. If a person has that affliction, would you want them around your children? I would want them to seek help.

Sorry, but sleeping with a child is NEVER ok in my book. I have sons that age, if a grown man or woman did that to any one of my kids, nothing in this world would stop me from tearing them apart.

[Danno 1,228]

<<<If they're under the age of 16, it's pedophilia.>>>>

Your words my friend.

DO you really believe sex with a 15 year old, is Pedophilia?

I suppose if that same 15 yearold has not begun puberty one could then technically say an attraction to them would be the impulse of a pedophile.

Now marvin you know one thing I insist on is.... that WORDS MEAN THINGS.... they have meanings.

Not sure what your point was in highlighting that victims were as young as 3.

​My claim about the vast majority being males and the greater majority being post pubescent, certainly allows for some cases to be sadly as young as 3.

BUt you never addressed my point of "why so many boys... and not girls?

Why so many young men and not little children?

You blame me for pointing the finger at Gays, when it was Alfred Kindsey who first made that connection when he found 37% of homosexuals admitted to having sex with kids 17 and younger.

Now I have never claimed that gay people are a bunch of pedophiles, no doubt there were many gay priests who didn't molest and like us were sickened by this stuff and yet research has show higher rates of incidents of molestation among gays.

Look the "North American Man Boy Love Association" (NAMBLA) didn't march in the Catholic Parades, but they were welcome in the Gay parades.

If you get bored and want to know the facts on how close this stuff is to the Militant Gay movement, just let me know.

But again, being Gay does not mean a person is a molester nor does being a male make one a molester. Oh Thats right, you and I are also at a much higher risk (statistically speaking) than a female is for molestation. .... and people know it and respond accordingly.

which is why a women can get a job as a nanny a whole lot easier than the random guy can.

For me the most frustrating part of this whole topic is two fold.

1. We really have no idea who would want to do such a thing, the most trusted person, even a family member could prey on a child.

2. To live ones life balancing the scale between protection and having to go through life as a parent wondering if this person or that might be the one. Sizing people up in your mind is so pathetic yet you must do it at times.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The law says what the age of consent is. The age a person undergoes puberty (if its not started by the time you're 15, there's something wrong with you) has nothing to do with it.

What a bizarre argument.

Edited January 23, 2014 by Papa Lazarou

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

<<<If they're under the age of 16, it's pedophilia.>>>>

Your words my friend.

DO you really believe sex with a 15 year old, is Pedophilia?

I suppose if that same 15 yearold has not begun puberty one could then technically say an attraction to them would be the impulse of a pedophile.

Now marvin you know one thing I insist on is.... that WORDS MEAN THINGS.... they have meanings.

Not sure what your point was in highlighting that victims were as young as 3.

​My claim about the vast majority being males and the greater majority being post pubescent, certainly allows for some cases to be sadly as young as 3.

BUt you never addressed my point of "why so many boys... and not girls?

Why so many young men and not little children?

You blame me for pointing the finger at Gays, when it was Alfred Kindsey who first made that connection when he found 37% of homosexuals admitted to having sex with kids 17 and younger.

Now I have never claimed that gay people are a bunch of pedophiles, no doubt there were many gay priests who didn't molest and like us were sickened by this stuff and yet research has show higher rates of incidents of molestation among gays.

Look the "North American Man Boy Love Association" (NAMBLA) didn't march in the Catholic Parades, but they were welcome in the Gay parades.

If you get bored and want to know the facts on how close this stuff is to the Militant Gay movement, just let me know.

But again, being Gay does not mean a person is a molester nor does being a male make one a molester. Oh Thats right, you and I are also at a much higher risk (statistically speaking) than a female is for molestation. .... and people know it and respond accordingly.

which is why a women can get a job as a nanny a whole lot easier than the random guy can.

For me the most frustrating part of this whole topic is two fold.

1. We really have no idea who would want to do such a thing, the most trusted person, even a family member could prey on a child.

2. To live ones life balancing the scale between protection and having to go through life as a parent wondering if this person or that might be the one. Sizing people up in your mind is so pathetic yet you must do it at times.

Not my words, the law. Also, you said you were in the Marine Corps right? What does the UCMJ say about this? Let me see: http://usmilitary.about.com/library/milinfo/mcm/bl134-27.htm

What Is the Age of Consent for Sex in the U.S. Military?

For members of the United States military, conduct is governed by the military’s own law, the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). For military members, the crime of rape can be (and has been) punished by death.

The age of consent for members of the military is 16 years of age. This means that a member of the military who has sex with a person under the age of 16 is committing a crime.

See, when I joined back in 1993, I remember this brief they gave us about the age of consent. Seems like they had issues with recruits and young girls, so they made sure to drive this point home.

As for your question, ask yourself, what is a choir girl? I've never heard of one. I know of choir boys and alter boys. How many young girls are in the catholic church vs young boys? It could be a target of opportunity. I'm not sure, but being that you're heavy into that religion, do some research.

[Danno 1,228]

Not my words, the law. Also, you said you were in the Marine Corps right? What does the UCMJ say about this? Let me see: http://usmilitary.about.com/library/milinfo/mcm/bl134-27.htm

What Is the Age of Consent for Sex in the U.S. Military?

For members of the United States military, conduct is governed by the military’s own law, the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). For military members, the crime of rape can be (and has been) punished by death.

The age of consent for members of the military is 16 years of age. This means that a member of the military who has sex with a person under the age of 16 is committing a crime.

See, when I joined back in 1993, I remember this brief they gave us about the age of consent. Seems like they had issues with recruits and young girls, so they made sure to drive this point home.

As for your question, ask yourself, what is a choir girl? I've never heard of one. I know of choir boys and alter boys. How many young girls are in the catholic church vs young boys? It could be a target of opportunity. I'm not sure, but being that you're heavy into that religion, do some research.

Marvin, you seem to be mixing up the term "under age" with Pedophilia.

A person can engage in underage sex without being a pedophile.

The bar for when an act is deemed pedophilia or is set by nature or the child's maturity..... not some arbitrary age or "jail bait" law which varies from state to state and country to country.

Pedophilia has no more to do with the law than does manic-depressant.

to your other point,

Granted, some priests might have had access to more boys but this is almost meaningless.

It's kinda like if I lived in a town with only one seafood place and I like seafood, I would find my way to the seafood place and ignore the many steakhouses.

Boys and young men were targeted though there were lots of girls in every parish.

People who rape (adults or children) find their way to the target of their desires.

The connection between gay priests and the children who were molested is undeniable and well documented.

Dr. Richard Fitzgibbons is a psychiatrist who spent many years treating Priests who have sexually abused others, he said-

“every priest whom I treated who was involved with children sexually had previously been involved in adult homosexual relationships.”

Now I know you want to believe all groups of people commit crimes or abuse others at basically the same level.

in your mind, that I or anyone else raise facts contrary to that tenant of yours amounts to "hate" and bigotry.

When I relay the investigative findings, you get mad at me, why? Are people who go in the priesthood not a unique kind of person anyway, any conclusion we draw from Gay Priests might or might not be true of any other group they might be a part of.

In other words when I say that it was -Men- who molested the boys, you don't charge in to rescue the virtue of Men, yet when I say the same thing concerning gay perpetrators in the priesthood you feel the need to defend Gays at large.

​The evil known as political correctness insists that truth be restrained, so that "proper thinking" will flourish on these subjects..... no matter the cost or the age of the victims.

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

Marvin, you seem to be mixing up the term "under age" with Pedophilia.

A person can engage in underage sex without being a pedophile.

The bar for when an act is deemed pedophilia or is set by nature or the child's maturity..... not some arbitrary age or "jail bait" law which varies from state to state and country to country.

Pedophilia has no more to do with the law than does manic-depressant.

to your other point,

Granted, some priests might have had access to more boys but this is almost meaningless.

It's kinda like if I lived in a town with only one seafood place and I like seafood, I would find my way to the seafood place and ignore the many steakhouses.

Boys and young men were targeted though there were lots of girls in every parish.

People who rape (adults or children) find their way to the target of their desires.

The connection between gay priests and the children who were molested is undeniable and well documented.

Dr. Richard Fitzgibbons is a psychiatrist who spent many years treating Priests who have sexually abused others, he said-

“every priest whom I treated who was involved with children sexually had previously been involved in adult homosexual relationships.”

Now I know you want to believe all groups of people commit crimes or abuse others at basically the same level.

in your mind, that I or anyone else raise facts contrary to that tenant of yours amounts to "hate" and bigotry.

When I relay the investigative findings, you get mad at me, why? Are people who go in the priesthood not a unique kind of person anyway, any conclusion we draw from Gay Priests might or might not be true of any other group they might be a part of.

In other words when I say that it was -Men- who molested the boys, you don't charge in to rescue the virtue of Men, yet when I say the same thing concerning gay perpetrators in the priesthood you feel the need to defend Gays at large.

​The evil known as political correctness insists that truth be restrained, so that "proper thinking" will flourish on these subjects..... no matter the cost or the age of the victims.

First of all, the UCMJ is across the board. It doesn't change.

Second, you're trying to tie gay and pedophile together. It's that simple. But since it's well documented, why haven't myself or anyone else heard of it? Why don't you post the link?

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

i agree, although this doesn't sound like 'violent' crime. more manipulative..

These are state issues. Kentucky, for example, has no limitation on ANY felony. 1 year on any misdemeanor.

Easily addressed in your state legislature. Go for it!

Clever girl, good for her.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Marvin, you seem to be mixing up the term "under age" with Pedophilia.

A person can engage in underage sex without being a pedophile.

The bar for when an act is deemed pedophilia or is set by nature or the child's maturity..... not some arbitrary age or "jail bait" law which varies from state to state and country to country.

Pedophilia has no more to do with the law than does manic-depressant.

to your other point,

Granted, some priests might have had access to more boys but this is almost meaningless.

It's kinda like if I lived in a town with only one seafood place and I like seafood, I would find my way to the seafood place and ignore the many steakhouses.

Boys and young men were targeted though there were lots of girls in every parish.

People who rape (adults or children) find their way to the target of their desires.

The connection between gay priests and the children who were molested is undeniable and well documented.

Dr. Richard Fitzgibbons is a psychiatrist who spent many years treating Priests who have sexually abused others, he said-

“every priest whom I treated who was involved with children sexually had previously been involved in adult homosexual relationships.”

Now I know you want to believe all groups of people commit crimes or abuse others at basically the same level.

in your mind, that I or anyone else raise facts contrary to that tenant of yours amounts to "hate" and bigotry.

When I relay the investigative findings, you get mad at me, why? Are people who go in the priesthood not a unique kind of person anyway, any conclusion we draw from Gay Priests might or might not be true of any other group they might be a part of.

In other words when I say that it was -Men- who molested the boys, you don't charge in to rescue the virtue of Men, yet when I say the same thing concerning gay perpetrators in the priesthood you feel the need to defend Gays at large.

​The evil known as political correctness insists that truth be restrained, so that "proper thinking" will flourish on these subjects..... no matter the cost or the age of the victims.

Since you are OK with restricting people's rights...why don't we just ban Catholicism?

Sex is not a crime...sexual abuse or sexual assault is a crime. Who is having a problem with the distinction? Priests? Ban Preists.

[Danno 1,228]

Since you are OK with restricting people's rights...why don't we just ban Catholicism?

Sex is not a crime...sexual abuse or sexual assault is a crime. Who is having a problem with the distinction? Priests? Ban Preists.

It's not just me who is OK with restricting peoples right we all are (with perhaps the exception of you) which is why we don't allow people to masturbate in the park or play loud music all night long.

Refine your point.