Atheist morality

Sorry - I didn't mean for you to read too much into the celibacy thing; it wasn't meant so much as an assertion as another possible explanation for the data than "molestors choose to be clergy".As another possibility not-to-read-too-much-into, it may be that there are more reported molestations by Catholic Priests than other clergy because The Catholic Church (as an organization) serves as a permissive and protective environment for molestors.In all actuality, the reason I brought up the whole clergy molestors issue was to show the problem with using statistics (such as psychiatry/suicide) as an indicator of morality and correlation between religion and morality. I think the point has been shown...However, I still feel that molestors-pose-as-clergy is too simple an explanation. If that was the case, I would think molestation rates by other child-authority-figures, such as coaches, camp counselors, troop leaders, etc. would be on par with that of clergy, which does not seem to be the case. Also, taking on the role of clergy requires more training and responsibility than the other positions I list, so I would think numbers of "posers" would be
higher in those other positions.Christians do immoral things, as do Christian clergy. To simply claim that they are not true Christians would make this discussion rather pointless, I think.

Ooook responded very well to this. But what Phat was claiming was that molestors falsely become clergy in order to molest children (one problem I have with this is that it would require much less effort and responsibility to become, say, a camp counselor - which would provide similar access and authority). To use your analogy, that would be like a criminal falsely become a cop and living a lie for several years in order to get away with a crime.My guess is that there are plenty of cops and clergy with genuine intentions that "go bad" later in their careers. I can think of an enormous reason granted by the faith - unconditional forgiveness, redemption, and rebirth.If the numbers can be trusted (which may not be the case), there is something unique about clergy, and moreso Catholic clergy, that correlates to child molestation. The idea that this is solely do to con-men posing as clergy seems ludicrous.

I also do not think that this is what happens, yet I do not believe it is a valid question.Again I have to go with the cop analogy. Did a bad cop become and officer in order to gain greater access and power for nefarious intentions? I don't think so. But there are a lot of bad cops anyway. The pressure of the job, and maybe financial difficulties create temptations to any cop.Those temptations are to renounce their actual professional duties and act as a criminal. Once this is done, I really feel I cannot consider them police who happen to be criminals... they are criminals who are using a badge as cover.Yes they began as honest cops, but turned into criminals with badges.Of course this is all semantics so no one is right. I just feel this is more accurate/useful way of looking at it.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Whoops. If this is what he meant, then I think he is wrong. I didn't mean to sound like I was defending that idea.I agree that cops and clergy more likely go bad on the job, rather than enter the profession with ulterior motives. In fact I was writing that very think to Oook as you were writing your reply to me.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Back in the "day", when homosexuality was frowned upon more than it is now, many young men who were gay became clergy due to good old Catholic guilt. Later, being celibate and being attracted to the 12-14 year old boys who were altar boys and whatnot, they had a lot of close encounters with these boys. Their inner passions were aroused
much as a heterosexual male who is a high school girls volleyball coach would be tempted.Indeed, in Denver we recently had a case of a coach who had untold sexual encounters with his high school team. His defense? He thought that they were eighteen! The girls actually thought that they loved him and so defended him until the end. Such a loss of innocence! He was sentenced 11 years to life.One key point in most Priest molestations is that the victims are not children as much as they are young men and boys who are at the age when the hormones kick in. Add a lonely Priest who is a closeted homosexual to the mix and you often have incidents.The kids that I work with can be annoying, but I don't let it bother me. Boys will often exhibit age appropriate hormonal actions that would make anyone edgy. The girls are worse. In my professional volunteer role, I am careful never to be alone with young people of either gender, as this prevents any questionable incidents.Of course I am alone with lots of other young people whom I know and we get along just fine. I know them and their families quite well.
I never think of any of these kids in a sexual manner, but I could see how the opportunity would be there for a molester. Kids need love and they open up to anyone who shows them love. Especially inner city kids with no Fathers.One question: Can molesters help their compulsions? Are they victims of their childhood molestations or are they devious and uncaring?This message has been edited by Phatboy, 03-24-2005 04:36 PM

Wow - you best be careful. No link has been made between homosexuality and pedophilia that I am aware of - do you have more than stereotypes to back up this assertion? My understanding is that most molestors of boys are male heterosexuals. Good questions. If the answer is "no" for the first, "victims" for the second, does that change the "morality" of the acts of molestation?

Back towards Atheist morality folk. Somehow priestly misconduct doesn't seem to fit the topic.

---

Statistically, yes...because there is a larger percentage of heterosexuals than homosexuals. I believe that if we could examine the statistics of boys older than 12 who were molested, we would find a larger percentage of homosexuals...primarily because of the attraction. I am not gay bashing, here...however. BACK TO THE TOPIC,HOWEVER>>>Morality is not divorced from spirituality, IMO, because spiritual reality is a part of everyones makeup be they believer or atheist.
Behavior is not improved by profession of spirituality in general..witness divorce stats in and out of church.
Morality is intrinsic because spiritual awareness is intrinsic.I guess that I am full of assertions, today. anyone care to comment?This message has been edited by Phatboy, 03-24-2005 05:55 PM

Hey Phat,I guess I feel like your arguements in this thread are all over the place; here is my highly simplified synopsis:- First it seemed you were saying that religious people were more moral than non-religious people.- When it was pointed out to you that religious people commit immoral acts, the argument became that truly religous people wouldn't do so, so those who commit immoral acts by definition are non-religous.- Now it seems like you are arguing that, since most people are moral regardless of religious leaning, all people are religious whether they realize it or not.I feel like you are trying to come up with any way to maintain a correlation between morality and religion, rather than admit that the former may indeed exist with the latter.

{Off topic comment}Mmmmm! How much of this is what you know (ie the facts) and what you have assumed? Be careful that you don't let predjudice influence you here Phat. {/Off topic comment}Then how can you measure morality? By what standards do you judge what morality is if I can be just as moral as someone who follows the literal truth of the bible or some other holy book? Join the club

quote:

---

You know, Adolf Hitler killed millions of Jews and others, and back in his day all they had was the radio and books.

---

If this isn't a reason to ban Wagner then what is this world coming too?

What is spiritual reality?If I have spiritual awareness, I am not aware of it.Morality is what you do, not the reason you do it.

quote:

---

Back in the "day", when homosexuality was frowned upon more than it is now, many young men who were gay became clergy due to good old Catholic guilt. Later, being celibate and being attracted to the 12-14 year old boys who were altar boys and whatnot, they had a lot of close encounters with these boys. Their inner passions were aroused
much as a heterosexual male who is a high school girls volleyball coach would be tempted.

---

So presuming you’re a heterosexual male, how long do you have to go without sex before you’re attracted to 12 year old girls? Considering that girls tend to go though puberty before boys, perhaps it would be fair to ask you about 10 year old girls?

BACK TO THE TOPIC,HOWEVER>>>
Im backing out of this one before it gets complicated. In response to Pink, however, I will say that I am not changing my tune...I just wing it....

Leaving the thread, or the diversion?