Pope blames the 70s for Pedophilia

Benedict qualified his mea culpa by stating that the scandal (in which priests who sexually abused children were often ignored or protected by the Catholic Church) was partly justified by the broader social context. Benedict said that while the church accepted some responsibility, he could not be silent about ''the context of these times.... There is a market in child pornography that seems in some way to be considered more and more normal by society." [History of Pornography No More Prudent Than Present]

Benedict claimed that as recently as the 1970s, "pedophilia was theorized as something fully in conformity with man and even with children." In this climate, the Catholic Church's actions were merely reflecting the moral relativism of the times: "It was maintained — even within the realm of Catholic theology — that there is no such thing as evil in itself or good in itself," Benedict said. That is, church leaders weren't sure if child sexual abuse was wrong, since secular society seemed to accept it.

http://www.livescience.com/culture/catholic-pope-blames-society-for-pedophile-priests-101221.html

the article goes on to describe the logical fallacy in the argument, but as a matter of fact the claims are questionable anyways.

As far back as the reformation, pedophilia by Catholic priests was propoganda used by the Protestants, indicating that popular support would not have been for the act. Further, child molestation was a major criticism layed by the Marquis de Sade, amongst other enlightenment thinkers, against the catholics.

Well that's just dumb.

Originally posted by King Kandy
Well that's just dumb.

QFT.

I cannot think of any society that "accepted" child molestation. Sure, some kept it "quiet" and overlooked it more than others, but I do not know of one single culture that thought it was 'good' or 'acceptable.'

Originally posted by dadudemon
I cannot think of any society that "accepted" child molestation. Sure, some kept it "quiet" and overlooked it more than others, but I do not know of one single culture that thought it was 'good' or 'acceptable.'

Depending on where you set the standard for "child" the Greeks may be argued to have idolized it.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Depending on where you set the standard for "child" the Greeks may be argued to have idolized it.

I thought that was a myth that the Greeks thought it was awesome and, in fact, it was looked down upon?

Originally posted by dadudemon
I thought that was a myth that the Greeks thought it was awesome and, in fact, it was looked down upon?

i blame more or less deviant religious groups and forced celibacy..

pope living in glass houses shouldnt throw stones

Next up for Benedict. "Hey man, everyone was inquisitioning! We didn't want to get left out."

Originally posted by dadudemon
I thought that was a myth that the Greeks thought it was awesome and, in fact, it was looked down upon?

Running around with boys get a shout out in Symposium.

From 181a onward: 181a

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Running around with boys get a shout out in Symposium.

From 181a onward: 181a

god, i read through a bunch of that a couple of times... doesn't it end up saying that there should be laws made to prevent people who "begin to acquire some mind—a growth associated with that of down on their chins" from sleeping with young children?

Originally posted by King Castle
i blame more or less deviant religious groups and forced celibacy..

pope living in glass houses shouldnt throw stones

Yeah, the pope is an idiot...or at least pretends to be for the sake of official dogma.

However, I'm not sure the glass house idiom is applicable simply because he's a catholic addressing the actions of other catholics. If he has remained faithfully celibate and has never molested a child because he can't fornicate, then he's not throwing stones in a glass house. In fact, if we accept that he has not molested kids or had sex since his oath, then he deserves to be the first in line to cast that sinless stone.

Well, after me, who thinks he and every guilty member of his organization should be strung up for child abuse and institutionalized cover-ups. You just can't blame the Village People for gay sex, much less gay sex for pedophilia.

Originally posted by inimalist
god, i read through a bunch of that a couple of times... doesn't it end up saying that there should be laws made to prevent people who "begin to acquire some mind—a growth associated with that of down on their chins" from sleeping with young children?

Yes.

It sounds like Plato justifies sleeping with boys because it has to do with some sort of origins or magic with goddesses. But then he goes on to say that there should a law be made to prevent this sort of love because it takes advantage of their "naivety", but that may be more in line with making a law that prevents a man from having sexual relations with a crap load of young men...if I'm to understand it correctly.

So, it is a my understanding that it was a myth and it was generally looked down upon by the Greeks. It would be no different than most of us thinking it wrong and having that contrasted by NAMBLA: some may think it right and the majority think it wrong.

Edit - Reminds me of the Rind et al. study. What are some of your thoughts on this, people? I do think that there would be a difference, psychologically, if a child was just curious. That makes sense. It also makes sense that a child forced into something would have psychological damage. It seems like a "no-brainer." But things are complicated and introducing 'adult' things to a child's mind may not be healthy or conducive to that child's natural development. But wait, what IS healthy and wouldn't that vary from child to child, greatly, making it near impossible to set a standard? Complicated as all get-out and it's hard for me to think about this stuff, objectively, because I have children. Does that disqualify me for a legitimate discussion on something like this? You tell me...

I'm not sure that Live Science is the most unbiased site in the world for getting information on the pope guys, just saying 😬 we should be used to seeing convenient quotations.
“The psychological destruction of children, in which human persons are reduced to articles of merchandise, is a terrifying sign of the times,”
This from what I understand wasn't even a prominent part of his speech, the main bulk of it was him telling the church to accept their humiliation in what they'd done. But as usual people are going to make a big deal out of nothing, when all he was really saying was that society sees people more like objects than actual humans, a statement that's pretty true lol

Well...The Popes a cer-hunt, then. Its official.

I blame the 70's for the pope.

😂

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Depending on where you set the standard for "child" the Greeks may be argued to have idolized it.

It is virtually factual that they did, but that was far before Christianity began.
As far as the pope's words, you don't blame the dairy farmers just because you spilt a glass of milk. Man up to the problems at hand instead of pointing fingers.

Originally posted by inimalist
god, i read through a bunch of that a couple of times... doesn't it end up saying that there should be laws made to prevent people who "begin to acquire some mind—a growth associated with that of down on their chins" from sleeping with young children?

Only in order to "prevent the sad waste of attentions paid to an object so uncertain." He's saying there should be a law against breaking their hearts.

Originally posted by BackFire
I blame the 70's for the pope.

sometimes the cover of a book tells you everything you need to know of whats inside...

he's leering at me!! shock

He is one creepy **** indeed

http://www.buzzfeed.com/eixo/12-evilest-pope-pictures-e9k