Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Ms. Halle's work (2008 Olympiad)
>> 3. It's contaminated by criminal perverts in priests'Gaelman:
> "Those priests, by virtue of being priests, are not theDear Gaelman,
> kind of gay folks who are attracted to young men, that
> I defend on most occasions...I like how the latter vote."
In the interests of accuracy, I would like to note that the
overwhelming majority of pedophiles are straight white men.
Get it? The vast majority of pedophiles identify as
*heterosexuals*, even when their preferred target for
pedophilia is young boys. (And, of course, our entire
society reveals its misogyny in its response to and
emphasis on pedophilia targeting young boys while turning a
blind eye to pedophilia targeting young girls.) To be
blunt: Homosexual men are no more likely than heterosexual
men to be sexually attracted to children.
Note that Frank did not say the Church is *populated" by
"criminal perverts in priests' robes" -- he said it is
*contaminated* by them. As in, one bad apple can spoil the
barrel. Many people regard the cover-up as worse than the
crime; the knowledge that the Church moved these priests
from parish to parish without regard to the children they
were molesting taints the entire Church heirarchy in the
eyes of many.
But neither the pedophilia nor the response of the Church
can actually be blamed on "the gays".
Musing, I don't think that's exactly what He meant by
"suffer the little children to come unto me"...
"Life's short and we never have enough time for the hearts of those who travel the way with us. O, be swift to love! Make haste to be kind." --Henri-Frederic Amiel
"I'm not sure it is exactly correct to say that Peter "opposes" anthroposophy..."
(this 'Quote of the ...' is getting silly).
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "Frank Thomas Smith" <fts.trasla@...> wrote:
> Peter Stadenmaier:
> "Whether it is true and whether it is racist have nothing to do with one another."