codeorama Posted May 1, 2003 Share Posted May 1, 2003 'Sexfest' draws delegate's ire By the Associated Press Published May 1, 2003 HARRISONBURG, Va. -- A state delegate is calling on James Madison University's president to defend "Sexfest 2003," a one-day campus program that was intended to promote safe sex and other issues. "This would seem to assume that all college students are sexually active and give the impression that the school condones premarital sexual activity," Del. Robert Marshall, R-Manassas wrote to President Linwood Rose. He also asked why abstinence wasn't promoted as an alternative. Marshall said condoms and pamphlets on everything from sexually transmitted diseases to prostate cancer were distributed at the Saturday conference. Rose declined comment until the university offers a formal reply. "It was an event you could attend or not attend," school spokesman Fred Hilton said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJWatson3 Posted May 1, 2003 Share Posted May 1, 2003 abstinance isn't safe sex-- it's no sex.... let's get realistic folks... we are animals-- we want to fu(k. i wish the ultra religious would focus on their sexually abusive priests and figure out why they can't keep their hands off young boys. i believe the answer lies in the realm of abstinance. everybody needs some honey, sometime. and rock-on JMU, good to see the college relating to student issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted May 1, 2003 Author Share Posted May 1, 2003 Originally posted by AJWatson3 abstinance isn't safe sex-- it's no sex.... let's get realistic folks... we are animals we want to fu(k. i wish the ultra religious would focus on their sexually abusive priests and figure out why they can't keep their hands off young boys. i believe the answer lies in the realm of abstinance. everybody needs some honey, sometime. That's true and funny...:laugh: :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantasm Posted May 1, 2003 Share Posted May 1, 2003 Makes me proud to be an alum:D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golgo-13 Posted May 1, 2003 Share Posted May 1, 2003 Originally posted by AJWatson3 abstinance isn't safe sex-- it's no sex.... let's get realistic folks... we are animals-- we want to fu(k. i wish the ultra religious would focus on their sexually abusive priests and figure out why they can't keep their hands off young boys. i believe the answer lies in the realm of abstinance. everybody needs some honey, sometime. and rock-on JMU, good to see the college relating to student issues. Ok.....just stay the h@ll away from my wife! :laugh: :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Om Posted May 1, 2003 Share Posted May 1, 2003 Okay, how many guys clicked on this thread with something other than educational ends in mind? I was going to ask for a show of hands, but then I thought better of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted May 1, 2003 Share Posted May 1, 2003 :halo: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted May 1, 2003 Share Posted May 1, 2003 Originally posted by Om Okay, how many guys clicked on this thread with something other than educational ends in mind? I was going to ask for a show of hands, but then I thought better of it. C'mon OM - fess up - you would have had to raise your hand. I thought this was going to be a thread about the Dems - and how they were gonna spin something :laugh: Little did I know that it was a story about JMU. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbo Posted May 1, 2003 Share Posted May 1, 2003 I would NEVER have thought of putting JMU and sexfest in the same sentence. :laugh: Looks to me like those horny college students just want free condoms.....not to mention an excuse to get nekkid with the Dean's blessing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doggmatic Posted May 1, 2003 Share Posted May 1, 2003 Actually, its ignorant to call all ultra religious folks child molesters. Sorry. Its merely a by-product of Catholocism's non-biblical doctrine that they enforce on their priests. Not to mention its flat out wrong. You may not have noticed, if you are grouping all Christianity into one group, but protestent ministers are married and don't travel down this path. I'd be glad to speak more about it if you aren't interested in some kind of flame war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheKurp Posted May 1, 2003 Share Posted May 1, 2003 So am I to understand that the vow of celibacy turns priests into child molesters? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doggmatic Posted May 1, 2003 Share Posted May 1, 2003 Its not only children. Children is just the focus of the media's attention. Priests go after the nuns as well (at least that is natural). My point is that the doctrine is wrong, as it is non-biblical, and these pathetic sexually repressed men get their jollys using twisted methods. Total sexual abstinence is not how we were designed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheKurp Posted May 1, 2003 Share Posted May 1, 2003 So you're saying that if priests were allowed to have sex under the laws of the Church they wouldn't molest children (and nuns)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doggmatic Posted May 1, 2003 Share Posted May 1, 2003 I'm pretty sure you have an idea of the answer to this. However... I believe that would pretty much be the case. No one could guaruntee there wouldn't be someone who had some serious problems. You know that from everyday interactions with other folks. Some are sick, some aren't. In other words, the occurances would be much less in frequency, yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheKurp Posted May 1, 2003 Share Posted May 1, 2003 So then if I were to do the research I would find an equal number of child molesters among Buddhist priests, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
riggins44 Posted May 1, 2003 Share Posted May 1, 2003 Thanks for this thread, Code. Will have to email or IM my stepson, a JR at JMU and see what brand of condiments they gave out. I prefer what they did to him studying anatomy and family life in a dorm room. Not ready to be a grandparent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted May 2, 2003 Author Share Posted May 2, 2003 Originally posted by riggins44 Thanks for this thread, Code. Will have to email or IM my stepson, a JR at JMU and see what brand of condiments they gave out. I prefer what they did to him studying anatomy and family life in a dorm room. Not ready to be a grandparent. No Problem.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doggmatic Posted May 2, 2003 Share Posted May 2, 2003 Originally posted by TheKurp So then if I were to do the research I would find an equal number of child molesters among Buddhist priests, right? Sounds like you've already done the research. (I'm going by the "right?" at the end of your sentence.) Post what you know. Could be interesting... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheKurp Posted May 2, 2003 Share Posted May 2, 2003 From what I've been able to gather, there is no higher incidence of pedophilia among Catholic priests than there is among any other profession that interacts with minors. That would appear to indicate that your assertion is nothing more than some innate assumption based on faulty reasoning, or media manipulation if you will. If you want to swap sources, let me know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doggmatic Posted May 2, 2003 Share Posted May 2, 2003 That wasn't my argument. I stated : "In other words, the occurances would be much less in frequency, yes." I never said we were talking about the molestation being higher in frequency than any other profession. That isn't my concern at all. That being said, I would be very interested in reading the source you speak of. Really. Is it a link on the web? I can get you my email address. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheKurp Posted May 2, 2003 Share Posted May 2, 2003 Doggmatic, You're going to have to forgive me because I'm having a hard time following your argument. You stated: Actually, its ignorant to call all ultra religious folks child molesters. Sorry. Its merely a by-product of Catholocism's non-biblical doctrine that they enforce on their priests. Ergo, you're stating, I think, that there's a direct link between pedophilia and the practice of celibacy among Catholic priests. Am I wrong? You later stated, and I'm paraphrasing, that the incidence of child molestations would decrease if the Catholic Church lifted the requirement of celibacy. Am I wrong here? Now, I stated that the rate of pedophilia at the hands of Catholic priests were statisically no higher than other professions who had access to minors. Simply put, other professions that do not require celibacy as a term of employment have statistically the same rate of pedophilia when access to minors is equivalently the same as among Catholic priests. Therefore, my argument is that celibacy does not increase the incidence of pedophilia among Catholic priests. The name of the book is: Pedophiles and Priests: Anatomy of a Contemporary Crisis by Philip Jenkins. Here's a description: This volume takes a close, dispassionate look at the entire history of the issue of sexual abuse among the clergy, and especially among the Roman Catholic clergy. From the first rumblings to today's headlines, Philip Jenkins has written a fascinating, exhaustive, and, above all, even-handed account that not only puts this particular crisis in perspective, but offers an eye-opening look at the way in which an issue takes hold of the popular imagination. Jenkins reassures us about our local clergy, but also delivers a disturbing message about how vulnerable we are to the news media. Meticulously documented and dispassionately argued, this volume marks a watershed in the discussion of an issue of enormous current interest, one that will not disappear from the headlines any time soon. It should be noted that Jenkins is a non-Catholic Penn State historian. It's also noteworthy that Jenkins' researched showed pedophilia to be a much bigger problem among Protestant ministers by almost a 10-to-1 ratio. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doggmatic Posted May 2, 2003 Share Posted May 2, 2003 The brief info you have shown is interesting. I would like to read more of it when I have time. Thanks for posting it. Ergo, you're stating, I think, that there's a direct link between pedophilia and the practice of celibacy among Catholic priests. Am I wrong? Well, it would seem fairly direct, at least to me of course. Its based more on intuition, to be honest. You later stated, and I'm paraphrasing, that the incidence of child molestations would decrease if the Catholic Church lifted the requirement of celibacy. Am I wrong here? No. And I still believe it would decrease. I think the requirement of celibacy may constrict certain individuals from joining the priesthood, for whatever reason. Perhaps it attracts the wrong individuals? To be honest, I wonder. Perhaps it is because I expect for out of the men who would choose to travel down that path. I totally see where your argument is coming from, however. I also find it interesting that there is a higher ratio of protestent ministers with these incidents. I wonder if this has something to do witht the fact there would be more protestent minsters in the country that catholic priests (which, if true would blowup my idea of protestant minsters being generally clean... oh well. ha.). Who knows... I wish I had a concise and accurate statistical spreadsheet in front of me to examine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.