See you in 10 years after you have a long heart to heart with Christ and he tells you to get back into the ministry and stay molesting children again.
Nah, he’ll be running for office, probably be a close race too.
Ten years? My dude, he’ll write a book about his “walk through the valley of the shadow of death and redemption through the grace of Christ” and publish it next year
Huh, so the right wingers who rage and scream about pedophilia and use that demonize anyone who disagrees with them on any issue, with zero facts, are the actual pedophiles? Color me shocked. If you run across a right winger who is freaking out about pedophiles to the point that they’ve regressed into all caps and are calling you evil while foaming at the mouth… you’re dealing with classic projection.
I simply must repost these images whenever I get the chance:
Please keep up reposting these! You’re doing amazing work.
Too bad we can’t get get the granularity of congressional district on these…
Makes sense that he was Trump’s spiritual advisor.
I assume he was also Epstein’s spiritual advisor.
*Religious advisor, ain’t nothing spiritual about a man who follows dogma and I’m tired of people confusing spirituality with religon
Two piles of the same bullshit.
Nah, they’re different, religion is a cancer, spirituality can give people a sense of belonging or being part of something bigger than themselves. Eat some mushrooms and tell me they’re the same thing lol.
Spirituality, even more than religion, is some broadly used word for all kinds of stuff like healing crystals, zodiac signs etc. A sense of belonging can come from many things, that doesn’t make it true or good per se. What you are describing is drug use. Spirituality may sound better for you, but it’s just bullshit for drug use. I’m not judging, but it is what it is.
I’m sorry you feel that way.
A better inner-life (a more spiritual outlook) is actually key part of recovery from drugs and mental illness and can ignore god completely. Drugs can help experience it but aren’t necessary, my mushroom comment was a bit tongue-in-cheek but they have been used for millenia as a shortcut or aid to shamans and medicine men. To write off multiple cultures experiences as “just drug use” is incredibly dismissive and arrogant.
A better inner-life is possible without intermixing it with intangible hocus pocus. Calling something “spiritual” or retracting to it beeing “culture” is often used as protection against criticism and I see you do it here. Something can be culture and still be criticized or called out for what it actually is. Slavery has been part of pretty much every culture at some point. Would you call me arrogant when I say it’s still inhumane and criminal behaviour? And thats what I do. It’s been culture for centuries, but all the time, it was also “taking drugs, feeling like beeing part of something bigger charged with magical thinking”.
edit: All you say about spirituality can be said about religion. It helps people and gives them purpose and has been culture for thousands of years. Yet, you say
religion is a cancer Isn’t that way more disrespectful, dismissive and arrogant that what I am doing? Whats your measure here?
They’re different, but not opposite. It’s like comparing height and colour.
Are you an athiest ?
There’s a reason I hate both religous people and athiests and part of it is because religous people follow dogma and athiests act like assholes towards people they view as beneath them and insert themselves in academia where they don’t belong
Both religous people and athiests have a holier-then-thou attitude
The word is ‘atheist’, you got the e and i mixed up.
I have not acted like an asshole, I have just pointed out facts, while the other called religion cancer. How am I the supposed asshole? Not giving in to bad arguments is not “acting like an asshole.”
I also do not view anyone beneath me, that’s a mean insinuation and most likely the beginning of a fabulous strawman.
insert themselves in academia where they don’t belong
What would that be an what does that have to do with anything I wrote?
I hate both religous people and athiests
Hating people is a bad thing.
Another head of the hydra choped off, how many more heads will grow back?
I’m sure the megachurch will still be around, question is how many other churches will spring out of its congregation and how many more victims will they all make.
Let’s keep chopping heads and find out, my axe ain’t getting dull any time soon
If you have carnal desires so strong as to target underage partnering, and religion being unable to inhibit that mentality, you should steer clear of the organization. Getting into it seeking absolvence will only accentuate your perversity. Self control is called self control because only you can control yourself.
People don’t rape children, or anyone, because they are just too horny and can’t restrain themselves. People who seek positions of power that often give them a huge Benifit of the doubt and then rape children, didn’t end up in that circumstance by accident. Rape isn’t sex. It isn’t about being so sexually stimulated you must force someone else to have sex with you. Rape is abuse, and the point of it is harm and domination. There’s a lot of data that supports these facts, particularly psychological studies, but there’s even more than that, let’s look at some data about rape. The vast majority of rapists abuse a victim that knows them well. Friends, family, or even their spouse or partner are the most frequent victims. This is not spontaneous behavior, victims are carefully chosen and often groomed for the abuse. This can be years of preparation. This isn’t something you do because you are just too horny. Next let’s look at the victims they choose, who is more likely to be raped, a child related to the rapist who is old enough to talk and talk clearly, or a child too young to speak at all, or too young to communicate what’s happened to them? The child less able to talk is higher risk. Is that spontaneous ‘‘I’m just so horny’’ behavior? No, that’s calculated behavior. Children with disabilities, particularly disabilities that make it hard or impossible to communicate effectively, are also higher risk of being sexually abused than children who don’t have these characteristics. Looking at adult victims, elderly people with disabilities that prevent them from communicating are also higher risk for sexual abuse than elderly individuals who can communicate. If a rapist is selecting victims who are, very young, very old, or disabled, do you honestly think the motivation is sexual arousal? These are not people considered sexually appealing in western culture right now. Another point is career choices. Rapists tend to look for jobs, even getting years of education to obtain these jobs, that give them access to ideal victims, children, the elderly, disabled children, and so on, preachers, youth pastors, school teachers, law enforcement, any position in hospitals from doctors to orderlies, nurses, imaging techs, or janitors, some of these professions are aware of this, and go to great lengths to make these jobs have very limited access and opportunity to harm potential victims, and some don’t, but again, is a rapist going to get a 4+ year education, or work their way up through a profession to get access to victims if the motivation was being sexually frustrated? No. That’s not what’s happening. What’s happening is rapists want to rape someone, and many have been known to select victims they aren’t even personally attracted to in their sex life. It’s not about sex, it’s about abuse.
But that’s the whole point of going to church
Another headline omitting the relevant trump connection
I mean, I posted about that the day before
Repeat the headline, don’t interpret.
Actual headline from independent was, “Texas Megachurch pastor who sat on Trump faith board resigns after admitting molesting girl, 12, in the 1980s”
You left out her age and trump mention. So why didn’t you just title that as headline? Also, why not change it now? This is Lemmy, you have that option.
I don’t change headlines. I use the original
You did here. You’re being asked to change it back after weirdly omitting her age as a preteen minor and his obvious connection to trump.
You do realize sites change headlines?
You do realize you could change it to match if that’s the case?
And you do realize that you’re also arguing two opposing points and embarrassing yourself?
I normally change my headlines when someone points out they’ve been updated. But I’ve never actually had someone get so rude and accusatory about it, so no thanks
What’s with Christians and raping children?
The religion itself has nothing to do with it. It’s the position that attracts the abusers. A pastor is a person that members will implicitly trust to be a good person. They won’t even think twice about leaving their children with them. It never occurs to them that a pastor could lie about that just like anyone else.
For an abuser, faking piousness in exchange for direct unfiltered access to your preferred victims is an easy choice. Heck, you’re even paid to do it.
I disagree that religion has nothing to do with it. Religion is the vehicle used for these people to molest children, and religion often protects them when they’re found out.
Religious institutions do an absurdly terrible job of governing themselves, or background checks, etc.
They’re the reason so much of this is allowed to keep happening.
There’s also the power dynamics involved in a spiritual leader having sway over a naive person.
The more rigid and fundamental the sect is, the more likely children are being abused. Not just kids by the way, women and men as well.
It also applies to all received religion.
Its easy to understand: they like children and rape, so they put them together to make child rape.
So… that’s an admission. He can be charged?
Texas, show us how much you care about protecting kids…
It’s probably well part the statue of limitations.
Scroll down, sounds an awful lot like there ain’t any. or is at most 18+20 years.
The statute of limitations does not apply. He’s a conservative “leader” in Texas. He ain’t gettin’ charged.
The statute of limitations only prevent old crimes from being dug up and brought to trial- mostly because at that point it’s hard to prove.
The reality is, this guy absolutely won’t get charged. Because of the pure bias.
Unless… someone were to, I dunno, tell Ken Paxton he did drag on Tuesday nights… but that would be totally unethical; and we really don’t need to play into that bullshit.
That also needlessly furthers their association with child molesters and drag when drag had nothing to do with it.
I think they already showed us at Uvalde.
do we have a c/notadragqueen yet…
there’s a priest arrested.
so… jail time? or at least a case? or is that so long ago that statute of limitations is involved?
I looked it up, 20 years past 18th birthday… unless, for example, it was continuous. Then there are none.
It was continuous. It lasted for five years. So, by TX CCP, there is no time limit to indict him. But, he’s a conservative leader in a red state. He’s never going to be charged.
He already quit and came back after two years. My bet is he makes another comeback. Fuck this guy and his enablers.
Neusthetic counseling or WTF the fundies call their fake therapy and then he’s fine. They will call him a recovering sex addict (I.E. On the same level as a married man who watches porn, in their usage of the phrase) and who will dissociate when you try to talk to them about what he actually did.
What the fuck is wrong with these people? I’ve made it through my entire adulthood without molesting any children…. WITHOUT EVEN TRYING. It’s real easy, the only thing you have to do is not fuck any kids. Do they need to teach that in church or something?
And they think they can still hold some kind of moral authority? What a sick joke.
Are you a paedophile? No? Then that’s why you find it easy.
Not defending this guy or anyone who harms kids, but to try and compare how easy it is for you not to do, to how easy it should be for those who have urges you and I can’t even imagine not to do, isn’t really productive - it completely ignores the core of the issue - for some people it isn’t that easy, and they need serious help, before they cause harm, not for their struggles to be brushed off as something that isn’t real because the rest of us don’t experience it.
And just to reiterate, this isn’t a defence, and those who do harm others should absolutely suffer the consequences, but you’re never going to stop that kind of harm from happening again and again if you pretend the problem that causes it doesn’t exist.
Who is pretending it doesn’t exist? I’d really enjoy robbing a bank so I didn’t have to work anymore, but I don’t because it’s wrong. No matter how much I want that money. I get the urge to smoke weed and play video games all day but I don’t because I have responsibilities. The urge isn’t the problem. I understand that they probably don’t want those urges and it’s either brain miswiring or due to their own abuse earlier in life, but having an urge and acting on it are two totally different things. Their lack of self control is the issue. The coverup and then having the AUDACITY to tell other people how to live their lives, like this asshole was doing, is the icing on the cake.
Ok, but I have unhealthy urges due to acute anxiety. If untreated, it can absolutely mean I’m behaving in ways that harm me and those around me. Since I care about others and my own well-being, I go to therapy and take medication.
I don’t like it when mentally ill adults*, who don’t care enough to pursue treatment, get let off the hook. He knows that he’s trading these kids’ futures for his own gratification and he doesn’t care. Not all PDFs are like this–but this motherfucker is and therefore gets no sympathy from me.
*This doesn’t include people who have illness, delusions, or lack of resources, preventing them from getting regular treatment.
🙄
And just to reiterate, this isn’t a defence, and those who do harm others should absolutely suffer the consequences, but you’re never going to stop that kind of harm from happening again and again if you pretend the problem that causes it doesn’t exist.
And to add: acknowledging the source/s of a problem ≠ sympathising with someone who has it.
I don’t see our views as conflicting. Not sure why you see it that way.
Your reply implies that because you struggle with anxiety (as do I, it is not comparable to paedophilia) but are still able to avoid harming others, and are able to reach out for help, that there is no reason why paedophiles can’t just do the same (so basically making the same claim OP on this thread made - if I can do it they should be able to do it too), ignoring that disclosing and getting help for anxiety and disclosing and getting help for paedophilia are two very different ball games for many different reasons, a few of which you even pointed out with your asterisk at the end. So you can clearly understand, to a point anyway, that some people may not have as good an access as you have, but it isn’t only due to money or location, but also lack of professionals willing to, or who are even educated in helping paedophiles, and that some people simply have a more serious condition than you do. So again, and hopefully for the last time - Are you a paedophile? No? Then that’s why you find it easier.
Your reply also implies that I have sympathy for paedophiles and or that I don’t think they should be held responsible for their actions, or that I’m “letting off the hook”, which I’ve already made clear isn’t the case.
Ok, I thought I covered things like schizophrenia, where people can’t always manage their treatment due to the nature of the disorder, when I listed illness, but I can see how that’d get missed.
And you’re right, I neglected to highlight the stigma of pursuing help for pedophilia. I guess I’m being idealist about the ethics of therapists and when they disclose or report.
Well this is a whole community that messed up. His church knew his past and decided to still put him in positions of trust and authority. They could’ve had him do work as a church landscaper or some other non-leadership role if they wanted to still keep him gainfully employed while going through treatment for his issues. Nobody forced the rest of the church leadership to keep him as a minister and pastor when they knew he was capable of abusing a young child for years on end. It is also the responsibility of pedophiles to not put themselves in positions where they have access to children. They might not be able to help their urges, but they can choose not to work around children or share a home with children. There are lots of jobs where children aren’t involved.
I’ve made it through my entire adulthood without molesting any children…. WITHOUT EVEN TRYING. It’s real easy, the only thing you have to do is not fuck any kids
This is what I am replying to.
None of what you said contradicts anything I’ve said, the only somewhat relevant point you touched on is
it is also the responsibility of pedophiles to not put themselves in positions where they have access to children. They might not be able to help their urges, but they can choose not to work around children or share a home with children.
Which only brings me back to my original reply - are you a paedophile? No? Then that’s why you think it’s that easy.
and
to try and compare how easy it is for you not to do, to how easy it should be for those who have urges you and I can’t even imagine not to do, isn’t really productive - it completely ignores the core of the issue - for some people it isn’t that easy, and they need serious help, before they cause harm, not for their struggles to be brushed off as something that isn’t real because the rest of us don’t experience it.
Hell, the church cultivates pedophilia by fetishizing virginity from an early age. You don’t push purity culture without fucking up people mentally.
Thing is, it’s not actually her virginity that’s being protected. It’s the privilege of her husband to take it.
True, sadly it’s only one of so many contributing/possible factors, and that’s the point - we can only ever try to tackle the problem if we look at the whole (admittedly very large and gruesome) picture, not just the focused anger at the individual that we feel when we first hear such things happen. Which is justified, don’t get me wrong, but punishing one paedophile won’t stop other paedophiles - if it was going to it would have already. Only addressing all of the factors that lead to them feeling the way they do (personally within themselves but also societally, as you point out), so that suitable places for them to turn to for help and treatment can exist, will.
Ah yes, I see the “Religion is bad! Religion enables child rapists! Abolish religion!” crowd is out.
Religion is not the issue, religion is the window dressing to the actual issue, it’s institutions protecting themselves.
Let’s take a trip down “Holy shit, these institutions are terrible” memory lane.
Our first stop is Jimmy Savlie and the BBC. Fairly confident in saying that the BBC is not a religious institution.
Next up, the Boy Scouts of America sex abuse cases, while the Boy Scouts of America had some religious trappings, as an organization it was never truly about religion.
Let’s not forget Larry Nasser and USA Gymnastics. Fairly sure that USA Gymnastics isn’t a religious intuition.
Fourth stop is Jerry Sandusky and their history of child sex assault.
Hockey Canada had a massive sexual assault scandal involving youth players sexual assaulting females.
The Trouble Teen industry has a long history of abusing children. While some companies/associations may have religious connotations, the industry as whole is not religious.
To round out the list: we have Judge Rotenberg Educational Centre Inc, were disabled children were tortured; Dr. John Money, who wanted to test gender identity and sexual orientation on twins by forcing one twin to grow up as a different gender; finally, there is Dr. Peter Neuauer, who spilt up twins and triplets without telling anyone to test nature vs nurture. The kicker to Dr. Neuauer, the results of the extremely unethical study are locked up at Yale until October 25, 2026 because “feared that public opinion would be against the study, and declined to publish it.”
Every one of these examples are all about powerful institutions, caring about protecting themselves. When it comes to religion and abuse, everyone mistakes the forest for the trees.
That’s some dense whataboutism
Are you also a “guns don’t kill people, people kill people” kinda person?
I’m reasonably sure it’s the bullets…
None but religious institutions lay claim to a divine insight into morality, though.
All hierarchies facilitate abuse. Theism is the ultimate hierarchy. When you have large congregations of people that fall in line under a hierarchy, those at the top will abuse those beneath them.
I shock
