Pedophile Christian Pastors Caught in Child Sex Sting

[*bfine32*]

(05-27-2016, 03:05 PM)SteelCitySouth Wrote: Which God?  

The one in which you truly believe in your heart to be God. There are those that may confess to believe in the Christian God, that do not and there's a chance the Buddha may be right an we simply reincarnate until we achieve Nirvana.

I believe in my heart I am right; as there are others that believe their's is the right one. Mine tells me to profess with my mouth.

[SteelCitySouth]

(05-27-2016, 03:28 PM)bfine32 Wrote: The one in which you truly believe in your heart to be God. There are those that may confess to believe in the Christian God, that do not and there's a chance the Buddha may be right an we simply reincarnate until we achieve Nirvana.

I believe in my heart I am right; as there are others that believe their's is the right one. Mine tells me to profess with my mouth.

Cool.  As to the bold part.  Okay, wasn't worried about that at all.

[JustWinBaby]

(05-25-2016, 04:02 PM)Griever Wrote: how do they not realise these are stings?

"girls under 18"....sounds legit

[Brownshoe]

lol this thread

[BigPapaKain]

(05-27-2016, 12:02 PM)PhilHos Wrote: You asked no question in the post I quoted. You stated a curiosity towards a possible outcome, but asked no question. 

That's because the way my phone does punctuation is idiotic. Usually I catch it but when I'm in a hurry to post something (the boss walking my way usually) I forget.

It was an implied question.

[*PhilHos*]

(05-27-2016, 12:25 PM)GMDino Wrote: Don't pretend to be holier, purer, better, whatever when you are not.

So back to the topic of the thread:  The church (all of them) have had problems with officials that use their positions to satisfy their carnal needs.  And they have covered up for them for so long that they NEED to be taken to task when someone is caught.  Again.  

Pretty much agreed, however it needs to be said that not everyone that seeks the betterment of society for whatever reasons is doing so from the standpoint of that they are "holier, purer, better," etc. Most pastors that I know would never claim to be better than anyone else and any preaching against sin they do is often from the standpoint of their own failings. 

I recognize, however, that the religious people found and quoted in the media and pretty much every politician may not be as genuinely humble. I just wanted to point out that the church is for the sinners. Christians and christian leaders may not always get that (and I know for a fact that many churches do NOT), but that's the truth.

As to the last part of your quote I, uh, quoted, I agree completely. Any and all persons who has harmed a child and any and all persons who has helped cover up said harm should be punished up to the fullest extent possible under law.

[*PhilHos*]

(05-31-2016, 12:25 AM)BigPapaKain Wrote: That's because the way my phone does punctuation is idiotic. Usually I catch it but when I'm in a hurry to post something (the boss walking my way usually) I forget.

It was an implied question.

I presume this was your "impled question":
One has to wonder how long they can claim they're morally right when things like this are being thrust into the public eye with disturbing regularity.


Allow me to 'answer' it. "They" will always claim they're morally right. We're talking about a small segment (that is still far too many) whose actions are inconsistent with what they purportedly believe and supposedly practice. Christianity and its followers claim they're morality not from their own actions and not even from their leaders (Catholic Christians, notwithstanding) but rather from the Bible. Make your claims about the Bible all you want, but the Bible, outside of translations into different languages and modernizing the language, has remained virtually unchanged since its inception.


So, until the Bible is no longer the basis for Christianity morality, then "they" will always claim morality to being on their side.

[BigPapaKain]

(05-31-2016, 12:12 PM)PhilHos Wrote: I presume this was your "impled question":
One has to wonder how long they can claim they're morally right when things like this are being thrust into the public eye with disturbing regularity.


Allow me to 'answer' it. "They" will always claim they're morally right. We're talking about a small segment (that is still far too many) whose actions are inconsistent with what they purportedly believe and supposedly practice. Christianity and its followers claim they're morality not from their own actions and not even from their leaders (Catholic Christians, notwithstanding) but rather from the Bible. Make your claims about the Bible all you want, but the Bible, outside of translations into different languages and modernizing the language, has remained virtually unchanged since its inception.


So, until the Bible is no longer the basis for Christianity morality, then "they" will always claim morality to being on their side.

Yeah that was it.

But bugger to that 'the Bible...has remained unchanged since its inception' is bunk.

I don't remember the King offhand (Henry something....probably Henry VIII) but he had all the parts about prematurely ending marriages removed from the Bible just so he could have an annulment.

And that's just one of the better known situations - how often do you think kings and queens altered the Bible to suit their needs? Do you think their kids would fix it? Now imagine those changes just kind of staying in place for generations - coupled with book burnings - they just kind of stick.

Now unless you can find and decipher every single Dead Sea Scroll (many of which are lost), you can't really say the Bible is now as it was originally written.

Hell the modern Bible is literally called the King James Bible.

[Belsnickel]

(05-31-2016, 12:21 PM)BigPapaKain Wrote: Hell the modern Bible is literally called the King James Bible.

Well, two different versions, the KJV and NKJV. I remember the argument with someone about that on the old board where they said the KJV was infallible and I pointed out a difference between it and the oldest original manuscript we have for some parts and that there was something in the KJV that wasn't in that. They refused to believe it even though it was right in front of them. It was something as small as The Lord's Prayer Doxology, but it is an example of additions by man over the years.

I personally prefer the NRSV, but each translation/version has its pros and cons.

[*PhilHos*]

(05-31-2016, 12:21 PM)BigPapaKain Wrote: Yeah that was it.

But bugger to that 'the Bible...has remained unchanged since its inception' is bunk.

I don't remember the King offhand (Henry something....probably Henry VIII) but he had all the parts about prematurely ending marriages removed from the Bible just so he could have an annulment.

And that's just one of the better known situations - how often do you think kings and queens altered the Bible to suit their needs? Do you think their kids would fix it? Now imagine those changes just kind of staying in place for generations - coupled with book burnings - they just kind of stick.

Now unless you can find and decipher every single Dead Sea Scroll (many of which are lost), you can't really say the Bible is now as it was originally written.

Hell the modern Bible is literally called the King James Bible.

First off, that's why I said "virtually" unchanged. The Bible as we know it today is extremely similar to the first Bibles put together like the one at the Council of Nicea.

Secondly, the modern Bible is NOT the King James Version. Yes, some people and denominations still use it, but by and large the vast majority of American churches (can't speak for other countries) use the New International Version. This version is NOT based on the KJV at all. It was a group of over 20 (forget the exact number) scholars working from the oldest manuscripts and copies of manuscripts and re-translating the Hebrew and Greek into modern (well, modern by 70s and 80s standards) English.

Lastly, every time a discovery like the Dead Sea scrolls are found, it only shows how remarkably accurate todays Bibles are.

[*PhilHos*]

(05-31-2016, 12:30 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Well, two different versions, the KJV and NKJV. I remember the argument with someone about that on the old board where they said the KJV was infallible and I pointed out a difference between it and the oldest original manuscript we have for some parts and that there was something in the KJV that wasn't in that. They refused to believe it even though it was right in front of them. It was something as small as The Lord's Prayer Doxology, but it is an example of additions by man over the years.

I personally prefer the NRSV, but each translation/version has its pros and cons.

Yep. I personally still prefer the NIV.

[Belsnickel]

(05-31-2016, 12:46 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Yep. I personally still prefer the NIV.

That was what I grew up with. I was introduced to the NRSV when researching denominations and have found it very easy to read, which is nice. But, it is often seen as the Bible of us "hippie progressive" Christians because fo the gender neutral language and what not.

[*PhilHos*]

(05-31-2016, 12:52 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: That was what I grew up with. I was introduced to the NRSV when researching denominations and have found it very easy to read, which is nice. But, it is often seen as the Bible of us "hippie progressive" Christians because fo the gender neutral language and what not.

Yeah, I grew up with the NIV (even if some of the more popular verses like John 3:16 I say in the KJV) and I can be kind of a traditionalist so I just stuck with it.

[Vas Deferens]

Typical "this guy wasn't a christian, a christian would never do this" whitewashing. Followed by "anyone who does this should be punished to the maximum extent of the law" horn tooting.

So christians get a pass and we deal with incidents like this with laws that are already on the books. Meanwhile transgendered individuals are told by christians (who may or may not be pedophiles) they need to use the bathroom that makes everyone more uncomfortable to PREEMPTIVELY avoid crimes christians are actively committing. Got it.

[Vas Deferens]

Meanwhile other christian pedophiles spend milliions to limit the civil rights of their own child sex victims.  


How can they get get any of this done with the crushing anxiety that someone with a different organ might take a shit next to them someday in the future?

Quote:EXCLUSIVE: Catholic Church spent $2M on major N.Y. lobbying firms to block child-sex law reform

ALBANY — Not leaving it to divine chance, the state Catholic Conference has turned in recent years to some of Albany’s most well-connected and influential lobby firms to help block a bill that would make it easier for child sex abuse victims to seek justice.

The Catholic Conference, headed by Timothy Cardinal Dolan, has used Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker, Patricia Lynch & Associates, Hank Sheinkopf, and Mark Behan Communications to lobby against the Child Victims Act as well as for or against other measures.
All told, the conference spent more than $2.1 million on lobbying from 2007 through the end of 2015, state records show. That does not include the conference’s own internal lobbying team.
Filings show the lobbyists were retained, in part, to work on issues associated with “statute of limitations” and “timelines for commencing certain civil actions related to sex offenses.” Other issues included parochial school funding and investment tax credits.
“They are willing to spend limitless money in order to basically keep bad guys from being accountable for their actions,” said Melanie Blow, chief operations officer of the Stop Abuse Campaign. “I think they’re doing it because they don’t want to have to pay out settlements.”
Timothy Cardinal Dolan heads the state's Catholic Conference, which in recent years hired major lobby firms to block legislation designed to help child abuse victims seek justice.

Added Kathryn Robb, an advocate and survivor who says she was abused by her brother as a 9-year-old: “If they need to spend that much money on lobbying, clearly, then, they have some pretty big secrets to hide.”
While a far cry from the millions in lobbying top special interests spend in Albany each year, advocates for child sex abuse survivors say the $2.1 million spent likely represents a worthwhile investment to the Catholic Conference if it can continue to block legislation that would eliminate the statute of limitations on child sex abuse civil cases and open a one-year window to bring lawsuits for victims who can no longer sue under current law.
The Catholic Conference has argued that opening a one-year window to revive old cases could ultimately bankrupt the Church.
The firms the Catholic Conference chose is also telling.

Melanie Blow, chief operations officer of the Stop Abuse Campaign, says the Catholic Conference is paying lobby firms because they want to avoid settlements for lawsuits.

Wilson Elser has long been Albany’s biggest lobbying firm. The firm represented the Catholic Conference from at least 2007 through the end of 2015 and was paid more than $1 million during that time, according to online filings with the state Joint Commission on Public Ethics.
After several key people either left the firm or reduced their responsibilities, the Church did not renew the contract with Wilson Elser for 2016, sources said.
Wilson Elser, which was being paid $10,000 a month by the Catholic Conference, had no comment.
In its place, state records show, the Catholic Conference hired another prominent firm, Greenberg Traurig, which it is paying $6,000-a-month. The lobbyist from the firm representing the Church is Michael Murphy, who used to be an assistant counsel for the Senate Republicans.

The Senate GOP opposes the one-year “lookback” window that Democrats are calling for.
The Catholic Church, some Orthodox Jewish groups, and other private entities oppose legislation by Assemblywoman Margaret Markey (D-Queens) and Sen. Brad Hoylman (D-Manhattan) that would eliminate the time limit that prohibits adults who were victimized as children from bringing civil cases after their 23rd birthdays.
Another top firm, Patricia Lynch & Associates, whose namesake had close ties to now disgraced Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, was hired by the Catholic Conference in 2009. Lynch’s firm for many years was ranked in the top 3 of well-paid lobbyists.
Lynch’s hiring by the Catholic Conference came after the Assembly passed different versions of the Child Victims Act four times from 2006 to 2008. The measure never came up again for a vote after Lynch was hired.

Kathryn Robb, who was abused as a child, said the Catholic Conference is hiding something if it has to spend big money on lobby firms.

“Once Ms. Lynch lobbied for the Catholic Conference, Mr. Silver’s support for our bill ended, and the bill did not come out of the Assembly’s Codes Committee ... which as speaker, he controlled,” John Aretakis, a former lawyer and an advocate for victims of clergy sex abuse, wrote in a scathing letter recently to a judge handling Silver's recent criminal sentencing.
State lobbying records show the firm’s contract with the Catholic Conference was terminated earlier this year, not long after Lynch was outed in court papers as having had an affair with Silver.
Silver was sentenced earlier this month to 12 years in prison after his conviction on federal corruption charges.
Lynch, whose firm was being paid $7,500-a-month, would only say her contract with the Catholic Conference was ended by “mutual consent.”

Hank Sheinkopf runs a firm hired by the church to lobby in Albany. Sheinkopf has close ties to Albany pols, including Gov. Cuomo.
 (CARROLL, PAT)
Sheinkopf, meanwhile, has had close ties with Gov. Cuomo, the former leadership of the Senate Democrats when they were in control of the chamber, and even the Senate Republicans.
Like the others who were hired by the Catholic Conference, he would not discuss the specifics about what he does for the $5,000-a-month he is being paid.
“They like me,” he said. “They think I’m smart.”
In an email, Catholic Conference spokesman Dennis Poust wouldn’t comment directly on his organization’s lobbying efforts. He also would not comment on the reasoning behind why specific lobbying firms were chosen.

Patricia Lynch's firm helped the Catholic Conference stop the Child Victims Act from becoming a law.

“The Catholic Conference lobbies on many issues, from assisted suicide to farm worker rights to school choice to criminal justice reform,” Poust said.
He said the conference’s lobbying activity is in full compliance with the law and is reported, as required, to the state Joint Commission on Public Ethics.
“As such it is all a matter of public record,” Poust said. “We have no further comment beyond that.”

[GMDino]

(06-01-2016, 05:09 PM)Vas Deferens Wrote: Meanwhile other christian pedophiles spend milliions to limit the civil rights of their own child sex victims.  


How can they get get any of this done with the crushing anxiety that someone with a different organ might take a shit next to them someday in the future?

From the article:

Quote:The Catholic Conference has argued that opening a one-year window to revive old cases could ultimately bankrupt the Church.

[Vas Deferens]

(06-01-2016, 05:53 PM)GMDino Wrote: From the article:

Quote:The Catholic Conference has argued that opening a one-year window to revive old cases could ultimately bankrupt the Church.

Nothing like giving tax-empt entities the power to shape public policy they do nothing to contribute into.  Even better when it involves long standing cover up of child abuse.

[Griever]

(05-27-2016, 12:02 PM)bfine32 Wrote: If you say so. However, this particiular instance was about folks folks mocking religion, by associating two criminals with it. I will speak out against those who mock religion every time; as my personal belief is that that sacrilege is the one unpardonable sin.

If other Christians are comfortable observing such actions; that is on them and their relationship with Christ. Mine tells me to speak up in hopes that someone may see the error of their ways before it is too late.

As to always agreeing. you may want to check out Lucies' bullying thread or Matt's Trump (most recent) thread. I actually have zero idea with Board Memeber you think I am falling to "call out" in this or any other thread.

no im pretty sure blasphemy against the holy ghost is the unpardonable sin

[Belsnickel]

(06-02-2016, 09:23 AM)Griever Wrote: no im pretty sure blasphemy against the holy ghost is the unpardonable sin

Rejection of the Holy Spirit is unpardonable because you are not accepting Jesus as the savior of man. If you feel genuine remorse, guilt, what have you for sin then it is forgiven, even if you feel you are not worthy of the forgiveness. It is those that continue to sin, without remorse, that would find their sins unforgiven. At least that is the theological interpretations I have seen.

[XenoMorph]

(06-02-2016, 09:54 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: Rejection of the Holy Spirit is unpardonable because you are not accepting Jesus as the savior of man. If you feel genuine remorse, guilt, what have you for sin then it is forgiven, even if you feel you are not worthy of the forgiveness. It is those that continue to sin, without remorse, that would find their sins unforgiven. At least that is the theological interpretations I have seen.

Nope pretty sure this dude burns in your pretty little hell