The “Anderson Report” - Abuse Hoax 2.0 in Illinois. There has been a lot of noise about the “Anderson Report” that accuses 395 Illinois priests of sexual abuses. All but one of the 395 persons mentioned …More
The “Anderson Report” - Abuse Hoax 2.0 in Illinois.
There has been a lot of noise about the “Anderson Report” that accuses 395 Illinois priests of sexual abuses. All but one of the 395 persons mentioned in the report are either dead or are no longer in ministry, Catholic League’s Bill Donohue stresses. Not all of them are priests, not all are from Illinois. What is most important: Most of the listings are unsubstantiated accusations.
The author of the report is Jeff Anderson, a former hippie and college dropout, who in law school was never known for his scholarship. In his last year at law school he successfully defended a homeless black man who urinated in a church. Later his clients included gay activists and murderers. Anderson is also a recovering alcoholic.
Anderson was raised a Lutheran who eventually became a Catholic. Then he became an atheist, even a – quote - “dedicated atheist.” Then he became again “deeply religious.” At the moment, he calls himself an agnostic. Anderson once …More
There has been a lot of noise about the “Anderson Report” that accuses 395 Illinois priests of sexual abuses. All but one of the 395 persons mentioned in the report are either dead or are no longer in ministry, Catholic League’s Bill Donohue stresses. Not all of them are priests, not all are from Illinois. What is most important: Most of the listings are unsubstantiated accusations.
The author of the report is Jeff Anderson, a former hippie and college dropout, who in law school was never known for his scholarship. In his last year at law school he successfully defended a homeless black man who urinated in a church. Later his clients included gay activists and murderers. Anderson is also a recovering alcoholic.
Anderson was raised a Lutheran who eventually became a Catholic. Then he became an atheist, even a – quote - “dedicated atheist.” Then he became again “deeply religious.” At the moment, he calls himself an agnostic. Anderson once …More
Holy Cannoli
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
Oh, you think the side of the lawyers is the side of the truth? 
Lawyers seek a verdict that is, hopefully, favorable to their client. That's it. However, in the US every defendant has a presumption of innocence until they are proven guilty. This is true for everyone including priests, bishops and cardinals. Those charged must have their guilt proved beyond any reasonable doubt which is not an …More
Oh, you think the side of the lawyers is the side of the truth?
Lawyers seek a verdict that is, hopefully, favorable to their client. That's it. However, in the US every defendant has a presumption of innocence until they are proven guilty. This is true for everyone including priests, bishops and cardinals. Those charged must have their guilt proved beyond any reasonable doubt which is not an easy hill to climb unless there is overwhelming evidence against the defendant.
Of nearly 6,000 priests accused of abuse over the past half-century (only 5 percent of the total number of priests during that period), less than 4 percent of those could be considered pedophiles — that is, men who prey on children. Any percentage is too high, but clearly pedophilia is statistically very rare in the Catholic priesthood. The researchers also note that celibacy is not the root of the problem, and that priests may be less likely to abuse than men in analogous professions.
However, there is still something strange here: The researchers in the John Jay report found no statistical evidence that gay priests were more likely than straight priests to abuse minors.
The disproportionate number of adolescent male victims was about opportunity, not preference or pathology, the report concluded. But a very high percentage of the abuse (excepting pedophilia) was of teenage boys, and not teenage girls. Is the report telling us that a majority of the abusers were heterosexual priests abusing teenage boys?
This strains credulity. There seems to be an agenda supporting the homosexual priesthood behind this conclusion.
The researchers make a convincing argument that there is a clerical culture that tends to “take care of its own,” not dissimilar to a law-enforcement culture that operates in reflexively defensive and self-protective behavior. It’s an important observation, as it has been pointed our repeatedly that the hierarchy and diocesan curia seemed in many cases to be more interested in shielding and rehabilitating the abuser priest than acknowledging the physical and spiritual devastation of abused children and their families.
Lawyers seek a verdict that is, hopefully, favorable to their client. That's it. However, in the US every defendant has a presumption of innocence until they are proven guilty. This is true for everyone including priests, bishops and cardinals. Those charged must have their guilt proved beyond any reasonable doubt which is not an easy hill to climb unless there is overwhelming evidence against the defendant.
Of nearly 6,000 priests accused of abuse over the past half-century (only 5 percent of the total number of priests during that period), less than 4 percent of those could be considered pedophiles — that is, men who prey on children. Any percentage is too high, but clearly pedophilia is statistically very rare in the Catholic priesthood. The researchers also note that celibacy is not the root of the problem, and that priests may be less likely to abuse than men in analogous professions.
However, there is still something strange here: The researchers in the John Jay report found no statistical evidence that gay priests were more likely than straight priests to abuse minors.
The disproportionate number of adolescent male victims was about opportunity, not preference or pathology, the report concluded. But a very high percentage of the abuse (excepting pedophilia) was of teenage boys, and not teenage girls. Is the report telling us that a majority of the abusers were heterosexual priests abusing teenage boys?
This strains credulity. There seems to be an agenda supporting the homosexual priesthood behind this conclusion.
The researchers make a convincing argument that there is a clerical culture that tends to “take care of its own,” not dissimilar to a law-enforcement culture that operates in reflexively defensive and self-protective behavior. It’s an important observation, as it has been pointed our repeatedly that the hierarchy and diocesan curia seemed in many cases to be more interested in shielding and rehabilitating the abuser priest than acknowledging the physical and spiritual devastation of abused children and their families.