PDA

View Full Version : Media vs. Church



ad8
03-10-2010, 02:15 PM
So there's been lots of criticism of the (catholic) church in Germany in the past few weeks. The media reported a lot about child abuse in the catholic church (cloisters, catholic elite schools, etc.). It turned out that 20 of 27 dioceses in Germany had cases of sexual abuse of children.

I like where this is going, but not where this is coming from.
What we are talking about has happened up to 40 years ago and right now, there have been no key events to initiate a further research as far as I know.
I mean, I think it's good to talk about this at all, but I'm a bit skeptical of the media on this one. The fact that they are able to lay emphasis on one subject for a few weeks and it practically destroys the reputation of the church is scary.

Still, it's good to see that these cases get disclosed. The stupidity with which some representatives of the catholic church react is almost incredible. Some of them say that the sexual revolution of 1968 has caused these child abuse problems, others say that the green party (repeat - the green party -) endorses child abuse.

And the church was cleansed of all sins.

What do you guys think?

On a less serious note: When I first heard of this massive abuse of children in the catholic church, I immediately thought of the South Park episode "Red Hot Catholic Love". God, they knew it:D

AllIn All It's Not So Bad
03-10-2010, 05:11 PM
i think it's a good idea that the media destroys the reputation of the church. In my opinion, they can accuse any church, and they shouldn't stick to just one.

You can never expect anything good out of religion

WebDudette
03-10-2010, 05:28 PM
I watched a debate on whether the Catholic Church was a force for good or not. The Catholic representatives freaked the fuck out when child abuse was brought up 'we should have known you'd drag sex into this!'. Of fucking course they would, it's no myth that the Catholic Church is responsible for child abuse, just because it's always brought up and it is a really bad accusation, doesn't mean it should be brought up.

The debate for anyone who is interested: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XpGyHJZ9b0&feature=related

It's actually really good, and who doesn't love Stephen Fry?

IamSam
03-11-2010, 08:34 AM
It's actually really good, and who doesn't love Stephen Fry?

The Catholic Church.

Jojan
03-11-2010, 09:52 AM
Media should expose every group of people that makes wrong. I hope people will see that there's no reason to have religion, and don't trust the people who control religion.

disclaimer_07
03-12-2010, 09:26 AM
While I do agree that such things should be exposed by the media, I don't think anyone can blame religion for this.

wheelchairman
03-12-2010, 09:39 AM
Media should expose every group of people that makes wrong. I hope people will see that there's no reason to have religion, and don't trust the people who control religion.

It's this kind of narrow-minded attitude that makes militant atheism so annoying.

The idea that there is no reason to have religion just seems.. dumb. Like you've never talked to a religious person before.

Yeah I know, I'm talking to Jojan. weird.

ad8
03-12-2010, 12:00 PM
While I do agree that such things should be exposed by the media, I don't think anyone can blame religion for this.
Well, you sure as hell shouldn't entirely blame the church for child abuse, but you shouldn't say that they aren't guilty, too.

The fact that there are cases of child abuse in the church shows that the church is not immune to things like that. The blatant stubbornness with which the church says that other people are responsible for child abuse is just frustrating to me. Oh and, I hope I didn't get you wrong. Of course you can't blame religion itself for it.

Alison
03-22-2010, 06:23 AM
The same thing is happening over here.

And priests are defending the fact that they kept it secret. It's pretty fucked up.

batfish
03-22-2010, 06:53 AM
I saw a Newsnight debate about this; it was pretty interesting.

The Archbishop of Westminster (head of the Catholic church in Britain) was asked if there was anything within the church that might lead to child abuse scandals like this. (The question was phrased slightly differently and the interviewer was obviously hinting at celibacy) He said that all the priests, bishops etc were pretty close and loyal and that loyalty led to cover-ups. He completely refused to accept celibacy as a reason.

Another man was asked, I think he was a churchman in Oxford (I don't know if he was from the Catholic church) and he said that obviously the celibate lifestyle of priests was a reason. He said that someone who chooses celibacy wouldn't have a problem, but because priests must be celibate, and some of them don't really want to be, the repression manifests itself in sexual abuse.

Offspring-Junkie
03-31-2010, 11:02 AM
On a less serious note: When I first heard of this massive abuse of children in the catholic church, I immediately thought of the South Park episode "Red Hot Catholic Love". God, they knew it:D

They "knew" it because it's an old problem people stop talking about after a while. Seven years ago people were like "Omg, what did they do?!?" Then nobody talked about it and now everybody acts as if it's news. Wait a couple of years, those child molesters will get away with this again. Even worse I don't what to know what the pope has to do with this. There are certain rumors...

rise_and_fall
04-14-2010, 09:42 AM
http://www.psychwww.com/psyrelig/plante.html


First, the available research (which is quite good now) suggests that approximately 4% of priests during the past half century (and mostly in the 1960s and 1970s) have had a sexual experience with a minor (i.e., anyone under the age of 18). There are approximately 60,000 active and inactive priests and brothers in the United States and thus we estimate that between 1,000 and 3,000 priests have sexually engaged with minors. That's a lot. In fact, that is 3,000 people too many. Any sexual abuse of minors whether perpetrated by priests, other clergy, parents, school teachers, boy-scout leaders or anyone else in whom we entrust our children is horrific. However, although good data is hard to acquire, it appears that this 4% figure is consistent with male clergy from other religious traditions and is significantly lower than the general adult male population which may double these numbers. Therefore, the odds that any random Catholic priest would sexually abuse a minor are not likely to be significantly higher than other males in or out of the clergy. Of course we expect better behavior from priests than from the average man on the street. While even one priest who abuses children is a major problem, we need to keep this issue in perspective and remember that the vast majority of priests do not abuse children.

Omni
04-15-2010, 04:59 PM
It's pretty bad when someone releases a statement basically saying "Yes, we know this has gotten very bad, but not every priest is fucking your kid. Just a couple thousand. It's still probably safe to send them to church if you can live with yourself if you didn't play the odds right."

ad8
04-16-2010, 11:04 AM
The same thing is happening over here.

And priests are defending the fact that they kept it secret. It's pretty fucked up.


I saw a Newsnight debate about this; it was pretty interesting.

The Archbishop of Westminster (head of the Catholic church in Britain) was asked if there was anything within the church that might lead to child abuse scandals like this. (The question was phrased slightly differently and the interviewer was obviously hinting at celibacy) He said that all the priests, bishops etc were pretty close and loyal and that loyalty led to cover-ups. He completely refused to accept celibacy as a reason.

Another man was asked, I think he was a churchman in Oxford (I don't know if he was from the Catholic church) and he said that obviously the celibate lifestyle of priests was a reason. He said that someone who chooses celibacy wouldn't have a problem, but because priests must be celibate, and some of them don't really want to be, the repression manifests itself in sexual abuse.
Hehe, if it should go the way it went in Germany you're going to have some nice entertainment.
In Germany, we've had catholic bishops blame the sexual revolution of '68 and homosexuality (yeah, if it didn't exist, those priests couldn't molest anyone... seriously WHAT THE FUCK???) for the abuse.

WebDudette
04-16-2010, 04:31 PM
This is a video blaming molestation on liberals and the new openness of the church. (http://mediamatters.org/blog/201004030002)

RexDarr
04-16-2010, 07:26 PM
In general I believe that the media tends to "hype" things up too much. They want the most views and most people following them, so they will make the news seem worse than it is.
I don't know about this case (I havent been following it), but I am positive that the news threw some false case in it and has made a HUGE spiral out of it, although it is a very large issue.

Thats my two cents

ad8
04-17-2010, 01:39 AM
This is a video blaming molestation on liberals and the new openness of the church. (http://mediamatters.org/blog/201004030002)
Oh my god. Why can't this guy try to make an argument that actually makes sense?

In general I believe that the media tends to "hype" things up too much. They want the most views and most people following them, so they will make the news seem worse than it is.
I don't know about this case (I havent been following it), but I am positive that the news threw some false case in it and has made a HUGE spiral out of it, although it is a very large issue.

Thats my two cents
Well in Germany the media said that there were cases of abuse in 22 of 27 german dioceses of the catholic church. Either the media are 100% lieing to us about anything they report or we DO have a problem here, which may well cause a "huge spiral" because child abuse isn't that cool.

I mean, whenever there's the case of one rapist in the media who raped some 12 year old kid everyone is going crazy and that guy is probably sentenced to at least 3 years prison. Now we have at least 22 cases of (sexual) abuse and we shall say "Oh that's ok it's not like every catholic priest is molesting children"?

RexDarr
04-17-2010, 10:52 PM
Oh my god. Why can't this guy try to make an argument that actually makes sense?

Well in Germany the media said that there were cases of abuse in 22 of 27 german dioceses of the catholic church. Either the media are 100% lieing to us about anything they report or we DO have a problem here, which may well cause a "huge spiral" because child abuse isn't that cool.

I mean, whenever there's the case of one rapist in the media who raped some 12 year old kid everyone is going crazy and that guy is probably sentenced to at least 3 years prison. Now we have at least 22 cases of (sexual) abuse and we shall say "Oh that's ok it's not like every catholic priest is molesting children"?

Wasnt the first post 20 out of 27? How did it just jump up to 22? Do you have proof that it is 22?

ad8
04-18-2010, 03:32 AM
Wasnt the first post 20 out of 27? How did it just jump up to 22? Do you have proof that it is 22?

Alright, I think I remembered the wrong number from this article. So it's 21 of 27 german dioceses according to this and other articles. The number comes from a survey in which 24 of the german dioceses participated and provided information about cases of child abuse.

Also, the number jumping up from time to time is not really surprising since time moves on and new cases are likely to be revealed as the inquiry
goes on.
http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/justiz/0,1518,676278,00.html

WebDudette
04-18-2010, 04:09 AM
RexDarr, no matter what the alleged number is, no matter how much the media is blowing this up, even if it is just one case, it's still happening, and it is still a big fucking deal.

RexDarr
04-18-2010, 07:27 PM
RexDarr, no matter what the alleged number is, no matter how much the media is blowing this up, even if it is just one case, it's still happening, and it is still a big fucking deal.

Yes I will say it is a big deal, but what I am getting at is that the media hypes up things... What would you follow more?
1 person dies in a fire
OR
10 people die in a fire

One person could die in a fire but they could turn around and say that 10 people died so that more people will be inclined to watch and see the story develop

Static_Martyr
04-19-2010, 04:17 AM
One person could die in a fire but they could turn around and say that 10 people died so that more people will be inclined to watch and see the story develop

Well, I sincerely doubt that even the mainstream media (well, other than FOX News [/rimshot]) *blatantly lies* about things to get ratings. Distorting/stretching the truth is one thing, but there are generally pretty strict standards about this sort of thing. I mean, they could play up the drama or the impact that something has had/will have, but that's something kind of vague by nature, that doesn't have a strictly statistical basis (you could argue that it's a matter of perspective)....but manufacturing hard statistics? Don't think I've seen that happen a whole lot.

RexDarr
04-19-2010, 03:32 PM
Well, I sincerely doubt that even the mainstream media (well, other than FOX News [/rimshot]) *blatantly lies* about things to get ratings. Distorting/stretching the truth is one thing, but there are generally pretty strict standards about this sort of thing. I mean, they could play up the drama or the impact that something has had/will have, but that's something kind of vague by nature, that doesn't have a strictly statistical basis (you could argue that it's a matter of perspective)....but manufacturing hard statistics? Don't think I've seen that happen a whole lot.

You have seen it happen, correct?
Media wants ratings, they will do what ever it takes.

wheelchairman
04-19-2010, 04:18 PM
While ratings are important to most networks and shows I guess, you can't really say its their one defining goal, because otherwise we'd mostly have a bunch of populist shock-schlock constantly, with no regards for the truth or anything.

Particularly news organizations might just have a vested interest in something other than 'ratings'. Simply because they also have to balance their reputation on being fair and enlightening. They might just pay homage to these concepts (and indeed, the closer you get to tabloid news, the more it simply becomes homage, however tabloid news has no reputation to protect to begin with. You see how that works?)

Like many news agencies would have to possibly worry about too many inconsistencies at once if they were to just throw out their journalism ethics. Or you would think that a journalist working for them might just go 'hey...this isn't right?' You know...because it would harm his integrity or something?

Also because people aren't idiots, getting ratings is one thing, but consistently fabricating lies in order to get ratings... well wouldn't that be a scandal? Especially cause this would be the kind of thing that the competitors in the world of news media would just leach onto instantly.

So yeah, quit posting one line, one dimensional comments with absolutely no backing because the world is far more complicated than that, and there are far more nuances in reality than in your world view.

DennisD
04-29-2010, 02:53 PM
You know what they say:
"Abstinence makes the church grow fondlers.":rolleyes:

DennisD
04-29-2010, 03:09 PM
Talking about the catholic church reminds me of George Carlin.
He says, "the government should start making ALL churchs pay taxes."
"Taxing the catholic church alone could pay off the national debt!"
He makes alot of sense.
RIP George....;)

JoY
05-01-2010, 07:56 PM
I do want to react, but it'll probably be vague due to my current state.

Anyway... My boyfriend is very Catholic, which bothers me in these kind of discussions. At the same time the symbolism doesn't just mean a whole lot to him, but to anyone who remotely believes in anything. The gratification they can get from biblical stoties is enormous & is -I believe- very important. The freaking assholes who rape children have nothing to do with that in my opinion & should be hung.

WebDudette
05-01-2010, 10:40 PM
Yes, but those 'freaking assholes who rape children' are being protected by those responsible for the well being of the church. I would applaud the church if they attacked these people with everything, ostracized them, and handed them over to authorities. But that isn't what is happening. What is happening is, the churches are protecting these people, covering things up, and even promoting these pedophile so they can be better protected. What is happening is, the church is blaming liberals and homosexuals for these mistakes. They won't admit that they may be setting up situation that encourage this to happen, or that celibacy may have something to do with it. In fact, they won't admit that they have anything at all to do with it.