Atheism’s sexual misconduct problem

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not reading all the comments but it’s worse when an acceptance of the abuse and a refusal to report abuse is tied to God—to your membership in the only community you have ever known, to going to heaven (and for Mormons that means being with your family after you die), and sometimes keeping your job (if you work for the church or BYU).

I was never in a situation involving but I did some messed up things to myself and others because I was brainwashed into thinking I had to. Like I believed that my depression was my fault and instead of getting out of bad situations I felt like a terrible person, things like that. It’s the same concept with abuse, your gut might tell you to report but you have handed over your idea of right and wrong to the institution, so you just do what the institution tells you to do.

I’m sorry for your situation. Some religions do tell you to fix your own mental issues, and that’s wrong.

To me it’s morally worse, though, when a small boy is lured into a pedophile situation by an atheist group like NAMBLA or Dawkins thinking “mild” pedophelia is acceptable (apparently Dawkins’ teachers groped him in boarding school and he thinks that was ok). To me, this is on the same level as pedo priests—worse, even, because NAMBLA is an organization with the sole purpose of promoting pedophelia.

I don’t mean worse as a moral matter, I mean worse in terms of potential for abuse.

Nice backpedaling. We can all read your defense of religious sexual abusers ourselves, thanks.

No, I’m the PP who said that sexual abuse is worse in a religious institution because there is greater potential for abuse and coverup. I was trying to distinguish between that and the heinousness of any particular instance of abuse. I definitely agree that a group of atheists luring young boys in to abuse then is as bad as priests doing the same; the difference is that with a religious you have an entire organization that includes family members, mentors, community members, etc who abusers can exploit into being complicit because of the power the institution has over them.

And yeah, anybody who said there are atheist organizations with as much power and control over the Mormon church, much less the Catholic Church, probably doesn’t understand the extent of the power of these organizations.

The National American Man-Boy Love Association, started by a prominent atheist, is a whole organization and community with power they exploit over young boys. In fact, unlike the church, exploiting power over young boys is the entire mission of NAMBLA.

The Christian Faith, started by a prominent person who told people they were the son of God, is a whole organization and community with power they exploit over young boys. In fact, unlike atheism, exploiting power over young boys is the entire mission of a huge number of priests within the church.

Huge number? About 3,000 priests worldwide have been investigated for sexual abuse. Today there are 415,000 priests worldwide, and obviously that number is higher if you include priests who were in parishes going back to the 1950s when some of these 3,000 cases happened.

You do the math.

Don’t twist my words; even 3,000 is horrific and way too much.

But in terms of percentages of each group, this actually seems like a smaller share than the number of prominent atheists with sexual abuse issues. Like Silverman, Thorstad, Harris defending the physicist, or Richard “a little pedophilia isn’t bad” Dawkins.

Your napkin math for all the molestations is impressive. I mean you name 4 individual atheists and then talk about nambla as a problem but offer no concrete figures at all. Its clear you must have a PhD in stats from Harvard and didn’t just throw some sht together in 3 minutes. Did you get a chance to read the articles mentioning hundreds of thousands of molestations by priests? You should check them out. There are real numbers in them.

PP had faith that her math works out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nobody has criticized Dawkins for supporting “moderate” pedophilia. Is he off-limits or something?

No one cares about Dawkins. He’s just some random dude. I only heard about him from the atheist bashers on DCUM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not reading all the comments but it’s worse when an acceptance of the abuse and a refusal to report abuse is tied to God—to your membership in the only community you have ever known, to going to heaven (and for Mormons that means being with your family after you die), and sometimes keeping your job (if you work for the church or BYU).

I was never in a situation involving but I did some messed up things to myself and others because I was brainwashed into thinking I had to. Like I believed that my depression was my fault and instead of getting out of bad situations I felt like a terrible person, things like that. It’s the same concept with abuse, your gut might tell you to report but you have handed over your idea of right and wrong to the institution, so you just do what the institution tells you to do.

I’m sorry for your situation. Some religions do tell you to fix your own mental issues, and that’s wrong.

To me it’s morally worse, though, when a small boy is lured into a pedophile situation by an atheist group like NAMBLA or Dawkins thinking “mild” pedophelia is acceptable (apparently Dawkins’ teachers groped him in boarding school and he thinks that was ok). To me, this is on the same level as pedo priests—worse, even, because NAMBLA is an organization with the sole purpose of promoting pedophelia.

I don’t mean worse as a moral matter, I mean worse in terms of potential for abuse.

Nice backpedaling. We can all read your defense of religious sexual abusers ourselves, thanks.

No, I’m the PP who said that sexual abuse is worse in a religious institution because there is greater potential for abuse and coverup. I was trying to distinguish between that and the heinousness of any particular instance of abuse. I definitely agree that a group of atheists luring young boys in to abuse then is as bad as priests doing the same; the difference is that with a religious you have an entire organization that includes family members, mentors, community members, etc who abusers can exploit into being complicit because of the power the institution has over them.

And yeah, anybody who said there are atheist organizations with as much power and control over the Mormon church, much less the Catholic Church, probably doesn’t understand the extent of the power of these organizations.

The National American Man-Boy Love Association, started by a prominent atheist, is a whole organization and community with power they exploit over young boys. In fact, unlike the church, exploiting power over young boys is the entire mission of NAMBLA.

The Christian Faith, started by a prominent person who told people they were the son of God, is a whole organization and community with power they exploit over young boys. In fact, unlike atheism, exploiting power over young boys is the entire mission of a huge number of priests within the church.

And celebrating the rape of a child bride.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did Atheists buy Supreme Court seats and make man/boy legal?

Huh? Who cares. Atheists founded NAMBLA with the exclusive mission of exploiting young boys.

Ok. Those people suck.

And they have nothing to do with atheists. Atheism isn’t an organization.

Sounds like it’s difficult for you to think beyond your own frame of reference.

Atheism isn’t just another religion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Organized religion (including Atheism) is evil. Full stop.

I don't think that word means what you think it means.

Atheism is a belief without evidence to support that belief. It's very close to a religion. Agnosticism is the absence of religion because there is no belief that requires faith.

LOL. It is the opposite of religion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. I’m atheist. I’m fine with PP pointing out sexual misconduct by atheists. It’s vastly outstripped by religious sexual misconduct, but any sexual misconduct is reprehensible and should have a harsh light shone on it. I’m not like the religious folks who try to hide their sexual abusers. Show the atheists who are sexual abusers. Let everyone know who they are. Don’t be like the religious people who defend sexual abuse by their leaders.

Only outstripped because there are vastly fewer atheists than believers. It would be interesting to see percentages of each group who are sexual abusers.

Also, if you read the links, two atheist organizations did try to hide a sexual abuser. Also, Sam Harris defended the leading atheist physicist who sexually abused women.

I do agree that the lesson here is that people suck. It’s just straight-up hypocrisy to claim some people suck more than others.

So your concern isn’t really sexual abuse, it’s that people talk about the avalanche of abuse by religious leaders. Your position is horrifying, but I suppose it is completely inline with how religions elevate sexual abusers, so I guess it doesn’t surprise me.

Wow, what a terrible deflection right there. Of course I’m concerned about both religious and atheist abuse—I never said otherwise. You, however, seem determined to sweep the high percentage of atheist abuse under the rug.

No, I am fine publicizing and spreading the news about atheist abusers. I’m not like you. I don’t defend sexual abuse by religious OR atheist leaders.

Please stop with the BS and lies. Not a single religious person on this thread has defended religious abusers.

You atheists, however, keep trying to deflect from atheist abuse with funky stats and deflections about religion.

So the atheists are deflecting, but starting a spinoff thread about atheist abuse because the LDS thread was unfair is... what, exactly?

OP here. Stop lying, I never said the LDS thread was “unfair.” I’ve condemned religious abuse several times on this thread. Also, I’m not LDS or Catholic.

Some (not all) of you atheists clearly have a double standard, and this thread highlights it. Post something about atheist abuse and you get accused of cherry picking, being stupid (why can’t we get rid of these trolls?), you have to wade through multiple whataboutisms regarding religion, some pretty innumerate comparisons about shares of abusers in different groups, and more.

There's a huge difference here that you're missing. People who say "I'm a catholic" are affiliated with a belief system that was started by and is propogated by the catholic institutions. They believe in a very narrow set of stories and codes that are perpetuated by the same priests that abuse kids. Atheism is a lack of belief in a god. It isn't a belief system in and of itself. Now, maybe these atheist instutitions are full of BS and child molesters. I have no idea. As an atheist, I have never heard of these people. The reason is simple: atheists don't in theory share any beliefs or values. They only share one thing: a lack of belief in a god. So, there really is no need for an "atheist organization" or an "atheist belief system," and if you say there is an "atheist problem with sexual misconduct", nobody has any idea what you're talking about because it's just some random ass fringe organization

Exactly -- well put, PP. OP, if your goal is to establish that atheists have a double standard when it comes to their affiliated organization concealing child abuse allegations, your argument is fatally undercut by the fact that we don't have an affiliated organization.

But to the extent that it makes you feel better, I, as an atheist, hereby condemn any individual atheists who molest kids. I also condemn and call for the dismantling of any atheist organization that promotes, perpetuates or conceals child abuse. Bust it up and salt the earth. So, there you go.

+1 on both points.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why are all prominent atheists white, heterosexual males?

No one GAF about “prominent atheists”. They are just more random guys trying to feel self-important. That’s probably how all religions started. Random dudes pretending they can explain life’s mysteries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't think OP is very bright.

OP is trolling with this lame a$$ thread.

And then tomorrow OP will complain about how the atheists are a nuisance on this forum.

Maybe we should ask Jeff if OP is a prolific atheist basher…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think OP is very bright.

OP is trolling with this lame a$$ thread.

And then tomorrow OP will complain about how the atheists are a nuisance on this forum.

Maybe we should ask Jeff if OP is a prolific atheist basher…

Wow, the truth hurts, huh? When all you can come up with is insults, you’ve lost the argument.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not reading all the comments but it’s worse when an acceptance of the abuse and a refusal to report abuse is tied to God—to your membership in the only community you have ever known, to going to heaven (and for Mormons that means being with your family after you die), and sometimes keeping your job (if you work for the church or BYU).

I was never in a situation involving but I did some messed up things to myself and others because I was brainwashed into thinking I had to. Like I believed that my depression was my fault and instead of getting out of bad situations I felt like a terrible person, things like that. It’s the same concept with abuse, your gut might tell you to report but you have handed over your idea of right and wrong to the institution, so you just do what the institution tells you to do.

I’m sorry for your situation. Some religions do tell you to fix your own mental issues, and that’s wrong.

To me it’s morally worse, though, when a small boy is lured into a pedophile situation by an atheist group like NAMBLA or Dawkins thinking “mild” pedophelia is acceptable (apparently Dawkins’ teachers groped him in boarding school and he thinks that was ok). To me, this is on the same level as pedo priests—worse, even, because NAMBLA is an organization with the sole purpose of promoting pedophelia.

I don’t mean worse as a moral matter, I mean worse in terms of potential for abuse.

Nice backpedaling. We can all read your defense of religious sexual abusers ourselves, thanks.

No, I’m the PP who said that sexual abuse is worse in a religious institution because there is greater potential for abuse and coverup. I was trying to distinguish between that and the heinousness of any particular instance of abuse. I definitely agree that a group of atheists luring young boys in to abuse then is as bad as priests doing the same; the difference is that with a religious you have an entire organization that includes family members, mentors, community members, etc who abusers can exploit into being complicit because of the power the institution has over them.

And yeah, anybody who said there are atheist organizations with as much power and control over the Mormon church, much less the Catholic Church, probably doesn’t understand the extent of the power of these organizations.

The National American Man-Boy Love Association, started by a prominent atheist, is a whole organization and community with power they exploit over young boys. In fact, unlike the church, exploiting power over young boys is the entire mission of NAMBLA.

The Christian Faith, started by a prominent person who told people they were the son of God, is a whole organization and community with power they exploit over young boys. In fact, unlike atheism, exploiting power over young boys is the entire mission of a huge number of priests within the church.

Huge number? About 3,000 priests worldwide have been investigated for sexual abuse. Today there are 415,000 priests worldwide, and obviously that number is higher if you include priests who were in parishes going back to the 1950s when some of these 3,000 cases happened.

You do the math.

Don’t twist my words; even 3,000 is horrific and way too much.

But in terms of percentages of each group, this actually seems like a smaller share than the number of prominent atheists with sexual abuse issues. Like Silverman, Thorstad, Harris defending the physicist, or Richard “a little pedophilia isn’t bad” Dawkins.

Your napkin math for all the molestations is impressive. I mean you name 4 individual atheists and then talk about nambla as a problem but offer no concrete figures at all. Its clear you must have a PhD in stats from Harvard and didn’t just throw some sht together in 3 minutes. Did you get a chance to read the articles mentioning hundreds of thousands of molestations by priests? You should check them out. There are real numbers in them.

PP had faith that her math works out.

None of you atheists understand ratios or percentages, do you? I feel bad about your innumeracy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not reading all the comments but it’s worse when an acceptance of the abuse and a refusal to report abuse is tied to God—to your membership in the only community you have ever known, to going to heaven (and for Mormons that means being with your family after you die), and sometimes keeping your job (if you work for the church or BYU).

I was never in a situation involving but I did some messed up things to myself and others because I was brainwashed into thinking I had to. Like I believed that my depression was my fault and instead of getting out of bad situations I felt like a terrible person, things like that. It’s the same concept with abuse, your gut might tell you to report but you have handed over your idea of right and wrong to the institution, so you just do what the institution tells you to do.

I’m sorry for your situation. Some religions do tell you to fix your own mental issues, and that’s wrong.

To me it’s morally worse, though, when a small boy is lured into a pedophile situation by an atheist group like NAMBLA or Dawkins thinking “mild” pedophelia is acceptable (apparently Dawkins’ teachers groped him in boarding school and he thinks that was ok). To me, this is on the same level as pedo priests—worse, even, because NAMBLA is an organization with the sole purpose of promoting pedophelia.

I don’t mean worse as a moral matter, I mean worse in terms of potential for abuse.

Nice backpedaling. We can all read your defense of religious sexual abusers ourselves, thanks.

No, I’m the PP who said that sexual abuse is worse in a religious institution because there is greater potential for abuse and coverup. I was trying to distinguish between that and the heinousness of any particular instance of abuse. I definitely agree that a group of atheists luring young boys in to abuse then is as bad as priests doing the same; the difference is that with a religious you have an entire organization that includes family members, mentors, community members, etc who abusers can exploit into being complicit because of the power the institution has over them.

And yeah, anybody who said there are atheist organizations with as much power and control over the Mormon church, much less the Catholic Church, probably doesn’t understand the extent of the power of these organizations.

The National American Man-Boy Love Association, started by a prominent atheist, is a whole organization and community with power they exploit over young boys. In fact, unlike the church, exploiting power over young boys is the entire mission of NAMBLA.

The Christian Faith, started by a prominent person who told people they were the son of God, is a whole organization and community with power they exploit over young boys. In fact, unlike atheism, exploiting power over young boys is the entire mission of a huge number of priests within the church.

Huge number? About 3,000 priests worldwide have been investigated for sexual abuse. Today there are 415,000 priests worldwide, and obviously that number is higher if you include priests who were in parishes going back to the 1950s when some of these 3,000 cases happened.

You do the math.

Don’t twist my words; even 3,000 is horrific and way too much.

But in terms of percentages of each group, this actually seems like a smaller share than the number of prominent atheists with sexual abuse issues. Like Silverman, Thorstad, Harris defending the physicist, or Richard “a little pedophilia isn’t bad” Dawkins.

Your napkin math for all the molestations is impressive. I mean you name 4 individual atheists and then talk about nambla as a problem but offer no concrete figures at all. Its clear you must have a PhD in stats from Harvard and didn’t just throw some sht together in 3 minutes. Did you get a chance to read the articles mentioning hundreds of thousands of molestations by priests? You should check them out. There are real numbers in them.

PP had faith that her math works out.

None of you atheists understand ratios or percentages, do you? I feel bad about your innumeracy.

And I feel bad that you feel obligated to defend reprehensible organizations because you’ve been indoctrinated so hard since birth.

The facts are not on your side.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not reading all the comments but it’s worse when an acceptance of the abuse and a refusal to report abuse is tied to God—to your membership in the only community you have ever known, to going to heaven (and for Mormons that means being with your family after you die), and sometimes keeping your job (if you work for the church or BYU).

I was never in a situation involving but I did some messed up things to myself and others because I was brainwashed into thinking I had to. Like I believed that my depression was my fault and instead of getting out of bad situations I felt like a terrible person, things like that. It’s the same concept with abuse, your gut might tell you to report but you have handed over your idea of right and wrong to the institution, so you just do what the institution tells you to do.

I’m sorry for your situation. Some religions do tell you to fix your own mental issues, and that’s wrong.

To me it’s morally worse, though, when a small boy is lured into a pedophile situation by an atheist group like NAMBLA or Dawkins thinking “mild” pedophelia is acceptable (apparently Dawkins’ teachers groped him in boarding school and he thinks that was ok). To me, this is on the same level as pedo priests—worse, even, because NAMBLA is an organization with the sole purpose of promoting pedophelia.

I don’t mean worse as a moral matter, I mean worse in terms of potential for abuse.

Nice backpedaling. We can all read your defense of religious sexual abusers ourselves, thanks.

No, I’m the PP who said that sexual abuse is worse in a religious institution because there is greater potential for abuse and coverup. I was trying to distinguish between that and the heinousness of any particular instance of abuse. I definitely agree that a group of atheists luring young boys in to abuse then is as bad as priests doing the same; the difference is that with a religious you have an entire organization that includes family members, mentors, community members, etc who abusers can exploit into being complicit because of the power the institution has over them.

And yeah, anybody who said there are atheist organizations with as much power and control over the Mormon church, much less the Catholic Church, probably doesn’t understand the extent of the power of these organizations.

The National American Man-Boy Love Association, started by a prominent atheist, is a whole organization and community with power they exploit over young boys. In fact, unlike the church, exploiting power over young boys is the entire mission of NAMBLA.

The Christian Faith, started by a prominent person who told people they were the son of God, is a whole organization and community with power they exploit over young boys. In fact, unlike atheism, exploiting power over young boys is the entire mission of a huge number of priests within the church.

Huge number? About 3,000 priests worldwide have been investigated for sexual abuse. Today there are 415,000 priests worldwide, and obviously that number is higher if you include priests who were in parishes going back to the 1950s when some of these 3,000 cases happened.

You do the math.

Don’t twist my words; even 3,000 is horrific and way too much.

But in terms of percentages of each group, this actually seems like a smaller share than the number of prominent atheists with sexual abuse issues. Like Silverman, Thorstad, Harris defending the physicist, or Richard “a little pedophilia isn’t bad” Dawkins.

Your napkin math for all the molestations is impressive. I mean you name 4 individual atheists and then talk about nambla as a problem but offer no concrete figures at all. Its clear you must have a PhD in stats from Harvard and didn’t just throw some sht together in 3 minutes. Did you get a chance to read the articles mentioning hundreds of thousands of molestations by priests? You should check them out. There are real numbers in them.

PP had faith that her math works out.

None of you atheists understand ratios or percentages, do you? I feel bad about your innumeracy.

Here's the crux - atheists aren't a denominator. They aren't an organization. You can't just add them up as a single group. You have a few individuals who happen to be atheists who have sexual misconduct problem. But they have zero connection to other atheists.

You're trying to lump all atheists into one group and that just doesn't work. We're just a bunch of individuals with zero association with each other.

That's why OP's whole post is laughable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think OP is very bright.

OP is trolling with this lame a$$ thread.

And then tomorrow OP will complain about how the atheists are a nuisance on this forum.

Maybe we should ask Jeff if OP is a prolific atheist basher…

Wow, the truth hurts, huh? When all you can come up with is insults, you’ve lost the argument.

What "truth"? You wouldn't know "truth" if it came up and slapped you on the ass.

And there is no "argument" here to be had. Just a lame attempt at trolling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not reading all the comments but it’s worse when an acceptance of the abuse and a refusal to report abuse is tied to God—to your membership in the only community you have ever known, to going to heaven (and for Mormons that means being with your family after you die), and sometimes keeping your job (if you work for the church or BYU).

I was never in a situation involving but I did some messed up things to myself and others because I was brainwashed into thinking I had to. Like I believed that my depression was my fault and instead of getting out of bad situations I felt like a terrible person, things like that. It’s the same concept with abuse, your gut might tell you to report but you have handed over your idea of right and wrong to the institution, so you just do what the institution tells you to do.

I’m sorry for your situation. Some religions do tell you to fix your own mental issues, and that’s wrong.

To me it’s morally worse, though, when a small boy is lured into a pedophile situation by an atheist group like NAMBLA or Dawkins thinking “mild” pedophelia is acceptable (apparently Dawkins’ teachers groped him in boarding school and he thinks that was ok). To me, this is on the same level as pedo priests—worse, even, because NAMBLA is an organization with the sole purpose of promoting pedophelia.

I don’t mean worse as a moral matter, I mean worse in terms of potential for abuse.

Nice backpedaling. We can all read your defense of religious sexual abusers ourselves, thanks.

No, I’m the PP who said that sexual abuse is worse in a religious institution because there is greater potential for abuse and coverup. I was trying to distinguish between that and the heinousness of any particular instance of abuse. I definitely agree that a group of atheists luring young boys in to abuse then is as bad as priests doing the same; the difference is that with a religious you have an entire organization that includes family members, mentors, community members, etc who abusers can exploit into being complicit because of the power the institution has over them.

And yeah, anybody who said there are atheist organizations with as much power and control over the Mormon church, much less the Catholic Church, probably doesn’t understand the extent of the power of these organizations.

The National American Man-Boy Love Association, started by a prominent atheist, is a whole organization and community with power they exploit over young boys. In fact, unlike the church, exploiting power over young boys is the entire mission of NAMBLA.

The Christian Faith, started by a prominent person who told people they were the son of God, is a whole organization and community with power they exploit over young boys. In fact, unlike atheism, exploiting power over young boys is the entire mission of a huge number of priests within the church.

Huge number? About 3,000 priests worldwide have been investigated for sexual abuse. Today there are 415,000 priests worldwide, and obviously that number is higher if you include priests who were in parishes going back to the 1950s when some of these 3,000 cases happened.

You do the math.

Don’t twist my words; even 3,000 is horrific and way too much.

But in terms of percentages of each group, this actually seems like a smaller share than the number of prominent atheists with sexual abuse issues. Like Silverman, Thorstad, Harris defending the physicist, or Richard “a little pedophilia isn’t bad” Dawkins.

Your napkin math for all the molestations is impressive. I mean you name 4 individual atheists and then talk about nambla as a problem but offer no concrete figures at all. Its clear you must have a PhD in stats from Harvard and didn’t just throw some sht together in 3 minutes. Did you get a chance to read the articles mentioning hundreds of thousands of molestations by priests? You should check them out. There are real numbers in them.

PP had faith that her math works out.

None of you atheists understand ratios or percentages, do you? I feel bad about your innumeracy.

Here's the crux - atheists aren't a denominator. They aren't an organization. You can't just add them up as a single group. You have a few individuals who happen to be atheists who have sexual misconduct problem. But they have zero connection to other atheists.

You're trying to lump all atheists into one group and that just doesn't work. We're just a bunch of individuals with zero association with each other.

That's why OP's whole post is laughable.

+1

I wouldn’t say “thiests” have an abuse problem for the same reason. Atheism is no more an organization than a belief in god is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not reading all the comments but it’s worse when an acceptance of the abuse and a refusal to report abuse is tied to God—to your membership in the only community you have ever known, to going to heaven (and for Mormons that means being with your family after you die), and sometimes keeping your job (if you work for the church or BYU).

I was never in a situation involving but I did some messed up things to myself and others because I was brainwashed into thinking I had to. Like I believed that my depression was my fault and instead of getting out of bad situations I felt like a terrible person, things like that. It’s the same concept with abuse, your gut might tell you to report but you have handed over your idea of right and wrong to the institution, so you just do what the institution tells you to do.

I’m sorry for your situation. Some religions do tell you to fix your own mental issues, and that’s wrong.

To me it’s morally worse, though, when a small boy is lured into a pedophile situation by an atheist group like NAMBLA or Dawkins thinking “mild” pedophelia is acceptable (apparently Dawkins’ teachers groped him in boarding school and he thinks that was ok). To me, this is on the same level as pedo priests—worse, even, because NAMBLA is an organization with the sole purpose of promoting pedophelia.

I don’t mean worse as a moral matter, I mean worse in terms of potential for abuse.

Nice backpedaling. We can all read your defense of religious sexual abusers ourselves, thanks.

No, I’m the PP who said that sexual abuse is worse in a religious institution because there is greater potential for abuse and coverup. I was trying to distinguish between that and the heinousness of any particular instance of abuse. I definitely agree that a group of atheists luring young boys in to abuse then is as bad as priests doing the same; the difference is that with a religious you have an entire organization that includes family members, mentors, community members, etc who abusers can exploit into being complicit because of the power the institution has over them.

And yeah, anybody who said there are atheist organizations with as much power and control over the Mormon church, much less the Catholic Church, probably doesn’t understand the extent of the power of these organizations.

The National American Man-Boy Love Association, started by a prominent atheist, is a whole organization and community with power they exploit over young boys. In fact, unlike the church, exploiting power over young boys is the entire mission of NAMBLA.

The Christian Faith, started by a prominent person who told people they were the son of God, is a whole organization and community with power they exploit over young boys. In fact, unlike atheism, exploiting power over young boys is the entire mission of a huge number of priests within the church.

Huge number? About 3,000 priests worldwide have been investigated for sexual abuse. Today there are 415,000 priests worldwide, and obviously that number is higher if you include priests who were in parishes going back to the 1950s when some of these 3,000 cases happened.

You do the math.

Don’t twist my words; even 3,000 is horrific and way too much.

But in terms of percentages of each group, this actually seems like a smaller share than the number of prominent atheists with sexual abuse issues. Like Silverman, Thorstad, Harris defending the physicist, or Richard “a little pedophilia isn’t bad” Dawkins.

Your napkin math for all the molestations is impressive. I mean you name 4 individual atheists and then talk about nambla as a problem but offer no concrete figures at all. Its clear you must have a PhD in stats from Harvard and didn’t just throw some sht together in 3 minutes. Did you get a chance to read the articles mentioning hundreds of thousands of molestations by priests? You should check them out. There are real numbers in them.

PP had faith that her math works out.

None of you atheists understand ratios or percentages, do you? I feel bad about your innumeracy.

Here's the crux - atheists aren't a denominator. They aren't an organization. You can't just add them up as a single group. You have a few individuals who happen to be atheists who have sexual misconduct problem. But they have zero connection to other atheists.

You're trying to lump all atheists into one group and that just doesn't work. We're just a bunch of individuals with zero association with each other.

That's why OP's whole post is laughable.

+1

I wouldn’t say “thiests” have an abuse problem for the same reason. Atheism is no more an organization than a belief in god is.

Sure. We wouldn’t lump all believers together either.

But if an organization conspires to cover up abuse problems then it’s an organization problem.