Pages: 1 2  Next -- Posted by XxHeroHeroinexX at 3:45 pm on Aug. 22, 2008 In the US in 2007: 135 cases of child abduction 635 CREDIBLE episodes of abuse by catholic priests and deacons. so, subway/bus/whatever you think could put your child in danger for abduction = 4 times safer than churches... and YES, i know i posted this already....but the other one i was "abusing anonymous" haha, so here it is again. -- Posted by Micus at 3:46 pm on Aug. 22, 2008 why did you put it anon -- Posted by HXC at 3:46 pm on Aug. 22, 2008 ANONYMOUS RAPE IS WIN. -- Posted by XxHeroHeroinexX at 3:47 pm on Aug. 22, 2008 Quote: from Micus at 3:46 pm on Aug. 22, 2008 why did you put it anon there are a bunch of religous baboons who would probably attack me for basically telling them that their churches arnt nearly as safe as the real outside world -- Posted by Fierce tigers at 3:47 pm on Aug. 22, 2008 I know moderation here is SHITE i got a topic removed because i posted the same video before..what so i can NEVER post that video again? -- Posted by La Motta at 3:47 pm on Aug. 22, 2008 Quote: from HXC at 11:46 pm on Aug. 22, 2008 ANONYMOUS RAPE IS WIN. It's that polar bear butler!!!!!!!! -- Posted by Malachite Morning at 3:48 pm on Aug. 22, 2008 Quote: from Fierce tigers at 5:47 pm on Aug. 22, 2008 I know moderation here is SHITE i got a topic removed because i posted the same video before..what so i can NEVER post that video again? Shut up. -- Posted by Alabamarama at 3:48 pm on Aug. 22, 2008 Quote: from XxHeroHeroinexX at 5:47 pm on Aug. 22, 2008 Quote: from Micus at 3:46 pm on Aug. 22, 2008 why did you put it anon there are a bunch of religous baboons who would probably attack me for basically telling them that their churches arnt nearly as safe as the real outside world Hehe @ religious baboons. -- Posted by CaliKevin at 3:49 pm on Aug. 22, 2008 Quote: from XxHeroHeroinexX at 3:47 pm on Aug. 22, 2008 Quote: from Micus at 3:46 pm on Aug. 22, 2008 why did you put it anon there are a bunch of religous baboons who would probably attack me for basically telling them that their churches arnt nearly as safe as the real outside world And making your post Anonymous won't make them think any differently.  Religious nuts are religious nuts are religious nuts. -- Posted by MrIndigo at 3:49 pm on Aug. 22, 2008 hmm... maybe one of the mods here is a religious baboon... I don't see any reason why this topic should be removed. -- Posted by Micus at 3:49 pm on Aug. 22, 2008 you realize its the internet right and words are just words so say whatever the fuck you want as long as it isnt against TOS -- Posted by ErnestoTheTrippyOne at 3:59 pm on Aug. 22, 2008 Quote: from Malachite Morning at 3:48 pm on Aug. 22, 2008 Quote: from Fierce tigers at 5:47 pm on Aug. 22, 2008 I know moderation here is SHITE i got a topic removed because i posted the same video before..what so i can NEVER post that video again? Shut up. Very nicely put. (sarcasm) -- Posted by Malachite Morning at 4:05 pm on Aug. 22, 2008 Quote: from ErnestoTheTrippyOne at 5:59 pm on Aug. 22, 2008 Quote: from Malachite Morning at 3:48 pm on Aug. 22, 2008 Quote: from Fierce tigers at 5:47 pm on Aug. 22, 2008 I know moderation here is SHITE i got a topic removed because i posted the same video before..what so i can NEVER post that video again?    Shut up. Very nicely put. (sarcasm) Shut... up. -- Posted by CaliKevin at 4:19 pm on Aug. 22, 2008 Quote: from MrIndigo at 3:49 pm on Aug. 22, 2008 hmm... maybe one of the mods here is a religious baboon... I don't see any reason why this topic should be removed. Actually there was a reason, it was stated by the member in the original post, and it was in fact a valid reason for deletion; Abuse of the Anonymous feature. -- Posted by HXC at 4:38 pm on Aug. 22, 2008 Quote: from LaMotta at 3:47 pm on Aug. 22, 2008 Quote: from HXC at 11:46 pm on Aug. 22, 2008 ANONYMOUS RAPE IS WIN. It's that polar bear butler!!!!!!!! What about me? OH SHI- John Stamos just woke up! brb! -- Posted by exceedinglyrare at 5:02 pm on Aug. 22, 2008 Quote: from XxHeroHeroinexX at 6:45 pm on Aug. 22, 2008 In the US in 2007: 135 cases of child abduction 635 CREDIBLE episodes of abuse by catholic priests and deacons.   so, subway/bus/whatever you think could put your child in danger for abduction = 4 times safer than churches... and YES, i know i posted this already....but the other one i was "abusing anonymous" haha, so here it is again. Except, oh wait, most of those cases of abuse by Catholic priests all took place in just a small handful of Catholic churches...nowhere near the number of other Christian churches in the country. Willful ignorance is an ugly thing. -- Posted by XxHeroHeroinexX at 5:36 pm on Aug. 22, 2008 Quote: from exceedinglyrare at 5:02 pm on Aug. 22, 2008 Quote: from XxHeroHeroinexX at 6:45 pm on Aug. 22, 2008 In the US in 2007:    135 cases of child abduction    635 CREDIBLE episodes of abuse by catholic priests and deacons.      so, subway/bus/whatever you think could put your child in danger for abduction = 4 times safer than churches...    and YES, i know i posted this already....but the other one i was "abusing anonymous" haha, so here it is again. Except, oh wait, most of those cases of abuse by Catholic priests all took place in just a small handful of Catholic churches...nowhere near the number of other Christian churches in the country. Willful ignorance is an ugly thing. still, it dosnt make it any less true -- Posted by exceedinglyrare at 6:45 pm on Aug. 22, 2008 And never mind how many more kids are kidnapped/raped/abducted by their own relatives. If you're really concerned about these kids, you should probably take them away from their families. -- Posted by humanivorous at 7:24 pm on Aug. 22, 2008 rape=dangerous, that i can see.. but "getting your wee-wee touched by the priest"=dangerous? nope.. not seeing it -- Posted by osmoticdespair at 4:47 am on Aug. 23, 2008 You should see the stats for kids molested at school. Better be safe and keep them at home, but wait, no - the vast majority of abuse is done by an immediate relative, the only really safe thing to do is just lock them up in a chastity belt and throw away the key, with some odd and unexplained mechanism for keeping things hygienic when the go to the loo. -- Posted by sophos at 6:05 am on Aug. 23, 2008 Quote: from osmoticdespair at 7:47 pm on Aug. 23, 2008 You should see the stats for kids molested at school. Better be safe and keep them at home, but wait, no - the vast majority of abuse is done by an immediate relative, the only really safe thing to do is just lock them up in a chastity belt and throw away the key, with some odd and unexplained mechanism for keeping things hygienic when the go to the loo. Pretty sure that the OP was meant as a jab at the church. -- Posted by Forever Angel at 9:59 am on Aug. 23, 2008 Quote: from sophos at 8:05 am on Aug. 23, 2008 Quote: from osmoticdespair at 7:47 pm on Aug. 23, 2008 You should see the stats for kids molested at school. Better be safe and keep them at home, but wait, no - the vast majority of abuse is done by an immediate relative, the only really safe thing to do is just lock them up in a chastity belt and throw away the key, with some odd and unexplained mechanism for keeping things hygienic when the go to the loo. Pretty sure that the OP was meant as a jab at the church. Most assuredly it was, but as you can see, it fails. -- Posted by Wilder at 10:17 am on Aug. 23, 2008 All of your posts are terrible. so, subway/bus/whatever you think could put your child in danger for abduction = 4 times safer than churches... You cannot make this inference. Consider how many children are left unattended at church vs. how many children are left unattended somewhere where they are obviously at high risk to be abducted. This quite obviously impacts instances of abduction. It's not that churches are more dangerous, it's that people let their guard down around them more. -- Posted by sophos at 9:03 pm on Aug. 23, 2008 Quote: from Forever Angel at 9:59 am on Aug. 23, 2008 Quote: from sophos at 8:05 am on Aug. 23, 2008 Pretty sure that the OP was meant as a jab at the church. Most assuredly it was, but as you can see, it fails. Not in the context of the OP, which was drawing a comparison only between the two. Quote: from XxHeroHeroinexX at 3:45 pm on Aug. 22, 2008 In the US in 2007: 135 cases of child abduction 635 CREDIBLE episodes of abuse by catholic priests and deacons. so, subway/bus/whatever you think could put your child in danger for abduction = 4 times safer than churches... -- Posted by Forever Angel at 8:09 am on Aug. 24, 2008 Quote: from sophos at 11:03 pm on Aug. 23, 2008 Quote: from Forever Angel at 9:59 am on Aug. 23, 2008 Quote: from sophos at 8:05 am on Aug. 23, 2008 Pretty sure that the OP was meant as a jab at the church. Most assuredly it was, but as you can see, it fails. Not in the context of the OP, which was drawing a comparison only between the two. Quote: from XxHeroHeroinexX at 3:45 pm on Aug. 22, 2008 In the US in 2007: 135 cases of child abduction 635 CREDIBLE episodes of abuse by catholic priests and deacons.   so, subway/bus/whatever you think could put your child in danger for abduction = 4 times safer than churches... There is no context in the OP, only numbers. Statistics without context are worthless. In fact they can be worse than worthless if used in misleading fashion, as is done here. -- Posted by sophos at 9:44 pm on Aug. 24, 2008 Quote: from Forever Angel at 8:09 am on Aug. 24, 2008 There is no context in the OP, only numbers. Statistics without context are worthless. In fact they can be worse than worthless if used in misleading fashion, as is done here. No context in the OP? What ignorant gibberish. The contextual argument that the OP was making is that it is four times more likely to get sexually abused in churches than it is to get abducted. If the provided statistics hold true, there is nothing misleading about the claim. It is a comparison purely between the two. Worse than worthless is slamming a perfectly sound claim by arguing unrelated issues, due to poor contextual comprehension; and perhaps just a hint of religious bias. -- Posted by Forever Angel at 9:14 am on Aug. 25, 2008 Quote: from sophos at 11:44 pm on Aug. 24, 2008 Quote: from Forever Angel at 8:09 am on Aug. 24, 2008 There is no context in the OP, only numbers. Statistics without context are worthless. In fact they can be worse than worthless if used in misleading fashion, as is done here. No context in the OP? What ignorant gibberish. The contextual argument that the OP was making is that it is four times more likely to get sexually abused in churches than it is to get abducted. If the provided statistics hold true, there is nothing misleading about the claim. It is a comparison purely between the two. Worse than worthless is slamming a perfectly sound claim by arguing unrelated issues, due to poor contextual comprehension; and perhaps just a hint of religious bias. Another of your intelligent responses. One, there is no source to verify this "perfectly sound claim". (And your 'clarification' of this claim is even worse, as you make no distinction at all between Catholic priests and 'church'.) Two, there is no description of how these abductions may have occurred, yet the implication is that the majority resulted from riding a subway or bus. So tell me, what is the context that makes this 'perfectly sound claim' so credible? And as far as bias, the OP is biased against 'the church' and so are you. -- Posted by sophos at 9:41 am on Aug. 25, 2008 Quote: from Forever Angel at 12:14 am on Aug. 26, 2008 ...there is no source to verify this "perfectly sound claim". How the simple complicate the simple. Read the OP, again. It's not rocket science. Quote: from XxHeroHeroinexX at 6:45 am on Aug. 23, 2008 In the US in 2007: 135 cases of child abduction 635 CREDIBLE episodes of abuse by catholic priests and deacons.   so, subway/bus/whatever you think could put your child in danger for abduction = 4 times safer than churches... -- Posted by Forever Angel at 10:24 am on Aug. 25, 2008 Quote: from sophos at 11:41 am on Aug. 25, 2008 Quote: from Forever Angel at 12:14 am on Aug. 26, 2008 ...there is no source to verify this "perfectly sound claim". How the simple complicate the simple. Read the OP, again. It's not rocket science.   Quote: from XxHeroHeroinexX at 6:45 am on Aug. 23, 2008 In the US in 2007:   135 cases of child abduction   635 CREDIBLE episodes of abuse by catholic priests and deacons.       so, subway/bus/whatever you think could put your child in danger for abduction = 4 times safer than churches... You're right, it's not rocket science. It's not science at all. And there is still no context. Could it just be a slight amount of bias on your part? Find the source showing these "CREDIBLE" claims, please. -- Posted by willz at 11:10 pm on Aug. 25, 2008 The thing that annoys me is that people (americans especially) stereotype Muslims as terrorists while a much higher proportion of catholic priests are pedophiles compared to the total numbers. So it is more accurate to say priests are pedophiles than it is to say muslims are terrorists. Pages: 1 2  Next