You need to get out more. A large portion of the world is a very dangerous or even deadly place for someone in the LGBT community. It's more like 1850 than 2050 in many parts of the world. You've actually got it relatively good in the U.S. Not as good as Canada of course, but that's usually the case
When would they be able to claim enburdenment? Court. This law guarantees that a person accused of a civil or legal violation can argue that it was in their keeping with their religious practice and not have the judge refuse to accept the defense.
I grew up in a Southern Baptist church. No wine for me.
Oh boy. I do hope you have some stats/research to back up that last broad, sweeping generalization.1850 in the US I imagine would have been relatively safe for gays as the police back then were a joke and there was no communication technology that could catch criminals even if they viewed them as fugitives. The social stigma never really caught on it seems until about 1900 when Oregon had the YMCA scandal and they started sterilizing gays. This set about the Navy scandals that got FDR in a bit of trouble. One thing led to another and the FBI eventually started going after gays. The sterilization of homosexuals I imagine would have been opposed by the church.
The Catholic scandals, its important to note, do not involve pedophelia per say but the hebephelia category. Or something similar. I know of a man who was molested in the church. He married and had kids but then later came out as gay in old age (with grown kids). After he came out he killed himself. This us pure speculation on my part but since he had been "molested" my guess is his psychologists or family told him he was not gay. This is not usually the case.
I was raised in a catholic backround and if a priest or adult touched me I would have beaten them heavily or ran off. Unless your gay I cant imagine voluntarily having sex with an old man. Now I liked my day-care woman mostly in their 20s. I probably have been with them voluntarily.Most of these catholic abuse issues are boys who are likely GLBT, who as being young and naive, have been coerced. This is not always the case but in my opinion is the case 90% of the time.
If they have been coerced they have not consented voluntarily. If they are not of the age of consent they can not consent. That concept is literally the foundation of our entire society. The kids (yes, kids) are usually altar boys between 11-14. It's adult male priests in a position of trust who are abusing and manipulating children.
Unless you're a gay man. That's a pretty important part. If it was 30 year old dudes who went to the church this would be an entirely different story than priests in their 50's abusing children. Were you into 50 year old women when you were 12?
If I were you I'd be careful about using the word naive.
1850 in the US I imagine would have been relatively safe for gays as the police back then were a joke and there was no communication technology that could catch criminals even if they viewed them as fugitives. The social stigma never really caught on it seems until about 1900 when Oregon had the YMCA scandal and they started sterilizing gays. This set about the Navy scandals that got FDR in a bit of trouble. One thing led to another and the FBI eventually started going after gays. The sterilization of homosexuals I imagine would have been opposed by the church.
The Catholic scandals, its important to note, do not involve pedophelia per say but the hebephelia category. Or something similar. I know of a man who was molested in the church. He married and had kids but then later came out as gay in old age (with grown kids). After he came out he killed himself. This us pure speculation on my part but since he had been "molested" my guess is his psychologists or family told him he was not gay. This is not usually the case.
I was raised in a catholic backround and if a priest or adult touched me I would have beaten them heavily or ran off. Unless your gay I cant imagine voluntarily having sex with an old man. Now I liked my day-care woman mostly in their 20s. I probably have been with them voluntarily.
This is one of the most damaging things that can be said of sexually abused children. This kind of abuse happens outside the church and from adults of both sexes. I can look at sex predator listing sites and find couples who abused children of both sexes together.I know of a man who was molested in the church. He married and had kids but then later came out as gay in old age (with grown kids). After he came out he killed himself. This us pure speculation on my part but since he had been "molested" my guess is his psychologists or family told him he was not gay. This is not usually the case.
I was raised in a catholic backround and if a priest or adult touched me I would have beaten them heavily or ran off. Unless your gay I cant imagine voluntarily having sex with an old man. Now I liked my day-care woman mostly in their 20s. I probably have been with them voluntarily.
I'm at a total loss to understand at all how sexual abuse (as in a non-consensual sexual activity) is ever the fault of the victim, regardless of age?
Yes different orders of magnitude exist, that however doesn't make any form of non-consensual sexual activity acceptable on any level.
Stumble across it?
Citation required.
Scaff you do not have to look really hard to find cases where people have unknowingly viewed child porn.
That sources doesn't actually support the point you just made, in fact it doesn't even discuss it!
Unless you know of any priests who are minors then I'm not entirely sure what that has to do with the discussion at hand?
Once again I'm not aware of any child priests, as such we are not discussing two minors at all.
Your attitude towards holding victims as even partially to blame for abuse is a concern, as I have said.
Your not advocating it, but you most certainly are excusing it and attempting to mitigate it based on some perceived action by the victims.
Well, there's literal summer camps for it...
