www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall revolted

I am revolted about Foley's behavior, and happy that he has exited the House. I'm also revolted at the Democrat Liberals trying to claim the moral high ground, given their history with the likes of Barney Frank, Gerry Studds, Teddy Kennedy, and Bill Clinton.

Here's a good piece by Cal Thomas to underline what I'm saying:

http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/thomas100306.php3

Jewish World Review Oct. 3, 2006 / 11 Tishrei, 5766

SCANDAL? WHAT SCANDAL?

By Cal Thomas

http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | In the media accounts of Florida Republican Congressman Mark Foley's resignation from the House over allegations of sexually explicit e-mails between himself and House pages, one frequently encounters the word "disgraced" modifying Foley's name and "scandal" to describe his behavior.


These are moral words, created for the purpose of labeling aberrant (and abhorrent) behavior. To show how far we have drifted from any sociological, not to mention theological moorings, consider these definitions from dictionary.com: "aberrant: departing from the right, normal, or usual course"; abhorrent: "causing repugnance; detestable; loathsome."


Right? Normal? Detestable? People who mock such notions ask, "According to whom?" Public schools, popular culture and editorialists at major newspapers have hammered into us this aversion to trans-generational morality. They proclaim that one person's concept and definition of "right" is as valid as another person's and to assert that there is only one right, one normal and one course is to be "judgmental" or "bigoted," attitudes modernity considers a worse "sin" than the behavior that used to be called sinful.


Our sophisticated age demands we not recoil at aberrant behavior, or call it abhorrent. The anti-moral wrecking ball has caused enough damage to our foundations that what remains of a structure is no longer recognizable. NBC edits positive references to G-d before broadcasting "Veggie Tales," but refuses to edit Madonna's blasphemous depiction of herself on a cross. These decisions are made by the network's "standards and practices" office, which mocks the words because clearly there remain few standards to which practices may be conformed.


Behavior once thought shameful is now paraded openly and promoted proudly to sell books. Former New Jersey Democratic Governor James McGreevey tours the talk show circuit. His presence dares anyone to question the legitimacy of his dumping two wives and having sex with men. He apologizes for his extramarital sexual relations and for putting people on the state payroll that didn't belong there, but he has no intention of changing his behavior.


Bill Clinton has recovered from sex with an intern in the White House and impeachment. He doesn't suffer for having practiced aberrant behavior. Few see him as having disgraced himself. Clinton takes in six figures on the lecture circuit and enjoys rock star status wherever he goes.


Former Congressman Gerry Studds (D-MA) may have started this decline (or did he merely reflect declining morality?). Studds had an affair in the early '70s with a 17-year-old male page. Studds was censured by the House in 1983, but famously turned his back to the Speaker in an act of disrespect and rejection of the judgment by his colleagues. He refused to resign and was re-elected to several more terms. A homosexual organization donated $10,000 to his campaign.


Rep. Daniel B. Crane, (R-Ill) had an affair more than two decades ago with a 17-year-old female page. After apologizing, he said he hadn't violated his oath of office, hoped his wife and children would forgive him and announced plans to run for re-election.



We all have what theologians call a "fallen" nature and no one should judge himself (or herself) morally superior to others. But that does not mean the standard for "right" behavior should be eliminated simply because many appear unwilling to conform to that standard.


In his classic, "The Abolition of Man," C.S. Lewis observed three generations ago that we are engaged in a type of tragic-comedy: "�we continue to clamour for those very qualities we are rendering impossible. � In a sort of ghastly simplicity we remove the organ and demand the function. We make men without chests and expect of them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honour and are shocked to find traitors in our midst. We castrate and bid the geldings be fruitful."


Scandal? Disgrace? I think not. Foley and others could only be so labeled if popular culture condemned, rather than promoted, immorality. Oh, sorry, there I go again, appealing to a discarded standard.


We do laugh at honor and as a result we do find traitors in our midst. We also mock conventions and then are surprised when some take us seriously and respond as if there are none. Congressman Foley can look forward to talk show fame and a lucrative book deal. Welcome to America, 2006!

Something that I've been thinking ever since the "Clergy Sex Scandals" have come to light.

If a priest tried to have sex with me when I was a teen-ager, he'd be missing some teeth. And, if my former "vocations director" (the last time I saw him was in a mug shot on the news) tried to do with me what he did with some altar boys he would have been missing some teeth too.

I'm definitely not excusing any adult/child sexual contact, but a teen-ager is old enough to know what he or she wants.

Remember Vili Fualaau?

Once again, I am NOT excusing any sinful behavior!

I know you are not. I understand exactly what you are saying. There is more than a bit of difference between a child and a promiscuous older teenager.

It's fair enough to point out hypocrisy on the part of some Democrats. As soon as I heard about the scandal (to me it is a scandal-I really couldn't care less about Cal Thomas's opinion-he is one of the most ideologically-driven, unbalanced commentators I've ever heard), the issues about pages in the past involving Congressmen Studds and Franks came to mind. It's troublesome to me that so many Democrats (and I'm a Democrat) dismiss sexual immorality when it involves one of their own and then are happy to score political points when it involves a Republican. What I believe ought to trouble everyone is the coverup of this matter by some of the Republican leadership in the House who were in a position to do something about this and did not do so until the matter was publicly exposed, and then they were dishonest about the extent to which they were informed about this-in my opinion, Speaker Haster should receive some sort of censure and perhaps should resign as Speaker of the House. I think on the issue of hypocrisy, the Republican Party comes out looking no better than the Democratic Party.
Ryan

Here are links to what I think are two of the very best of today's editorials on this subject:

It\'s Never Too Late to Do the Right Thing [realclearpolitics.com] by Tony Blankley

and

Step Aside, Speaker Hastert [realclearpolitics.com] by Larry Kudlow.

The fact that Congressman Foley may have been molested earlier in his life is not an excuse. Each man is responsible for his own actions, good and evil.

John:
Thanks for making the links to the Tony Blankley and Larry Kudlow columns available. I enjoyed reading them, and I particularly liked the one by Tony Blankley. I've often heard him on the McLaughlin Group. I rarely agree with him on political questions, but I do think he is a person of character. I applaud him for calling on the leadership of his party to do the right thing-in spite of whether the Democrats would do the right thing if they were in the same position and regardless of the consequences with respect to the upcoming elections. We would all benefit greatly if more politicians of all political persuasions would follow Blankley's advice to do what is right-even if it is not politically expedient.
Ryan

Originally posted by Dr. Eric:
�If a priest tried to have sex with me when I was a teen-ager, he'd be missing some teeth. And, if my former "vocations director" (the last time I saw him was in a mug shot on the news) tried to do with me what he did with some altar boys he would have been missing some teeth too.�

But a sexual predator knows how select the kids who won�t stand up for themselves, the class �outcast�, the adolescent from a broken home who is yearning for acceptance from a father figure, the child from the abusive home who is crying out for affection of some sort.

Originally posted by byzanTN:
�I know you are not. I understand exactly what you are saying. There is more than a bit of difference between a child and a promiscuous older teenager.�

So now teenagers who are targeted by sexual predators are �promiscuous�? I guess they asked for it? Or are you advocating for lower age of consent laws?

I bet in the millions of cases that not every one is a case of rape.

I'll also bet that not every one is a case of picking on the simple.

And once again, a teen-ager is big/old/smart/strong enough to know what's going on, if not why is he in a seminary? Most of the St. Louis "scandals" were at the minor seminary.

_________________________________________________

So the plot thickens...

I didn't say that the victims were "simple"; needy,confused, yes. The priests involved used thier position of trust to prey on young ppl. If a teen-ager is "big/old/smart/strong enough to know what's going on," should we lower the age of consent? It seems you're determined to blame underage victims for molestation.

ABC has apparently come to a similar conclusion. I don't have a link yet but did you find ne for the CBS report?

CDL

I'm not blaming the victims, but I'm saying that a teen-ager is old enough to say no or fight back. Why didn't they?

If a teen-ager rapes, murders, steals, beats, cheats, or swindles we put him/her in jail. They aren't babies or children.

And, I'll bet the priests who did this didn't go from "0 to 60 in 3.2 seconds." this kind of stuff usually starts with a phrase or look or something like Foley did with the e-mails. There usually is a warning with this kind of stuff. Why wasn't the inappropriate behavior stopped then? (A question for the bishops.)

I'm just suggesting that just maybe it wasn't all on the priests. AND priests uncategorically MUST adhere to the vows of chastity, whether married or single!

The story made it into the Australian a papers. The world just loves it when a 'Catholic' is shown up to be a hypocrite.

CDL,

Here's your link:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/10/04/politics/main2059821.shtml

Dr. Eric

This mess tells me that not only should active gays who can't keep themselves under control should not only not be in the priesthood but should not be in a leadership role in the government. Concupiscence will be the death of us all.

CDL

DRUDGE REPORT has this to add to the story:

XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX THU OCT 5 2006 2:53:48 ET XXXXX

CLAIM: FILTHY FOLEY ONLINE MESSAGES WERE PAGE PRANK GONE AWRY
**World Exclusive**
**Must Credit the DRUDGE REPORT**

According to two people close to former congressional page Jordan Edmund, the now famous lurid AOL Instant Message exchanges that led to the resignation of Mark Foley were part of an online prank that by mistake got into the hands of enemy political operatives, the DRUDGE REPORT can reveal.

According to one Oklahoma source who knows the former page very well, Edmund, a conservative Republican, goaded an unwitting Foley to type embarrassing comments that were then shared with a small group of young Hill politicos. The prank went awry when the saved IM sessions got into the hands of political operatives favorable to Democrats.

The primary source, an ally of Edmund, adamantly proclaims that the former page is not a homosexual. The prank scenario was confirmed by a second associate of Edmund. Both are fearful that their political careers will be affected if they are publicly brought into the investigation.

The prank scenario only applies to the Edmund IM sessions and does not necessarily apply to any other exchanges between the former congressman and others.

The news come on the heels that Edmund has hired former Timothy McVeigh attorney, Stephen Jones.

Developing...