86 replies »

1. http://vishwacareclinic.blogspot.in/2012/12/music-therapy-during-pregnancy.html

2. But that’s just you talking Nate. Show me examples of this as a wide spread effort. Even better show me hidden crimes of Democrats that the “media” won’t report.

3. “As well how do you accuse the “media” of not reporting Democratic wrongs and only Republican wrongs”

   Go back to school and learn to read Peter.

   “You see this all the time when the media fails to report someone that did something wrong was a democrat but when a republican does the same thing party affiliation is in the headline. “

4. Well I Goggled Fox News reporting on priest sex abuse and school sex abuse, not much difference between the two in numbers of pages – and Fox is on your side.

   As for the publishing of the story about the government report on educational sex abuse I don’t know how many times you can run the same story on the same report to equal what the Catholic Register considers fairness when reporting about multiple priest/church abuse stories. Certainly these things are reported as they happen in schools – and it was the LA Times that reveled their front page investigation in 2009.

   As well how do you accuse the “media” of not reporting Democratic wrongs and only Republican wrongs – if they’re not reported. Do you have secret a knowledge file that the press is suppressing? Certainly Fox News would be all over this. As for Republicans, especially the holy crusade kind, I think it’s fair game as they and the story would be more news worthy because they are always standing up for “family values”. Usually those who throw stones in glass houses are more newsy, and that would apply to Democrats as well.

   So, is Fox News and the rest of Rupert Mudock’s media biased? Is Rush Limbaugh biased? 700 Club?, Wall Street Journal, and all the other right wing news media? I think your point of view has lots of soap boxes.

5. No Peter I blast them for bias, there is a huge difference. They might have some argument or reason they don’t run sex abuse stories, there is no excuse for the disparity in reporting. You see this all the time when the media fails to report someone that did something wrong was a democrat but when a republican does the same thing party affiliation is in the headline.

   My problem is not the “media” supposed journalist, self proclaimed report one thing or another, its when they report as a weapon or agent of propoganda.

   Reread this figure;

   Tom Hoopes, then National Catholic Register executive editor, observed: “during the first half of 2002, the 61 largest newspapers in California ran nearly 2,000 stories about sexual abuse in Catholic institutions, mostly concerning past allegations. During the same period, those newspapers ran four stories about the federal government’s discovery of the much larger — and ongoing — abuse scandal in public schools.”[159]

   This is clear cut bias, this is people advancing a political agenda pretending to be news. The effectivness of this displays in the ignorance the majority of liberals have about the facts, i.e. sexual abuse in our schools is a far bigger problem then in churchs.

   If liberals projected a fraction of the hate and vitiral at our schools as they do the church far more kids would be saved from this nightmare.

6. I certainly won’t defend any school system for ignoring and not taking action on child sex abuse, but leave it to the Catholic Register to claim a conspiracy of news organizations to hide educational sex abuse in schools while running a witch hunt against the Catholic Church. The Church has used some pretty despicable tactics when victims came forward such as blaming the parents and lawyer-ing up, so they’re always looking for scapegoats and deflection issues. That’s been one of the complaints by victims, the Church has not reached out to them.

   I do think that institutions ( or parts of them) can and do tend to hide their own wrong doing, Penn State is a recent example, but I can’t say if or why the LA Times or other news media has attempted to cover this up, I do know that given the “right’s” hate for teachers and teacher unions it’s own witch hunt propaganda will be full throttle.

   The LA Times is not the only news organization and for sure everyone is jumping on the band wagon now to hopefully sort this out. Where was FOX
   news before the LA Times supposedly “caught up” with what was going on, is Fox one of your hated “media”?

   You lambast the LA Times and the “media” for covering this up but then quote the LA Times from 2009;

   “An explosive, front-page investigation on Sunday (5/10/09) in the Los Angeles Times reported that the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD)”

7. In all of 2010, there were eight credible accusations against Catholic clergy for contemporaneous abuse of a minor. In 2009, the number was six.

   Tom Hoopes, then National Catholic Register executive editor, observed: “during the first half of 2002, the 61 largest newspapers in California ran nearly 2,000 stories about sexual abuse in Catholic institutions, mostly concerning past allegations. During the same period, those newspapers ran four stories about the federal government’s discovery of the much larger — and ongoing — abuse scandal in public schools.”[159]

   n US schools, according to the United States Department of Education,[156] “nearly 9.6% of students are targets of educator sexual misconduct sometime during their school career.” In studies of student sex abuse by male and female educators, male students were reported as targets in ranges from 23% to 44%.[156] In U.S. school settings same-sex (female and male) sexual misconduct against students by educators “ranges from 18–28% of reported cases, depending on the study”[157]

8. As mentioned here this is why I have such disdain for the media and liberals

   For several years, we have reported on the disparate coverage by the Times and other mainstream outlets when reporting the awful crime of child abuse. While the Times and others seem to trumpet each-and-every decades-old allegation against a Catholic priest, they have either downplayed or ignored current-day scandals in our nation’s schools. As we’ve written before, “When it comes to the abuse of children, it sure seems like the national media doesn’t get too worked up unless the words ‘Cardinal,’ ‘bishop,’ or ‘priest’ is in someone’s job title.” (For a catalog of this disparity, see “Los Angeles Times: Clergy Abuse and School Abuse” at TheMediaReport.com.)

   A couple questions remain, however:

   Will the Times follow up on this report and continue to uncover other egregious cases? Remember how the Boston Globe handles the Catholic Church abuse scandal in 2002: It wasn’t just one article. The Globe alone ran a mind-blowing 989 articles related to the scandal in the 2002 calendar year alone! (Yes – that’s an average of almost three a day! See for yourself.) On McIntyre’s show this morning (5/11/09, 9 am hour), Song told the audience that, “Since the Rooney incident, the number of teachers ‘housed’ – that’s the term they use for being placed on administrative leave while charges against the employee are being investigated – has almost tripled in number.”

   As the rest of the national media tracked the Church scandals in Boston several years ago and expanded on it, will mainstream outlets give this outrageous scandal the wide attention it deserves?
   Stay tuned.

9. An explosive, front-page investigation on Sunday (5/10/09) in the Los Angeles Times reported that the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) “repeatedly” returned teachers and aides credibly accused of child molestation back to classrooms, and these individuals then molested children again. The jaw-dropping story, by Times staffer Jason Song, is incredibly angering, and the tales of abuse are stomach-turning. (An accompanying audio slideshow at the Times web site is quite sad and maddening.)

   In the last several years, media outlets have endlessly ripped and tarred the Catholic Church for mishandling episodes from decades ago. Meanwhile, these episodes in LAUSD date back are all quite recent. One documented case dates back to just last year! From Song’s story:

   The first complaint against [Ricardo] Guevara came in 1995 … Guevara, who denied the allegation, was never charged with a crime. He was cleared to return to work at the same school … Several years later, he was hired full time at the Miramonte Early Education Center … District administrators knew of the 1995 accusation, but no one informed school leaders … In 2002, a 6-year-old accused “Mr. Ricardo” of repeatedly touching her groin during class one day … But with no witnesses besides the child, who over time mixed up details of what had occurred, prosecutors declined to pursue the case. Guevara returned to Miramonte to work with children.
   In 2002, a student reported that Michael McMurray, a fourth-grade teacher at Plainview Avenue Elementary School in Tujunga, had on several occasions forced a girl to sit on his lap and pose for a camera … Two years later, during class, McMurray wrote a note to a fourth-grader on a Post-it, according to police documents. “Are you comfortable with me putting my hand on your knee?” he asked … McMurray, who molested her on at least two occasions, later pleaded no contest to sexual abuse of a child and was sentenced to 16 years in prison. Ten other girls stepped forward, complaining that they too had been touched inappropriately by McMurray, but the charges were dismissed as part of a plea agreement. At least three girls have sued the district.
   James Marlo Duffin, a fourth-grade teacher at Middleton Elementary School in Huntington Park, had been investigated in May 2001 for allegedly touching a girl’s buttocks … Duffin returned to the classroom. Almost two years later, while teaching at Gulf Avenue Elementary School in Wilmington, he was accused of touching a girl’s buttocks and molesting two other students … It is not clear whether Duffin’s new principal had been told of the prior allegation.
   Even as he was applying to be a trainee at the district in 2001, the aide, Paul Thompson, was under investigation by police for allegedly raping a 10-year-old boy at a group home where he had worked … A district background check failed to pick up on the complaint … Between July 2002 and March 2003, Thompson repeatedly forced the boy to perform sexual acts, according to amended criminal charges in 2005 alleging eight counts of lewd acts with a child. After a jury acquitted Thompson on five counts and could not agree on the other three, a mistrial was declared. In a second trial that ended in November 2005, the jury acquitted him of all remaining charges. Within a week, Thompson was reassigned to Blythe Street Elementary School in Reseda to be a special education aide to a female second-grader, according to his later testimony. It is unclear whether his new principal was told of the prior allegations.
   [In 2007], before he was transferred to Markham Middle School as assistant principal, [Steve] Rooney had been arrested on suspicion of assault with a deadly weapon. He allegedly brandished a handgun at the stepfather of a student who attended Foshay Learning Center … Police told senior district officials that they had found evidence in Rooney’s home of a possible sexual relationship between Rooney and the student, police later told The Times. But the student, 17, did not cooperate with the LAPD investigation, police said. No charges were filed. Without conducting their own investigation, L.A. Unified officials reassigned Rooney to Markham after a few months. In 2008, Rooney was arrested for allegedly kidnapping and sexually assaulting a 13-year old female student from Markham at his home. Since then, he has been charged with various sexual crimes involving four girls, two former students at Foshay and two at Markham.

10. Isn’t this exactly what you “claim” your problem with the church is?

    A major child sex abuse scandal has erupted in the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD). Where’s the national media?

    Steve Thomas Rooney faces 13 felony sex-related counts, including charges that he had unlawful sex with two female students, ages 13 and 14, during the time he was an assistant principal at a middle school. And here’s the kicker: In August 2007 LAUSD assigned Rooney to his job even though it knew that police had investigated him about an alleged sexual relationship with a student at his previous job at a high school. The former high school girl has since testified that Rooney impregnated her.

    Don’t have them arrested, reassign them, cover up. Schools do this far more often then the church did, yet you and the media turn a blind eye. Why are you ok with the schools abusing kids but want the church shut down?

    I think all sexual abuse is bad and all abusers should be arrested. Your only interested when its commited by the church or conservatives.

11. Timothy your story yesterday was right on and John and Ken you should be proud. But, you need the rest of the ugly story the district and the administration of South Gate Police Department is trying to keep secret. I am a police officer with LAUSD. LAUSD Officer Barajas was just transfered (when Angulo returned to work) far away from Southeast high school to keep him quiet and as punishment for standing up and doing the right thing. He is a hero and should be vindicated. This is what really happened at Southeast HS that you dont know about.

    In February of this year the girl who was molested by the teacher in 2007 came directly to Officer Barajas and told him that in 2007 when she reported her rape Angulo and Sotomeyer beat her down in an interogation for three hours and intimidated her into changing her story when she was really in fact molested. She told Officer Barajas that she wanted something done but they refused. Knowing Angulo would try and cover it up like they did last year he did the right thing and reported this conversation not to Angulo but first directly to South Gate Police Department. The detective handling the case for SGPD interviewed the girl and knew immediately this should have been reported in 2007 and filed a criminal case not just with the local court but with the DA’s public integrity unit. That is how Mr Demurgen got involved and indicted the teacher as well as Angulo and Sotomeyer.

    Now the cover up and the real reason Angulo is back to work. Members of the administration of the South Gate Police Department (Chief and Captains) are very, very close personal friends with Angulo. Fortunately for the kids at SEHS these police administrators were not aware that their own hard working detectives and the DA’s office did this investigation and got the indictments for these crimes until it was in the news or there may have been no investigation. Angulo’s friends at the SGPD’s administration after finding out about the indictments immediately wrote a secret letter on City of South Gate Chief of Police letterhead to the LAUSD administration supporting Angulo and attempting to counteract the indictments and stop Angulo’s suspension. It worked and he’s now back at SEHS where he can further protect molesters.

    How do police administrators get off supporting a defendant in an active case that has not even gone to trial? I think the public integrity unit should investigate the Chief and Captains at South Gate PD and the involved administrators should be indicted and fired. Some of us think some members of the South Gate police administration may have known about the original molestation in 2007 from Angulo and didnt follow the law and investigate it as required. This may be another reason for them writing the letter and trying to derail this case. Mr. Angulo is now telling staff members who are shocked and dismayed that he is back to work that the police department would never have written this letter if he had done something wrong. These school staff members know better and are dishartened that he is back. What kind of message is this sending to other kids who may be molested and are afraid to report it.

    It’s common knowledge that SEHS is refered to by many staff members as molestation high. Mr. Angulo and the SGPD administration should be ashamed of themself.

12. You make it so easy Peter;

    “The reason the Catholic Church is such a target is because the abuse was institutionalized and with a wide spread cover up. It would be like the LA School District (your example) acting as an institution to hide, move and cover up pedophile teachers.”

    You mean you don’t know LA Unified School District is far worse then the catholic church? Compared by number of employees a LAUSD employee is far more likly to sexually abuse a child then a catholic priest or nun.

    2008

    Los Angeles Unified School District says a total of 21 teachers and administrators have been yanked from schools in the past year because of allegations of inappropriate sexual contact with kids. The District only provided that figure after a week of repeated questions from KNX 1070.

    Los Angeles city councilman Bernard Parks is putting forward a motion today calling on the District to disclose all information relating to alleged sex crimes by a former assistant principal at two schools in the South LA area.

    The council’s request came on the same day that LAUSD officials said that more than 20 employees have been removed from school in the past year because of inappropriate sexual conduct accusations that involved children. School officials said 25 teachers and employees were removed from schools during the past year.

    “This is not out of the ordinary for school districts all over the nation,” said LAUSD Deputy Superintendent Ray Cortines. “These things happen.

    45 in two years. Why do you ignore liberal instutions that molest far more kids then the church to attack the church? If you cared at all about kids you would stop worring about the church and focus on the schools. But you don’t care about kids you just want to push your politics, no matter how many kids suffer, typical liberal.

13. “I haven’t defended them once, you can’t cut and paste one comment where I said what they did was right, enough, or acceptable.”

    No, but you seem to by trying to insinuate I support pedophiles everywhere but the Catholic Church. And you seem to be attempting to disperse the church’s crimes by pointing out other peoples crimes that were not part of the original discussion.

    “I have argued your an idiot for some how equating failing to excommunicate to doing nothing.”

    No, I did not equate that at all. The excommunication issue came up only when I posted how easily the nun was excommunicated, and no pedophile priests were, even serial child molesters. Removing priests from access to children AND reporting them to the police is the way it should have been handled – not transfer to unsuspecting diocese and more victims. Excommunication would not have been my first thought, neither would exoneration in the confessional. Frankly excommunication would have been too good for them.

    “I have also argued your a hipocrit for only caring about the church abuse of children and not the rampant abuse at the hands of liberals in elected positions, education, hollywood, and fashion.”

    We were not discussing how those groups were trying to deny women access to birth control. When have I ever defended pedophiles, anywhere? Can YOU cut and paste? There is a difference between what consenting adults do that is immoral (Democrats and Republicans) and what adults do to children (or defenseless women) – which is a crime.

    You keep including “liberals” as one big group to hate, a tactic honed by “conservatives”. I’ll use your own words, would that be 50%+1, all, some, many? You take great satisfaction is prefacing your arguments with the word “liberal” as if that word alone makes what comes afterward factual.

    “The point being you don’t care if kids are abused you just want to attack the church and conservatives.”

    Really! You think I could care less about abused kids outside the Catholic Church – you really are an idiot, and one so filled with hate I bet it keeps you up at night. The reason the Catholic Church is such a target is because the abuse was institutionalized and with a wide spread cover up. It would be like the LA School District (your example) acting as an institution to hide, move and cover up pedophile teachers.

14. I haven’t defended them once, you can’t cut and paste one comment where I said what they did was right, enough, or acceptable.

    I have argued your an idiot for some how equating failing to excommunicate to doing nothing.

    I have also argued your a hipocrit for only caring about the church abuse of children and not the rampant abuse at the hands of liberals in elected positions, education, hollywood, and fashion. The point being you don’t care if kids are abused you just want to attack the church and conservatives.

    Thanks for once again displaying your rank dishonesty.

15. “Would you be happy if the church paid the pedofile priest to go away?”

    Nate, why do you defend the Catholic Church’s handling of it’s decades old pedophile scandal by insinuating I support how a school district handles their pedophiles? Do you think I want protection for teachers while lambasting the church?

    By the way the teacher has only been charged, he has not gone to trial yet and been convicted. He certainly should have been taken out of reach of children immediately.

    “the district didn’t have evidence to justify the firing because the Sheriff’s Department investigation was ongoing.”

    Not sure how you feel about a person’s legal rights and the assumption of innocence, but they are protected in the (U.S.) Constitution.

    All the school district had to do was suspend him with pay. I’d certainly have supported the Church if they had done half as much to protect children as they had to protect priests and their own misguided image.

16. Would you be happy if the church paid the pedofile priest to go away?

    The Los Angeles Unified School District paid Mark Berndt, the teacher at the center of the Miramonte Elementary child abuse scandal, $40,000 to drop the challenge to his dismissal last year.

    The payout consisted of four months of back salary plus reimbursement for the cost of health benefits. Berndt was fired by the Board of Education in February 2011 after officials learned that the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department was investigating him for alleged lewd acts against students. He was arrested last week.

    The firing took Berndt off the district payroll. But he fought to keep his job through an appeal process that lasted until he settled with the school system and resigned in June.

17. “Slant it the right way you can get a majority to say anything.”

    Nate, that’s part of what makes it funny, IT”S A FOX POLL. How do you think they would slant it – toward Obama? Of course I would have thought the “flock” would have been smart enough and Catholic enough to oppose this no matter the question – guess not.

18. I suspect some of them might be smoking on the court the way they are playing. It would explain some of the defence

    They use to offer free Taco Bell Chaluppas if they scored 100, I thought it was for the fans, it was probably more for the team to motivate them. 17,000 chaluppas would sound like heaven if you have the munchies

19. Wonder why Obama doesn’t show an interest in the Pro game? Probably because most players don’t really care nor worship him, they don’t care about him or politics. Too busy smokin’ them doobies when not on the court.

20. lol

    typing and yelling at the basketball game at same time doesn’t work

    dang Bucks just wont lay down and die

21. “Controspectives”? A freudian slip of the keys there Nate?

22. Poll

    “Do you support insurers being required to provide free birth control”

    “Generic birth control cost $10 per month, do you support requiring insurers to pay $15 per month to provide it thus driving up premiums and the number of uninsured?”

    Number two is more factual then number one. Its not free birth control, it increases premiums by the cost plus 10% or 15% plus what ever pharma marks it up since they are not price sensitive any more.

    The jump in prices when a drug goes from private pay to insured is huge.

    I thought we had an uninsured problem, why are liberals further increasing the cost of insurance?

23. what was the pool question? Slant it the right way you can get a majority to say anything. I could ask the question and get 80% to disapprove.

24. This is so laughable. Maybe the Catholic Church should be mandated to pay 100% of pregnancy costs – that may turn them around.

    it’s hard to think self funded plans will be let off the hook. I’d think they’d want to provide this coverage since pregnancy is expensive.

    “Fox’s own national poll finds top-heavy public support for offering birth control coverage in health plans.

    By a 61-34 percent margin, those surveyed this week approve of the Obama administration requiring all employee health plans to provide birth control coverage as part of health care for women.

    Sixty-seven percent of women surveyed, and 65 percent of Catholic women, supported the contraception/birth control requirement. Fifty-three percent of men surveyed endorsed birth control coverage.

    The Catholic hierarchy has relentlessly opposed the birth control requirement. Seattle Archbishop J. Peter Sartain has addressed the issue in a March for Life sermon, a statement earlier this week and an article. All warned about threats to religious liberties.

    But the flock isn’t buying it. The Fox poll 58 percent of Catholics endorsing birth control coverage. It tracks almost exactly with a survey by the Public Religion Research Institute released earlier this week. It, too, found that 58 percent of Catholics were in approval.”

25. This will be interesting. Apparently Obama and his administration are unaware that 60% of those with employer insurance don’t have an insurance company. 85%+ of large employers, i.e. college, hospital, etc are self funded and don’t have insurers.

    If there is no Insurer then does that mean there is no benefit?

    or;

    Was he lying and all these employers are still going to have to pay for controspectives. In which case he bought himself a month or two then not only are they going to be just as pissed but he is going to look like an idiot for now knowing most people aren’t covered by Insurance companies.

26. What an arrogant jerk Obama is. His solution after screwing up with the Catholic vote? Dump it on the Insurance industry without consulting them first how they would feel and respond.

    Did this guy really get an American education? I really think it is ingrained in his soul and DNA he is a f—ing King from Kenya, even if he was born in Hawaii.

    We are stuck with him only because the Republicans are completely clueless in trying to nominate a moderate spokesman/woman for the party, as well as the one party system of Repugnacrats won’t allow a third party or independent candidate could be placed in state ballots.

    I guess we have to devolve to another civil war to learn and change, eh?

27. “When talking to someone and you say our it implies a shared possesion or commonality.”

    Thanks for the grammar lesson. Actually it was in the same paragraph (the Middle) as my discussion on changing “our” state constitution – thought you might be smart enough to grasp that.

    In future I’ll also have to correct your many spelling mistakes.

28. “The NC State Constitution (it was in my discussion about NC constitution):”

    So your constitution in which case you should have said my. When talking to someone and you say our it implies a shared possesion or commonality.

    “the enjoyment of the fruits of their own labor,”, “all persons are created equal”

    Depending upon your filing status and your taxable income, the North Carolina tax rate ranges from 6 to 7.75 percent.

    Appears some people enjoy the fruits of their labor at an unequal rate…..so much for “all persons are created equal”

29. “Really, 50%+1 have done that? And you know this how?”

    The correct statement would have been too many. I’ll settle for that.
    http://www.childbrides.org/sex.html

    Maye I’m as misinformed about polygamists as religious people are about gay marriage.

    ““Right now our constitution espouses equality of all citizens,””

    “Not in 40 years it hasn’t.”

    The NC State Constitution (it was in my discussion about NC constitution):

    “Section 1. The equality and rights of persons.

    We hold it to be self-evident that all persons are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, the enjoyment of the fruits of their own labor, and the pursuit of happiness.”

30. “If Catholics where half as scared of excommincation as you maybe there would be no sin.”

    Yea, no sin by righteous Catholics. I guess pedophile priests weren’t scared of it either, or being turned in, or being stopped.

    Just one report of many:
    http://www.independent.ie/national-news/six-child-protection-reports-charting-movements-of-pedophile-priests-to-be-published-today-2949488.html

    “So when are you liberals going to start kicking out your pediophiles?”

    Sure, “liberals” protect and support pedophiles. If we find them I hope we criminally charge them and jail them, and not ship them to another diocese.

31. ” If you believe that could happen then you’d also believe that people with multiple personalities could marry a dozen people – just wacky right wing ranting.”

    It’s the left and liberals pushing for the right of multiple partners in bisexual/threeway relationships your moron. Ya wacky right wing, keep telling yourself that.

32. “Haven’t seen many Catholics repenting on birth control”

    How much time do you spend in confessionals? How would you see or know how many repeant?

    “Course Catholics have always made it easy to be a Catholic and live a sinful life.”

    Unlike the non belivers who live such honest and riteous lives. Denegrate people who are considerly more honest and charitable then you for not being 100% honest and charitable. If you spent half as much time worrying about your own life as you did that of catholics maybe it wouldn’t be so sad?

    “Is that why no pedophile priests have been excommunicated ”

    You keep making this ignorant argument, why would a priest be excommunicated? You keep arguing this bogus and meaningless standard. Why do you have such a hard on for excommunication, for a non believer you sure believe in it. If Catholics where half as scared of excommincation as you maybe there would be no sin.

    So when are you liberals going to start kicking out your pediophiles?

    ” is that the reason the anti-gay marriage faction works against equal access for gays, taxes!”

    Some of them, there are millions so you better get to asking each one if you want to know.

    “I think not.”

    Your telling me I don’t know what I think?

    “Right now our constitution espouses equality of all citizens,”

    Not in 40 years it hasn’t. Affirmative Action is a direct contradiction to equality.

    ” It does however present some problems as to property rights and benefits offered through employment, etc.”

    Now your trying to use marriage for social engineering, why would marriage have any effect on employement or property rights? The issues should be 100% seperate. Why as an employer should I care or be involved in my employees home life.

    Becuase government started using marriage to provide unequal benefits they then made marriage a political issue in regards to who can and can not do it.

    “Most of the polygamists though have used their “beliefs” to have sex with children”

    Really, 50%+1 have done that? And you know this how? Your turning out to be one of the most bigoted people I have ever argued with.

    “Your statement about a bi-sexual being able to have two partners is just plain goofy.”

    You sheltered idiot.

    http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/301

    “Meanwhile in the Netherlands polygamy has been legalised in all but name. Last Friday the first civil union of three partners was registered. Victor de Bruijn (46) from Roosendaal “married” both Bianca (31) and Mirjam (35) in a ceremony before a notary who duly registered their civil union.”

    Why do I waste my time arguing with such uneducated shutins?

33. “I do have a problem with marriage entitling people to lower taxes or special benefits not afforded those who are not married.”

    I agree, so is that the reason the anti-gay marriage faction works against equal access for gays, taxes! – I think not. Here is NC there is an up coming vote on changing the state constitution to ban gay marriage. No where is equal taxation come up as an argument, only biblical reasons, even though those wanting equal marriage opportunity may not believe in the any particular bible and don’t want to be married in a church that doesn’t want them. Right now our constitution espouses equality of all citizens, I guess some will be more equal than others. In fact the ONLY reason this Republican (new government) effort to change the constitution is being put forward is to cement support from black churches who traditionally vote Democrat. It is pure politics, not principle.

    “You still don’t answer how marriage can be a right then denied to people that want multiple marriage partners”

    I support any marriage arrangement that is legally afforded heterosexual partners. Marriage with multiple partners may or may not work, with consenting adults why would you oppose it? It does however present some problems as to property rights and benefits offered through employment, etc. and paying for that. But those are financial questions not marriage questions. Most of the polygamists though have used their “beliefs” to have sex with children through prearranged marriages – that is a crime.

    Your statement about a bi-sexual being able to have two partners is just plain goofy. If you believe that could happen then you’d also believe that people with multiple personalities could marry a dozen people – just wacky right wing ranting.

    “Don’t require the church to recognize the marriage you wont have them fighting back.”

    No where does this require any church to recognize any marriage they would not perform in their own church. Marriage is as much a civil/legal function as a religious one, for both you need a civil marriage license and people don’t need churches to get married. This is just scare warfare by narrow mined “liberal” haters and religious bigots. I think gays would be happy with a civil union called “marriage” if it gives them all the legal benefits of traditional marriage. Why don’t you agree with that? Why do you want complete exclusivity of the word – it’s just a word?

    Why isn’t the Catholic church waging a crusade to make divorce illegal, if marriage if so sacrosanct? Does the church recognize divorce?

    “you only get excommunicated for failing to confess and repeant.”

    Haven’t seen many Catholics repenting on birth control – unless they do it in the confessional then go right back to using birth control, I guess they figure Gods not watching. Course Catholics have always made it easy to be a Catholic and live a sinful life. Just do as you wish, confess, and all is forgiven, you’ll still get into heaven. Is that why no pedophile priests have been excommunicated – they just repent in the secrecy of the confessional and the crime goes unpunished, unreported, and is forgiven?

34. No I don’t work to make marriage illegal, I have no problem with people spending their lives with who ever they feel like. I do have a problem with marriage entitling people to lower taxes or special benefits not afforded those who are not married. You speak of equal protection, where is it for the non married person? Our tax code and laws should not be used for social engineering.

    You have no clue what excomminication and christianity is do you? You wouldn’t sound like such an idiot if you had a clue what you were running your mouth about. The purpose of christianity is not to judge and punish people, you only get excommunicated for failing to confess and repeant. The goal of the church is to improve the person not lock them out. If they excommunicated everyone that sin what would be the purpose?

    Maybe half witted bigots should stop running around demanding excommunications?

    You still don’t answer how marriage can be a right then denied to people that want multiple marriage partners, that is why we shouldn’t leave it to the supreme court to find rights, the legislature should do their job if needed. But again there is no reason for this to even be a federal consideration.

    “What right do Catholics have in determining who can be married by civil ceremony – more church indoctrination into other peoples lives.

    Don’t require the church to recognize the marriage you wont have them fighting back. The issue isn’t the church trying to keep people from getting married its people trying to force their lives on the church which they disagree with. Again remove the unequal benefits of marriage no one would care. Why aren’t they happy with civil unions, why does it need to be a marriage?

35. “the buying of birth control, is not commerace”

    the ACA is not controlling who buys birth control, they’re controlling what is offered, buying it is still up to the religious or otherwise conscience of the buyer. Maybe the Catholic church should excommunicate all those Catholics who are buying and using birth control – cause there’s a lot.

    By the way, marriage is/will being addressed by the constitution, under the equal protection clause. If it gets approved by the Supreme Court will you/Cathoilc Church accept it? As to state law, do you work at making gay marriage constitutionally illegal in your state?

    What right do Catholics have in determining who can be married by civil ceremony – more church indoctrination into other peoples lives.

36. “throw the Constitution out when it suits you.”

    When have I done this, cite any example, even one.

    “changing/interpreting the Constitution to deny gay people the right to marry”

    Where is that in the constitution? Marriage is not addressed anywhere in the constitution nor should it be, the federal government has no business in this matter as it was not a power granted to it. This is a State power that should be addressed at the State level. If a State says gay people can marry then they should be allowed to marry. If a State says they can’t then it should be illegal. The federal government has no business telling a State how to handle this sitution.

    To further mock your argument and beliefs why is a bi-sexual person not allowed to marry both a man and women? They should have all the same rights afforded strait or gay couples, no?

    “ban abortion”

    Murder is a crime at both the federal and state level, anti abortion laws are not counter to the constitution. If someone hits a pregant women and kills the baby they are charged with a crime for what they did to the baby, if the mother or her chosen doctor kills the baby its ok though?

    “A wave of new state fetal homicide laws recognizing a fetus “of any gestational age” as a person and potential crime victim has abortion rights advocates worried the statutes could undermine a woman’s right to end her pregnancy.

    This year, Alabama, Alaska, Oklahoma, South Carolina and West Virginia passed new fetal homicide statutes making it a separate offense to kill a fetus when a pregnant woman is murdered or assaulted. All five new laws apply to fetuses starting at conception.

    Among the 37 states with laws making death of a fetus a separate crime, language giving legal status to a fetus at the earliest stages of pregnancy is proliferating. While often enacted in response to a high-profile crime such as the 2002 Modesto, Calif., murder of Laci Peterson and her unborn son, Connor, these laws are increasingly being drawn into the abortion debate.”

    In 37 states its ok for a mother to murder her baby but not someone else, how do you square that? Unless you consider a fetus property and thus a property crime, which you liberals would be just discussing enough to do.

    “The Constitution says the federal government has the right to regulate commerce, why doesn’t the Catholic Church abide by that”

    When does the church not? Refusing to engage in commerace, the buying of birth control, is not commerace, well it was until Obama walked all over the constitution.

37. Yes Nate, throw the Constitution out when it suits you. Tell me which law the Catholic Church holds higher, man’s law or their God’s law? Seems you right wing nut jobs don’t have much aversion to changing/interpreting the Constitution to deny gay people the right to marry or to ban abortion.

    The Constitution says the federal government has the right to regulate commerce, why doesn’t the Catholic Church abide by that – because maybe it goes against their conscience?

    “they are already arguing janitors for example”

    They? Who they? Where? Janitors where? An affiliate or in a actual church? But you know if the janitor does not want to use birth control no one is making him.