I agree.Originally posted by Aoichi:
Nice diversion: JPII and Benedict (at least) were complicit as were (are) dioceses all over the world. Don't act like the clergy's involvement in the past is ancient history as it is ongoing.
Watch the Frontline documentary.
Using that website can you please show where Notre Dame football, and the people posting here have anything to do with your tin foil hat posts?Originally posted by Aoichi:
Read VatiLeaks -- the Church has been covering up pedophilia since the MIDDLE AGES!!
And you, Domer, are an ostrich.
So if his points are so irrelevant why do we have a flock of Notre Dame fans trying to so hard to deny them? Particularly when you factor in the personal vehemence, attempt to ridicule, and straw man arguments. For example does "bigfoot" and "JFK's assassination" ring a bell?Originally posted by IrishBlooded:
Using that website can you please show where Notre Dame football, and the people posting here have anything to do with your tin foil hat posts?Originally posted by Aoichi:
Read VatiLeaks -- the Church has been covering up pedophilia since the MIDDLE AGES!!
And you, Domer, are an ostrich.
So does that mean you can't make the connection using that website? Or that your vocabulary is limited to terms such as 'rape' and 'turds'?Originally posted by Aoichi:
The connection is you turds showing up here claiming moral superiority when just the OPPOSITE is true.
Ostriches.
The one you specifically mentionOriginally posted by Aoichi:
What Wiki site?
The connection, and I'll repeat it for the duller types here like you, is the predilection to sweep everything under the rug -- It's in your genetic code.
Who was it that compared what's happening at ND with PSU, a secular institution, the other day -- Domer'76? I think he forgot that Paterno and Sandusky were/are in the same cult as is ND.
It's pretty funny that you all are quick to criticize me but none of you have had the balls to watch the Frontline show.
Do so, educate yourself, and stop on back.
So does this mean you don't have a name. Of anyone... At any time... Anywhere... You honestly believe that 128 years of players including teams that were north of 150 players, drunks, druggies, semi-professional players, and championship teams. That not one person, not one. Not a single person would let something like this slip in the wrong conversation and make a news headline? Not 1 time?Originally posted by Aoichi:
I'll say this slowly for the learning impaired like you: t h e c o m m o n t h r e a d i s c o v e r - u p !
Ignore and sweep chit under the rug -- that's the way you all roll (all the while claiming moral superiority).
Watch the Frontline show and stop acting like an idiot.
Proof of what? That unless a Notre Dame player is directly named in something, a brand name used to promote the Catholic Church in advancing their religion is sacrosanct?Originally posted by IrishBlooded:
I have never said or insinuated I was better then any person. But I do ask for proof.
I'm not trying to make this old news, I'm not trying to deflect from it. I'm not trying to say that ND didn't do anything wrong.Originally posted by Mazatlan:
Proof of what? That unless a Notre Dame player is directly named in something, a brand name used to promote the Catholic Church in advancing their religion is sacrosanct?Originally posted by IrishBlooded:
I have never said or insinuated I was better then any person. But I do ask for proof.
Here are the facts:
1. The Church has actively engaged for centuries in a cover-up to thwart the investigation and prosecution of criminals
2. While apologists regularly claim this is "old news," in fact there are many recent cases of this. i.e. having lawyers argue the specious claim that because these were priests, therefore any conversation or even admitting they were in the presence of the child in question....is shielded as part of the "ministerial process."
We're not talking about confession, or even someone counseling them to talk with God about their problems. The argument made in court was that EVERY SINGLE PAGE OF THEIR RECORDS were exempt under the claim. On that basis if they went to a Notre Dame football game, that too was part of the "ministerial process" and could not be released to the police.
You see where I'm going here. Notre Dame wants to have it both ways just like the church in general. The Notre Dame police are both public and private at the same time, just as the church is a ministerial process regardless of what they're doing. It's hypocrisy and another fact is Notre Dame is major part of the church in terms of gaining visibility.
The net result is if Notre Dame is part of the Church's outreach for publicity and attention -- and of course they are -- then they also part of everything else. Particularly when they're using the very same "private - privacy" argument to shield the PD records from the public.
Including
How convenient for you to claim there must a direct case of Notre Dame being involved in pedophilia or the cover up of the same. However that would ignore the fact Notre Dame is used a model to promote the Catholic Church. It would also ignore the generations of Fathers in administration and students who later who went into the priesthood who could easily meet your requirement, but are being protected from exposure by the Church's cover up. So we don't have accessibility to their crimes.Originally posted by IrishBlooded:
In the case that started this entire thread. It was about protecting a private issue at a ND / Michigan football game. It was a man that fell down a set of steps in the administration building. And since it happened on private property, and everything was settled privately. There was no public record of it. I'm sure that is because of tin foil hat man's conspiracy also. I bet he actually was transporting the body of Elvis to the new hanger 51 under touchdown Jesus where they will put it on ice and wait for alien overlords to return from Planet X-bop and show us the secrets to living in the ocean with Nessy and the mer-people.