Grahame Posted April 19, 2010 Share Posted April 19, 2010 Neither, grahame. but then again, unlike you, I never said that Holly and Jessica were to blame for their own murders. Which I did not say either. I was making the point they had received sex education that had failed them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plain Talker Posted April 19, 2010 Share Posted April 19, 2010 I am glad you have come back because I wanted to add to my previous post that paedophiles are given new identities to protect them from vigilante groups, Sarah's Law does not come into force until 2011 and anyone disclosing the identity of a paedophile will be prosecuted. PT was wrong. I'm not wrong, grahame. And you are as wrong as you an possibly be in, oh, so many areas. Mainly in the areas of believing that paedophiles get relocated with new identities automatically, and in believing that Holly and Jessica were complicit in their own murders, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sccsux Posted April 19, 2010 Share Posted April 19, 2010 Neither, the point I was making was that in the UK alone 47,000+ women are raped every year which puts things into perspective better than plekhanov's wild rantings. Well, the point is pointless when applied to the subject of the catholic church covering up the actions of the (to use terminology you're familiar with - and have accused others of being) sordid perverts within:thumbsup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted April 19, 2010 Share Posted April 19, 2010 Which I did not say either. I was making the point they had received sex education that had failed them. What an extraordinary thing to say. How had they been failed by sex education? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grahame Posted April 19, 2010 Share Posted April 19, 2010 A typical ploy by Grahame to avoid answering direct questions. It is now well established fact that some of the Catholic priesthood in Boston (USA) and in Ireland sexually abused children over many years. It is also now well established fact that the Catholic church hierachy shielded abusing priests by a) not reporting allegations of child sexual abuse to the police; b) moving abusing priests to different parishes - where they sexually abused yet more children. Incontrovertible facts Grahame. So, a simple question for Grahame to answer - why do you defend the Catholic church for shielding paedophile priests? I look forward to your answer Grahame, though I suspect that once more you will dodge the question*. *Tell you what Grahame - I'll make it dead easy for you to dodge my question. In your reply, just refer to my being an atheist and then you can accuse me of having an anti-Christian agenda. There - I've made it really easy for you to avoid answering my question Grahame. I have repeatedly said the Catholic church was wrong. I am not defending them I am doing what any good judge does in his summing up when he examines all the facts of the case instead of presenting a bigoted prejudiced summery of which plekhanov is profoundly guilty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plain Talker Posted April 19, 2010 Share Posted April 19, 2010 Which I did not say either. I was making the point they had received sex education that had failed them. No you did not say that at all. You said nothing LIKE that, you twisty, deceitful man, you. http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showpost.php?p=6007785&postcount=679 Children of that age are not that innocent, they would have known the facts of life, they are taught them at school from a young age and they didn't have to get in the bath. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grahame Posted April 19, 2010 Share Posted April 19, 2010 No you did not say that at all. You said nothing LIKE that, you twisty, deceitful man, you. http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showpost.php?p=6007785&postcount=679 They are not innocent of the facts of life, and like I said these things are best left alone. True on both counts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted April 19, 2010 Share Posted April 19, 2010 They are not innocent of the facts of life, and like I said these things are best left alone. True on both counts. If they are 'not innocent of the facts of life' why are you saying that 'sex education failed them'? What is 'thses things are best left alone?' supposed to mean? In what way was the girls knowledge about sexual matters in any way relevant to their abuse and murder? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karis Posted April 19, 2010 Share Posted April 19, 2010 I didn't know anything about sex until I was - oooh, 12, 13. I really didn't know much more than the very very basics of the birds and the bees. I was completely innocent and didn't have any sex education, and even if I had, I'm sure it wouldn't have helped me stave off a wily sex attacker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redrobbo Posted April 19, 2010 Share Posted April 19, 2010 I am glad you have come back because I wanted to add to my previous post that paedophiles are given new identities to protect them from vigilante groups ... Paedophiles are NOT "given new identities to protect them from vigilante groups" at all Grahame. I have been professionally involved following the discharge of convicted paedophiles Grahame. You are completely wrong on this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.