Comments on: Controversial Attorney Vows to Continue his Fight to Humiliate and Embarrass the Catholic Church

By: Matt

Matt — Tue, 06 Nov 2007 01:43:23 +0000

Hey Tara,

The problem is most of the sick-o’s what did this are dead, like the one who they moved around in Syracuse to about 2 dozen parishes. He molested over 50 before he died and went to visit the devil. Its hard not to name a dead defendent when all they did was cover it up and let them keep doing it until they died. What about the victims, just because they are dead means it didn’t happen?

By: Mrs Jackie Parkes

Mrs Jackie Parkes — Sat, 22 Sep 2007 14:46:20 +0000

Wouldn’t want to stand in his shoes..i can feel them getting very warm!

By: shelray

shelray — Sat, 22 Sep 2007 01:26:20 +0000

Bink,

“I just don’t look too much into it all.”

Sometimes that’s a problem of mine, I have a tendency to perseverete on issues like this.

By: bink

bink — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 19:14:24 +0000

Well, ok, fair point there. There are others, and I suppose I wasn’t reading too closely to what you said initially. It’s not like there are many though… just a few “high-profile” incidents that really are not going to have an effect on the future of the Church. I just don’t look too much into it all. There has always been at least a low-level of open, hostile, and judgemental opposition to the Church. These sex abuse accusations are just one of the many and they will eventually die out in favor of some other accusations that reflect on general opposition to Church policy on other moral issues. Today it’s sex-related… tomorrow it’s… any guesses?

By: shelray

shelray — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 02:54:12 +0000

“it seems you are using this one incident to define a group (or majority) as a whole”

what group am I defining? I am making a statement that there are others who use the opportunity of sex abuse to attack the church.

By: tara

tara — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 02:10:06 +0000

What goes around, comes around. Aretakis–confirms that he wants to humilate and embarass the Catholic Church. When he stands before Jesus how will he justify his behavior of ruining peoples lives and reputations for his evil intentions and a few bucks? But not everyone will go along with these evil folk–thankfully the judge saw his evil intent (naming a dead man as a defendant??) and a small justice will have to be paid.

By: bink

bink — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 22:48:01 +0000

Shelray, I think your point to Unapologetic Catholic might be better supported by evidence… as it stands in the post, it seems you are using this one incident to define a group (or majority) as a whole. If this is just a feeling you get from what you have observed, then so be it - that still doesn’t mean that one would be naive to think otherwise.

This is not really meant to be accusatory, but I still don’t think that you adequately demonstrated any evidence that this was not “…an isolated incident among Catholic antagonists.”

By: shelray

shelray — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 18:24:52 +0000

Unapologetic catholic wrote “The first statement is no more logical than the second.
Through the eyes of the Unapologetic catholic, I’m sure it isn’t. In my world, they’re not even close. Thanks for your comment.

By: Unapologetic Catholic

Unapologetic Catholic — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 17:19:02 +0000

1. “To think that this is an isolated incident among Catholic antagonists is naive and unfortunately will continue to occur until someone in the position of authority stand up to the bullies and say no more.”

2. One priest is a pedophile. Clear evidence that most are.

The first statement is no more logical than the second.