| Topic: |
Sociology > Education |
| User: |
"J Young" |
| Date: |
07 Nov 2007 11:18:39 PM |
| Object: |
MEDIA IGNORE SEXUAL ABUSE IN THE SCHOOLS |
http://catholicleague.org/release.php?id=1354
November 5, 2007
Beginning October 20, the Associated Press (AP) ran a three-day series
on sexual abuse in the public schools. Catholic League president Bill
Donohue commented on it today:
"In its first installment on this issue, the AP called sexual abuse by
public school teachers 'a widespread problem.' The news wire service,
which spent seven months gathering information, pulled no punches:
'Students in America's schools are groped. They're raped. They're
pursued, seduced and think they're in love. An Associated Press
investigation found more than 2,500 cases over five years in which
educators were punished for actions from bizarre to sadistic.' Indeed,
it said that on any given school day, three educators are actively
hitting on students, thus speaking to 'a much larger problem in a
system that is stacked against victims.' And as we've known for some
time, this is because the teachers unions are more interested in the
rights of accused teachers than they are the welfare of alleged
victims. Who speaks for the kids is a mystery.
"Complicating the cause of justice is the National Association of
State Directors of Teacher Education and Certification. It keeps tabs
on guilty teachers but only shares the names among state agencies. No
wonder suspended teachers are commonly passed from one school district
to another, or from one state to another. So frequent is this
phenomenon that it's called 'passing the trash' or the 'mobile
molester.'
"Just as outrageous is the media's reaction. Even though two weeks
have elapsed since the AP story broke, a Nexis search shows that only
five newspapers carried the entire series: Daily Breeze (CA), Richmond
Times Dispatch (VA), Statesman Journal (OR), Knoxville News-Sentinel
(TN) and Inside Bay Area (CA); it was also carried by Connecticut Post
Online.
"So where was the Boston Globe, which broke the Catholic scandal, and
all the other big media outlets? Just goes to show that it was never
the molested who counted, just the identity of the molester."
.
|
|
| User: "Kenneth Doyle" |
|
| Title: Re: CATHOLICS IGNORE SEXUAL ABUSE IN THE CHURCH |
10 Nov 2007 01:57:29 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 10:49:14 -0600, duke wrote:
On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 08:19:30 -0800, wrote:
I'm also an American, and you call me a goose-stepping murderer
because I helped arm US soldiers.
Nope. Lying again, as usual. I call you a goose-stepping murderer
because you built weapons that were used to injure and kill people that
didn't pose any threat to your country.
Well, it takes a real man to tackle another raping his daughter. By
your own admission, you'd help him.
But not to worry. I don't take you seriously anyway.
Why do you always check what I write, then?
So I can laugh at your ignorance.
Hey duke, you failed to state that God's existence can't be proved.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Kenneth Doyle" |
|
| Title: Re: CATHOLICS IGNORE SEXUAL ABUSE IN THE CHURCH |
10 Nov 2007 01:57:14 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 05:54:49 -0600, duke wrote:
On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 00:42:34 -0800, wrote:
Leaving that aside, though, the reason so many of you make fun of him
isn't for any of the reasons you've cited.
Nope. Do you follow what Puke sends?
From what I've seen, it
seems to me you make fun of him because you want to conform to a
certain behaviour and in an attempt to be accepted.
I don't care about being accepted or not by a bunch of people I will
never meet.
I'm making fun of Puke because he is a genuine imbecile who poses as a
christian and I can't stand hypocrisy.
I'm also an American, and you call me a goose-stepping murderer because
I helped arm US soldiers.
But not to worry. I don't take you seriously anyway.
Hey duke, you failed to state that God's existence can't be proved.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: CATHOLICS IGNORE SEXUAL ABUSE IN THE CHURCH |
10 Nov 2007 05:48:10 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 22:48:41 -0000, CE <jlrisdon@gmail.com> wrote:
On Nov 9, 5:45 pm, wrote:
On 9 Nov., 22:41, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 13:23:24 -0800, wrote:
Who says I defend him. I have no idea what he posts.
Get informed before making an ***** of yourself, *****...
But you make an ***** of yourself no matter who you post to. So I treat you
accordingly.
Funny, every one makes fun of you, not me...
Is it because you're a liar, a hypocrite, an arrogant sack-of-*****, an
ignorant moron or a goose-stepping murderer?
The premise of your question is wrong, since not everyone makes fun of
duke. I, for example, do not make fun of him.
Leaving that aside, though, the reason so many of you make fun of him
isn't for any of the reasons you've cited. From what I've seen, it
seems to me you make fun of him because you want to conform to a
certain behaviour and in an attempt to be accepted. It strikes me that
you're trying to fulfill your need to belong to a group and gain the
approval of others.
Whoa!! Thanks, CE.
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kenneth Doyle" |
|
| Title: Re: CATHOLICS IGNORE SEXUAL ABUSE IN THE CHURCH |
10 Nov 2007 01:57:59 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 05:48:10 -0600, duke wrote:
On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 22:48:41 -0000, CE <jlrisdon@gmail.com> wrote:
On Nov 9, 5:45 pm, wrote:
On 9 Nov., 22:41, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 13:23:24 -0800, wrote:
Who says I defend him. I have no idea what he posts.
Get informed before making an ***** of yourself, *****...
But you make an ***** of yourself no matter who you post to. So I
treat you accordingly.
Funny, every one makes fun of you, not me... Is it because you're a
liar, a hypocrite, an arrogant sack-of-*****, an ignorant moron or a
goose-stepping murderer?
The premise of your question is wrong, since not everyone makes fun of
duke. I, for example, do not make fun of him.
Leaving that aside, though, the reason so many of you make fun of him
isn't for any of the reasons you've cited. From what I've seen, it seems
to me you make fun of him because you want to conform to a certain
behaviour and in an attempt to be accepted. It strikes me that you're
trying to fulfill your need to belong to a group and gain the approval
of others.
Whoa!! Thanks, CE.
Hey duke, you failed to state that God's existence can't be proved.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: CATHOLICS IGNORE SEXUAL ABUSE IN THE CHURCH |
09 Nov 2007 05:34:57 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 22:48:41 -0000, CE <jlrisdon@gmail.com> wrote:
On Nov 9, 5:45 pm, wrote:
On 9 Nov., 22:41, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 13:23:24 -0800, wrote:
Who says I defend him. I have no idea what he posts.
Get informed before making an ***** of yourself, *****...
But you make an ***** of yourself no matter who you post to. So I treat you
accordingly.
Funny, every one makes fun of you, not me...
Is it because you're a liar, a hypocrite, an arrogant sack-of-*****, an
ignorant moron or a goose-stepping murderer?
The premise of your question is wrong, since not everyone makes fun of
duke. I, for example, do not make fun of him.
Because you have no room to make fun of anybody, Skippy. Not even
duke.
Leaving that aside, though, the reason so many of you make fun of him
isn't for any of the reasons you've cited. From what I've seen, it
seems to me you make fun of him because you want to conform to a
certain behaviour and in an attempt to be accepted. It strikes me that
you're trying to fulfill your need to belong to a group and gain the
approval of others.
We make fun of duke because he's a stupid, dishonest *****. Much
like you.
.
|
|
|
| User: "CE" |
|
| Title: Re: CATHOLICS IGNORE SEXUAL ABUSE IN THE CHURCH |
09 Nov 2007 06:01:26 PM |
|
|
On Nov 9, 7:34 pm, John Baker <nu...@bizniz.net> wrote:
On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 22:48:41 -0000, CE <jlris...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Nov 9, 5:45 pm, wrote:
On 9 Nov., 22:41, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 13:23:24 -0800, wrote:
Who says I defend him. I have no idea what he posts.
Get informed before making an ***** of yourself, *****...
But you make an ***** of yourself no matter who you post to. So I treat you
accordingly.
Funny, every one makes fun of you, not me...
Is it because you're a liar, a hypocrite, an arrogant sack-of-*****, an
ignorant moron or a goose-stepping murderer?
The premise of your question is wrong, since not everyone makes fun of
duke. I, for example, do not make fun of him.
Because you have no room to make fun of anybody, Skippy. Not even
duke.
Leaving that aside, though, the reason so many of you make fun of him
isn't for any of the reasons you've cited. From what I've seen, it
seems to me you make fun of him because you want to conform to a
certain behaviour and in an attempt to be accepted. It strikes me that
you're trying to fulfill your need to belong to a group and gain the
approval of others.
We make fun of duke because he's a stupid, dishonest *****. Much
like you.
There's a big difference between the small group of people you
identify with the pronoun "we" and the earlier claim that "everyone"
makes fun of duke. In acknowledging that I do not make fun of duke,
you have conceded that point.
With regards to your outburst and dig at me, I expected as much.
Admitting that you only make fun of duke in order to conform and gain
approval from your peer group is probably something difficult for you
since such an admission would expose your group's behaviour for what
it is, that is, nothing more than newsgroup bullying. The admission
would also likely make members of the group feel a little pathetic
since they are so needy that they have to engage in this kind of
behaviour to gain the approval of others.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: CATHOLICS IGNORE SEXUAL ABUSE IN THE CHURCH |
09 Nov 2007 06:06:27 PM |
|
|
In article <1194652886.217387.301280@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com> CE <jlrisdon@gmail.com> writes:
On Nov 9, 7:34 pm, John Baker <nu...@bizniz.net> wrote:
On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 22:48:41 -0000, CE <jlris...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Nov 9, 5:45 pm, wrote:
On 9 Nov., 22:41, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 13:23:24 -0800, wrote:
Who says I defend him. I have no idea what he posts.
Get informed before making an ***** of yourself, *****...
But you make an ***** of yourself no matter who you post to. So I treat you
accordingly.
Funny, every one makes fun of you, not me...
Is it because you're a liar, a hypocrite, an arrogant sack-of-*****, an
ignorant moron or a goose-stepping murderer?
The premise of your question is wrong, since not everyone makes fun of
duke. I, for example, do not make fun of him.
Because you have no room to make fun of anybody, Skippy. Not even
duke.
Leaving that aside, though, the reason so many of you make fun of him
isn't for any of the reasons you've cited. From what I've seen, it
seems to me you make fun of him because you want to conform to a
certain behaviour and in an attempt to be accepted. It strikes me that
you're trying to fulfill your need to belong to a group and gain the
approval of others.
We make fun of duke because he's a stupid, dishonest *****. Much
like you.
There's a big difference between the small group of people you
identify with the pronoun "we" and the earlier claim that "everyone"
makes fun of duke. In acknowledging that I do not make fun of duke,
you have conceded that point.
With regards to your outburst and dig at me, I expected as much.
Admitting that you only make fun of duke in order to conform and gain
approval from your peer group is probably something difficult for you
since such an admission would expose your group's behaviour for what
it is, that is, nothing more than newsgroup bullying.
Actually, "bullying" occurs when the helpless are tormented
with no means of avoiding it.
Duke, on the other hand, thoroughly enjoys the bash-and-be-bashed
of Usenet, as evinced by his high number of posts and the
relish with which he dishes out insults.
No one forces Duke to read a single post on `alt.atheism'.
Though I'd wager that if you somehow prevented him, he'd go into
withdrawal.
-- cary
.
|
|
|
| User: "CE" |
|
| Title: Re: CATHOLICS IGNORE SEXUAL ABUSE IN THE CHURCH |
09 Nov 2007 06:38:04 PM |
|
|
On Nov 9, 8:06 pm, (Cary Kittrell) wrote:
In article <1194652886.217387.301...@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com> CE <jlris...@gmail.com> writes:
On Nov 9, 7:34 pm, John Baker <nu...@bizniz.net> wrote:
On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 22:48:41 -0000, CE <jlris...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Nov 9, 5:45 pm, wrote:
On 9 Nov., 22:41, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 13:23:24 -0800, wrote:
Who says I defend him. I have no idea what he posts.
Get informed before making an ***** of yourself, *****...
But you make an ***** of yourself no matter who you post to. So I treat you
accordingly.
Funny, every one makes fun of you, not me...
Is it because you're a liar, a hypocrite, an arrogant sack-of-*****, an
ignorant moron or a goose-stepping murderer?
The premise of your question is wrong, since not everyone makes fun of
duke. I, for example, do not make fun of him.
Because you have no room to make fun of anybody, Skippy. Not even
duke.
Leaving that aside, though, the reason so many of you make fun of him
isn't for any of the reasons you've cited. From what I've seen, it
seems to me you make fun of him because you want to conform to a
certain behaviour and in an attempt to be accepted. It strikes me that
you're trying to fulfill your need to belong to a group and gain the
approval of others.
We make fun of duke because he's a stupid, dishonest *****. Much
like you.
There's a big difference between the small group of people you
identify with the pronoun "we" and the earlier claim that "everyone"
makes fun of duke. In acknowledging that I do not make fun of duke,
you have conceded that point.
With regards to your outburst and dig at me, I expected as much.
Admitting that you only make fun of duke in order to conform and gain
approval from your peer group is probably something difficult for you
since such an admission would expose your group's behaviour for what
it is, that is, nothing more than newsgroup bullying.
Actually, "bullying" occurs when the helpless are tormented
with no means of avoiding it.
Duke, on the other hand, thoroughly enjoys the bash-and-be-bashed
of Usenet, as evinced by his high number of posts and the
relish with which he dishes out insults.
No one forces Duke to read a single post on `alt.atheism'.
Though I'd wager that if you somehow prevented him, he'd go into
withdrawal.
-- cary
This is taken from a web site:
"Rationalization happens with bullies and victims. The bully
rationalizes what they have done by saying that their victim 'deserved
it'."
Now, compare that statement with the claim made that: "We make fun of
duke because he's a stupid, dishonest *****."
Do you see how the claim that was made on this newsgroup is
essentially the same as saying Duke deserved it? Do you see what kind
of person often makes that claim?
Even if bullying is sanctionned by a peer group, it's still bullying.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: CATHOLICS IGNORE SEXUAL ABUSE IN THE CHURCH |
09 Nov 2007 07:49:07 PM |
|
|
In article <1194655084.693726.17360@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com> CE <jlrisdon@gmail.com> writes:
On Nov 9, 8:06 pm, (Cary Kittrell) wrote:
In article <1194652886.217387.301...@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com> CE <jlris...@gmail.com> writes:
On Nov 9, 7:34 pm, John Baker <nu...@bizniz.net> wrote:
On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 22:48:41 -0000, CE <jlris...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Nov 9, 5:45 pm, wrote:
On 9 Nov., 22:41, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 13:23:24 -0800, wrote:
Who says I defend him. I have no idea what he posts.
Get informed before making an ***** of yourself, *****...
But you make an ***** of yourself no matter who you post to. So I treat you
accordingly.
Funny, every one makes fun of you, not me...
Is it because you're a liar, a hypocrite, an arrogant sack-of-*****, an
ignorant moron or a goose-stepping murderer?
The premise of your question is wrong, since not everyone makes fun of
duke. I, for example, do not make fun of him.
Because you have no room to make fun of anybody, Skippy. Not even
duke.
Leaving that aside, though, the reason so many of you make fun of him
isn't for any of the reasons you've cited. From what I've seen, it
seems to me you make fun of him because you want to conform to a
certain behaviour and in an attempt to be accepted. It strikes me that
you're trying to fulfill your need to belong to a group and gain the
approval of others.
We make fun of duke because he's a stupid, dishonest *****. Much
like you.
There's a big difference between the small group of people you
identify with the pronoun "we" and the earlier claim that "everyone"
makes fun of duke. In acknowledging that I do not make fun of duke,
you have conceded that point.
With regards to your outburst and dig at me, I expected as much.
Admitting that you only make fun of duke in order to conform and gain
approval from your peer group is probably something difficult for you
since such an admission would expose your group's behaviour for what
it is, that is, nothing more than newsgroup bullying.
Actually, "bullying" occurs when the helpless are tormented
with no means of avoiding it.
Duke, on the other hand, thoroughly enjoys the bash-and-be-bashed
of Usenet, as evinced by his high number of posts and the
relish with which he dishes out insults.
No one forces Duke to read a single post on `alt.atheism'.
Though I'd wager that if you somehow prevented him, he'd go into
withdrawal.
-- cary
This is taken from a web site:
"Rationalization happens with bullies and victims. The bully
rationalizes what they have done by saying that their victim 'deserved
it'."
Now, compare that statement with the claim made that: "We make fun of
duke because he's a stupid, dishonest *****."
Do you see how the claim that was made on this newsgroup is
essentially the same as saying Duke deserved it? Do you see what kind
of person often makes that claim?
Even if bullying is sanctionned by a peer group, it's still bullying.
You have cited one aspect of bullying. And yes, you may fairly
argue that this feature is fulfilled.
But another, crucial, aspect of bullying -- that the victim
has no choice -- is completely absent.
Duke's role is hardly that of the helpless victim -- in fact, if
it were not for the fact that Duke is utterly oblivious to
how poorly he fares in these exchages, his behavior
could be termed masochistic.
But it's not, because Duke, delusionally, thinks he's beating
up on all comers.
Victim of bullying. Not at all.
-- cary
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: CATHOLICS IGNORE SEXUAL ABUSE IN THE CHURCH |
10 Nov 2007 06:05:23 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 01:49:07 +0000 (UTC), (Cary
Kittrell) wrote:
Duke's role is hardly that of the helpless victim -- in fact, if
it were not for the fact that Duke is utterly oblivious to
how poorly he fares in these exchages, his behavior
could be termed masochistic.
Helpless victim???? Are you crazy? I have God on my side.
I'm only trying to help you.
But it's not, because Duke, delusionally, thinks he's beating
up on all comers.
Beating up? Nope, correcting.
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kenneth Doyle" |
|
| Title: Re: CATHOLICS IGNORE SEXUAL ABUSE IN THE CHURCH |
10 Nov 2007 01:53:44 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 06:05:23 -0600, duke wrote:
On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 01:49:07 +0000 (UTC),
(Cary Kittrell) wrote:
Duke's role is hardly that of the helpless victim -- in fact, if it were
not for the fact that Duke is utterly oblivious to how poorly he fares
in these exchages, his behavior could be termed masochistic.
Helpless victim???? Are you crazy? I have God on my side.
I'm only trying to help you.
But it's not, because Duke, delusionally, thinks he's beating up on all
comers.
Beating up? Nope, correcting.
Hey duke, you failed to state that God's existence can't be proved.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: CATHOLICS IGNORE SEXUAL ABUSE IN THE CHURCH |
13 Nov 2007 12:59:55 PM |
|
|
duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net>
On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 01:49:07 +0000 (UTC), (Cary
Kittrell) wrote:
Duke's role is hardly that of the helpless victim -- in fact, if
it were not for the fact that Duke is utterly oblivious to
how poorly he fares in these exchages, his behavior
could be termed masochistic.
Helpless victim???? Are you crazy? I have God on my side.
Who said "helpless victim"? Not I; I said "masochist". Masochists
enjoy being on the receiving end of abuse.
Given your dozens and dozens of posts a week, every one of
which which elicits nothing but abuse, someone less perceptive
might consider you motivated by masochistic pleasure.
Those who look a little deeper, however, realize that this
is not the case -- because they soon notice your complete inability
to realize what happens to you every time you open your mouth
on Usenet.
-- cary
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: CATHOLICS IGNORE SEXUAL ABUSE IN THE CHURCH |
13 Nov 2007 01:38:23 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 18:59:55 +0000 (UTC), (Cary
Kittrell) wrote:
Duke's role is hardly that of the helpless victim -- in fact, if
it were not for the fact that Duke is utterly oblivious to
how poorly he fares in these exchages, his behavior
could be termed masochistic.
Helpless victim???? Are you crazy? I have God on my side.
Who said "helpless victim"? Not I; I said "masochist". Masochists
enjoy being on the receiving end of abuse.
Then I have made you a masochist.
Given your dozens and dozens of posts a week, every one of
which which elicits nothing but abuse, someone less perceptive
might consider you motivated by masochistic pleasure.
I don't consider a bunch of junior village idiots like you boys and girls
capable of abusing me. All you do is run around and scream "liar". You're not
making any sense. There is nothing you can discuss. There is nothing you can
make a point on. So you yell "liar".
The ng well sees that you have nothing to say. You are the ones making fools of
yourselves.
Those who look a little deeper, however, realize that this
is not the case -- because they soon notice your complete inability
to realize what happens to you every time you open your mouth
on Usenet.
Yep, I embarrass the hell out of you little tur-duck-ens.
What is your name? "LIAR" screams asu.
I can sit back here in my sleep and command the conversation with your little
village idiots. Haahaahaahaahaahaa.
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: CATHOLICS IGNORE SEXUAL ABUSE IN THE CHURCH |
10 Nov 2007 04:42:43 AM |
|
|
On 10 Nov., 01:38, CE <jlris...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Nov 9, 8:06 pm, (Cary Kittrell) wrote:
In article <1194652886.217387.301...@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com> CE <jlris...@gmail.com> writes:
On Nov 9, 7:34 pm, John Baker <nu...@bizniz.net> wrote:
On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 22:48:41 -0000, CE <jlris...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Nov 9, 5:45 pm, wrote:
On 9 Nov., 22:41, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 13:23:24 -0800, wrote:
Who says I defend him. I have no idea what he posts.
Get informed before making an ***** of yourself, *****...
But you make an ***** of yourself no matter who you post to. So I treat you
accordingly.
Funny, every one makes fun of you, not me...
Is it because you're a liar, a hypocrite, an arrogant sack-of-*****, an
ignorant moron or a goose-stepping murderer?
The premise of your question is wrong, since not everyone makes fun of
duke. I, for example, do not make fun of him.
Because you have no room to make fun of anybody, Skippy. Not even
duke.
Leaving that aside, though, the reason so many of you make fun of him
isn't for any of the reasons you've cited. From what I've seen, it
seems to me you make fun of him because you want to conform to a
certain behaviour and in an attempt to be accepted. It strikes me that
you're trying to fulfill your need to belong to a group and gain the
approval of others.
We make fun of duke because he's a stupid, dishonest *****. Much
like you.
There's a big difference between the small group of people you
identify with the pronoun "we" and the earlier claim that "everyone"
makes fun of duke. In acknowledging that I do not make fun of duke,
you have conceded that point.
With regards to your outburst and dig at me, I expected as much.
Admitting that you only make fun of duke in order to conform and gain
approval from your peer group is probably something difficult for you
since such an admission would expose your group's behaviour for what
it is, that is, nothing more than newsgroup bullying.
Actually, "bullying" occurs when the helpless are tormented
with no means of avoiding it.
Duke, on the other hand, thoroughly enjoys the bash-and-be-bashed
of Usenet, as evinced by his high number of posts and the
relish with which he dishes out insults.
No one forces Duke to read a single post on `alt.atheism'.
Though I'd wager that if you somehow prevented him, he'd go into
withdrawal.
-- cary
This is taken from a web site:
"Rationalization happens with bullies and victims. The bully
rationalizes what they have done by saying that their victim 'deserved
it'."
Now, compare that statement with the claim made that: "We make fun of
duke because he's a stupid, dishonest *****."
Do you see how the claim that was made on this newsgroup is
essentially the same as saying Duke deserved it? Do you see what kind
of person often makes that claim?
Even if bullying is sanctionned by a peer group, it's still bullying.-
If Puke wasn't acting like an arrogant jerk, if Puke displayed some
open-mindedness instead of insulting people just because they have
another philosophy than his, if Puke wasn't lying when facts are shown
right in front of his nose, then, we would treat him like a regular
person.
Besides, he comes back every day to alt.atheism, seems genuinely proud
to display his ignorance -let alone his inability to discuss-, and
keeps on insulting everyone around him not to mention threatening us
with eternal damnation.
Either you are unaware of Puke's postings (which I doubt since he
posts quite a lot) or you think that he is right.
If anything, we're the ones who are bullied by him since he's the one
insulting us, on "our" discussion group. No one is forcing him to come
here.
To be frank, I think this guy is quite pathetic and has a very low
self-esteem. Hence the "I'm more intelligent than you are because I
believe in god"-rant. If anything, he should thank us for validating
what seems to be a very sad and lonely life.
As for myself, I systematically oppose intolerance, racism, hypocrisy,
homophobia and ignorance... A very "christian" attitude, don't you
think? Yet, I'm the one being attacked by Puke, J Young, Wentzky and
bobandcarl, all alleged "christians"...
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: CATHOLICS IGNORE SEXUAL ABUSE IN THE CHURCH |
10 Nov 2007 06:02:14 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 02:42:43 -0800, wrote:
Even if bullying is sanctionned by a peer group, it's still bullying.-
If Puke wasn't acting like an arrogant jerk, if Puke displayed some
open-mindedness instead of insulting people just because they have
another philosophy than his, if Puke wasn't lying when facts are shown
right in front of his nose, then, we would treat him like a regular
person.
Welcome to being what you accuse others of being.
Besides, he comes back every day to alt.atheism, seems genuinely proud
to display his ignorance -let alone his inability to discuss-, and
keeps on insulting everyone around him not to mention threatening us
with eternal damnation.
You turkey, I can't threaten you with eternal damnation. That's not in my
charter. I'm only warning you of what you're facing by your own choice.
A very "christian" attitude, don't you
think? Yet, I'm the one being attacked by Puke, J Young, Wentzky and
bobandcarl, all alleged "christians"...
Awww, are we crying in mommie's skirt now?
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: CATHOLICS IGNORE SEXUAL ABUSE IN THE CHURCH |
10 Nov 2007 10:24:30 AM |
|
|
On 10 Nov., 13:02, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 02:42:43 -0800, wrote:
Even if bullying is sanctionned by a peer group, it's still bullying.-
If Puke wasn't acting like an arrogant jerk, if Puke displayed some
open-mindedness instead of insulting people just because they have
another philosophy than his, if Puke wasn't lying when facts are shown
right in front of his nose, then, we would treat him like a regular
person.
Welcome to being what you accuse others of being.
Oh the irony...
Besides, he comes back every day to alt.atheism, seems genuinely proud
to display his ignorance -let alone his inability to discuss-, and
keeps on insulting everyone around him not to mention threatening us
with eternal damnation.
You turkey, I can't threaten you with eternal damnation. That's not in my
charter. I'm only warning you of what you're facing by your own choice.
OK, wrong wording: instead of being an *****, you're just an
arrogant piece-of-*****. My mistake.
A very "christian" attitude, don't you
think? Yet, I'm the one being attacked by Puke, J Young, Wentzky and
bobandcarl, all alleged "christians"...
Awww, are we crying in mommie's skirt now?
Nope, just expressing the truth (something you are unfamiliar with,
hence your question).
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: CATHOLICS IGNORE SEXUAL ABUSE IN THE CHURCH |
10 Nov 2007 10:47:46 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 08:24:30 -0800, wrote:
Even if bullying is sanctionned by a peer group, it's still bullying.-
If Puke wasn't acting like an arrogant jerk, if Puke displayed some
open-mindedness instead of insulting people just because they have
another philosophy than his, if Puke wasn't lying when facts are shown
right in front of his nose, then, we would treat him like a regular
person.
Welcome to being what you accuse others of being.
Oh the irony...
Yep, one of you listed 10 "lies" on my part, and I refuted all 10.
You can call it irony, I call it my mastery.
Besides, he comes back every day to alt.atheism, seems genuinely proud
to display his ignorance -let alone his inability to discuss-, and
keeps on insulting everyone around him not to mention threatening us
with eternal damnation.
You turkey, I can't threaten you with eternal damnation. That's not in my
charter. I'm only warning you of what you're facing by your own choice.
OK, wrong wording: instead of being an *****, you're just an
arrogant piece-of-*****. My mistake.
Well, now we starting to improve.
If you want to **discuss** something with me, then cut out all the little junior
atheist crap of calling everything I say a lie, or me a piece of *****. It's
pointless for me to offer discussion when the village idiot like you only runs
around crying "lie" or calling me names like you just did.
A very "christian" attitude, don't you
think? Yet, I'm the one being attacked by Puke, J Young, Wentzky and
bobandcarl, all alleged "christians"...
Awww, are we crying in mommie's skirt now?
Nope, just expressing the truth (something you are unfamiliar with,
hence your question).
You call me an "arrogant piece of *****" and you expect me to quit piling up on
you? Grow up, little tittie.
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kenneth Doyle" |
|
| Title: Re: CATHOLICS IGNORE SEXUAL ABUSE IN THE CHURCH |
10 Nov 2007 01:55:52 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 10:47:46 -0600, duke wrote:
On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 08:24:30 -0800, wrote:
Even if bullying is sanctionned by a peer group, it's still
bullying.-
If Puke wasn't acting like an arrogant jerk, if Puke displayed some
open-mindedness instead of insulting people just because they have
another philosophy than his, if Puke wasn't lying when facts are
shown right in front of his nose, then, we would treat him like a
regular person.
Welcome to being what you accuse others of being.
Oh the irony...
Yep, one of you listed 10 "lies" on my part, and I refuted all 10.
You can call it irony, I call it my mastery.
Besides, he comes back every day to alt.atheism, seems genuinely
proud to display his ignorance -let alone his inability to discuss-,
and keeps on insulting everyone around him not to mention threatening
us with eternal damnation.
You turkey, I can't threaten you with eternal damnation. That's not
in my charter. I'm only warning you of what you're facing by your own
choice.
OK, wrong wording: instead of being an *****, you're just an arrogant
piece-of-*****. My mistake.
Well, now we starting to improve.
If you want to **discuss** something with me, then cut out all the
little junior atheist crap of calling everything I say a lie, or me a
piece of *****. It's pointless for me to offer discussion when the
village idiot like you only runs around crying "lie" or calling me names
like you just did.
A very "christian" attitude, don't you
think? Yet, I'm the one being attacked by Puke, J Young, Wentzky and
bobandcarl, all alleged "christians"...
Awww, are we crying in mommie's skirt now?
Nope, just expressing the truth (something you are unfamiliar with,
hence your question).
You call me an "arrogant piece of *****" and you expect me to quit piling
up on you? Grow up, little tittie.
Hey duke, you failed to state that God's existence can't be proved.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Vic" |
|
| Title: Re: CATHOLICS IGNORE SEXUAL ABUSE IN THE CHURCH |
10 Nov 2007 11:01:18 PM |
|
|
One fine day in alt.atheism, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> bloodied us up
with this:
You call me an "arrogant piece of *****" and you expect me to quit
piling up on you?
He's just stating facts. You *are* an arrogant piece of *****.
--
Uncle Vic
aa Atheist #2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department.
Convicted by Earthquack.
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: CATHOLICS IGNORE SEXUAL ABUSE IN THE CHURCH |
11 Nov 2007 06:17:46 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 05:01:18 GMT, Uncle Vic <address@withheld.com> wrote:
One fine day in alt.atheism, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> bloodied us up
with this:
You call me an "arrogant piece of *****" and you expect me to quit
piling up on you?
He's just stating facts. You *are* an arrogant piece of *****.
And, I'm good at piling up on you.
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Vic" |
|
| Title: Re: CATHOLICS IGNORE SEXUAL ABUSE IN THE CHURCH |
11 Nov 2007 07:03:45 AM |
|
|
One fine day in alt.atheism, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> bloodied us up with
this:
On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 05:01:18 GMT, Uncle Vic <address@withheld.com> wrote:
One fine day in alt.atheism, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> bloodied us up
with this:
You call me an "arrogant piece of *****" and you expect me to quit
piling up on you?
He's just stating facts. You *are* an arrogant piece of *****.
And, I'm good at piling up on you.
Like a pile of *****?
--
Uncle Vic
aa Atheist #2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department.
Convicted by Earthquack.
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: CATHOLICS IGNORE SEXUAL ABUSE IN THE CHURCH |
11 Nov 2007 07:21:04 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 13:03:45 GMT, Uncle Vic <address@withheld.com> wrote:
One fine day in alt.atheism, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> bloodied us up with
this:
On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 05:01:18 GMT, Uncle Vic <address@withheld.com> wrote:
One fine day in alt.atheism, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> bloodied us up
with this:
You call me an "arrogant piece of *****" and you expect me to quit
piling up on you?
He's just stating facts. You *are* an arrogant piece of *****.
And, I'm good at piling up on you.
Like a pile of *****?
You're fading, vs. Are you running out of fluff to hate God?
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Kenneth Doyle" |
|
| Title: Re: CATHOLICS IGNORE SEXUAL ABUSE IN THE CHURCH |
10 Nov 2007 01:55:26 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 06:02:14 -0600, duke wrote:
On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 02:42:43 -0800, wrote:
Even if bullying is sanctionned by a peer group, it's still bullying.-
If Puke wasn't acting like an arrogant jerk, if Puke displayed some
open-mindedness instead of insulting people just because they have
another philosophy than his, if Puke wasn't lying when facts are shown
right in front of his nose, then, we would treat him like a regular
person.
Welcome to being what you accuse others of being.
Besides, he comes back every day to alt.atheism, seems genuinely proud
to display his ignorance -let alone his inability to discuss-, and keeps
on insulting everyone around him not to mention threatening us with
eternal damnation.
You turkey, I can't threaten you with eternal damnation. That's not in
my charter. I'm only warning you of what you're facing by your own
choice.
A very "christian" attitude, don't you
think? Yet, I'm the one being attacked by Puke, J Young, Wentzky and
bobandcarl, all alleged "christians"...
Awww, are we crying in mommie's skirt now?
Hey duke, you failed to state that God's existence can't be proved.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Vic" |
|
| Title: Re: CATHOLICS IGNORE SEXUAL ABUSE IN THE CHURCH |
10 Nov 2007 10:44:00 PM |
|
|
One fine day in alt.atheism, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> bloodied us up
with this:
Besides, he comes back every day to alt.atheism, seems genuinely proud
to display his ignorance -let alone his inability to discuss-, and
keeps on insulting everyone around him not to mention threatening us
with eternal damnation.
You turkey, I can't threaten you with eternal damnation.
We know that. But you presume to speak for your imaginary Jesus, who in
love for *all* mankind, threatens non-believers with eternal damnation.
Whatever that is.
That's not
in my charter. I'm only warning you of what you're facing by your own
choice.
What we are facing is a life free from the shackles of religion. Free from
having to debase ourselves in public, free from the belief that we are
nothing but lowly sinners, incapable of rational thought, incapable of
anything but to lower oneself to an imaginary diety that may or may not
exist. I say may not.
We all die, Earl. You say life goes on after death. I say there is no
evidence for that, it is just wishful thinking on your part.
--
Uncle Vic
aa Atheist #2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department.
Convicted by Earthquack.
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: CATHOLICS IGNORE SEXUAL ABUSE IN THE CHURCH |
11 Nov 2007 06:22:49 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 04:44:00 GMT, Uncle Vic <address@withheld.com> wrote:
Besides, he comes back every day to alt.atheism, seems genuinely proud
to display his ignorance -let alone his inability to discuss-, and
keeps on insulting everyone around him not to mention threatening us
with eternal damnation.
You turkey, I can't threaten you with eternal damnation.
We know that. But you presume to speak for your imaginary Jesus, who in
love for *all* mankind, threatens non-believers with eternal damnation.
Whatever that is.
Speak for??? Are you crazy? I only repeat his words.
Now, your statement re threatens non believers is wrong. We are judged by our
lives while in the flesh, and if we cruise thru life rejecting his love for us
and his call to love others and to live outside his teachings, then he gives us
our demonstrated desire for all eternity. And that's hell.
That's not
in my charter. I'm only warning you of what you're facing by your own
choice.
What we are facing is a life free from the shackles of religion.
I don't have any shackles. And I love life.
Free from
having to debase ourselves in public, free from the belief that we are
nothing but lowly sinners, incapable of rational thought, incapable of
anything but to lower oneself to an imaginary diety that may or may not
exist. I say may not.
Finally, you're not sure.
We all die, Earl. You say life goes on after death. I say there is no
evidence for that, it is just wishful thinking on your part.
There is evidence. One man did it.
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Vic" |
|
| Title: Re: CATHOLICS IGNORE SEXUAL ABUSE IN THE CHURCH |
11 Nov 2007 07:04:51 AM |
|
|
One fine day in alt.atheism, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> bloodied us up with
this:
Speak for??? Are you crazy? I only repeat his words.
Is he aware that you think he's a traffic cop?
--
Uncle Vic
aa Atheist #2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department.
Convicted by Earthquack.
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: CATHOLICS IGNORE SEXUAL ABUSE IN THE CHURCH |
11 Nov 2007 07:21:31 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 13:04:51 GMT, Uncle Vic <address@withheld.com> wrote:
One fine day in alt.atheism, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> bloodied us up with
this:
Speak for??? Are you crazy? I only repeat his words.
Is he aware that you think he's a traffic cop?
Fluff.
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Kenneth Doyle" |
|
| Title: Re: CATHOLICS IGNORE SEXUAL ABUSE IN THE CHURCH |
09 Nov 2007 07:05:04 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 00:38:04 +0000, CE wrote:
On Nov 9, 8:06 pm, (Cary Kittrell) wrote:
In article <1194652886.217387.301...@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com> CE
<jlris...@gmail.com> writes:
On Nov 9, 7:34 pm, John Baker <nu...@bizniz.net> wrote:
On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 22:48:41 -0000, CE <jlris...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Nov 9, 5:45 pm, wrote:
On 9 Nov., 22:41, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 13:23:24 -0800,
wrote:
Who says I defend him. I have no idea what he posts.
Get informed before making an ***** of yourself, *****...
But you make an ***** of yourself no matter who you post to. So
I treat you accordingly.
Funny, every one makes fun of you, not me... Is it because
you're a liar, a hypocrite, an arrogant sack-of-*****, an
ignorant moron or a goose-stepping murderer?
The premise of your question is wrong, since not everyone makes
fun of duke. I, for example, do not make fun of him.
Because you have no room to make fun of anybody, Skippy. Not even
duke.
Leaving that aside, though, the reason so many of you make fun of
him isn't for any of the reasons you've cited. From what I've
seen, it seems to me you make fun of him because you want to
conform to a certain behaviour and in an attempt to be accepted.
It strikes me that you're trying to fulfill your need to belong to
a group and gain the approval of others.
We make fun of duke because he's a stupid, dishonest *****. Much
like you.
There's a big difference between the small group of people you
identify with the pronoun "we" and the earlier claim that "everyone"
makes fun of duke. In acknowledging that I do not make fun of duke,
you have conceded that point.
With regards to your outburst and dig at me, I expected as much.
Admitting that you only make fun of duke in order to conform and gain
approval from your peer group is probably something difficult for you
since such an admission would expose your group's behaviour for what
it is, that is, nothing more than newsgroup bullying.
Actually, "bullying" occurs when the helpless are tormented with no
means of avoiding it.
Duke, on the other hand, thoroughly enjoys the bash-and-be-bashed of
Usenet, as evinced by his high number of posts and the relish with
which he dishes out insults.
No one forces Duke to read a single post on `alt.atheism'.
Though I'd wager that if you somehow prevented him, he'd go into
withdrawal.
-- cary
This is taken from a web site:
oooh, then it must be true.
"Rationalization happens with bullies and victims. The bully
rationalizes what they have done by saying that their victim 'deserved
it'."
Now, compare that statement with the claim made that: "We make fun of
duke because he's a stupid, dishonest *****."
So you define bullying as making fun of someone in an environment where
there is absolutely no chance of actual physical harm. So what? That
just proves that you're a fucking moron.
Do you see how the claim that was made on this newsgroup is essentially
the same as saying Duke deserved it? Do you see what kind of person
often makes that claim?
He deserves to be made fun of. He doesn't deserve to be bullied just
because he's a lying arsehole. How exactly can one possibly be bullied
on USENET?
Even if bullying is sanctionned by a peer group, it's still bullying.
Only if you have a completely moronic view of what bullying is.
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: CATHOLICS IGNORE SEXUAL ABUSE IN THE CHURCH |
10 Nov 2007 08:28:22 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 01:05:04 GMT, Kenneth Doyle <nobody@notmail.com> wrote:
He deserves to be made fun of. He doesn't deserve to be bullied just
because he's a lying arsehole. How exactly can one possibly be bullied
on USENET?
Even if bullying is sanctionned by a peer group, it's still bullying.
Only if you have a completely moronic view of what bullying is.
Haahaahaahaa.
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kenneth Doyle" |
|
| Title: Re: CATHOLICS IGNORE SEXUAL ABUSE IN THE CHURCH |
10 Nov 2007 01:52:20 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 08:28:22 -0600, duke wrote:
On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 01:05:04 GMT, Kenneth Doyle <nobody@notmail.com>
wrote:
He deserves to be made fun of. He doesn't deserve to be bullied just
because he's a lying arsehole. How exactly can one possibly be bullied
on USENET?
Even if bullying is sanctionned by a peer group, it's still bullying.
Only if you have a completely moronic view of what bullying is.
Haahaahaahaa.
Hey duke, you failed to state that God's existence can't be proved.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
Kentucky -- State pays $425,000 to settle suits,Workers cite pushto ignore abuse
Re: CATHOLICS IGNORE SEXUAL ABUSE IN THE CHURCH
Teachers Urged to Ignore GLSEN's Marriage Curriculum
Re: Media Ignore Gephardt's Vow to Crush Court - If elected president, he'd overrule any Supreme Court decisions he doesn't like. Gephardt is ignorant on the Constitution
NCAA's Politically Correct Fools Ignore the 1st Amendment
DCF bureaucrats find a way to ignore judge's order, punish couple
State, not church: Kaysville policy should ignore religious practices
Tucson, Arizona -- Foster care, too often, is a toxic intervention:Gov. Janet Napolitano when she says we should ignore statistics showing thatthe number of children torn from their families...
| Can A Just Judge Ignore a Wrong?
test, ignore
Ignore this
To Lunatic Liar Barbara Schwarz: Why did LAPD ignore your 2003 complaint?
Re: Media Ignore Gephardt's Vow to Crush Court - If elected president, he'd overrule any Supreme Court decisions he doesn't like. Gephardt is ignorant on the Constitution
Repost: 100+ federal agencies ignore mentally deranged Schwarz' complaint on Scarff
Ignore
|
|
|
