I thought that the technique you refer to was Fallon on Leadsom...now there’s something I’d pay not to watch.
Printable View
Lets set this in context for a moment. Whose position would you rather be in? Being rubbed up against in a lewd manner, or, like Rosie Cooper, potentially being attacked by a machete wielding bloke. Attack with a machete or with a *****: I think I know which I would least like.
I always feel sorry for the folk who are accused when innocent but their lives are wrecked because they were assumed guilty before any proof has been found. Cliff Richards, Jimmy Tarbuck to name a few. Dave Jones got stick from the terraces for nearly two years, although proven innocent his life has changed forever, I remember the poor bloke saying he'd rather of been accused for murder Imagine that!
Names should stay out of the media until proved guilty!
The thing is back in the bad 70s and 80s and even 90s, it was like a given that an older person could abuse his position and few dared report it. The police won't bother and even civil action was nigh impossible, basically a he said, she said thingy.
And even most victims, even ourselves, took it as something, hey, just be careful, don't go near such persons. It was an accepted thing.
As a Catholic, I'm bloody ashamed at what so many priests back in the day did and got away with.
Mike Harding in ‘The Adventures of the Crumpsall Kid’ provides a very graphic account of some of the things the Catholic Fathers got away with. Great book...shocking, in places, reading. The whole point is, there are still people around who got away with this stuff. Growing up in south Lancashire the rumours about Cyril Smith were abundant in the very early seventies, but still nothing was done until it was all too late. How many more times do we let the establishment off the hook?
I bloody hate *****philes.
Yes I do look at young girls but only above 18 year olds, but that was then, now that I'm older, I don't see at good reason that a man in his 40s has any business having a relationship with ****agers, even youngish 20 somethings. Look yes, admire their beauty, but nothing more.
If men want or have unflinching ***ual urges, then by all means, the oldest profession is there to serve them. Even rent boys if that's the case. But no way anyone below the legal age.
I'm quite happy that Singapore, where I live most of the time, has in this century passed laws that criminalises any form of paid ***ual acts or grooming of persons below the age of 18. The law of consensual *** is 16, but I think it should be 18. Preferably it should be raised to 20.
As for the Catholic Church here in this region thankfully there's been no reports of the abuse we've seen elsewhere, but I do get the feeling some *******s got it away with it.
If a priest breaks the law, which is a law that his Church has deemed unlawful or sinful, then he must face the Law of the land and not of the Church to begin with. Pay the price and if the Church wants to forgive you, good, but criminal law has to respected.
Lol...bet you didn’t think the same at fif****.
Can't put the genie back in the bottle Rom, especially when the age of consent is fif**** in France and just four**** in Germany and Portugal, I think.
I'm not sure it’s the age of consent that’s the problem anyway. Sure we’ve all come across four**** and fif**** year olds who are more 'worldly' than some twenty something year olds. It's the abundance of powerful men who remain happy and willing to abuse the vulnerable that is the problem.