Where did you see apologies?
I read it basically as “schools are even worse than churches and scouts yet are overlooked,” nothing apologizing for the churches.
I read it basically as “schools are even worse than churches and scouts yet are overlooked,” nothing apologizing for the churches.
Ironic phrasing, given the Catholic Church wants authority to decide what is demonic while acting like demons. Why is the comment so plainly aggrieved? Is the Catholic Church a victim here?
Even as your sanitized claim, where is the evidence?
It doesn't exist.
But that's not the point. You made up a quote I didn't say ("demonization"), and accused the former poster of doing something they weren't: defending the church.
Saying that schools are worse yet ignored is not defending the church. It may also be incorrect, but that's a separate assertion.
Here I'll help you:
> Just about every kid goes to school though, so people just prefer to sweep that under the rug and focus on targeting organizations they are not a part of or disagree with because they're easier to demonize and make fun of.
In what world is that useful to your sanitized claim? Is it not an obviously underhanded apology for the conduct of the church? Is the aggrieved nature of this really lost on you?
Is that really the best reply you could conjure? Maybe you can produce some evidence absolving the Catholic Church here? Or are you also an apologist for institutions that call themselves sacred engaging in systemic sex abuse?
Instead ask them if their church ever taught them anything on how to prevent sexual abuse, in both children or adults. Quickly you'll find the apologist for the church saying it's not the churches job even though they are in charge of children and vulnerable adults almost all the time.
Perhaps I'm mischaracterizing it, and it's about training those around potential abusers on how to recognize signs of abuse and adopt tactics that prevent it? Or it's about training _children_ to recognize what's unacceptable and how to report it safely? Or something else entirely?
Regardless, your conviction in the efficacy of the training grabs my interest. Could you share more about it so I'm not working off of incorrect assumptions?
You also mentioned that their abuse rates are lower than schools. Do you happen to have a source for that — I’d be interested in educating myself on that as well!
Calling someone's god, an "imaginary friend" is probably a trait of someone very anti-religious though. I haven't read all the different religious texts, but I highly doubt any of them call their god a friend. Perhaps Jesus could be considered friendly, but I don't think the Bible says that a Christian must consider Jesus as their friend. I think it's more like how parents should be parents and not friends. I imagine in most if not all relgions, gods should be gods and not friends.