Spotlight

bnt

frostyjacks wrote: »

Would this film be fêted as much by Hollywood if it was about child abuse in the Jewish community?

In the trade, that's known as "the whataboutism". :rolleyes:

frostyjacks

bnt wrote: »

In the trade, that's known as "the whataboutism". :rolleyes:

It's the hypocrisy that is annoying, more than the Church-bashing. The same people who celebrate this film gave an award and a standing ovation to Roman Polanski not very long ago.

Roman Polanski raped a little girl, and is idolised by Hollywood. Go figure.

pauldla

If 'bashing' is defined as 'a harsh, gratuitous, prejudicial attack on a person, group, or subject', I'd be interested to know what aspects of the film you consider to be harsh, gratuitous and/or prejudicial.

frostyjacks

pauldla wrote: »

If 'bashing' is defined as 'a harsh, gratuitous, prejudicial attack on a person, group, or subject', I'd be interested to know what aspects of the film you consider to be harsh, gratuitous and/or prejudicial.

They claim celibacy is the issue, that it creates a culture of secrecy. Plus the Boston Globe turns a blind eye to child abuse in other institutions.

http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/dave-pierre/2015/11/22/boston-globes-spotlight-sex-abuse-shows-hypocrisy

Links234

frostyjacks wrote: »

It's the hypocrisy that is annoying, more than the Church-bashing. The same people who celebrate this film gave an award and a standing ovation to Roman Polanski not very long ago.

Roman Polanski raped a little girl, and is idolised by Hollywood. Go figure.

Therefore they should have no problem with institutional child rape in the Catholic church, is that what you're saying?

lazygal

frostyjacks wrote: »

They claim celibacy is the issue, that it creates a culture of secrecy. Plus the Boston Globe turns a blind eye to child abuse in other institutions.

http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/dave-pierre/2015/11/22/boston-globes-spotlight-sex-abuse-shows-hypocrisy

Liberal media bias?!

frostyjacks

Links234 wrote: »

Therefore they should have no problem with institutional child rape in the Catholic church, is that what you're saying?

No. By hypocrisy I mean they make big budget films on abuse in the Catholic Church, but are quite happy with other people abusing children. It's an odd state of affairs.

Cabaal

frostyjacks wrote: »

No. By hypocrisy I mean they make big budget films on abuse in the Catholic Church, but are quite happy with other people abusing children. It's an odd state of affairs.

You're labeling all of Hollywood as the same, when clearly it is not. Sure they are idiots that will come to defense but there are countless others who will not. Hollywood is also not a organization with a leader like the Catholic church, so you're not comparing like with like.

We however can label the Catholic church as the abuse because all the high up's knew of abuse and helped cover it up, they even created some handy guidelines the parishes could use.

Roman Polanski will be arrested if he ever sets foot in the USA,
Hell he has a interpol red flag against him so he'll be arrested if he travels to numerous countrys in the world.

While all the time sex abusing priests and bishops that covered up abuse are welcome in the Vatican, even with the Vatican knowing what they did.

Skrynesaver

frostyjacks wrote: »

Would this film be fêted as much by Hollywood if it was about child abuse in the Jewish community?

So is the problem is the secret Jewish cabal that run the world or the Catholic church's protection of child rapists?

Penn

frostyjacks wrote: »

No. By hypocrisy I mean they make big budget films on abuse in the Catholic Church, but are quite happy with other people abusing children. It's an odd state of affairs.

Wow.

Wow. Wow. Wow. Wow. Wow.

Wow.

pauldla

frostyjacks wrote: »

They claim celibacy is the issue, that it creates a culture of secrecy. Plus the Boston Globe turns a blind eye to child abuse in other institutions.

http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/dave-pierre/2015/11/22/boston-globes-spotlight-sex-abuse-shows-hypocrisy

Is that what they claim? I haven't seen the film (and probably won't for a while), so I'll have to take your word for it. If the film does claim that clerical celibacy is the root of child abuse in the RCC, I'd be inclined to see it as a fairly simplistic explanation (not that that's unheard of in movies, of course). On the other hand, it'd be hard to see how mandatory repression of the sex drive is completely unconnected to the matter.

Your second allegation is pretty damning though, if true. Do you mean that they ignore cases of child abuse not committed by Catholic clergy? Thats hard to believe.

Thanks for the link; I was previously unaware of that (rather unfortunately-titled) site. It's not a terribly well-written article, though; long on polemic, short on detail. Newsbusters indeed!

PopePalpatine

Funnily enough, I was wondering who "NewsBusters" were, it turns out they're kind of the "SourceWatch Eire" to the reactionary (conservative just isn't strong enough) Media Research Council's Legatus.

The Randy Riverbeast

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Funnily enough, I was wondering who "NewsBusters" were, it turns out they're kind of the "SourceWatch Eire" to the reactionary (conservative just isn't strong enough) Media Research Council's Legatus.

Top comment is trying to blame those evil gays for abusing children. Can get an idea of their audience.

If people are struggling to understand why a global organisation is getting more attention than a local group that 99% of the world knows nothing about then I don't think there is much point paying attention to them.

Links234

frostyjacks wrote: »

No. By hypocrisy I mean they make big budget films on abuse in the Catholic Church, but are quite happy with other people abusing children. It's an odd state of affairs.

You know Frosty, you're not entirely wrong. If the allegations from Corey Feldman and others are true, there are folks in Hollywood who've basically run a pedophile ring, and there's been more than enough allegations made towards director Bryan Singer to make you wonder, not to mention people like Victor Salva and Jeffrey Jones who are still working today. But, you bring this up seemingly not out of concern that Hollywood has these issues, rather to dismiss criticism of the catholic church, you care less about hypocrisy and more about deflection. The fact that you consider the movie "catholic-bashing" shows that you care more about admonishing other parties for criticizing the church than any perceived hypocrisy, and far from altruism on your part, you just don't want the catholic church being held accountable. This is what you'd consider concern trolling.

Links234

The Randy Riverbeast wrote: »

Top comment is trying to blame those evil gays for abusing children. Can get an idea of their audience.

Wow. I had a look at the comments there, absolutely shocking! That's some Paul McHugh level of ****ed up.

Cabaal

frostyjacks, honest questions for you.

- Do you believe that the catholic church's handling of the sex abuse it has overseen has been acceptable up until 2000?
- Do you believe the Catholic church has adequately compensated victims its actions have lead to the abuse of?
- Do you believe it is acceptable for the Vatican to send representatives over to Ireland to interview abuse victims and then accuse abuse victims of lying and claiming that they were only "in it for the money!"?
- Do you believe in recent times the Church has taken appropriate steps to stop further abuse and report abuse it becomes aware of?
- Do you believe the Catholic Church in Ireland and the Vatican have freely and openly worked with government and UN investigations into abuses?
- Do you think it was appropriate for Cardinal Sean Brady to have remained in his position after it came to light that he failed to report abuse he became aware of and his involvement in ensuring an abuse victim agreed to silence?

Be nice if instead of you directing blame away if you actually answered the above, they are perfectly reasonable questions to somebody who seems to want to defend the church by labeling others.

Cabaal

frostyjacks wrote: »

Would this film be fêted as much by Hollywood if it was about child abuse in the Jewish community?

Can you find an equal level of abuse carried out by the Jewish religious orders?
Have they also performed this abuse it basically every country they exist in?

Your argument against this is silly, you forgot that it is CATHOLICS who are disgusted by the abuse that has happened. It is CATHOLICS who also worked for the Boston globe and wrote the stories (most of them were Catholics).

It is majority of self identified CATHOLICS in Ireland etc that have gone to see this movie. In American if the movie did so well it involved Christians and Catholics going to see it too...not just Jewish people.

Bottom line is you can only blame the Vatican and the ****en evil Catholics for the abuses and the good Catholics for us becoming aware of the abuses.

frostyjacks

- Do you believe that the catholic church's handling of the sex abuse it has overseen has been acceptable up until 2000?
Yes


- Do you believe the Catholic church has adequately compensated victims its actions have lead to the abuse of?
Yes, more than adequate.

- Do you believe it is acceptable for the Vatican to send representatives over to Ireland to interview abuse victims and then accuse abuse victims of lying and claiming that they were only "in it for the money!"?
Yes

- Do you believe in recent times the Church has taken appropriate steps to stop further abuse and report abuse it becomes aware of?
Yes, it's learned it's lessons the hard way.

- Do you believe the Catholic Church in Ireland and the Vatican have freely and openly worked with government and UN investigations into abuses?
Don't know, I'm confident they have taken the necessary steps.

- Do you think it was appropriate for Cardinal Sean Brady to have remained in his position after it came to light that he failed to report abuse he became aware of and his involvement in ensuring an abuse victim agreed to silence?
Yes, better to have a good man at the helm than risk uncertainty. Why this obsession with calling for people's heads every time they drop the ball?

Huntergonzo

frostyjacks

I have an easier question for you frostyjacks:

Do you think?........that's it, that's the question. Now take your time.

Penn

frostyjacks wrote: »

- Do you believe that the catholic church's handling of the sex abuse it has overseen has been acceptable up until 2000?
Yes

Wow. Not even the f*cking Church thinks that. Not even the vast vast vast vast vast majority of Catholics think that. Not even the priests who actually committed the abuse think that.

Your defence of the Church is laughable, and as such, I laugh at it.

Hahahahaha.

fisgon

frostyjacks wrote: »

Would this film be fêted as much by Hollywood if it was about child abuse in the Jewish community?

We may never know, for many reasons, but mainly because there is no evidence of the kind of systematic, widespread abuse and cover-up of the abuse of thousands of children by rabbis.

There is no evidence that the rabbis' superiors found out about any abuse, and then moved them on to different synagogues, so they could rape again. There is no evidence that this happened in country after country after country, in exactly the same way, involving now tens if not hundreds of thousands of children.

But don't mind about that, just stick your head in the sand and keep inferring some kind of anti-catholic bias, rather than face up to what actually happened.

fisgon

frostyjacks wrote: »

- Do you believe that the catholic church's handling of the sex abuse it has overseen has been acceptable up until 2000?
Yes

Are you a real person? You realize that you sound like an atheist posing as a defender of the catholic church, in order to portray the worst possible image of catholic apologists?

Do you even realize what you are saying in this one answer? You are basically approving of the widespread facilitation of the rape of children. This is not propaganda, it is not a Jewish-inspired conspiracy theory, this is what happened.

Trent Houseboat

Was the guy in Room catholic?

pauldla

Interior – Boston Globe Office – Daytime. EDITOR is sitting at a desk. Enter REPORTER.

Editor: Jimmy! What have you got for me.
Reporter: Well boss, we've spent the last few months looking into this clerical abuse story.
Editor: Talk to me kid, what have you found.
Reporter: It's bigger than we thought, boss.
Editor: What do you mean?
Reporter: Remember how we thought there were only one or two priests involved?
Editor: Yeah...?
Reporter: It goes deeper, boss.
Editor: What do you mean?
Reporter: It looks like there are a lot more priests. A lot more.
Editor: Gee..how many?
Reporter: Dozens, boss. Dozens. Maybe even more.
Editor: Oh my God..
Reporter: Yeah. And that's not all.
Editor: That's not all?
Reporter: It looks like senior clergy knew.
Editor: They knew?
Reporter: Yeah, they knew all about it, but they just moved them on to other parishes.
Editor: They knew, but just moved them on?
Reporter: That's how it looks. And then they paid off the victims.
Editor: This is huge, kid. Huge. Good job.
Reporter: I gotta hand it to the others, it was a team effort, boss. We've still got a hell of a lot more work to do, but I'm just glad that we're finally getting somewhere with this.
Editor: Yeah, sure, of course. Well, there's only one thing to do now.
Reporter: What's that, boss?
Editor: Check up on what those Jews are doing....

PopePalpatine

frostyjacks wrote: »

- Do you believe that the catholic church's handling of the sex abuse it has overseen has been acceptable up until 2000?
Yes


- Do you believe the Catholic church has adequately compensated victims its actions have lead to the abuse of?
Yes, more than adequate.

- Do you believe it is acceptable for the Vatican to send representatives over to Ireland to interview abuse victims and then accuse abuse victims of lying and claiming that they were only "in it for the money!"?
Yes

- Do you believe in recent times the Church has taken appropriate steps to stop further abuse and report abuse it becomes aware of?
Yes, it's learned it's lessons the hard way.

- Do you believe the Catholic Church in Ireland and the Vatican have freely and openly worked with government and UN investigations into abuses?
Don't know, I'm confident they have taken the necessary steps.

- Do you think it was appropriate for Cardinal Sean Brady to have remained in his position after it came to light that he failed to report abuse he became aware of and his involvement in ensuring an abuse victim agreed to silence?
Yes, better to have a good man at the helm than risk uncertainty. Why this obsession with calling for people's heads every time they drop the ball?

You are beyond hope, especially with your belief that the Church's response before 2000 to clerical abuse was A-OK.

The Black Oil

frostyjacks wrote: »

They claim celibacy is the issue, that it creates a culture of secrecy. Plus the Boston Globe turns a blind eye to child abuse in other institutions.

http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/dave-pierre/2015/11/22/boston-globes-spotlight-sex-abuse-shows-hypocrisy

One of the points of the film is that the Globe doesn't exactly cover itself glory. iirc, one of the victims depicted stated he sent them files before and there was no pick up/interest from it.

I saw the film a few weeks ago and largely enjoyed it. It's a human story about the legwork involved in long form, investigative journalism. I thought it was a notch or two below being in a class of its own and perhaps a tad too long. I didn't think it would win the Oscar, and well, awards, who ultimately takes them all that seriously in the end?

One of the key lines is: The church thinks in centuries, Mr. Rezendes.

The bottom line is that institutions are often inward looking, frequently protect themselves first and foremost. Move personnel around and hide bad things. With the church, this was backed up by lay members pretty much acting as apologists and hoping the issue would be quietly kicked into touch and a general mindset in Boston parish - don't go looking under that rock. This is not unique to religious institutions. One need only look at some of the stories around the lack of accountability in some Irish health stories.

Any suggestion that it's anti-Catholic is ludicrous and baseless. It's about as anti-Catholic as a bag of potatoes.

robindch

PopePalpatine wrote: »

I heard there's a lotion that could help with your problem.

Lotion, schmotion. That image is blocked here in sunny Indonesia:

pauldla

frostyjacks wrote: »

They claim celibacy is the issue, that it creates a culture of secrecy. Plus the Boston Globe turns a blind eye to child abuse in other institutions.

http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/dave-pierre/2015/11/22/boston-globes-spotlight-sex-abuse-shows-hypocrisy

Watched it last night. To correct the point above, they do not claim that celibacy is the issue; a character in the film with many years of experience working with priests (and who is himself a clergyman) claims that up to 50% of clergy break their vow of celibacy and have relations with the opposite sex. This creates a culture of silence.

Good movie overall, I thought.

Walter H Price

Having read through this thread the other day , i went to see Spotlight on Saturday, all i can say is what an incredible film.

How anyone could defend the actions of the Catholic Church in relation child sex abuse in this day and age is beyond me.

I was particularly moved by the conflict faced by the female journalists Grand Mother , remembering how hard it was for my own grandparents to come to terms with the abuse scandals here. and seeing the names of the Irish dioceses flash up at the end really just hammered it home.

For a church that was already in massive decline due to its failure to modernise , the abuse sandals initially exposed by the Spotlight team in Boston really had such a profound impact on distancing the young people from the church.