Bill Donohue maintains reputation as one of the biggest douchebags on Earth

I’ve written before about Bill Donohue’s tireless defense of child rapists by downplaying their crimes, so this is really nothing new. Here’s what he recently said:

The refrain that child rape is a reality in the Church is twice wrong: let’s get it straight—they weren’t children and they weren’t raped. We know from the John Jay study that most of the victims have been adolescents, and that the most common abuse has been inappropriate touching (inexcusable though this is, it is not rape). The Boston Globe correctly said of the John Jay report that “more than three-quarters of the victims were post pubescent, meaning the abuse did not meet the clinical definition of pedophilia.” In other words, the issue is homosexuality, not pedophilia.

As usual, he’s wrong on all counts. Half of the sexual abuse involved female victims and just because some of the abuse happened to teenagers instead of pre-pubescents, that doesn’t make it okay. Not even close. Not only did the specific offenders rape underage (and sometimes very underage) minors but they abused their position of trust in order to do so. And worst of all, a point Donohue has no interest in acknowledging, the Church directly conspired to cover up these crimes and this cover-up reaches reaches the very top of the Church’s leadership.  The US court system has even served the pope with papers over his involvement in the cover-up.

It’s just appalling that he continues to maintain this untenable position and nobody seems interested in denouncing him or making any attempt to distance themselves from him. I even saw Donohue representing the Catholic League at the recent St. Patrick’s Day Parade in NYC. As far as I can tell, nobody suggested it would be inappropriate to allow a child rape supporter to participate in what’s supposed to be a family friendly parade.

Enhanced by Zemanta

3 Responses to Bill Donohue maintains reputation as one of the biggest douchebags on Earth

  1. Sayingwhatneedsaying says:

    Bill Donahue is proud to be down on his knees……. with the Poop’s dick shoved deeply in his own ass, as the Vatican dictates the words he is to write.

  2. Toni says:

    Not one of your arguments refutes Donahue’s assertions. Further, you are flat out wrong in stating that “half” the abuse victims were female. Absolutely, unequivocally false. Please offer the source for your assertion.

    • mjr256 says:

      First off, let’s look at how many victims were prepubescent, shall we?

      This is according to Robert Hoatson, the president of an abuse victim support group called Road to Recovery:
      “The report defines prepubescent children as those 10 and under and says that only 22% of the priests’ victims were prepubescent. But if the researchers had used the American Psychiatric Association’s definition that classifies children age 13 and younger as prepubescent, THE VAST MAJORITY of the victims would have been considered prepubescent.”

      So Donohue is exploiting the report’s skewed definition of prepubescent to get his figure when in fact, according to the standard 13 and younger definition of prepubescence, “the vast majority” of the victims fall into the category of prepubescent. So Donohue’s dead wrong on his principle argument.

      Now regarding the gender percentages, it seems that Donohue was correct on the victims break down of more than 3/4 male. So I admit I was wrong on that one. BUT Donohue’s overall dismissal of the still very large number of female victims in a misguided attempt to write this off as a “homosexual” problem is shown to be completely wrong when the report breaks that data up by sexual act:

      Verbal (Sextalk) – 885 boys + 215 girls = 1,100 total

      Shown Pornography – 223 boys + 9 girls = 232 total

      Shown Porn videos – 142 boys + 6 girls = 148 total

      Touch Over Cleric’s Clothes – 704 boys + 165 girls = 869 total

      Touch Over Victim’s Clothes – 2,862 boys + 691 girls = 3,553 total

      Touch Under Victim’s Clothes – 3,280 boys + 701 girls = 3,981 total

      Cleric Disrobed – 944 boys + 177 girls = 1,121 total

      Victim Disrobed – 1,112 boys + 303 girls = 1,415 total

      Photos of Victim – 169 boys + 32 girls = 201 total

      I could go on and on but you can see the full breakdown here:

      It’s easy to hide behind statistics and focus on the fact there there were more male victims than female while ignoring the actual high number of female victims, but how is male church leaders fondling over 1,400 MOSTLY prepubescent GIRLS proof that this is a homosexual problem? That’s flat-out ridiculous and shows that while his statistics are indeed correct, his actual overall point is clearly wrong when we look at the shear number of female victims. So was Donohue simply being deliberately dishonest or did he just never look any deeper at this atrocity before finding a scapegoat? Inquiring minds want to know.

      So congratulations! You were correct that I was indeed wrong when I claimed half the victims were women. Sorry about that. I am certainly man enough to admit when I’m wrong, and I was wrong on that. However, I was absolutely correct in pointing out Donohue’s incorrect claim that most of the victims (as if that would somehow excuse mass child rape) were post-pubescent. So are you going to let him have it too?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: