It sounds as if his mind has been warped by exposure to pedo priests.

I'm willing to believe it might even be true - occasionally. In "a lot of cases"? Nah. Which makes it a not very useful argument anyway, without even getting into the older person's duty to be the responsible one and rebuff the seduction. Especially from a 14 year old.

On the other hand, if any of his priests are being tempted by 17 or over girls, I'm happy for him to send them my way. I'm helpful like that.

The text of the interview is here, if anyone is interested:

http://commonwealmagazine.org/blog/?p=20516

Kids might try to persuade adults to do all sorts of impulsive things, like jumping off a bridge into a stream without knowing how deep the water is and if there are sharp rocks on the bottom. But adults are supposed to be adults. The average asshole on the street has this figured out, so I don't see why it's beyond the grasp of a priest with a doctorate in psychology.

I'm willing to believe it might even be true - occasionally. In "a lot of cases"? Nah. Which makes it a not very useful argument anyway, without even getting into the older person's duty to be the responsible one and rebuff the seduction. Especially from a 14 year old.

Posted by: Ltw at September 1, 2012 8:19 AM
________________________

Reminds me of a certain rare commentator here - I forget his name - from a couple of years ago who complained bitterly about the statutory rape laws, saying he got involved with his wife of many years when he was in his 30s(?) and she was 16 or so, and they were quite happy in their marriage.

Aside from the fact that such cases are very much the exception and not the rule, why can't adults grasp that it's not about what minors "want," it's about adults' DUTY and what minors NEED - namely, for adults to behave like respectable adults who also respect the idea of "inability to consent," whether psychological or legal.

Besides, if you plan to marry, why is it so hard for an ADULT to wait two years or more? Time does tend to fly when you're an adult, after all!

No doubt that sometimes is the case. It would be a very troubled kid, and the adult should always say no no matter what so the priest or any other adult should still be to blame. But I'm sure it does happen.

Priests should be jailed for it, just like anyone else. And people over them who try to hide them, should be jailed for accessory, just like in any other power structure (Penn State, anyone?)

Just one comment, this deargument, has been used often and sometimes sucessfully, by female teachers, with their students.

I've been working in public education for a while now. A couple of times I've had high school girls test the waters, so to speak. It's not that hard to deflect this.

1. Do not "friend" them on Faceplant. (Which is easy for me, as I eschew the Book of Face)
2. Do not exchange phone numbers.
3. Do not exchange text messages.
4. Reply not to email.
And, most importantly 5. Do not be alone with them.

None of this is rocket surgery. You don't have to be unfriendly or rude, just be professional. You're the adult; act like one.

" . . . said she made him do it, after all he's just a man . . . "

Steve writes, concerning female students: "5. Do not be alone with them."

While I understand why you say this, I wonder: are there never cases where you need to discuss a test result privately, or where a student hangs around after hours to talk to you about an assignment?

- Seems to me a difficult rule to apply in all circumstances. How does this work out in practice?

- If you do manage to apply it, do you also apply the same rule to your male students?

If Groeschel's statements aren't the perfect example of a delusional mind, nothing is.

That original word in my post is supposed to have been 'argument'.

" it needs to be supported."

Well let's go for the most famous one: mary kay letourneau. Multiply convicted, multiply impregnated.
He then won a court fight to be with her, if that isn't the student pursuing, I don't know what is. Currently married to her originally 13 yr old 'victim'.

Debra Lafave, the teacher caught sleeping with a 14 yr old. Although famous for the "I'm too pretty for prison" comment, did imply he was the pursuer. Only got 3 yrs probation. I would consider that a sucess.

According to :
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2012/02/is_sexual_abuse_in_schools_very_common_.html
it is estimated that between 3% and 10% of students suffer sexual abuse (various definitions) from teachers. Or between 2 and 4.5 million kids.

I can't find the link now but I remember claims that the entirety of the Priest sex scandals was on the order of 10,000 victims over several decades, making a few hundred per year. Each a tragity, but plaing in comparison to estimated millions by teachers.

I love how Groeschel is trying to act like the major problem here is priests sleeping with 17 or 18 year old girls. Which, while still problematic, is close enough to being legal and even morally understandable. When in reality it's more like priests molesting 8 year old boys. Doesn't sound quite as good.

I'm sure it's those whorish eight-year-old altar boys' fault, Shannon.

I couldn't imagine letting my eight-year-old be an altar boy. Even if I trusted the priest implicitly, can you imagine the stigma of having been an altar boy now?

Can't you just hear it at the school bus stop? "You were an altar boy? So, is your priest hung?"

"Did he give out candy afterwards, to keep you from telling your parents?"

Schools, juvenile detention facilities, summer camps, even foster care, are magnets for predators.

Here's a list of a few of the teachers who got caught:

http://www.wnd.com/2011/06/39783/

While I understand why you say this, I wonder: are there never cases where you need to discuss a test result privately, or where a student hangs around after hours to talk to you about an assignment?

I am not a teacher, so for me this is not a problem. I've spoken with teachers about such things, and they recommend that at least you leave the door open. I'd have my phone voice recorder on, and I'd save the file.

- Seems to me a difficult rule to apply in all circumstances. How does this work out in practice?

Well, the two times I had someone come on to me, it worked pretty well. I didn't even hurt their feelings. I was just unavailable. Any relationship advice giver can tell you how to do it.

- If you do manage to apply it, do you also apply the same rule to your male students?

In truth, I hadn't thought of that, being as heterosexual as I am. But, yeah. That would be a good idea.

The point here is that the Adult is responsible for making sure no matter what the child says or does, nothing inappropriate happens because they are the Responsible Adult. I've seen what sexual abuse does to kids, it's ugly, and twisted. It makes them think that they are worthless, and they start coming on to everything that moves because that's all they think they are good for. They never learn how to form real relationships, they just tattoo 'Welcome' on their backs and become doormats to anyone who wants to use them.
So even if the kids in the examples above "came on to" their abusers, chances are they were abused beforehand and learned that behavior. Normal, healthy kids don't seek sexual relationships with old farts like us, they have plenty of cute tail to chase that is the same age as they are, listens to the same music, watches the same movies and speaks the same language.

Normal, healthy kids don't seek sexual relationships with old farts like us -- Kat at September 1, 2012 8:25 PM

That assumption leads to all sorts of nightmares for people, young and old; especially in this day and age. When I was in my senior high years (age 16-18) there were several teachers I had fantasies about boffing. I was never sexually abused.

So automatically assuming that the kid is innocent and the adult is perfectly guilty does not take into account that nobody is perfect.

I agree that about sub-twelve it is the adults fault. But when you throw in hormones, stupidity, lapses in judgement, appearances, locations it changes the adult being perfectly guilty.

I went to more than one party in my early twenties that had a 16 or 17 old female out hunting, and horny the would do anything male that could move.

Sub 12? Are you fucking kidding me? Any priest or adult that has sex with minors are predators on society and should be dealt with as prey.

So automatically assuming that the kid is innocent and the adult is perfectly guilty does not take into account that nobody is perfect.I agree that about sub-twelve it is the adults fault. But when you throw in hormones, stupidity, lapses in judgement, appearances, locations it changes the adult being perfectly guilty.
This is utter garbage, especially in the case of pedophile priests. Not only are they the adults, their faith Demands that they remain Celibate, and remain morally pure. I don't care if Lolita herself crawls naked across the floor begging for it, the right thing to do is throw a blanket over the child and run.
You say you fantasized about your teachers, so what? If you had done anything overt, and they had taken you up on the offer, I would still blame them. Children make mistakes, adults are supposed to keep those mistakes from turning into tragedies.

Can I just say I love talk of 'minors' that word is so loaded and has so many definitions.

Did you know even is state with an age 18 limit for sex, on federally owned land within the state age of consent is 16.

But even in areas where age of consent is 16, and even if you are married, it is illegal to take naked picture of yourself or your consenting lover/spouse until both are over 18.

Now mabye its just me but for the last 20years the only preist sex abuse scandals I have heard of is male preists molesting or raping pre pubecent boys.

Was there a rash of preists accused of having sex with 7 year old girls that I missed?

Shoulda read 17year old girls