Society's Take On the Catholic Priest Harrassment Scandal

My opponent tried to change the subject 3 times in this debate. First, he was debating the scandal and society's take. Then, the molesters. Now, he is defending the church. He has to debate the topic and not shift out of the topic, because it is easier for him. His point is already flawed. He doesn't have to shift the topic 3 times to loose. >>> "While we can blame the church, a viable means of shifting the blame, they did not know, there was no way of knowing the results of their small changes over time, a better way of doing things would be to blame the individuals themselves, no? But instead, the media decides to condemn the church and push the individuals off to the side." +++ They did know. They had the right and responsibility to remove those child molesters. The church allowed the problem to stagnate, which is dispicable. Any dumb person knows to remove a child molester from children. Your defense for the church is completely weak, unsubstantiated and just doesn't make sense. Any respectable organization will remove a child molester from its children. Your defense is not a justification for the church's allowing of molestation. +++ The media does not have control over America's opinions. Look at Clinton. She still has votes despite the media. The polygamist raids have a lot of opponents despite the media. Americans are free-thinkers and your media conspiracy theory is a crackpot theory that wasnot researched and is not only unsubstantiated by any evidence at all, but is just untrue. Why? Because everybody deserves a second, or third, or fourth, chance, but by all means, let's blame the church, this is the first time in history that this has happened. >>> About Reverend Wright, he did not just say mean things, a mean thing would be to say "nappy headed ho" on radio. Wright said down right traitorous things, geez I don't know "Goddamn America" during a time of war? But everybody should get their second, or third, or fourth chance, so let's sweep him under the rug, even though he's been saying things like that for twenty or so years. +++ Wright has the freedom of speech. Wright said treacherous things in a time of war. He has the right. It is his first ammendment right to free speech to say what he wants about his government. He is not hurting anyone. Maybe offending them, but he is not permanantly psychologically damaging them. Those child molesters did an unjustifiable act and to try to justify it is dispicable, which is what you are doing. >>> Now I'm sorry that I am passionate some times and that I can't be a mindless automaton with no emotions, but if one can't be passionate at times, who will? Now can I take this rod out of my ? +++ whats your problem? +++ I get passionate. Obama gets passionate. But we say the truth. You can too. Don't pull this card. +++ My opponent is either trying to defend the molesters or the church for not removing the molesters. These acts are both unjustifiable and are and should be punishable by law. They often were not, however, punished by law. Neither of them can be justified. Molesting is immoral and downright evil. And protecting a molester, not even distancing your organization from them, and allowing them to visit other children, that is just as immoral as molesting the children.