Newsgroup: it.cultura.religioni
Titolo: 11 miliardi allo stuprato da un prete

La 
repubblica.it
11 miliardi allo stuprato
da un prete
Maxi indenizzo dalla Chiesa Usa
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
NEW YORK - La Chiesa cattolica americana ha pagato 5,2 milioni di dollari
(quasi 11 miliardi di lire) a un uomo che aveva denunciato molestie sessuali
subite nel 1979 quando era bambino ad opera di un prete della contea di
Orange, in California.
Secondo esperti legali questa sarebbe la cifra più alta mai pagata dalla
chiesa a titolo di risarcimento per reati di questo tipo.
James Gray, il giudice che ha avallato il risultato del patteggiamento, ha
anche ordinato alla diocesi di Orange County, e all'arcidiocesi di Los
Angeles, che avrebbero saputo delle molestie e che avrebbero taciuto, di
chiedere scusa pubblicamente a Ryan Di Maria, la vittima, e ad altri quattro
uomini che hanno denunciato violenze analoghe.
Di Maria, oggi un avvocato di 28 anni, durante il processo aveva detto che
il prete, Michael Harris, lo aveva toccato e molestato sessualmente anche
un'altra volta nel 1991. Di Maria ha affermato di aver dovuto combattere con
la depressione e di aver pensato al suicidio dopo il fatto.
Michael Harris, che era stato preside di due scuole cattoliche prima di
essere messo in congedo nel 1994, ha sempre respinto le accuse. Ma le
autorità ecclesiastiche hanno fatto sapere che ora, dopo che la diocesi ha
avallato le accuse contro di lui, il prete sott'accusa, già messo in
congedo, ha deciso di chiedere al Vaticano il permesso di lasciare il
sacerdozio.
Tod Brown, il vescovo di Orange County, in una dichiarazione ha espresso
«profondo rammarico» e ha reso omaggio ai cinque uomini per il coraggio
mostrato con la loro denuncia.
«Nonostante Michael Harris continui a negare ogni addebito, la diocesi di
Orange nutre pesanti dubbi sulla sua innocenza - ha detto il vescovo -
soprattutto alla luce del numero delle persone che lo hanno denunciato e
delle accuse che sono praticamente tutte simili ed effettuate in tempi
diversi».
saluti
<Gigi>

[...]
Mi sono perso qualcosa, avevi dato delle notizie sulla morti frequente di
preti cattolici sudafricani per aids, ti si chiedeva la fonte, ... ;-)
Saluti Claudio Pace.
-- 
Inviato il ven 24 ago 2001 10:02:46 CEST da 217.58.46.90 [217.58.46.90]
http://www.neuromante.net/

 ha scritto nel messaggio
news:wehh7.26043$vC1.2...@news1.tin.it...

Caro gigi vedo che anche a te piace fare un po il giornalista su varie
notizie
i credo che tu debba inserire le tue notizie in un contesto o con qualche
fine
se vai in 
watchtower.observer.org
 vedrai che quel post c era da ieri
addirittura con filmatino
domanda ///perche inserisci questi post!
invece vorrei consigliarti un bel film i 6 giorno *** penso che faccia il
tuo caso***
Saluti il Solito Rino

 ti si chiedeva la fonte, ... ;-)
messaggio telepatico,
fra i raeliani e' cosa normale.
;-)

 --
su un bollitino scientifico:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rael-science-select/message
saluti
<Gigi>

 ha scritto nel messaggio
news:9m5a2s$n3b$1...@newsreader.mailgate.org...

Questa è la fonte:
http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis/web/vortex/display?s
lug=mindy05&date=20010805
saluti
<Gigi>

 ha scritto nel messaggio
news:IYrh7.43925$TS4.1...@news2.tin.it...

Sarebbe possibile avere qualche fonte tipo, che ne so, ansa?
Pace e Bene
Niko

 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rael-science-select/message
Non ti sembra una notizia di parte? Di parta raeliana direi
"rael-science-select/message".  Saluti Claudio Pace.
-- 
Inviato il ven 24 ago 2001 15:25:03 CEST da 217.58.46.90 [217.58.46.90]
http://www.neuromante.net/

 ha scritto nel messaggio
news:9m5ig4$caa$1...@fe1.cs.interbusiness.it...

Questa è la fonte:
http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis/web/vortex/display?s
lug=mindy05&date=20010805
purtroppo l'indirizzo internet non viene scritto per intero: come vedi, solo
una parte è in viola
Devi trascriverlo tutto a mano
questo è il testo in inglese:
--------------------------
Editorials & Opinion : Sunday, August 05, 2001
Mindy Cameron / Seattle Times editorial columnist
Theology has its place, and this isn't it
As Americans grapple with the 21st-century version of what it means to blend
religious values with public policy, consider this startling and
little-noticed news item last week from Pretoria, South Africa.
Roman Catholic bishops of southern Africa denounced the use of condoms in
the fight against HIV/AIDS, calling it an "immoral and misguided weapon."
These are clerics from the region of the world where people suffer the
highest incidence of HIV/AIDS. From one-fifth to one-third or more of all
adults in southern African nations are infected with the deadly virus.
There is virtually no debate among experts in medical science and public
health that condom use is critical to preventing the spread of the disease.
Yet, in a document released at the close of their meeting, the Southern
Africa Catholic Bishops' Conference said, "condoms may even be one of the
main reasons for the spread of HIV/AIDS."
In logic that is both convoluted and deadly, bishops reasoned that condom
use contributes to the "breaking down of self-control and mutual respect."
It's tempting to dismiss one more depressing AIDS-related headline from
southern Africa as unique to that part of the world and its exotic culture
and traditions.
In fact, Roman Catholic bishops in southern Africa are merely adhering
faithfully to edicts from the Vatican, where Pope John Paul II consistently
teaches that chastity and abstinence are the sole means to battle HIV/AIDS.
It's not easy to apply 12th-century religious doctrine to life in 2001. In
America, millions of Roman Catholics have for years wrestled privately, in
their homes and hearts, with the most challenging of church teachings. Many,
if not most, have strayed from church edicts against contraception. Some
struggle with church views against homosexuality.
President George W. Bush has made something of a public spectacle of his own
struggle over stem-cell research. Will he or won't he support
government-backed research?
The debate is over stem cells from human embryos. Should they be used in
research that scientists say has huge potential for saving lives now ravaged
by diseases such as Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, diabetes and others?
The narrower issue is whether federal money can be used for such research.
Public money is the major source of funding. Appropriately so, since
research results have great promise for all of society.
The view of the Catholic Church is that the embryo, however simple the life
form, is nonetheless human life and cannot be destroyed even for other
life-giving purposes.
With all due respect for the pope, who is indeed an important religious and
moral beacon for the world, the well-publicized meeting of president and
pope two weeks ago is of great concern.
I have no quarrel with the search for moral underpinnings to public policy
decisions. But let's also consider the practical consequences of those
decisions.
You don't have to go to southern Africa to find consequences of Catholic
Church teaching on abstinence and the use of condoms. Look no further than
within the church itself.
Last year, in an investigative report of AIDS in the priesthood, the Kansas
City Star found that Roman Catholic priests are dying from AIDS at a rate
four times that of the general U.S. population.
The report, based on extensive surveys of priests across the country,
revealed how church teachings on celibacy, homosexuality and safe sex can
create a deadly scenario for priests who violate their vows.
That is a problem for the church to resolve, if it chooses to.
The problem this nation has to resolve is how much theology to bring into
public policymaking. In difficult debates over supporting stem-cell
research, prohibiting human cloning, or bringing religious organizations
into government-backed social services, there is no bright line.
The best we can do is stick to secular and practical values of human
progress, and urge politicians to leave theology to the theologians.
Contact Mindy Cameron via e-mail at 
mindyc...@earthlink.net
 or write her
c/o The Seattle Times, P.O. Box 70, Seattle, WA 98111.
Saluti
<Gigi>

 --
No. Il bollettino prende notizie un pò da tutto il modo in vari bollettini
di informazione e li raggruppa.



Di cosa parla?
saluti
<Gigi>
La mia religione? la scienza nel sito:
http://www.rael.org

 ha scritto nel messaggio
news:DTsh7.44025$TS4.1...@news2.tin.it...


 Devi trascriverlo tutto a mano
per fortuna che avete dalla vostra la tecnologia degli "elohim",
va be' ci pensero io :-)
http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis/web/vortex/display?slug=mindy05&date=20010805
ciao,
Mauro A.

 (...)
Per fortuna che da bambino piccolino non mi confessavo spesso. E non andavo
all'oratorio!
E pensare che alcuni pretucci iniziarono la confessione con la domanda
"quando ti sei masturbato per l'ultima volta?"
Bye, Rkk


http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rael-science-select/message
Balle! O meglio bolle (di sapone) :-)
Nessun bollettino scientifico.
Ma una mailing list della setta anticlericale raeliana che riporta
l'articolo di un giornale statunitense al cui interno una singola frase
fa cenno ad un "dossier" sensazionalistico pubblicato un anno prima da
un altro giornale americano e riguardava un "sondaggio" su un campione
di preti statunitensi.
Nessun Sudafrica dunque e nessun giornale scientifico. Non solo ma
nessuna base scientifica di quel sondaggio i cui risultati vennero
duramente e pubblicamente sconfessati dal "Statistical Assessement
Service" una organizzazione specializzata nel promuovere un uso corretto
e scientifico della statistica nei dibattiti di interesse pubblico. 
Tipico esempio di come vengono costruite certe bolle di sapone... il
"bollettino scientifico" ha come fonte una singola frase di un giornale
che fa riferimento ad una vecchio "scoop scandalistico" la cui "base
scientifica" era stata gia' da tempo sconfessata...
Salutissimi. 
"Se sarete quello che dovete essere, metterete fuoco in tutto il mondo".
                                                          (GMG 2000) 
  ________
  \  /\  /
   \/  \/     T R X
   /\  /\    -------- (c)
  /  \/  \
  ^^^^^^^^

four times that of the general U.S. population.
[...]
Si cita un report di un anno prima... e basta. Un po' poco come fonte. 
Allora ho fatto delle ricerche e' ho trovato il "dossier". Nessun
"bollettino scientifico" ma un altro giornale locale (Kansas City Star)
che presenta un suo sondaggio che ha decisamente piu' dello
scandalistico e dei titoloni ad effetto che dell'indagine scientifica.
Ed infatti c'e' chi ha fatto le pulci a questo sondaggio e ha trovato
che fa acqua da tutte le parti... Ma stavolta non e' giornale popolare
ma una associazione scientifica specializzata nel promuovere il corretto
utilizzo della statistica nei dibattiti pubblici (Stats - Statistical
Assessement Service). 
E tra una pulce e l'altra, si scopre che il dato cosi sensazionalistico
tanto annunciato che getta una tale inquietante ombra sugli oltre 46000
preti americani e' basato su... soltanto 4  preti che hanno l'Aids e su
altri 3 che pensano di averlo (all'interno del campione considerato dal
sondaggio).
Come bene dice lo Stats, non ci vuole molta competenza in statistica per
capire quanto sia dubbiosa una analisi che proietta su scala nazionale
un dato riferito a 4 (o 7) individui. 
Una verifica impietosa, che smonta il sondaggio e che porta lo
Statistical Assessement Service a titolare: "Bad news on priests and
AIDS".
http://www.stats.org/newsletters/0002/priests.htm



Bella fonte "scientifica": una frase all'interno di un articolo di un
quotidiano. :-)
Fa riferimento ad un "dossier" senzazionalistico di un anno prima,
realizzato da un giornale popolare di Kansas City. Peccato che anche qui
la fonte non sia molto scientifica e nemmeno il sondaggio sembra
esserlo. 
Articolo per articolo, ne allego qui sotto uno  pubblicato dalla
Statistical Assessement Service e che "smonta" quel dossier...
Salutissimi.
  ________
  \  /\  /
   \/  \/     T R X
   /\  /\    -------- (c)
  /  \/  \
  ^^^^^^^^
-------------------------< allegato >------------------
Tratto da:
http://www.stats.org/newsletters/0002/priests.htm
(c) Statistical Assessement Service
Bad News on Priests and AIDS
Flaws in a newspaper's survey undermine an exposé on AIDS among Catholic
priests
On Jan. 29, an exclusive Kansas City Star story carried nationwide
through the Knight-Ridder News Service proclaimed a scandal of silence
in the Catholic Church involving priests and their sexuality. 
As the San Jose Mercury News headlined, the “Death Rate From AIDS is
Higher for Priests.” Based on the results of 801 responses to a mail
survey the Star sent to 3,013 priests, the story begins, “Hundreds of
Roman Catholic priests across the United States have died of
AIDS-related illnesses, and hundreds more are living with HIV, the virus
that causes the disease.” 
Despite the heavy and uncritical news coverage, questions about the
survey suggest caution in inferring a hidden AIDS epidemic among
priests. Instead, they illustrate the pitfalls awaiting news
organizations that conduct surveys in order to create headlines. 
Consider the following assertions about the survey from the Star article
and the Knight-Ridder dispatch: 
“The response rate was ‘very good’... said the Rev. Rodney DeMartini,
executive director of the National Catholic AIDS Network.” 
In fact, few survey researchers would consider a 27 percent response
rate to be “very good.” It means that nearly three of four priests who
were targeted failed to respond. Normally, when a response rate is this
low, follow-up surveys are conducted to increase the returns or at least
to learn whether the minority who responded were representative. 
“Given the sample size, the poll’s margin of error is 3.5 percentage
points, meaning that if the same poll were conducted 100 times, 95
percent of those times the results would be no more than 3.5 percentage
points higher or lower than the results of this poll,” the article said.
This boilerplate description of sampling error would only be valid if we
knew that the 801 respondents were representative of the nationwide
population of approximately 46,000 priests. But we have no idea whether
the minority who responded were unusually concerned about AIDS,
differentially open to questions of personal sexuality, or even more
likely to have a homosexual orientation (see below) than the 2,212
non-respondents. 
Without knowing such things, we cannot estimate how much other poll
results might vary from this survey’s findings. And this undermines the
substantive claims that follow. To wit, the article stated: “Fifteen
percent said they were homosexual and 5 percent bisexual. Estimates of
the percentage of homosexuals in the general population .... say the
figure is between 5 percent and 10 percent.” 
The potential skewing of the sample in regards to sexual orientation
means the finding of 15 percent homosexuality has no application beyond
the group who responded. (An additional 8 percent identified themselves
as bisexual or “other,” leaving only 77 percent self-identified
heterosexuals.) 
Moreover, the most comprehensive studies of male homosexuals in the
United States (such as the 1994 University of Chicago/National Opinion
Research Center study) put the percentage between 2 percent and 4
percent for the general population. The 10 percent upper limit cited in
the story presumably refers to the widely discredited studies of Alfred
Kinsey, which were based on small and highly skewed non-random samples. 
If the percentage of homosexual males in the United States is roughly 3
percent, then the fact that only 77 percent of the survey respondents
affirmed that they were heterosexual either means that priests are
disproportionately homosexual or that a disproportionate number of
homosexual priests chose to respond to this sexual survey.
Unfortunately, we can’t determine from this survey which statement is
true. Nonetheless, the article said, “About one in 114 said they either
have HIV or AIDS or might have but haven’t been tested. That would
translate into about 400 priests nationwide... .” 
Specifically, 0.5% of those who responded answered yes to having HIV or
AIDS, 0.4% answered possibly, and 99.1% answered no. In absolute terms,
this means seven individuals said they either have or fear they might
have AIDS. Any projection of seven individuals onto a nationwide stage
is statistically dubious, particularly when we don’t know how
representative this group is. 
Finally, the article concluded, “It appears priests are dying of AIDS at
a rate at least four times that of the general population.”
Specifically, the Star estimated the AIDS-related death rate among
priests to be “about 4 per 10,000, four times that of the general
population rate of roughly 1 per 10,000.” But an appropriate comparison
group for priests is surely not the general population, which includes
women and children, but rather adult males. 
Data from the most recent (1998) Statistical Abstract of the United
States put the AIDS-related death rate among adult males in the 90s at
about 4 per 10,000, the same rate that the Star estimates among priests.
On this basis, contrary to the headlines, the AIDS death rate is not
“higher for priests.”
When all is said and done, what can we conclude with scientific
confidence? There may or may not be a distinctive problem with AIDS
among US Catholic priests, but this study cannot provide the evidence
needed to determine whether this is so. 
However, a sidebar to the Star’s story did include one statement that is
unquestionably true: “The Star cannot ensure that the priests responding
are demographically and geographically representative of all Roman
Catholic priests. The priests who chose to respond to the survey may be
different from those who opted not to reply.”
Indeed. So why publish the results as if this crucial qualifier didn’t
matter? To be sure, every AIDS death represents a human tragedy, and
AIDS incidence among an avowedly celibate community raises special and
sensitive concerns. In this case, however, to paraphrase Alistair
Campbell, the Catholic Church appears “more spinned against than
spinning.”