A Jesuit trained teenager says he was a virgin throughout high school and many years later. That's a bombshell for the secular world.
He says he studied, tried to excel in sports and went to Mass every Sunday.
This is bombshell news.
But also, it is interesting how a hyper-sexualized secular world finds the term male virgin to be incredulous.
They would rather believe that he was having sex, sex, sex as a teenage Catholic boy taking advantage of women, raping them and bragging about it. Isn't that what secularists believe about men?
And certainly if you have a man or a woman to believe, who do you pick to believe? A woman of course, because secularists aren't sexist.
How do we recover Godly sexuality? It isn't the secular way folks. It's God's way as taught by the Catholic Church, the witness of Catholics notwithstanding.
15 comments:
Wait and see if the Jesuits from his time in High School come out and stand up for the accuser and defame and ridicule the judge.
"How do we recover Godly sexuality? It isn't the secular way folks. It's God's way as taught by the Catholic Church..."
Yes, but every time a priest tries to teach what the Church USED to teach, his bishop comes down hard in him. And heck, the Francis just signed over the Faith to the Chinese government. In my lifetime, it seems that the culture is bending and shaping the Church.
Bill Clinton and Ted Kennedy must have been his role models.
Maybe folks need a reminder from the New Testament, "there is no room for fornicators or aduluterers in the kingdom of heaven" (unless they repent). Heck today, on the "Georgia Pol" website, there was someone ridiculing Kavanuagh as a loser for not, well, engaging in such relations during college!
I imagine in the 1950s, "hooking up" was not tolerated at many colleges, but I guess the 1960s opened up the "anything goes" era, which we have a hard time shaking off today.
The issue is not whether it is credible that a man remain a virgin in high school and college. This should not be shocking at all. The issue concerns Judge Kavanaugh’s credibility. The FOX News interview with Judge Kavanaugh and his wife yesterday was painful to watch and one’s heart goes out to both of them. This said, one’s heart also goes out to any woman who has been sexually abused in the way that has been alleged in this case.
For the life of me I cannot understand why Judge Kavanaugh and the Republicans do not want an FBI investigation to establish the truth of the matter, to clear Judge Kavanaugh’s name, and to safeguard his reputation. What am I missing here?
A2, the reason for the disclosure of this woman's complaint now is to stall Kavanaugh's approval. It is a political move and quite blatant at that by the Dems. They knew about this letter (Diane Finestein) since July but only made it available now knowing that an FBI investigation, if approved, would delay his approval process until after the mid term elections.
All of this, from the political point of view, is quite disgusting but so evident for most of us.
I don't know the psychological state of this woman, but from what she describes she was more fearful of her parents finding out she was falling down drunk than someone
having taken advantage of her and unsuccessfully. Otherwise, it would have been reported to the law enforcement back then by her parents. Or would it have been?
The democrats should be soundly condemned for holding back on this for political gain and taking advantage of this women's letter they have known about since July which Diane says she wasn't sure of it veracity.
Let's face it, false accusations about this sort of thing happen all the time. We have to admit this too.
And finally, if it did happen, whoever the perp was and it does not appear to be Kavanaugh, if arrested back then, would have been arrested for a misdemeanor.
As a lawyer, I think you are well aware why there are statues of limitation. You need corroborating witnesses and an accuser who wasn't falling down drunk herself who can say where and when it happened. She can't!
A2, let's say that the accuser had pressed charges and it was a misdemeanor offense. What would the judge in 1980 have said to these two teenagers both of whom were falling down drunk and incapable of making rational decisions concerning their sexual hormones and committing a crime?
I suspect he would have chastised them both and said to them that being so intoxicated leads to these kinds of situations where judgement and an ability to control one's desires are compromised. Being falling down drunk of one's own volition and being flirtatious while being in such a state leads to these situations. How do you avoid it as a teenager. You don't get drunk to the point you can't even remember all the circumstance so the alleged crime.
Unfortunately, how many judges today in this climate of political correctness would be able to tell that hard truth to two teenagers?
I remained a virgin until I married. When I tell people that, they simply do not believe me. We seem to have adopted this notion that no man remains a virgin and an almost identical presumption about women. It seems almost sick that we insist that everyone has to break the commandments to be "normal".
Father McDonald, those were two excellent responses. What should have happened is, once Senator Feinstein received the letter, her staff at her behest would have gone into action to interview the accuser and find out if there was any evidence or corroboration to back up her accusation. Finding none, the matter would never have been presented to the committee or made public.
What most corrupt liberals forget, EVEN if these allegations were true (and they seem to lack objective corroboration) they happened when Kavanaugh was 17. But these same liberals were combative and defensive in support of Senator Oldsmobile Kennedy who killed a woman and was known to be an aggressive sexual predator WHILE he was a senator (and not 17) and there was a credible allegation of rape against then Governor Bill Clinton of Arkansas and then receiving oral sec in the Oval Office (not when he was 17) and taking a pass today on Keith Ellison where we have 911 reports. The Dem Party resembles a criminal organization. Harry Truman must be rolling over in his grave.
Father McDonald:
Thank you for your responses.
Of course, the Democrats are playing politics. But so are the Republicans. I think you know my attitude towards all of them and towards the hyper-partisan media that supports one side or the other.
Regarding the merits, I am not in possession of all the relevant facts. There needs to be proper process and that process needs to be de-politicized. That is why we have law and lawyers, and trained investigators.
I don’t know who put it out there that an FBI investigation into Professor Ford’s allegations would take weeks, although I wouldn’t mind betting it was the Republicans and FOX News. The FBI investigation into the Anita Hill-Clarence Thomas issue took two days.
Once or twice in my life I have been unjustly accused, although the accusations were not of a sexual nature. It is a horrible feeling. If I were accused as Judge Kavanaugh has been accused, and knowing I was innocent, I would want an impartial investigation by trained investigators to establish the facts and clear my name, not a highly politicized and partisan political process designed to ramrod my nomination through, on the one side, or tear it down, on the other. I would imagine that anyone unjustly accused would want this.
Not having an investigation creates the appearance of something to hide, much as Donald Trump’s refusal to divulge his tax returns creates the appearance of something to hide. As an innocent man, I would not want to create this appearance. Sadly, though, I suspect Judge Kavanaugh is as much the victim of manipulation by the Republicans as Professor Ford is of manipulation by the Democrats
Anonymous 2,
You must have missed Joe Biden's clip from 1991 during the Anita Hill hit job on Clarence Thomas:
Then-Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Joe Biden (D-Del.), who was presiding over the Clarence Thomas hearings, called for everyone to stop invoking the FBI in that manner.
"The next person who refers to an FBI report as being worth anything, obviously doesn’t understand anything. FBI explicitly does not, in this or any other case, reach a conclusion, period. Period," Biden said.
TJM:
And the point of your posts is? They seem non-responsive to mine. More Trumpian distraction tactics I suspect.
Anonymous 2,
Actually it is right on point. Groper Biden didn't believe the FBI had any say in the matter back then but now he says it does. I would not accuse you of being Clintonion, so why accuse me of being Trumpian? The Dems on the Judiciary Committee failed on the substance with Kavanaugh so they are now employing Stalinistic dirty tricks. I would be ashamed of my party if they did this. I suspect they will pay at the polls dearly because most Americans believe in essential fairness. Even Alan Dershowitz has slammed them on this.
TJM:
I’m sorry but what Biden did or did not do is irrelevant to the issue of what should happen with Judge Kavanaugh. As we learned at our mother’s knee, “two wrongs do not make a right,” even if prior actions are sometimes relevant to the issue of hypocrisy or to the question of binding precedent. And here we are talking about moral right and wrong as well as prudential right and wrong.
All this mess, and the mess still to come (given the new allegations today), could have been avoided if President Trump had done what I believe he should have done in the first place—nominate the woman from Notre Dame. But of course, nominating a female would have been “too PC” wouldn’t it?
PC or not, having a conservative female Justice on the Court would have been far healthier for issues like abortion. So why didn’t President Trump do this? Doesn’t the question answer itself? Why does he do or not do anything? Answer—because he sees it to his own personal advantage.
As I have said repeatedly, I am disgusted by all of them!
Post a Comment