The researchers found that, in mirror image to abuse in the community, three-quarters of the victims were male, most between 10 and 15.
The rest of Zwartz's comment is about the report's strong recommendation that people who work with children and adolescents are carefully chosen and vetted, and that the clergy should never be left alone with adolescents in places and on occasions that abuse could occur.
Wonderful.
Once again, no mention of the fact, so clearly on the record, that homosexuals are those most likely to abuse the young. Instead we get the usual smear of all clergy. No questioning about the attitudes and principles of those homosexuals who parade as clergy when they must know (as any orthodox Christian would know) that homosexual behaviour, let alone the abuse of the young, is opposed to Christian teaching.
And what about commenting on the fraud and imposture? What about commenting on the changes in community attitudes towards sexual behaviour in the 1970s and 1980s and the influence of the Kinsey generation? What about the possible motives of those who become priests and then go on to abuse young males? No way will such inconvenient questions come into it. There's a political agenda to be pursued and that for The Age takes precedence.
Of course, a report in The Age will not ignore any opportunity of having a kick at Catholics. Thus we have:
"There's a spirit of openness in this report that contrasts with the attitude of other churches, especially the Catholic Church," said Mr Salter, director of Adults Surviving Child Abuse [and Victims advocate].
Vested interests? Don't dare suggest that. And how perverse of the Catholic Church not to fall in with the various agendas against it.
