View Full Version : Christian Heritage Leader is Child Molester
songbird36
2 Apr 2005, 01:08 AM
The erstwhile leader of the Christian Heritage Party in New Zealand has just been convicted of molesting an 8 year old girl on multiple occasions.
He has been stood down from his position as a Police Prosecutor and looks set to go to jail. His co-leader has described this as a complete "betrayal of trust" and has sent sincere condolences to the victim.
How many other leaders and people in positions of power are doing this sort of thing?
This case comes hot on the heels of recent charges against two top cops in NZ for raping a Hamilton woman 20 odd years ago.
jyakulis
2 Apr 2005, 01:09 AM
Is this suppose to be surprising?
wait april fools?
songbird36
2 Apr 2005, 01:11 AM
In his case yeah - he was an outspoken "moral crusader" against child abuse and sexual exploitation. I'm sure these people often adopt a front like that to disguise their own behaviour.
jyakulis
2 Apr 2005, 01:14 AM
In his case yeah - he was an outspoken "moral crusader" against child abuse and sexual exploitation. I'm sure these people often adopt a front like that to disguise their own behaviour.
well, i guess his views of child abuse our different than the average bear then hmm?
Division56
2 Apr 2005, 01:15 AM
It does not suprise me...
Deeply closeted gay guys often put up a front of really macho straight behavior, because they are afraid to come out...
It seems he put up a front just the same. Becoming the polor opposite if what he was afraid of being found as.
jyakulis
2 Apr 2005, 01:17 AM
Hey sonbird i read the article....apparently he has a law degree. Very interesting indeed!
songbird36
2 Apr 2005, 01:20 AM
Well actually he pleaded "guilty" and was in tears; appearing very contrite.
However one has to wonder whether the guilty plea was motivated more by the desire to avoid a longer sentence, rather than concern for the victim. It often is.
jyakulis
2 Apr 2005, 01:20 AM
Well actually he pleaded "guilty" and was in tears; appearing very contrite.
However one has to wonder whether the guilty plea was motivated more by the desire to avoid a longer sentence, rather than concern for the victim. It often is.
Didn't he get beat up outside the courtroom? I saw the picture in your paper. lol
songbird36
2 Apr 2005, 01:22 AM
Yes a young guy was charged and convicted with assaulting him.
I'm not sure if he was related to the victim.
Capill is the same guy who said a Maori statute with an erect penis was "obscene".
jyakulis
2 Apr 2005, 01:30 AM
this reminds me of a southpark episode
Mr. Evans: Okay, so what are some other things that we can do besides molest our children?
Man: [in back row] See a movie?
Mr. Evans: Sure, "see a movie"'s good. [writes it down on the blackboard] We could see a movie instead of molesting our children. What else?
Mrs. McCormick: Make a sweater?
Mr. Evans: Uh huh. I'll put ah, "knitting, sewing." [writeis them down] Who's got another one?
Blond Man: [to Liane's left] Molest children?
Mr. Evans: Nonono, we're looking for things to do besides molesting our children.
Blond Man: Oh. Fishing?
Mr. Evans: Fishing's good. Uh huh. [writes that down]
songbird36
2 Apr 2005, 01:41 AM
Hmm - well his wife did stand beside him throughout the whole sordid affair!
jyakulis
2 Apr 2005, 01:44 AM
Hmm - well his wife did stand beside him throughout the whole sordid affair!
Even after he was GUILTY! She was probably in denial. Did they have kids? If I were her I'd be freaking out. I don't get the whole complex with them, even priests. Do you think they go into priesthood out of guilt for their lust toward children or something hoping to be forgiven.
Kotuku
2 Apr 2005, 07:31 AM
The erstwhile leader of the Christian Heritage Party in New Zealand has just been convicted of molesting an 8 year old girl on multiple occasions.
:shock: OMG!!!!
I leave the country for 15 months & weird things happen! (not that i'm suggesting that my absence has caused the weird things, like some kind of inbalance in the ying-yang of the country)
What next? Winstin Peters has an affair with a Filipino?? :thelook:
Biff_Loman
2 Apr 2005, 07:45 AM
And the universe continues to unfold as it should.
Well, not quite, but this sort of thing is incredibly heartening to me. I love poetic justice.
songbird36
2 Apr 2005, 07:54 AM
I'm not sure there's anything poetic about it.
If there is, perhaps you'd like to enlighten us? It just looks grubby and sordid from where I'm sitting.
songbird36
2 Apr 2005, 07:55 AM
Even after he was GUILTY! She was probably in denial. Did they have kids? If I were her I'd be freaking out. I don't get the whole complex with them, even priests. Do you think they go into priesthood out of guilt for their lust toward children or something hoping to be forgiven.
They have 10 kids. Wonder what they think about their Dad being a sexual pervert. In stauch Christian families the father is invariably the old fashioned "head of the household".
Wow a Christian that's a pervert. Is there any other kind?
Kotuku
2 Apr 2005, 09:23 AM
Wow a Christian that's a pervert. Is there any other kind?
:rolleyes2 I thought Shai gar was the master deBAITER
Biff_Loman
2 Apr 2005, 09:40 AM
I've already stated in another thread that I have too many opinions, so I'm going to have to leave my previous comment as is.
Miss Anthropic
2 Apr 2005, 10:20 AM
Hmmm, interesting. Those religious leaders usually molest little boys. Except the Mormons, they seem to molest the little girls and then marry them as young teenagers.
They have 10 kids. Wonder what they think about their Dad being a sexual pervert. In stauch Christian families the father is invariably the old fashioned "head of the household".
I'm willing to bet they experienced his perversion first hand! No pun intended.
songbird36
2 Apr 2005, 10:32 AM
Normally I'd probably take Mgbradsh's line and make some wry or cynical comment. I'm not surprised either by this.
But for some reason when I read about this in the news today I just felt very sad..and disillusioned.
Biff_Loman
2 Apr 2005, 11:04 AM
That being the case, Songbird, I am sorry for being caustic.
I would explain my beef with the religious right in detail, but I'm getting tired of myself.
Instead, I will express sadness that yes: an individual has been shamed in front of his family, friends, and community because of urges that he could not control. And that is a sad thing.
Again, I apologize for the reflex post earlier.
That being the case, Songbird, I am sorry for being caustic.
I would explain my beef with the religious right in detail, but I'm getting tired of myself.
Instead, I will express sadness that yes: an individual has been shamed in front of his family, friends, and community because of urges that he could not control. And that is a sad thing.
Again, I apologize for the reflex post earlier.
If it weren't for "the sins of the father" I'd say he deserves the public humiliation for what he did to the children. I'd go as far as to say what he is getting probably isn't enough.
songbird36
3 Apr 2005, 01:37 AM
This last post is quite apposite. Predictably enough my vicar in church this morning preached on this topic, and on the challenges facing the Christian church and society as a whole in dealing with incidents like this.
He spent a large portion of the sermon talking about the Christian principle of forgiveness as it applies to this case - stating that in the end the victim, church and society should (after a period of shaming, and public accountability) find it in their Christian hearts to forgive this man as Jesus would have done. He said the forgiveness would be hard won, and only after Capill had demsintrated adequate accountability and responsbility in terms of his future role as a church denizen.
At this point I interjected and said "why *should* we be expected to forgive something which many people regard as unforgivable"? Doesn't forgiveness just let this man off the hook, morally, for the crimes he has committed?
Under the Old Testament Capill would likely have been stoned to death for this behaviour, by an angry crowd. Why do we pussy-foot around now, with concepts like grace and forgiveness, when people do things that put them beyond the pale?
What do others think? Has Christian forgiveness gone too far, and is it being used as an apologetic for people who should know better than to ever do these things in the first place?
Biff_Loman
3 Apr 2005, 05:47 AM
What do others think? Has Christian forgiveness gone too far, and is it being used as an apologetic for people who should know better than to ever do these things in the first place?
As an agnostic: perhaps. It depends on how we define forgiveness. If forgiveness includes an assumption that God will help him reform his behaviour: absolutely not. The man needs (human) help to prevent him from doing it again. If an effective solution cannot be reached, he should be kept separate from potential victims.
I doubt that reconciliation between this individual and the community can ever occur unless the individual is truly contrite. That could be difficult to ascertain. "I got caught" is a great reason to be sorry.
Now, from a Christian perspective: God's grace is unlimited. If the sinner wishes to approach God with a spirit of humility and repentance, he will not be denied forgiveness.
As for man: It appears that Jesus nullified stoning with the "he is without sin" speech. At least we could be relatively confident that the man shouldn't be smashed to bits. But should he remain integrated in the community? I would say that only the unrepentant should be cast out, based on my own interpretation of scripture.
But I am no longer a Christian, so I'm not particularly connected to this dilemma.
Oh I love it - this is the stuff that slowly but surely lets people know if they had any doubts before that there wasn't a god who gives a shit about us then they definetly don't have them after this kind of shit.
Horrible for the kids but it serves a greater good I suppose in the long run.
Songbird, why did god let a little girl get molested by this christian leader guy?
songbird36
3 Apr 2005, 10:22 AM
Songbird, why did god let a little girl get molested by this christian leader guy?
That is one of the perennial questions for Christians. If there's a God then why is there evil in the world?
My answer: God sees everything but He does not control everything. He allows humankind to act according to their free will, and sometimes He will intervene to influence events and sometimes not.
Kotuku
3 Apr 2005, 10:34 AM
That is one of the perennial questions for Christians. If there's a God then why is there evil in the world?
My answer: God sees everything but He does not control everything. He allows humankind to act according to their free will, and sometimes He will intervene to influence events and sometimes not.
Precisely, If God* had absolute control over everything, we'd all be puppets without free will...... and that would be a fairly meaningless kind of life.... and if there is a God, I don't think thats how he/she/it would run things.
:rolleyes: Sorry PPC,... the "because there is evil in the world, God can't exist" argument just doesn't "cut it". Besides which, I think we all know you were just trying to bait for an argument.
*assuming there is a discrete entity. Personally I am a theist-agnostic.
songbird36
3 Apr 2005, 10:40 AM
Yeah but unfortunately he's caught me in a good mood.
lol
Kotuku
3 Apr 2005, 10:45 AM
Yeah but unfortunately he's caught me in a good mood.
lol
:D
That is one of the perennial questions for Christians. If there's a God then why is there evil in the world?
My answer: God sees everything but He does not control everything. He allows humankind to act according to their free will, and sometimes He will intervene to influence events and sometimes not.
Well if god knows everything and god creates child molestors who molest children then god molests children.
Precisely, If God* had absolute control over everything, we'd all be puppets without free will...... and that would be a fairly meaningless kind of life.... and if there is a God, I don't think thats how he/she/it would run things.
:rolleyes: Sorry PPC,... the "because there is evil in the world, God can't exist" argument just doesn't "cut it". Besides which, I think we all know you were just trying to bait for an argument.
*assuming there is a discrete entity. Personally I am a theist-agnostic.
Actually it cuts it very well. Why does god allow little children to be fucked in their assholes by full grown men? To teach them a lesson about forgiveness?
Kotuku
3 Apr 2005, 12:18 PM
Actually it cuts it very well. Why does god allow little children to be fucked in their assholes by full grown men? To teach them a lesson about forgiveness?
:rolleyes: Oooh,... melodramatic !!
Sorry,... your logic (not only in this thread) implys that there is either;
1) a supernatural entity that controls every aspect of the world (and anything that said entity allows, is because said entity wants to teach a lesson or punish etc), or ..
2) There is nothing. No entity, no spiritual force, nada, nothing.
Sorry,... I don't think that those are the only two options & frankly, thinking that there are only two extreme options seems a bit narrow minded to me. I on the other hand am open minded.
Again,.. I think you are only trying to bait people.
I don't see how it is possible for something to be a god ... sometimes when god feels like it but not all times. I bet you think god gets tired and things like that and god has feelings right? Even though somehow god knows everything so before god had a feeling god knew god had a feeling about something well I can't figure it out maybe you can explain it better, and no I am not trying to "bait" anyone unless you call discussing things on a public message forum "baiting."
:rolleyes: Oooh,... melodramatic !!
Sorry,... your logic (not only in this thread) implys that there is either;
1) a supernatural entity that controls every aspect of the world (and anything that said entity allows, is because said entity wants to teach a lesson or punish etc), or ..
2) There is nothing. No entity, no spiritual force, nada, nothing.
Sorry,... I don't think that those are the only two options & frankly, thinking that there are only two extreme options seems a bit narrow minded to me. I on the other hand am open minded.
Again,.. I think you are only trying to bait people.
So then are you saying god has things that are out of gods control inside this system of things that god created? God let people have free will yet god already knows what those people are going to do so god knowingly let someone go do something like rape a child? I mean - I can't make sense of it - why don't you help me figure this out because as I am looking at this it doesn't make sense unless you buy into some larger pictue with some kind of a belief system based on nothing but human emotion/"faith."
Kotuku
3 Apr 2005, 01:13 PM
I don't see how it is possible for something to be a god ... sometimes when god feels like it but not all times. I bet you think god gets tired and things like that and god has feelings right? Even though somehow god knows everything so before god had a feeling god knew god had a feeling about something well I can't figure it out maybe you can explain it better, and no I am not trying to "bait" anyone unless you call discussing things on a public message forum "baiting."
:huh: If i've misinterpreted your reasons for debating, I apologise.
I'm probably the wrong person to argue with, regarding gods. I do not believe in a God sitting in the sky that rules & controls absolutely all.
If there was one like that, and it allowed only absolute good in the world, - how would we know what good was? If everything was good wouldn't we be leading artificial robotic lives?...
I do subjectively feel that there is "something" (and as that is my own subjective feeling, its not something I can logically "prove"). I however don't define what that "something" is in absolute terms. In reality that "something" might be an entity,.. it might be a "soulfull global conciousness",.. or the subjective feeling might be derived from nothing but wonky synapses in my brain.
If there was a God that was all-loving to the extent that he controlled everything & people never knew what bad was (& without bad, how can you understand true happiness),.. if we were all diety controlled robots,... would that really sound-like an all loving God ? - where people don't understand what happiness is?
In any case, I trained as an Evolutionary biologist. So I don't go for the idea of precise literal interpretations. My spiritual "beliefs" are pretty well abstract.
If there is an entity, I think it would be more like a parent (i'm talking about ideal parents here)
- would you prefer a parent that controls your every move to the extent where you never have the freedom to learn anything on your own, or
- would you prefer a parent that that guides you, yet gives you the freedom to learn some things on your own.
Ok,... thats just an analogy (i'm sure you can poke lots of holes in it) & remember I'm not trying to prove that there is a God/Entity,... just that its not neccessarily a black & white issue.
What do you mean would I prefer? The way you say that makes me think that because you believe something to be a certain way that it is a certain way. As if we got a choice in what actually occured if I preferred a parent that did this as opposed to one that did that.
It doesn't matter what anyone prefers because however reality is - it IS.
You don't seem like you have very many definitions or "limits" as to what your hypothetical god has. Does your god know everything always?
Kotuku
3 Apr 2005, 01:30 PM
What do you mean would I prefer? The way you say that makes me think that because you believe something to be a certain way that it is a certain way. As if we got a choice in what actually occured if I preferred a parent that did this as opposed to one that did that.
It doesn't matter what anyone prefers because however reality is - it IS.
It was just a Philosophical analogy to illustrate what I subjectively perceive to be the difference between an all controlling God, & one that guides. I was trying to illustrate that in a way the second could be more "loving".
In anycase, you are correct that there is an absolute reality,
Whether or not our limited human perceptions are sufficient to ever logically understand it, or prove it is another matter.
Kotuku
3 Apr 2005, 01:32 PM
You don't seem like you have very many definitions or "limits" as to what your hypothetical god has. Does your god know everything always?
Well, I did say that I am open minded, and my spiritual concept is more of an abstraction.
So to put it in very simple terms - you don't know what you believe?
Kotuku
3 Apr 2005, 01:55 PM
So to put it in very simple terms - you don't know what you believe?
No.
I believe that there are several different possabilities, and I realise that human perception might be insufficient to accurately perceive whatever the true reality is, and if I choose one of the different possabilites that I perceive, I might pick the wrong one (or it might be that the true reality is something I haven't even conceptualised).
There are so many different religions in the world that say they are the correct one & obviously some of those aren't.....
Claverhouse
3 Apr 2005, 02:06 PM
I believe that there are several different possabilities, and I realise that human perception might be insufficient to accurately perceive whatever the true reality is, and if I choose one of the different possabilites that I perceive, I might pick the wrong one (or it might be that the true reality is something I haven't even conceptualised).
Perfectly put.
Claverhouse :ph34r:
No.
I believe that there are several different possabilities, and I realise that human perception might be insufficient to accurately perceive whatever the true reality is, and if I choose one of the different possabilites that I perceive, I might pick the wrong one (or it might be that the true reality is something I haven't even conceptualised).
There are so many different religions in the world that say they are the correct one & obviously some of those aren't.....
Some? I think you mean all except one or you mean all of them or you mean none of them? But some? So let me get this right you are scared to choose the wrong one yet some people, who knows how, were some how able to figure out the right one?
If you chose the one you perceived to be right then how could any god be angry that you chose that one even if it was the wrong one?
Kotuku
3 Apr 2005, 05:40 PM
Some? I think you mean all except one or you mean all of them or you mean none of them? But some? So let me get this right you are scared to choose the wrong one yet some people, who knows how, were some how able to figure out the right one?
If you chose the one you perceived to be right then how could any god be angry that you chose that one even if it was the wrong one?
In absolute terms one could say that either only one of them is correct or none. However I did not write it in that manner because it could be argued that there might be elements of the "truth" in more than one religion......
I think you totally misunderstood what I was saying regarding not wanting to choose. No, its got nothing to do with some perceived God angry that I chose the wrong one. My conceptualisation of religion, life the universe & everything is an constantly developing philosophical process, & deciding which conceptualisation is "correct" at this stage would be premature. Basically I'm working from the idea that the "truth" might be somewhat different to the normal conceptualisations. The way we perceive and conceptualise the world, is afterall limited by our human cognitive capabilities.
That is one of the perennial questions for Christians. If there's a God then why is there evil in the world?
My answer: God sees everything but He does not control everything. He allows humankind to act according to their free will, and sometimes He will intervene to influence events and sometimes not.
You are defending deism, not Christianity.
Powered by vBulletin™ Version 4.0.7 Copyright © 2012 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.