Speaking of film director Roman Polanski's crime against 13 year old Samantha Gailey a little more than 30 years ago, Whoopi Goldberg has said, "I know it wasn't rape-rape. I think it was something else, but I don't believe it was rape-rape."
One can always rely upon Ms. Goldberg to provide intelligent commentary on world events. Meanwhile, back on planet earth, David Wells, a former district attorney on the case, was quoted as having said, "This pedophile raped a 13 year-old girl. It's still an outrageous offense." Transcripts detail just how outrageous.
One can always rely upon Ms. Goldberg to provide intelligent commentary on world events. Meanwhile, back on planet earth, David Wells, a former district attorney on the case, was quoted as having said, "This pedophile raped a 13 year-old girl. It's still an outrageous offense." Transcripts detail just how outrageous.
What does the Catechism of the Catholic Church teach about rape? It says that, "Rape is the forcible violation of the sexual intimacy of another person. It does injury to justice and charity. Rape deeply wounds the respect, freedom, and physical and moral integrity to which every person has a right. It causes grave damage that can mark the victim for life. It is always an intrinsically evil act. Graver still is the rape of children..." (2356).
And Ms. Goldberg wants us to believe what exactly? That somehow statutory rape is not really "rape-rape"? That it is not really an "intrinsically evil act"?
Is this really the message that Ms. Goldberg wants to send to others? Does she really want to downplay the seriousness of child rape? This is the same woman who levelled unfair accusations against Pope John Paul II while adding that the Holy Father "infuriates" her. See here.
3 comments:
Maybe she thinks this is not serious because she can't think-think?
In his column for On Faith, Rev. Thomas Reese, S.J., a senior fellow at the Woodstock Theological Center, said: "Imagine if the Knight of Columbus decided to give an award to a pedophile priest who had fled the country to avoid prison. The outcry would be universal. Victim groups would demand the award be withdrawn and that the organization apologize. Religion reporters would be on the case with the encouragement of their editors. Editorial writers and columnist would denounce the knights as another example of the insensitivity of the Catholic Church to sexual abuse.
And they would all be correct. And I would join them.
But why is there not similar outrage directed at the film industry for giving an award to Roman Polanski, who not only confessed to statutory rape of a 13-year-old girl but fled the country prior to sentencing? Why have film critics and the rest of the media ignored this case for 31 years? He even received an Academy award in 2003. Are the high priests of the entertainment industry immune to criticism?"
Bob Ellis at Dakota Voice suggests that "Perhaps Goldberg’s determination that this isn’t 'rape rape' hinges on the fact that the girl was not yet a mature human being. Perhaps, in the vein of President Obama’s science czar John Holdren, Goldberg sees the girl as not yet fully developed and thus not yet fully human. And just like an unborn child that we can kill at will, the girl is not worthy of the human rights and protections the rest of us enjoy."
That possibility is very disturbing. Talk about a broken moral compass.
Post a Comment