Clint wants attention - well, he's got it

A blog that I removed from this site near four years ago (see Tidy Time) has published a scurrilous attack on me because of a post I wrote the other day on the NZ paedophiles who were part of a giant paedophile ring. I wanted to know who they were and was hoping they wouldn't get name suppression.

So, I am accused of faux outrage. Given that I am a parent of two children that I watch out for, this accusation has to be just for effect. Without it, I suppose the whole post might flop. Here's the justification:

For a blog that is so openly catholic to now be all upset about the awful crime of kiddy fiddling is a joke. Plenty of perverts in the catholic church - I'd be willing to wager some of these perverts are part of one of our organised religious movements in NZ.

If there are still any pederasts (homosexual men who target teenage boys) in the Catholic Church in NZ, I would also want to know who they were. At this point, there are no reports of who the paedophiles are, and furthermore, given that the site they were a part of was called boylover.net, where men talked about their sexual feelings towards boys, there is a high chance that we aren't looking at paedophiles here, it's pederasts.

Then there is the implication that pederasty is part of the Catholic faith - which is dead wrong. All sexual activity outside of marriage is mortally sinful and if unrepented, will lead the sinner directly to Hell. That is what we believe. Unfortunately, over the last number of decades, a great many unsuitable men were admitted into the priesthood. This problem has been dealt with recently, but the effects are unfortunately ongoing. From What the US Military could learn from the Catholic Priesthood:

Homosexual relationships caused a deep fracture in the priestly male fraternity. Pseudo-intimacy and intrigue replaced the outward looking evangelization of apostolic brotherhood. Bishops were unwilling to discipline the abusive priests under their charge. The Communio became divided. Religious leaders hid their own homosexual proclivities. The worst priests desacralized the liturgy and their vows and their priestly identity, while good priests often became isolated, fearful, and rigid. All priests were maimed.

We've had time to reflect, analyse and understand this issue. I don't think Clint is really interested in what the problem has been and how it is being solved. He's more interested in pushing his view of the world in which sex can be had any which way, and there's no consequence to anyone.

Lucia Marie, the author of the post is hardly the type of mild mannered christian you'd want to live next door to.

We've told by our neighbours that we are great to live next door to, and that our children are wonderful, friendly and polite.  Clint does not know me personally.

If you have the misfortune to read their blog get ready to see her frothing at the mouth over the mention of equal rights to all citizens.

Most people reading this blog be a little puzzled by this statement, unless they know what he is implying. The redefinition of marriage, for instance. Equal rights, in some people's vocabulary, means changing long established traditions to fit the new amorality.

For people that apparently are for free enterprise and freedom of choice and expression, ask them how they feel about gay people.

Freedom is not what this blog is about. We have the word "Conservative" in our blog name for a reason. Here is what Conservatism means to us: 10 Conservative Principles. The first being:

...the conservative believes that there exists an enduring moral order. That order is made for man, and man is made for it: human nature is a constant, and moral truths are permanent. A society in which men and women are governed by belief in an enduring moral order, by a strong sense of right and wrong, by personal convictions about justice and honor, will be a good society—whatever political machinery it may utilize; while a society in which men and women are morally adrift, ignorant of norms, and intent chiefly upon gratification of appetites, will be a bad society—no matter how many people vote and no matter how liberal its formal constitution may be.

An enduring moral order means that you don't go about redefining or destroying the moral order.  That leads to chaos, which leads to destruction.  As is happening right now, before our very eyes.  Kind of like being sucked into a black hole in slow motion, so slowly it's hard to see it. 

Anyway, Clint goes on:

You either support freedom for all or you don't. That's why these sorts of people would love the idea of a religious state like Iran, but run by christians, able to administer death penalties to those who don't conform to their narrow-minded moralistic codes.

Well, we don't support unrestrained freedom. That's just license, not freedom. Easy to confuse.

Furthermore, at this point in time, Catholics cannot support the death penalty. As Pope John Paul II has said, "Modern society has the means of protecting itself, without definitively denying criminals the chance to reform."

Don't get me wrong, they have the freedom to believe whatever they like and say whatever they choose. But as long as they insist that they are also part of the VWRC* then it is insulting to all right wingers.

Clint is stuck in a time warp. Again, this blog is called NZ Conservative. Conservatism transcends left/right politics.

Graham Capill is the closest people like NZ Conservative have got to getting one of their own into Parliament. Just like Lucia and her co bloggers, he too was an angry religious nut bar and look what he was into.

And now, true to form, Clint shows his real self. He accuses me of being like Graham Capill, who was imprisoned for molesting an 8 year old girl.

In another time, Clint, doing that to someone's face would have resulted in a duel.  Instead, it's just a blog post.  This time.