Graham Capell

**idb** · 30th June 2005, 14:15

Originally Posted by Paul in NZ

The easy thing is to hurl abuse and feel all smug that one of the bible thumpers is exposed as having feet of clay etc etc.
it’s just too easy to gloat at someone that’s worse than we are while ignoring our own faults and vices.

Maybe we should not be so smug, maybe we should strive to be better people because of this sort of thing occurring in society. Lifting our own game would be an apt response, I certainly know I’m far from perfect and at times (usually unintentionally) I come across as a real bastard. I think I better work on that!

Cheers

Sorry Paul, I can't agree in this case.
I could compete for the New Zealand Fence-Sitting Team normally but in this case I feel justified in casting stones.
The difference between this man and other paedophiles is that he set himself up as a moral leader and was a most public judge of others.
Not only has he hurt his victims, family and friends (just as any paedophile does) but he has caused untold damage to the Christian community and all those who looked up to him and trusted him.
Despite what we may think about Christianity and its adherents, it is full of good, well-meaning people who believe in living well and men like Graeme Capell betray these folk in the worst way.
I know it has been said before but it is the monumental hyprocrisy that sets this man and his crime apart.

**idb** · 30th June 2005, 14:25

Originally Posted by Zed

This loser is not a representative of the truth but rather a deceiver.

The trouble is Zed, when they are in the pulpit, how can you tell which they are?
How can you tell which one is the right one to listen to/follow?
What if I decided to better myself and become a Christian, what if I devoted my life to a church but years later discovered that I had chosen the wrong crew to kick around with.
That is some of the damage this man has caused.

I'm getting myself worked up now.....calm blue ocean, calm blue ocean, calm blue ocean........

**Lou Girardin** · 30th June 2005, 14:26

Originally Posted by Zed

You missed it Lou. In the Bible it's whatever age after puberty that a man or woman leaves their parents and joins to their spouse in marriage. Therefore the age of consent is not fixed, but certainly 5 year old children do not qualify!

So an 11 year old who's started menstruating is fair game?
Without starting an avalanche of biblical quotes, this is nonsense.
Biblical justification for sex with children tends not to work these days. But give the Yanks time and they'll find a way.

**Paul in NZ** · 30th June 2005, 14:27

Originally Posted by idb

Sorry Paul, I can't agree in this case.
I could compete for the New Zealand Fence-Sitting Team normally but in this case I feel justified in casting stones.
The difference between this man and other paedophiles is that he set himself up as a moral leader and was a most public judge of others.
Not only has he hurt his victims, family and friends (just as any paedophile does) but he has caused untold damage to the Christian community and all those who looked up to him and trusted him.
Despite what we may think about Christianity and its adherents, it is full of good, well-meaning people who believe in living well and men like Graeme Capell betray these folk in the worst way.
I know it has been said before but it is the monumental hyprocrisy that sets this man and his crime apart.

I think his behaviour is pretty atypical and not all that different. You can say the same thing about the priests, scout leaders, boys brigade dudes etc etc that have been caught out as well.

When it comes down to it. Are you not now doing exactly what he did?

If I assume that you are a christian then yes I can understand how this may hurt you but it's bigger than this, these people have hurt every father that took his daughter to kindy, every guy that wants to coach his kids sports team etc etc. I still remember the looks and comments I got when I coached our daughters F1 netball team... Despite no one else stepping up to do it!

It's got fuck all to do with his religion, thats just an amusing side issue.

Rather than burning the guy I'd like to know more about this. Why? How on earth did he think he was going to get away with it? Was it worth it? How did he develop this 'taste' etc etc in the hope we can stop it again. Burning the guy is a pretty attractive option but it just drives the others deeper.

I dunno. This is geting tired

**idb** · 30th June 2005, 14:41

Originally Posted by Paul in NZ

I think his behaviour is pretty atypical and not all that different. You can say the same thing about the priests, scout leaders, boys brigade dudes etc etc that have been caught out as well.

When it comes down to it. Are you not now doing exactly what he did?

If I assume that you are a christian then yes I can understand how this may hurt you but it's bigger than this, these people have hurt every father that took his daughter to kindy, every guy that wants to coach his kids sports team etc etc. I still remember the looks and comments I got when I coached our daughters F1 netball team... Despite no one else stepping up to do it!

It's got fuck all to do with his religion, thats just an amusing side issue.

Rather than burning the guy I'd like to know more about this. Why? How on earth did he think he was going to get away with it? Was it worth it? How did he develop this 'taste' etc etc in the hope we can stop it again. Burning the guy is a pretty attractive option but it just drives the others deeper.

I dunno. This is geting tired

No, I'm not Christian and I agree the religion issue is something of a red herring, except that is another group that he has damaged as well as those you mentioned above.

**MSTRS:Me** · 30th June 2005, 14:42

Originally Posted by Paul in NZ

This is geting tired

Agreed - all anyone seems to do is talk about what to do. These paedophiles are not able to be 'rehabilitated' - they are full of remorse (yea right) when caught, but they bide their time until their freedom to practice their little party tricks is once again available to them. I've heard the term 'chemical castration' bandied about & understand it to mean application of an injection periodically. That assumes the co-operation of caught offender. Think they are likely to go willingly???
Hang their nads in a pot of hydrochloric acid - now that kind of 'chemical castration' I can accept.

**Zed** · 30th June 2005, 15:16

Originally Posted by Lou Girardin

So an 11 year old who's started menstruating is fair game?
Without starting an avalanche of biblical quotes, this is nonsense.
Biblical justification for sex with children tends not to work these days. But give the Yanks time and they'll find a way.

Don't act like a right pillock Lou, in no way was I justifying sex with children and you know it!

**Zed** · 30th June 2005, 15:25

Originally Posted by idb

The trouble is Zed, when they are in the pulpit, how can you tell which they are?
How can you tell which one is the right one to listen to/follow?
What if I decided to better myself and become a Christian, what if I devoted my life to a church but years later discovered that I had chosen the wrong crew to kick around with.

Idb, my comment about him being a deceiver and not representing truth is based on the events that have come to light. Being able to spot a deceiver like Capell before 'his sins find him out' is another discussion altogether. :sly:

**Lou Girardin** · 30th June 2005, 15:28

Originally Posted by Zed

Don't act like a right pillock Lou, in no way was I justifying sex with children and you know it!

I'm sorry but you referred to underage sex with biblical references, I pointed out that those references are meaningless and, in todays world, usually illegal.
So we are no clearer as to what you consider underage.
What do you actually THINK is underage?
Step away from that bible.

**Lou Girardin** · 30th June 2005, 15:41

Originally Posted by Zed

Don't act like a right pillock Lou, in no way was I justifying sex with children and you know it!

I'm sorry but you referred to underage sex with biblical references, I pointed out that those references are meaningless and, in todays world, usually illegal.
So we are no clearer as to what you consider underage.

What do you actually THINK is underage?
Step away from that bible.

**Zed** · 30th June 2005, 15:43

Originally Posted by Lou Girardin

What do you actually THINK is underage?
Step away from that bible.

No younger than sixteen Lou.

**MikeL** · 30th June 2005, 16:43

Originally Posted by Zed

No younger than sixteen Lou.

But if we agree now that 15 is under-age, how do we account for varying ages of consent or marriage historically, other than by cultural relativism?
If God did not disapprove of a 13 year-old Israelite girl from marrying, 2,500 years ago, why would he disapprove now?

**Lou Girardin** · 30th June 2005, 16:46

On another tack, if parents want to keep their kids safe, why do they dress their pre-pubescent daughters like hookers?

**Zed** · 30th June 2005, 17:15

Originally Posted by MikeL

But if we agree now that 15 is under-age, how do we account for varying ages of consent or marriage historically, other than by cultural relativism?
If God did not disapprove of a 13 year-old Israelite girl from marrying, 2,500 years ago, why would he disapprove now?

Who said He disapproves now Mike? Btw I am predominately discussing marriage here and not simply consent.

Hey Mike, can you think of at least 4 reasons why God in the Bible established the marriage union in the first place? :unsure: