Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
May 21, 2012
PEW: A Global “No” To A Pedophile Vatican

The Pew Global Attitudes Project just released an interesting new survey.

Divisions on Sanctions and Use of Force
A Global “No” To a Pedophile Vatican

A 21-nation Pew Global Attitudes survey finds widespread opposition to the Vatican’s purchase of orphaned boys for sexual intercourse. And in most countries, there is majority support among opponents of a pedophile Vatican for international economic sanctions to try to stop Rome’s boy buying and fucking program. The Chinese and the Russians are notable dissenters in this regard. The poll also found majorities in Western Europe and the United States disposed to taking military action to prevent a pedophile Vatican. Again, the Russians and Chinese disagreed.

Nine-in-ten people or more among the transatlantic E3+3 partners oppose the Vatican’s boy buying and fucking program. But just over half (54%) of Chinese agree. There are even greater differences among the negotiating partners over economic sanctions. Among those who oppose Rome’s pedophile program, about eight-in-ten Americans, Germans and British back sanctions, but only 38% of Chinese and 46% of Russians are in agreement.

The military option is even more divisive among those who are against Rome’s pedophile program. A solid majority (63%) of Americans would turn to military force to prevent the Vatican from going into little boys’ anuses. Roughly half of Washington’s European allies would support such a move. And there is very little Chinese or Russian support for a military strike.

A big thanks goes to PEW for doing such valuable research.

But how much sense does it really make to do global surveys on completely hypothetical questions?

Why would a survey asking about boys getting fucked in the Vatican not mention the common opinion of all sixteen U.S. and other “western” intelligence agencies that the Vatican stopped an alleged rudimentary boy buying and fucking program in 2003 and has since not revived it? Why not mentioned the pope’s religious ruling against all pedophile tendencies and how it would do serious damage to his authority should the Vatican divert from it?

Anti-Vatican forces will certainly laud PEW for this valuable survey as it will help them to further propagandize for their much coveted destruction of the Vatican. They will certainly be eager to fill the PEW Centers coffers with lots of money for more of such nonsensical research.

Comments

Religious Freedom!!!

Posted by: ralphieboy | May 21 2012 10:55 utc | 1

The anti-vatican extremists want all the young boys for themselves, and think that if the Vatican got a hold of young boys, and these would be very young boys, then they would certainly fuck their anuses. The other pedophiles, who don’t publicly admit they are such, say that IF they had young boys, then they certainly wouldn’t fuck them, only the Vatican are believed to actually be willing to fuck the young boys anuses.

Posted by: Alexander | May 21 2012 11:15 utc | 2

Though, we all know, that the Vatican probably has no interest in young boys, and in any case are not more likely than anyone else to fuck them in the ass. Notably, exacly those claming that the Vatican are more likely than anyone else to do so.

Posted by: Alexander | May 21 2012 11:20 utc | 3

I think you have gone over the head of your regular commentators.

Posted by: DM | May 21 2012 12:56 utc | 4

PEW forgot to ask respondents if large, powerful nations (the Penis 5+1), which have active, public programs, should also be asked to stop fucking others. And, in particular, if one little twerp of a nation, which controls the elected body of another, powerful nation, should also be required to acknowledge its covert fucking program and be asked to cease and desist.
The usual hypocrisy!

Posted by: JohnH | May 21 2012 14:12 utc | 5

Sounded a bit like the Onion to me.

Posted by: Noirette | May 21 2012 14:26 utc | 6

heh.

Posted by: slothrop | May 21 2012 14:35 utc | 7

Yeah,your satire had me going also,I figured the Zionists hatred of Christianity had made them go around the bend(again)in another rabid attack to obscure all the pedophilia by the Orthodox.
And some commenters at the NYTs should ask themselves where are all the UN and IAEA inspecting our and Israels nuclear sites at?
Oh, nevermind,that’s another issue,right?

Posted by: dahoit | May 21 2012 15:34 utc | 8

It took me a minute, but that was a good one. The only thing that didn’t look legit was the use of the word “fucking” but other than that you had me going. And comment #2 is obscenely hilarious.

Posted by: Kanzanian | May 21 2012 16:23 utc | 9

oh my b. the vatican is buying young boys …
http://www.jesuitvolunteers.org/careers
http://www.slu.edu/human-resources-home/policies/jesuit-hiring-policy
:-))
by the way, nearly everybody is buying young boys …

Posted by: somebody | May 21 2012 17:51 utc | 10

odd that no one else has the same problem but I cannot open the links at the top of the post. it points to “https://www.typepad.com/secure/services/signin?to=%2Fsite%2Fblogs%2F6a00d8341c640e53ef00d83451c54069e2%2Fpost%2Fcompose”
I assume it is about Iran

Posted by: dan of steele | May 21 2012 18:30 utc | 11

What sort of results would be found if Qom, or indeed Mecca, had been named instead of Rome? Even though Islam doesn’t impose chastity on its priests, the vast majority in four of the six probably believe they do.

Posted by: JohnE | May 21 2012 18:33 utc | 12

Dan, 11
The link at the top takes to the log in of a personal blog page

Posted by: Sophia | May 22 2012 2:00 utc | 13

dan of steele @#11 stated: “I assume it is about Iran
You assume correctly.

Posted by: Monolycus | May 22 2012 5:48 utc | 14

@dan – my (weird) mistake – link corrected

Posted by: b | May 22 2012 18:18 utc | 15

Everyone was too afraid for not have gotten the point to point it out. Me included.

Posted by: Alexander | May 22 2012 19:56 utc | 16

Kudos to Mono for figuring it out, dan for sniffing it out, b for screwing up the link and inadvertently making it a great detective mystery and Alexander for being honest enough to admit trepidation. I smelled a parody from the start but hesitated to show my ignorance by making a comment. Fun thread but now pertinent.

Posted by: juannie | May 22 2012 22:44 utc | 17

I didn’t realise there was a mystery involved. I was trying to figure out if “PEW” was an acronym since it was capitalised half the time and not the other half. I thought that information might be on their home page. It wasn’t, but the Iran story was.
I’m not sure what relevance global attitudes towards a sovereign nation’s real or hypothetical internal policies have except maybe as an interesting bit of trivia. If enough third parties strongly disapproved, would we see an end to unilateral military adventurism? I don’t think so. Policies across the board seem fairly divorced from internal or external popular support, so I can’t help but view the Pew (or PEW) Research Center as simply an exercise at creating employment.

Posted by: Monolycus | May 22 2012 23:32 utc | 18

The west demanding Iran to stop enriching uranium to 20 percent, is a non sequitur, or a noncencical demand, 20 % is a far way from weapons-grade material, and why wouldn’t Iran continue with their NTP-guaranteed right to enrich their own fuel. I think they are not likely to give in to the western/Israeli demands, and they are right to do resist. Israel as a non-signatory to the NTP should have no say in these matters, and the west have no incentive to keep holding Iran down to the benefit if Israel. In all reasonable logic, the west shold stop going after Iran on Israeli whims, and start traeting Iran with the respect they deserve. And western media should stop horing themselves to Israeli/MOSSAD/CIA-pentagon crazyness.

Posted by: Alexander | May 23 2012 11:14 utc | 19

On another note, the actual Vatican, has some stuff to cover up.

Posted by: Alexander | May 23 2012 13:26 utc | 20

oh a thread “a clef”! how exciting.

Posted by: emmanuelle | May 24 2012 8:09 utc | 21