Posted on 06/08/2018 1:51:23 PM PDT by ebb tide
So after confessing your sins to your own personal god, do you march down to the police station and confess them there?
Of course. Everyone else is doing it too so we're not so bad. We're not as bad as (finger pointing at others).
Look, there's a squirrel!
Have you stopped beating your wife yet?
Not necessarily. You go to the person you wronged and ask them for forgiveness and make restitution if it’s required.
And if there are civil or legal consequences to your actions, then you man up and take it.
I know that’s a novel concept for Catholics, personal accountability, but that’s supposed to be the way it works with each other.
I don’t see any protestant pastors voluntarily turning themselves in for child sexual abuse or revealing who else is doing so.
People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.
You are aware that nobody gets a pass, right?
No. Here you are, denying that very principle.
We don’t give families a pass on sex with kids.
We don’t give cops a pass on sex with kids.
We don’t give schools a pass on sex with kids.
We don’t give mental health workers a pass on sex with kids.
We don’t give entertainers a pass on sex with kids.
We don’t give politicians a pass on sex with kids.
Pretty much, we hold to a zero tolerance view regarding pedophiles.
I am not sure your statement about the non-exclusivity of sexual abuse is supposed to change anything. Would you enlighten us all as to how that matters in any way?
You are aware that nobody gets a pass, right?
No. Here you are, denying that very principle.
We do not require wives to testify about their husbands crimes.
We do not require attorneys to testify about crimes committed by their clients.
We do not require priests to act as informers for the police.
All long standing principles.
This simply reinforces that the principle is similarly limited regarding the clergy.
Now, you wouldn't have made your ill formed assertion if children mattered much at all to you (and it saddens me that they do not) so appealing to your ethics, morality, and human kindness of necessity will fall on deaf ears. Nonetheless please stop trying to defend the indefensible because it is unbecoming on a conservative forum.
Adults have a responsibility (even though you not only personally shirk this responsibility, you demand others shirk it) to protect children which supersedes their responsibilities to one another.
The Catholics won’t give in on this—they can’t, at least according to them. Whether you think this is scummy of not, as a conservative do you think the state should pass a law that says they have to follow it even if their faith won’t allow them to do so? And then punish them by incarceration and financial penalty?
How do you see this law being enforced—how is it going to be used against the people who break it? I only can see stings and prosecution deals for lesser sentences by people that claim or actually record themselves going to confession and confessing their child abuse.
Freegards
Adults making adult choices?
Or a child being raped?
I side with the child. I have zero problem with people who attempt to use religion finding out that their religion doesn't extend to protecting them from receiving their due for that.
AND.
I am consistent. I also opposed Obama’s attempt to prevent troops overseas from rescuing child sex slaves of the Muslims in the middle east.
Exact same issue, consistent position on my part, two different religions.
There you have it. Not even slightly sorry to disagree with your position.
Ok, you think the state can and should punish them for this.
Can you describe how they enforce this law, how will it work in practice? How do they find out if a priest broke this law? Do you only accept recordings of the actual priest hearing the confession or what?
Freegards
“Are you aware that this is more sexual abuse in families, in schools and in non-Catholic Churches than there are in the Catholic Church?”
Well that makes it all better now, doesn’t it.
L
“We do not require attorneys to testify about crimes committed by their clients.”
Actually, we do. Is called “ethics”. Your Church might want to look into the concept sometime.
L
It will work exactly how it works with husbands and wives when abuse of a minor is involved. Exact legal proceedures may vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction just as with everything else, but the way they handle this will parallel the way they handle married couples.
It is not as if there were truly new ground here.
Well a confession is a pretty specific area—it always takes place in a confessional between two people. What evidence is acceptable to you that one of these two people heard something from the other and then broke the law? A recording? A simple claim? Or what? Seems like you could fill me in if you know how it will work.
Freegards
It isn’t as though the nature of evidence were up to me to decide. It is up to individual jurisdictions to decide. Look to existing legislation. In the US, warrants and judicial hearings would be involved but I have little knowledge of how they do things in Australia.
God raises up civil governments because when we each do that which is right in our own eyes we mess things up. Even clergy, regarding some things.
So just claiming it happened is acceptable to you or what? Is a child molester claiming that he went to a priest and told of his crimes enough to say this law has been broken or what?
Dude just tell me how you envision this law to work—as a conservative you support it, just tell me how you see it working? Doesn’t seem like an outrageous question.
Because I only see two or three ways, and they aren’t things that I as a conservative can support. Especially because Catholics won’t defend themselves because of their faith on this.
Freegards
As a matter of fact, I specifically stated that whatever protections are in place regarding a husband and wife involved with the abuse of a minor will likely be used in this situation. You are pretending that there need be some wannabe Cotton Mather pressing people with stones, and that people are somehow demanding that.
What is it about the rape of children that causes you to try to put words into other people's mouths and make protecting them seem like a bad thing?
“You are demanding a fully unearned restoration of a relationship with the public and the rest of Christendom which the Catholic Church destroyed by its actions, while not even being interested in the steps necessary.”
No, I’m demanding that what is of God be left to Him and His Church. The sanctity of confession should remain inviolate by everyone involved.
This has nothing to do with pedophile priests or even unlawful acts if any kind. It has to do with liberty.
“I never said that merely making a claim was acceptable did I?”
Is it? I can’t tell if you think it would be OK or not. Seems like a simple question. I mean if hearsay is enough in the wife-husband case, is that enough for you in a case between a priest hearing a confession?
“You are pretending that there need be some wannabe Cotton Mather pressing people with stones, and that people are somehow demanding that.”
Nope, just wondering how you envision this law being enforced—again I think it seems like a reasonable question. Sting operations, recordings, what? I am curious and don’t know how it works between husbands and wives—is it hearsay or what? Just spell it out, and how that standard would apply between a priest hearing someone’s confession.
“What is it about the rape of children that causes you to try to put words into other people’s mouths and make protecting them seem like a bad thing?”
I didn’t put any words in anyone’s mouth, as anyone can see who reads the thread. I kept asking what means would be OK for the state to enforce this law, and gave examples of what that might be. I was curious what they might be to a conservative who supports this law.
Freegards
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.