 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Clerical Abuse of Children
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Iains Date: 07 Aug 17 - 03:29 AM Joe:"If a person in my employ commits a crime, how much can be taken from me?" That really neatly summarizes the morality/justice of reparations. Does the guilt belong to the individual or the organisation? The only guilt the organisation has is that by association and perhaps lax controls. The modern world is very different from that of one or two generations ago and the glare of publicity shines in places never dreamed of 20,40,60 years ago. How can the standards of today be applied to events that occurred in a time of totally different mores? Even if by convoluted logic guilt can be assessed in shekels to be taken from the organisation-is it fitting in view of the fact that such a cost may destroy it? My own view is that the horse bolted way back and that trying to destroy the church of today for the errant behaviour of a small minority active in the past is both totally wrong and repugnant. I say that a lapsed Jesuit educated catholic that has not crosses the door of a church in over 50 years. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 07 Aug 17 - 04:05 AM "You insist on blaming the child abuse scandal on "The Church," " No I don't Joe - I say that the Church played a part in those abuses I have consistently listed the part it played - ignoring the abuses, even though they were common knowledge, passing on the culprits to places where they were unknown so they could continue their abusing and finally shipping them abroad where their abuses were (presumably) perpetrated on people who didn't matter That is full complicity and it is what I am accusing the Church, as a body, of doing. The Vatican hid and continues to to hide the details of those abuses and has yet to admit its part in what happened and apologise for it It is a "half truth" to claim the victims have been fully compensated - the Irish taxpayer has been given the responsibility of the donkey's share of the bill, the church is still prevaricating. You and others have suggested that this situation must go on in order for the Church to hold onto its vast wealth. You refuse even to respond to the facts of the Church's involvement other than to express outrage and make accusations of "half truths and anachronisms"and, disgracefully, attempt to make this "Irish" rather than the International scandal it has become. The Church I am speaking didn't "die long ago" - modern social development has forced it to make compromises - extremely reluctantly, and these revelations have all but totally undermined its authority - that is not the enlightened change that needs to happen Atheist that I am, I have no wish to see the destruction of the church - I have far too much respect for the believers I count as friends. The Church, as a body must no longer be in the position to influence the running of countries in important matters, as it still does. It has proved itself untrustworthy with children, yet in Ireland, it controls over 90% of our primary schools - many schools are demanding baptismal certificates for entry in places where they are the only alternative - here, we would have to ship a child over forty miles to find a non or multi-denominational school Unless the activities of the church are confined to the VOLUNTARY spiritual guidance of those who seek it, the Church will implode, leaving a massive gap in the lives genuine believers. You say my anger concerns something that happened "long ago" - I assume you are claiming the same for all those who have walked away from the churches here, leaving them virtually empty and in the crisis that are now facing You speak with the smug ignorance of someone far detached from the reality of what is happening It all seems very different 'Up in Wisconsin' (as Don Lange put it in his song). Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Steve Shaw Date: 07 Aug 17 - 04:55 AM I'm not sure I'm hearing you correctly here, Joe. I hope you're not saying that the book should be closed on crimes because they happened decades ago. Recently, a man in his late 70s living locally, well known to most people in our town, was sent to prison for 15 years for sexually abusing underage boys in the late 1950s. He had lived a lie for decades, becoming a highly-respected man in the community and occupying public positions. The sense of betrayal we all felt when he was finally exposed was palpable, which, of course, is nothing when set alongside with the lives he ruined. This is one category of crime that time can never diminish. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 07 Aug 17 - 05:08 AM "I hope you're not saying that the book should be closed on crimes because they happened decades ago. " Perhaps those taking this line should state clearly what statute of limitations should be applied to such crimes - and to what other crimes they should be applied (or should they apply only to those committed by clerics)? Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Iains Date: 07 Aug 17 - 05:28 AM Seems to me a little semantic confusion is creeping in. Where is evidence of a statute of limitations being applied to past cases of child abuse? There seems a conflation of crime, punishment,individuals, organizations. An individual is responsible for the crime and as an individual must suffer the punishment. Reparations punish the organization as priests are probably men of straw. How far back in time should the failings of the organization be pursued and punished? Do the descendants of the spanish inquisition deserve reparations? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 07 Aug 17 - 07:11 AM "Reparations punish the organization as priests are probably men of straw." Reparations are paid for misdoing, mismanagement, injustices.... of the overseers, as well as those responsible Once more, the actions of the Church are being ignored They active participated in the activities by covering them up and allowing them to go on. They need to answer for that fact as well as there being measures put into place to ensure they can's happen again The victims/survivors appear to have been forgotten in all this - do they not need closure - do the crimes against them not need to be answered for Would the parents of a child killed by an unpunished drunken driver be told to forgive and forget if they saw that driver driving around as if nothing had happened? Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Kenny B (inactive) Date: 07 Aug 17 - 08:06 AM This article attempts to explain the scale of and ins and outs of reparations Busines insider aticle on Reparations Just for Iains t I c I'm sure the "Via Maria" film would put peoples minds at rest regarding the Inquisitors, they were bunch of naughty but nice old guys |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Greg F. Date: 07 Aug 17 - 09:44 AM Well, both Ake and Greg_F now have broken records in their players. Well, Joe, since Ake keeps spouting the same BS over and over and over, I can save a great deal of time and effort by re-posting the same reply. Its simply a matter of efficient use of time. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jeri Date: 07 Aug 17 - 10:31 AM What's the definition of insanity again? Of course, you don't expect a different outcome, you just want the same old non-reaction over and over. I wonder what THAT signifies... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Greg F. Date: 07 Aug 17 - 11:43 AM I wonder what THAT signifies... A minor personality disorder, perhaps? ;>) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: akenaton Date: 07 Aug 17 - 12:39 PM From Joe......"We call it child abuse, or child molestation, or sexual abuse of children. But yes, most of the victims are age 11 or older - but normal homosexuals do not rape 14-year-old boys." I think the correct term is sexual assault of minors, but whatever, the crimes are committed by adult males upon young males, that is homosexual assault. You deny that it has anything to do with sexual preference, yet almost all the assaults are committed against young males, not young females......please explain this anomaly. It is irrefutable that there is a huge over representation of homosexuals in the priesthood (approx. 30% against 1.5% in the general population).....please explain this anomaly. Why do these rates of assault not manifest themselves in other religious denominations.? The Church is not to blame for the assaults, only for clumsy attempts to cover up and a mad Celibacy rule. They are now between a rock and a hard place, easy meat for the haters of religion who are hugely over represented in this forum. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Iains Date: 07 Aug 17 - 01:09 PM My apologies for adding further complications to what is already a sore subject. I had no idea the a statute of limitations would apply in child abuse cases. I stand corrected. . In the US it appears a unique case in every state and worldwide the time period varies, and the definitions become increasingly complex. In the case of sexual child abuse a statute of limitations may occur or may not, depending on where the crime occurred. The link below is a CONSULTATION PAPER ON THE IRISH LAW OF LIMITATION OF ACTIONS ARISING FROM NON-SEXUAL ABUSE OF CHILDREN and contains comparisons worldwide. http://www.lawreform.ie/_fileupload/consultation%20papers/cpNonSexAbuse.htm (You probably need to be a lawyer to truly understand what it is stating) http://www.catholicwhistleblowers.com/whistleblower-essays/statutes-of-limitations-regarding-clergy-sexual-abuse-of-minors In places there is a clear distinction between Child abuse and child sexual abuse and can lead to very different outcomes. http://angelroar.com/foradults/c-child-abuse-resources-adults/childabusestatuteoflimitationsbystate |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Kenny B (inactive) Date: 07 Aug 17 - 02:43 PM Irish Law Reform Consultation Very complicated. Appendix A at the end of chapter 5 Makes the whole dilemma more readable best to skip to : CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY OF PROVISIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS 89 Part I: Preliminary Issues 89 Provisional nature of recommendations 89 The need for a special regime 89 Differing regimes for sexual and non-sexual child abuse 89 The elimination of periods of limitation 89 Part II: Options for Reform 89 Option One: Test of "disability" Statute of Limitations (Amendment) Act, 2000 89 Option Two: Test of "discoverability" Statute of Limitations (Amendment) Act, 1991 89 Option Three: Presumption of incapability; the Ontario model 90 Option Four: Fixed period of time 90 Part III: Scope and Operation of the Test 90 Definition of "non-sexual abuse" 90 Mixed cases 91 The cause of action 91 Relationship of trust and dependency between the plaintiff and the defendant 91 Vicarious liability and liability of supervisory authorities 91 Retrospective effect of statutes of limitation 91 APPENDIX A: TABLE OF THE LAW OF LIMITATIONS OF OTHER JURISDICTIONS APPENDIX B: LIST OF LAW REFORM COMMISSION'S PUBLICATIONS The other 2 papers seem to echo and illustrate Business Insiders article ..... all worth a read |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 07 Aug 17 - 03:09 PM Can I suggest that, rather than pander to an obsessive hate merchant, we ignore Ake's attempts to turn this discussion into another of his "queer-bashing" expeditions Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Kenny B (inactive) Date: 07 Aug 17 - 03:46 PM Jim How About "Ignorance is bliss" tae coin a phrase |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: akenaton Date: 07 Aug 17 - 04:34 PM Anyone who has done any reading on the subject, will know that Pederasty has been rooted in homosexuality since the time of Ancient Greece. Some much needed information will be found here WIKI "Some modern observers restrict the age of the younger partner to "generally between twelve and seventeen",[6] though historically the spread was somewhat greater. The younger partner must, in some sense, not be fully mature; this could include young men in their late teens or early twenties.[7] While relationships in ancient Greece involved boys from 12 to about 17 or 18,[8] in Renaissance Italy they typically involved boys between 14 and 19,[9] and in Japan the younger member ranged in age from 11 to about 19.[10] |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Greg F. Date: 07 Aug 17 - 05:53 PM and now for a Musical Interlude |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 07 Aug 17 - 09:22 PM Steve Shaw says: I hope you're not saying that the book should be closed on crimes because they happened decades ago. Well, Steve, I do think that the books should be closed on the crimes sooner or later. I think there is wisdom behind enacting statutes of limitations. As time passes, it becomes harder and harder to conduct a fair trial. More and more, it becomes a "he say, she says" proposition - and memories of witnesses fade as the decades pass. In the U.S., the turning point was 2002. It was handled in different ways in different places, but it was handled decisively. Because of the huge number of crimes by priests discovered, the state legislature here in California enacted a temporary extension of the statute of limitations on crimes against children, and a window was set for claims to be filed. That window has now closed, although some settlements are still being negotiated. I think that a temporary extension was a good way to handle things. It cost us Catholics a lot, but it settled things quite well and gave us some safety from an endless chain of future claims for older and older crimes. It also forced us to develop procedures for both preventing and compensating future crimes. Without that security, it was hard to plan for the future - or to collect money from donors. Current priorities for the Catholic Church in California and immigrants and the homeless, and these are important issues in this Age of Trump. I'm relieved that we have been able to put the child molestation scandal behind us here in the Catholic Church of California. I wish some other state legislatures had acted so decisively. In another of his solemn condemnations that Jim denies making, he says that I disgracefully, attempt to make this "Irish" rather than the International scandal it has become. No, Jim, that's not my point. My point is that the crimes were committed locally, and need to be prosecuted and compensated locally. In Ireland, the crimes were committed by Irish priests and some nuns, not by priests from the Vatican or from the U.S. And those criminals were supervised by Irish bishops or religious superiors. The answer to the sex abuse scandal in Ireland is in Ireland, not in the Vatican or in the U.S. The power to stop these crimes was in Ireland, not somewhere else. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: mg Date: 08 Aug 17 - 12:13 AM and those irish bishops..some of whom were stupid beyond belief, like brady, were in thrall to the vatican...they were owned lock stock and barrel by the vatican. they were told when to jump and how high. they were ordered, presumably under pain of mortal sin, to defend the church against scandal...it was absolutely the vatican. s..t rolls downhill. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 08 Aug 17 - 01:47 AM I don't think your perception is correct, mg. Some auxilliary bishops may be in thrall to the Vatican. Indeed, they may have been placed in a diocese by the Vatican to keep an eye on the local ordinary. But for the most part, local ordinaries are an independent lot. They know they're not beholden to the Vatican, and they generally aren't afraid to express that independence. They tend to have the attitudes of corporate executives, and often can be a bit low on ability as spiritual leaders and "people skills." And they are rarely "stupid." Still, I tend to take a cynical view of bishops because so many of them seem overly concerned with the material needs of the structure of their dioceses, to the disadvantage of the spiritual needs of Catholics and their communities. Sean Cardinal Brady was an organization man. He liked things to run smoothly. But he served the structure of the Catholic Church of Ireland, not the Vatican. He resigned in 2014, at the standard retirement age of 75. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 08 Aug 17 - 03:27 AM "I do think that the books should be closed on the crimes sooner or later." In these circumstances, that is one of the most inhuman statements you have made to date Joe These crimes have only come to light comparatively recently - their extent continues to be an almost daily revelation. Summing them up overall, they are the rape and abuse of children and young people - serious crimes of the type that have torn Britain in two racially to the extent of ruining Britain's economy and bringing about a sharp rise in racist incidents in the wake of Brexit largely when it was generated on the actions of a tiny handful of Asian criminals in areas of England - there it was underage girls, here it was schoolchildren, unmarried mothers, altar-boys - anybody that priests could get their hands on And they should be forgiven and forgotten? Come on Joe - what kind of human being would ever consider such a thing? Many - most of the victims are still living - they have lived with the consequences of the crimes committed against them, lives have been ruined - even ended, by the damage that was done. The crimes were committed locally - really? What about the covering up, what about the continuing refusal of access to information, what about the refusal by the church to acknowledge their part in these assaults - similar to your own refusal to accept that the church has tainted itself to the point of destruction for its part. Very few prosecutions have taken place- Smythe was the worst, so society leapt on him as a sacrificial lamb, despite the fact that that same society colluded to allow him to continue to abuse - in Ireland and in the United States. I reckon that, given your forgive and forget attitude, the Hillsborough disaster would have just made it thorough your statute of limitations. I ask again What about the victims in all this - are they not desrving of closure, having aleardy suffered lifetimes of misery for what happened to them at the hand of the church? You continue to stone-wall on the part played by the church - you refuse to acknowledge that they refuse to co-operate or admit their guilt. You refuse to discuss the effect that this has had and is continuing to have on thousands of lives - even though your church is dying here because of what took place. I take no satisfaction in that - you apparently don't care This affair will run and run throughout the rest of my lifetime - the State may forget it, the church may continue to refuse to accept responsibility, but the people of Ireland won't I occasionally find my self at odds with Ollaimh's habit of overstatement, but here I go all the way, there is a great deal of hypocritical apologism connected to this subject, and you reflect a considerable amount of it. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 08 Aug 17 - 03:36 AM So, Jim, instead of just pronouncing that my statement is inhuman, can you address my reasoning behind my statement? Do you have any understanding of the concept of statutes of limitations? Is it practical to prosecute fifty-year-old crimes, and can a prosecutor conduct a fair trial of a fifty-year-old crime? I don't know how I could stand trial for something I did fifty years ago. I just can't remember much from then very clearly. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 08 Aug 17 - 04:34 AM "Do you have any understanding of the concept of statutes of limitations? " Yes I have Joe - and I also have an understanding that crimes have been committed, victims lives have been ruined and the perpetrators have never been brought to justice To support that situation by seeking to hide behind the law is beneath contempt We are talking about an incredibly wealthy and influential institution here - we know the part they played, we know their refusal to co-operate in contemporary investigations, we know of their refusal to meet up with the obligations put on them by law - and we know they seek to cling on to the power that brought about this brutal period of our history. I suppose you hold groups like those who sought out justice for the Holocaust in the same contempt I ask again - where do the victims stand in all this - have they no right to acknowledgement? You have offered none Should they forget the crimes committed against them - they won't because they can't - nobody ever could "Ollaimh's" accusations ring louder and louder each time you post I ask again, where is the juystice for the victims in all this - is their right to justice any less than that of the perpetrators" Fair trial - my arse Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 08 Aug 17 - 05:44 AM Jim sez: To support that situation by seeking to hide behind the law is beneath contempt Well, no, it's simply an opinion that's different from yours. And, of course, to disagree with Jim Carroll is "beneath contempt".... In the U.S., setting a deadline for claims served as motivation for people to step forward and tell the truth about how they had been molested as children. The dioceses got a lot more claims than they expected. Without a deadline, many claims never get filed, and the damage done lies festering for years. Better for all to be done with it. Fairly, but done with it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 08 Aug 17 - 06:00 AM "Well, no, it's simply an opinion that's different from yours. " Cop-out again Joe I am tired of asking you to respond to the rights of the victims - you refuse to do so That also is beneath contempt You have put the rights of dirty old men over their rights Enjoy your Christianity Joe - I'm relieved never to have been tainted by it, those I have been privileged to witness its effects Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: akenaton Date: 08 Aug 17 - 06:13 AM Setting aside The Statute of Limitations, on which I agree with Joe, the Crimes were not committed BY the Church, but by adult males who happened to be employees OF the Church. Should the law enforcement agencies be held responsible for the actions of every bent or sexually abusive policeman? The Church can only be faulted on improper vetting of priests(they should have spotted the time bomb within their organisation) and a limited and desperate attempt at damage limitation. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 08 Aug 17 - 08:07 AM One again, the complicity is being ignored by the usual suspects The victims apparently are the figments of somebody's imagination End of story as far as this particular branch of Christianity is concerned Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 08 Aug 17 - 01:32 PM Certainly, Jim, the primary concern in all this should be for the victim. But does it do the victims any good to keep reopening these wounds on a regular cycle, year after year? And can you really say that there is no validity to my contention that it is near-impossible to conduct a trial that is fair to anyone, 50 years after the crime took place? There's a woman in my local parish whose sister was killed by a boyfriend over twenty-five years ago. The boyfriend had never committed a crime before. He spent 25 years in prison, and then was recommended for parole. The victim's sister organized a "victim's rights" group, and the prison guard union backed it up with a lot of money. This group appears at every parole hearing in the state, fighting against all paroles because they are a violation of victim rights. Is that what "victim rights" are, Jim - eternal vengeance? The woman I know has fed her anger for over a quarter century. Has it done her any good? Since I've worked the last five years for improvement of conditions for people in jail, I am very careful around this angry woman. So far, I have been able to keep a cordial relationship with her - but I'm careful. There has to be a place of balance in all of this, Jim. Prolonging the anger forever, does not bring peace to anyone. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: mg Date: 08 Aug 17 - 02:18 PM Yes. It is absolutely necessary for them to open these wounds if it helps them or others. Do you read abuse tracker? I do first thing every morning. Every day new stories from new people...not the same people each time. Torture is sometimes involved. Do we want the truth or not? It is horribly inconvenient and hard to process or to believe nice father otoole did that but if he did his victims have an absolute right to speak up. The financial aspect is an unfortunate consequence of this. I wish it was not a factor but it is. It is a very very sick church..not the only one to be sure. I want the church to go way back to before constantine and look for true roots in england especially..seems they had a nice church led by joseph of arimathea as far as i know. Mary magdalene perhaps in france. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Raggytash Date: 08 Aug 17 - 02:22 PM There is a huge difference Joe, in the case you cited the perpetrator has been punished for his crime. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 08 Aug 17 - 02:58 PM @But does it do the victims any good to keep reopening these wounds on a regular cycle, year after year?@ What makes you think such wounds ecver close The facts are now open - too late to keep them hidedem The victims and their families are tho ones demanding that their wrongs be redressed How dare you compare these events to a woman demanding vengeance? The recognition is what is being demanded - who the hell do you and yours think you are to refuse it? A feeble excuse Joe - getting more feeble by the minute Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Donuel Date: 08 Aug 17 - 03:28 PM Who here has seen the movie 'Doubt' about a Parrish Priest.(Philip Seymour Hoffman) Powerful performances without being apologetic |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 08 Aug 17 - 03:36 PM Usually, it's the conservatives who dwell on crime, recycling their outrage time and time again. Benghazi comes to mind. I just realized the other day that only 4 Americans died in the attack. The story has been repeated and amplified so many times, that nobody knows what happens. I do have sympathy for the families of those four diplomats who died, but I really don't want Mrs. Clinton to go to prison for their deaths. In my community, we have a group that is very strongly organized in opposition to our homeless shelter. Anytime a transient is arrested, the group will beat the story to the ground, repeating and amplifying it over and over again. There was a wheelchair-bound homeless man in a cowboy hat who came into our choir practice one night. He was a little intoxicated, but not bad; so we let him stay and listen. I was afraid I was going to have to force him to leave when I was locking up the doors, but he was already gone. The next day, I learned that he had left the church and gotten involved in a disturbance next door. The father of a teenage boy said the homeless man had "assaulted" his son. I learned later that it was a VERBAL assault, a detail the father managed to omit, along with the fact that the assaulter was in a wheelchair. In other words, an old man in a wheelchair yelled at a kid. The father repeated the story at a hearing before the County Board of Supervisors almost a year longer, adding that Joe Offer was responsible for the crime because he failed to call the police when the man was listening to the choir practice. But it seems we have our little group here who dwell on crime, too. I was wondering about the Abuse Tracker that mg reads daily. Turns out, it is part of the bishopaccountability Website that I use as my main source of information. I do believe that justice must be done in these cases, that criminals should be prosecuted and punished, and victims should be compensated. But I think a reasonable statute of limitations would be 20 or 25 years after the victim reaches adulthood. Even after 20 years, evidence gets very stale and it becomes impossible to reconstruct what happened with any accuracy. And I really don't think that this feeding frenzy of abuse trackers is a healthy thing for anybody. Life goes on. We can't live our lives obsessed with crime. I agree with Donuel about the value of the movie "Doubt," and I think "Spotlight" was excellent. We need to come to an understanding of all this and do our best to ensure it does not happen again. But dwelling on the whole thing and repeating it over and over, is just like the Benghazi addicts do. This obsession with Catholic sex crimes does seem to be an addiction for some people. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 08 Aug 17 - 04:04 PM @But it seems we have our little group here who dwell on crime, @ What you have just suggested is that the victims cannot be trusted with justice because they might abuse it How disgusting is that? You ought to be ashamed of yourself - you oun, but you won't be Depressing when you see the mask fall away As for your #little group# = you, Ake and maybe Iains (the feller who said the victims of the London fire couldn't be house in vacant property) are the only ones who support nott giving the victims of clerical abuse justice You are now down to attacking the victims for claiming reperation - How soon before we get "They brought it on themselves" like Smythe claimed? Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 08 Aug 17 - 04:16 PM I don't question the actual victims of crime at all, Jim. I question people like you and mg who have made the sex abuse scandal into a hobby. The victims want peace and healing and sympathy, and they deserve it. You want blood. Don't try to misdirect this and try to convince people I have no sympathy for the victims. The Benghazi people keep trying that on Hillary Clinton. And the likes of you are trying to make the plight of the sex scandal victims into a tool to promote atheism and your political agenda. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: mg Date: 08 Aug 17 - 04:17 PM let's not call it feeding frenzy or obsession. Give it a nicer name..ministry let's call it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: mg Date: 08 Aug 17 - 04:18 PM hobby does not quite cut it... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 08 Aug 17 - 04:26 PM Spectator sport? Kinda like a fantasy football league, I think. It's quite divorced from reality, all this breathless reporting every three years of recycled crimes that happened in the 1970s, and all the maudlin sympathy for the poor little children who are now drawing pensions. I worked for thirty years as an investigator, mg. I like to see things reported accurately and in proportion and context, with exploration into the reasons why things happened. This sex abuse by clergy was a serious problem, and it will continue to be a problem. I think that we have made great headway toward resolving the problem, but I think we have a whole lot to learn. The frenzied finger-pointing doesn't allow for serious discussion and learning. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: mg Date: 08 Aug 17 - 04:27 PM And furthermore, I don't count hoping to help prevent the rape and perhaps future suicide of 12 year olds, or God forbid, 3 year olds, to be a hobby. Hobbies are more like refinishing furniture or training falcons or gluing macaroni on jars for art. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: mg Date: 08 Aug 17 - 04:28 PM Maudlin sympathy...that takes the cake. That is sick. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Iains Date: 08 Aug 17 - 04:38 PM When child abuse occurs in all environments and belief systems by persons of any number of backgrounds and occupations then it is an unhealthy obsession that focuses attention on one small subset of one particular religion and ignores the true scale of the problem. Is this an attack on a religion or those guilty of child abuse? Why not focus attention, for example, on the more than 130,000 children sent to a "better life" in former colonies, mainly Australia and Canada, from the 1920s to 1970s under the child migrant programme . The children, aged between three and 14, were almost invariably from deprived backgrounds and already in some form of social or charitable care. The reality, for some of those children, was a childhood of servitude and hard labour at foster homes: on remote farms, at state-run orphanages and church-run institutions. They were often separated from siblings. Some were subjected to physical and sexual abuse. To give some sort of perspective to what I say a link is attached. http://arrow.dit.ie/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=aaschsslbk |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Kenny B (inactive) Date: 08 Aug 17 - 05:39 PM Leading on from Iains post of Aug 17 04:38 Oranges and Subshine - Film Critique Interesting reading as well as some current side issues re treatment of Mexican migrants by ICE Relevant Sample from end of Oranges and Sunshine In his speech delivered at Parliament House in November 2009, then Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd told child migrants, "the laws of our nation failed you." But the laws of the nation worked then, as now, just as intended: upholding the economic and political power of the ruling class and reserving its greatest repression for the most oppressed and vulnerable sections of the population |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: mg Date: 08 Aug 17 - 05:56 PM I am as aware of the australian problem as i know how to be. it is awful. horrible number of suicides. perhaps there will be justice at the top..who knows. I also volunteer to work with girls who have been abused, often by the mother's creepy boyfriend. If you want me to toot that particular horn more, I will be glad to. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Steve Shaw Date: 08 Aug 17 - 06:16 PM Joe, in effect you are saying that child sexual abusers should be left alone after x number of years, arbitrarily defined, whereas their victims, many of whom will long outlive that time limit, will continue with their living hell until the day they die. I've already illustrated this point with a recent case that happened locally which saw a man sent to prison for abuses dating back to 1959. The evidence against him, though ancient, was corroborated by his many victims, which is what nailed him. He pleaded guilty, no option. That abuse occurred nearly sixty years ago, Joe, but after all that time the victims still got justice and many of them still live round here. You are being far too kind to the abusers and far too couldn't-care-less about their victims. That's how you are coming across. Let the courts decide whether evidence is too degraded on a case-by-case basis. It could be that the prospect of justice fades with the decades, but, even after half a century, it may not be impossible, as I've shown. So, no arbitrary limits. Think of those victims first. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 09 Aug 17 - 12:21 AM Yes, Steve, that's what I'm saying, without the emotional add-ons. That's one of the many reasons why there are statutes of limitations for most crimes. We should be able to expect that our criminal and civil courts and our law enforcement agencies should be able to handle such serious cases with reasonable alacrity. There comes a point in time where evidence is stale and witness testimonies are no longer valid because of lapse of memory and the death or unavailability of witnesses. So, from a legal perspective, it is no longer possible to conduct a fair trial. And yes, I believe that there should be a law that sets time limits on prosecutors, requiring them to file charges and bring cases to trial within a reasonable amount of time. Yes, there may be a few valid cases that get missed because of that, but so be it. Now, because of the special nature of child molestation and the fact that children are often not able to step forward and press charges until they have reached adulthood, I think the limit should be set at twenty to twenty-five years after the victim reaches adulthood. Ten years would be a reasonable limit for most crimes, but I think that the special circumstances of the crime of child molestation demand a longer time allowance. But yeah, after a certain amount of time, the claims get less credible and harder to prove or disprove. And when we've reached that point, I believe it's time to stop. I say this with thirty years of experience as an investigator. It's not about sympathy or lack of sympathy for the victims - everybody has sympathy for the victims. There comes a time when it just doesn't make sense to try to get evidence about events that happened long ago. It's still worthwhile to research such things and learn from them, but information gets to a point where it is too old to be valid in a court of law. Now, once a claim has been filed and a crime has been reported within the time allowed by that statute of limitations, then I think the case must be prosecuted to the end, even if the court trial takes years. And if there is a judgment against the offender or his/her employer, that judgment should never be invalidated by the simple passage of time. I don't know the details of the story in Jim's March 2017 (thejournal.ie) link that says
Did the religious orders agree to the increase to €353 million? Can they afford to pay it? Did some of the orders pay, and others not? The Christian Brothers (not the LaSalle Christian Brothers, the Irish Christian Brothers) were particularly notorious in their operation of the industrial schools in Ireland and other institutions in Canada and other nations. They seemed to have a philosophy of harsh treatment, and they got found out. I would imagine that their portion of the debt is huge, and I also imagine that they may well be close to bankruptcy. So, it may be that the Christian Brothers have failed to pay their portion, while others like the Sisters of Mercy have paid in full. Sorry, but I don't believe that the Vatican should be required to pay the debts of individual religious orders or dioceses out of its endowment. These were local crimes, not Vatican crimes. Now, the question arises whether all Catholics should share equally in responsibility for all reparations for all victims. I think not. The sexual abuse existed everywhere, but some dioceses and some religious orders responded to victims with compassion and sympathy and nearly-immediate compensation. Should those who "did the right thing" be penalized equally? I don't think so. It's a difficult question. I believe that most of people involved tried their best to "do the right thing," but a sizeable number of people did not. What's the proper response in all this? Punish all for the misdeeds of a minority? -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 09 Aug 17 - 03:11 AM "Is this an attack on a religion or those guilty of child abuse?" As the main protagonists in this affair from the very beginning have been (often devout) believers, it is certainly not an attack on religion, not should it be - beliefs ought to stand or fall on their own merits as society develops to the stage where they can debate the subject freely and competently. The danger of what is happening is that the church will totally collapse, leaving a vacuum in the philosophy - a cynicism. What has to come out of all this is that the church be confined to the teaching of philosophy to those who voluntarily seek its advice. If the clergy have any input into the nation's affairs, it has to be on the same basis as we all have, as individuals and not as representatives of a powerful pressure group. It's position in education is now coming under scrutiny, as is it role in health. Some of its most prominent 'messages'; on homosexuality for instance, have now been swept aside - Ireland has a gay Prime minister and a children's minister who has been in a life-long lesbian relationship - the Prime Minister recently took part in the Gay Parade in Belfast, along with representatives of the Garda Siochana (Irish Police Force) The Church has failed to gain ownership of Ireland's most important maternity hospital - one of the most significant statements made in that campaign was made by a participant in one of the demonstrations, who said, "I'm fed up with the church and its influence on the state. Taxpayers money going into the hospital does not equal religious ownership of the new hospital". This is only a start - but it is a start. The decision on reparation mus be one decided by those directly affected - the question of the continuing power and influence is one we all have to decide - and are deciding. The Archbishop of Dublin, Diarmuid Martin, has admitted that these exposures have been "badly handled" - no doubt he is a pragmatist who realises the damage that this has done and will continue to People like Joe have yet to arrive at that conclusion - blaming the victims, The Irish and Irish Catholics and telling the victims they are not to be trusted with the right to justice....... don't think so really!!! Jim Carroll Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 09 Aug 17 - 03:41 AM Jim sez: What has to come out of all this is that the church be confined to the teaching of philosophy to those who voluntarily seek its advice. What I find frightening, Jim, is that word "confined." I speak loudly and constantly in the name of the Catholic Church on behalf of immigrants and the homeless, which are currently my two main concerns. And no matter what happened in the sex scandal, I WILL NOT BE CONFINED. I acknowledge that other members of my church have done terrible things. Nonetheless, I WILL NOT BE SILENCED. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Jim Carroll Date: 09 Aug 17 - 04:24 AM "I WILL NOT BE SILENCED." Your church is a waelthy and powerful organisasation Joe - it flaunts that wealth and has abused that power That is the Church I am referring to,, not the dedcated Christins who speak up of behalf of immigrants and the homeless - that is the real job of the church written into thee sctipures. part of the job description You kow the Church I am referring to All to often, your church throws its weight behind those who oppress the poor, homeless - and particularly the immigrants, (not only yours, but other Churches) In Britain, The House of Lords has often been described as "The Conservative Party at prayer". Please try to address my poing without distorting it - you know where I stand on these matters Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: Joe Offer Date: 09 Aug 17 - 04:24 AM On one hand I have an immigrant who is facing imminent deportation and a lifetime of separation from her children, and I have five people sleeping in the rain with no blankets. On the other hand, I have a person who was molested by a priest forty years ago and wants a million-dollar settlement. I see the homeless people and immigrants every day, and their welfare is where my passion lies. I have compassion for victims of child molestation, but I have never met a child molest victim. Where will I want to spend my money? Does that mean I'm unsympathetic? I spent eighty bucks on a stranger's rent yesterday, or maybe he just ripped me off. Was I wrong because I didn't spend it on child molest victims wanting a million bucks? If I believed my million would heal a victim of abuse, I'd pay it - but it won't. Joe |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic Abuse of Children From: akenaton Date: 09 Aug 17 - 05:22 AM Bravely said sir. Do you arseholes see what real liberalism means and can accomplish? Or would you rather sit on your fat arses and polish your mythical ideology. |