State of CT vs The Catholic Church

Dude, I've been sexually assaulted. People like you, people who think that everybody makes up accusations are the lowest people on the face of my world.

 

I'm sorry for that and wasn't aware of it. But I hope you can go back and understand that I am not accusing all or even most of the victims of making things up. In fact, the cases are isolated, but I am trying to compare that to the number of dirty priests being very small. I know for a fact that one such occurrence of fabrication happened near my home town, but I can't track down any sort of link to the story otherwise I would have offered it by now. I hope this changes your view of me, as I am far from thinking that most people make up accusations.

 

That would all be solved in a snap if the Catholic Church would proactively attack the problem: aggressively root out the predators, enthusiastically feed them to the civil authorities, assist in every way possible in the prosecutions, emphatically excommunicate the guilty, and push for the harshest possible legal penalties. (And I mean THE harshest.)

I was raised Catholic. I am goddamn sick and tired of having my religion hijacked by fucking perverted predators. Time to take it back.

No, I myself was not victimized. But I know some people who were. The fact that the church abandons, ostracizes and attacks the victims (who put their trust in the church), in favor of coddling, protecting and aiding the perpetrators, is nothing short of an atrocity, and utterly forfeits the church's moral authority to offer any opinion on anything. Any Thing.

Now that's Change We Could Believe In.

 

J-Ratz was JPII's hatchet man for many, many years. His hands are not clean.

 

No, it really wasn't at all. One poster did attack the Catholic church for its disgraceful history in dealing with pedophiles among its priests, and rightfully so. But mostly people were saying the bill shouldn't have even been introduced and it certainly shouldn't pass.

Even one incident of the church protecting a priest who assaulted a child should leave you disgusted and outraged. There is no defending it. None. Religious leaders are supposed to be better than that. They are supposed to uphold the morality they preach and offer guidance and protection to the members of their church, especially the young ones. These priests and the higher-ups that protected them have not only hurt the people that were assaulted, they have damanged the Catholic church itself. Your attempt to turn this on the victims is disgusting.

 

This is not from "the folks running the state."
Jodi Rell will never sign this, even if it comes out of the legislature, which it won't.
But if you fuck with secular politics the way religion has over the past couple of decades, you're asking for extreme responses.

 

"Most of the front page" was spent ridiculing the law in question.
Double-posting is rare, but you're worthy of it, foof.

 

Thought the same thing when yesterday my Monsignor came out to speak to congregation about the serious assault on the church. It cuts both ways.

When the church had their problems a few years back the CT Catholic leaders showed the height of arrogance in their trying to cover up everything. Now the chickens are coming home to roost.

 

I honestly don't understand what the big deal is, nor do I see a benefit for those (as we've read) who are seeking to "silence the church." Church doctrine would still be set by the same hierarchy. Only the fiduciary duties of churches would be turned over to laymen -- and those would be elected by church members -- and they would undoubtedly be led by the same organisms that have always led the church. Much ado, it seems.

And as for "targeting" the Catholic church, the original article pointed out that most other churches are already led this way. The Catholic church is in the extreme minority in this way.

Or am I missing something?

 

Two quick comments regarding why victims "come out of the woodwork years and years" later, from someone who has done a lot of reporting on this issue of clergy sexual abuse:

1. In nearly all cases, the statute of limitations for sexual abuse expired a long time ago. Therefore, the victims' only avenue for justice is a civil case (a lawsuit) rather than a criminal case.

2. Are there claimants suing priests, parishes and dioceses who are chiefly interested in money? Sure, it's possible. But in my experience, the VAST MAJORITY want their abusers to be held accountable for their actions and, just as important, want the Catholic Church to change the secretive ways that enabled these predators to abuse thousands of kids. When settlements are announced, the non-monetary stipulations (such as removing the names of abusive priests from church building plaques or stained-glass windows) are more important to many victims than the monetary amount.

As a lifelong Catholic who knows some victims of clergy sexual abuse -- and who also knows some very dedicated priests whose reputations have been hurt by the predators among their ranks -- I can understand some of the points made about church bashing by the media.

But to blame any of the church's current troubles on the abuse victims is dead wrong. Crimes were committed by priests and the bishops who looked the other way and/or protected them. Eventually, everyone must do penance for their sins.

 

In addition to the out-and-out attacks I described, there were also many posts discussing the would-be law that were laced with sarcasm about the Church. Besides, people are twisting my words and interpreting what I said as an explicit attack on the victims when that is not the case, so at least let me have my interpretation. I apologize for getting hot under the collar for my earlier posts, but it was very late and I get worked up in a spirited debate anyway. I wasn't trying to attack all the victims in question or pick on any victim of sexual abuse. That being said, I stand by the foundation of my posts, as I tried to bring up an instance that hit close to home (a falsely accused priest) and tie the ratio of fabricators to honest victims to the ratio of dirty, heinous priests to those that are upstanding. Hopefully this will keep some of you from viewing me as pure evil, as my beef was with the anti-Catholic sentiment, not sex abuse victims...I do not blame them whatsoever.

 

You tried to draw false accusations in as a defense of child-molesting priests and the church officials who protected them. You also attempted to call into question the validity of any claim that came to light well after the fact, completely dismissing the difficulty some victims have coming forward.

Do you really think there are more false accusations than there are actual assults that are never reported?

Stop the excuse making. There is no excuse. By the way, I believe we are up to three posters on this thread who claim to know a victim of sexual abuse by a priest. Given the relatively small number of posters, that number is kind of disturbing.