Catholic child sexual abuse worse than previously known

[Tcg]

"Reckoning

An NBC Bay Area investigation into a new wave of lawsuits accusing Catholic clergy of sexually abusing children
By Candice Nguyen, Michael Bott and Alex Bozovic

The Catholic church is once again being buried in child sex abuse accusations across California. More than 4,000 people are suing Catholic institutions across the state, enabled by a recent law that opened a window for survivors to sue their alleged abusers, no matter how far back their accusations go. Hundreds of Northern California priests are being accused for the first time, including some still working in churches and schools today. NBC Bay Area’s Investigative Unit dug through the new claims, which suggest the decades-long scandal could go far deeper than the public previously knew."

<https://www.nbcbayarea.com/investigatio ... g/3458889/>

(Bolding mine)

Why would anyone who cares about children continue to support this institution?


Tcg

[bjs1]

secrecy. Religions do not allow their dealings to be open to investigation the way any other organisation is. In short, they consider themselves above the law.

This is false. Most religious organizations, including the RCC, are open to investigation. For more than 2 decades the RCC in America has pro-actively shared information with law enforcement with a few areas of exception (such as confessional).

Moral High Ground. They claim to be in a position to teach people how to live, but if these accusations are true, they have no business to teach anyone anything.

This is problematic. Do you think it is right in general to say that if one percent of a group does something, then all members of that group are guilty? If someone were to answer yes, then I assume that person would also say that Atheists, police, school teachers, all political parties, and essentially every group in existence is untrustworthy.

Religious validity. If religions are not true, they provide nothing but lies and scamming us out of money.

This is a non-sequitur. There is no logical way to get from “Bob did something bad” to “What Joe believes about God is false.”

There may be a case for community and charity, but would we accept Islamic law being imposed in the west on those grounds? If not, why should Christian 'Law' be tolerated, just because we have gotten used to it?

What Christian “Law” is being enforced in modern western nations?

[TRANSPONDER]

secrecy. Religions do not allow their dealings to be open to investigation the way any other organisation is. In short, they consider themselves above the law.

This is false. Most religious organizations, including the RCC, are open to investigation. For more than 2 decades the RCC in America has pro-actively shared information with law enforcement with a few areas of exception (such as confessional).

Moral High Ground. They claim to be in a position to teach people how to live, but if these accusations are true, they have no business to teach anyone anything.

This is problematic. Do you think it is right in general to say that if one percent of a group does something, then all members of that group are guilty? If someone were to answer yes, then I assume that person would also say that Atheists, police, school teachers, all political parties, and essentially every group in existence is untrustworthy.

Religious validity. If religions are not true, they provide nothing but lies and scamming us out of money.

This is a non-sequitur. There is no logical way to get from “Bob did something bad” to “What Joe believes about God is false.”

There may be a case for community and charity, but would we accept Islamic law being imposed in the west on those grounds? If not, why should Christian 'Law' be tolerated, just because we have gotten used to it?

What Christian “Law” is being enforced in modern western nations?

This supposed transparency and open to investigation claim is what we told is the case, but it is clear that this is not so, or so the claims suggest. It may be false, but the claims keep popping up and nothing is done, and it seems that the Churches keep it close. i don't follow scandal cases too much but I hear talk of them and here we are with a thread that suggests that we are here again despite the Church promising it would clean up its' act. What it shares with law enforcement was limited to other crimes, not its' own.

Your flawed and biased thinking is shown in your Bad apple argument. Especially since i recall I pre -refuted that. I'll do it again. Sure I said that an employee doing a crime does not smear the whole company, but a system of corporate cover - up does. This is a Problem with other organisations and gets bad publicity, It should be the same with Churches, especially when they claim to be morality mentors for the rest of us.

You strawman (1) my point about 'Bob did something bad' and I know you are smart enough to know that's a sreawman. The point is not that someone doing something wrong makes a religion untrue, but IF a religion is untrue, any supposed social benefits it may bring to society do not justify supporting it.

Christian law. Well at the moment, it was less of a threat than islamic - here, anyway, with little Creationism, but yes, Religious schools being opened to push religion and the Authorities were ok with that as they didn't need to find the funding - until they found that Shariya Law muslims were taking over.

But in the US, we know that something like half the school boards ban evolution and teach creationism and never mind the Law. And whatever one thinks of womens' rights, it is hardly to be doubted that repealing womens' rights is purely inspired by religion 'Law'. I also think that anything sidelining Law (using 'States' rights rather than Federal rights) is religious at base. Christian flag flown above the US flag.

As I say, it isn't a Thing yet, but a threat, but what goes on in the churches and the religion - laced political groups, warns us what Christian law will look like.
Even Ham's Ark violated law by discriminating in worker hiring - non Christians need not apply. This is considered all right, bur us alt right.

(1) I translated that from Theist - English:

English 'Strawman' - a misrepresentation of an argument so as to make it easier to knock gown.

Theist. An argument the theist doesn't like.

[historia]

i don't follow scandal cases too much but I hear talk of them and here we are with a thread that suggests that we are here again despite the Church promising it would clean up its' act.

But that is precisely not what this news story is about.

The news coverage in the OP concerns a recent California law that removed the statue of limitation -- i.e., the time period in which a litigant is allowed to bring a lawsuit -- for sexual assault cases.

This change caused a number of litigants to bring forward lawsuits against northern California diocese for alleged cases of assault that otherwise would have been beyond the statue of limitation. These are, by definition, old cases, most from many decades ago, and in several instances involving perpetrators who are dead.

[TRANSPONDER]

i don't follow scandal cases too much but I hear talk of them and here we are with a thread that suggests that we are here again despite the Church promising it would clean up its' act.

But that is precisely not what this news story is about.

The news coverage in the OP concerns a recent California law that removed the statue of limitation -- i.e., the time period in which a litigant is allowed to bring a lawsuit -- for sexual assault cases.

This change caused a number of litigants to bring forward lawsuits against northern California diocese for alleged cases of assault that otherwise would have been beyond the statue of limitation. These are, by definition, old cases, most from many decades ago, and in several instances involving perpetrators who are dead.

Ok. Thanks for that. I recall I did raise the question fo whether these are old case that popped up (for whatever reason) or it is evidence of the same old problem. I accept your correction.

[The Nice Centurion]

They say they are open for investigation ...

I doubt that this is 100% the case. Every sect wants to cover up its priests.
What do they hide unofficially? This old cases now coming to light because a new law - Some priests still working. Even working with kids ...

Were none of them accused by victims before church authoritys even if beyond reach of law?

And church authoritys did nothing?

Besides ...

1900 years this Catholic sect was closed for outside investigation and in safety raped kids.

Deal with it!

[bjs1]

1900 years this Catholic sect was closed for outside investigation and in safety raped kids.

Deal with it!

Interesting claim.

What is your source?

[TRANSPONDER]

1900 years this Catholic sect was closed for outside investigation and in safety raped kids.

Deal with it!

Interesting claim.

What is your source?

Well, historically, the reputation of the catholic church was not of the best when it came to sexual pecadilloes and Shenagigans. Though of course this might have been salacious talk rather than actual reports. Because that is what secrecy is for -0 to keep it secret.

That it only came out so recently that this had been going on in living memory (and it had better not turn out to be going on still or there should be a Maralago swoop and grab and never mind respect) and it is Reasonable to suppose that it was not just between consenting adults. But no, it can't be proven.

[bjs1]

1900 years this Catholic sect was closed for outside investigation and in safety raped kids.

Deal with it!

Interesting claim.

What is your source?

Well, historically, the reputation of the catholic church was not of the best when it came to sexual pecadilloes and Shenagigans. Though of course this might have been salacious talk rather than actual reports. Because that is what secrecy is for -0 to keep it secret.

That it only came out so recently that this had been going on in living memory (and it had better not turn out to be going on still or there should be a Maralago swoop and grab and never mind respect) and it is Reasonable to suppose that it was not just between consenting adults. But no, it can't be proven.

I don't think I can agree that is reasonable at all.

The actual evidence is that in the 1950s and 1960’s the RCC sent abusers to counseling instead of handing them over to civil authorities. The church was open to outside investigation, but they didn’t proactively report abuse (to be fair, that could be said about much of America at that time).

To go from that to “1900 years this Catholic sect was closed for outside investigation and in safety raped kids” seems like a leap that stretches even the most active imaginations.

[TRANSPONDER]

1900 years this Catholic sect was closed for outside investigation and in safety raped kids.

Deal with it!

Interesting claim.

What is your source?

Well, historically, the reputation of the catholic church was not of the best when it came to sexual pecadilloes and Shenagigans. Though of course this might have been salacious talk rather than actual reports. Because that is what secrecy is for -0 to keep it secret.

That it only came out so recently that this had been going on in living memory (and it had better not turn out to be going on still or there should be a Maralago swoop and grab and never mind respect) and it is Reasonable to suppose that it was not just between consenting adults. But no, it can't be proven.

I don't think I can agree that is reasonable at all.

The actual evidence is that in the 1950s and 1960’s the RCC sent abusers to counseling instead of handing them over to civil authorities. The church was open to outside investigation, but they didn’t proactively report abuse (to be fair, that could be said about much of America at that time).

To go from that to “1900 years this Catholic sect was closed for outside investigation and in safety raped kids” seems like a leap that stretches even the most active imaginations.

The evidence that caused as much outrage as finding out the sin and that they were covering it up was that offending priests were just shifted to new parishes, not dismissed.

This is why - while old offences being more than supposed, the real Real question is whether it has been corrected, as we are grudgingly crediting ther Church with doing. If it turns out that the abuse is still going on and is being covered up, the outrage will be bigger than before (never mind the million of believers will find excuses or just ignore it). I don't know, but like failed prophecies, I don't forget about it.

[bjs1]

This is why - while old offences being more than supposed, the real Real question is whether it has been corrected, as we are grudgingly crediting ther Church with doing. If it turns out that the abuse is still going on and is being covered up, the outrage will be bigger than before.

Agreed. But as that hasn't happened as of yet, I'm not sure what your point is.