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 Areas 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]

"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 Areas 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

Slightly less than 1% of Catholic priests in America have been accused of some form of abuse. By comparison, roughly 5% of secular teachers in America have been accused of some form of abuse.
https://www.nytimes.com/1995/05/21/nyre ... usual.html
https://floridaactioncommittee.org/like ... r-teacher/

Do you also wonder why anyone who cares about children would support institutions of secular education? Or is it only when religious people are involved that you make such sweeping generalizations?






Edit: To be clear, I am not saying such actions are acceptable in any setting. Rather, I am suggesting that it is hypocrisy to use "cares about children" as an excuse to attack a group that someone disagrees with.

[POI]

Edit: To be clear, I am not saying such actions are acceptable in any setting. Rather, I am suggesting that it is hypocrisy to use "cares about children" as an excuse to attack a group that someone disagrees with.

Why do Catholic institutions try to protect known sexual predators and/or avoid accountability?

https://msmagazine.com/2024/01/30/rape- ... uch%20laws.

[bjs1]

Edit: To be clear, I am not saying such actions are acceptable in any setting. Rather, I am suggesting that it is hypocrisy to use "cares about children" as an excuse to attack a group that someone disagrees with.

Why do Catholic institutions try to protect known sexual predators and/or avoid accountability?

https://msmagazine.com/2024/01/30/rape- ... uch%20laws.

Yeah, that's half a century ago. It was an issue back then. The Catholic church changed its practice in the mid-1970s. They have practiced full transparency for more than 20 years now. Placing that question in the present tense is misleading propaganda.

[POI]

Edit: To be clear, I am not saying such actions are acceptable in any setting. Rather, I am suggesting that it is hypocrisy to use "cares about children" as an excuse to attack a group that someone disagrees with.

Why do Catholic institutions try to protect known sexual predators and/or avoid accountability?

https://msmagazine.com/2024/01/30/rape- ... uch%20laws.

Yeah, that's half a century ago. It was an issue back then. The Catholic church changed its practice in the mid-1970's. They have practiced full trasparency for more than 20 years now. Placeing that in question in the present tense is misleading propaganda.

"Changed it's practice"? Why would they need to change? Aren't they "morally" superior? Further, a Catholic church is 'transparent' after they are caught. They also still protect the abuser. Same source quote:

"The Catholic Church also keeps sexually abusive clergy in positions of authority. A Massachusetts newspaper recently reported on a case where a priest had sex with a parishioner in the 1990s after leading her to believe he could cure her lesbianism by having sex with her. He remains in active ministry at a university, working with vulnerable young people."

You have to ask yourself, why would the Catholic church continue to employ a known sex offender, who is to be responsible for children?

By now, its not very far-fetched to assume the Catholic church provides a safe haven for sexual predators.

[bjs1]

Edit: To be clear, I am not saying such actions are acceptable in any setting. Rather, I am suggesting that it is hypocrisy to use "cares about children" as an excuse to attack a group that someone disagrees with.

Why do Catholic institutions try to protect known sexual predators and/or avoid accountability?

https://msmagazine.com/2024/01/30/rape- ... uch%20laws.

Yeah, that's half a century ago. It was an issue back then. The Catholic church changed its practice in the mid-1970's. They have practiced full trasparency for more than 20 years now. Placeing that in question in the present tense is misleading propaganda.

"Changed it's practice"? Why would they need to change? Aren't they "morally" superior?

No, they are human.

Further, a Catholic church is 'transparent' after they are caught.

They did the wrong thing - though I grant that I say that with the advantage of hindsight. The effects of abuse were less well understood in the 1950's and 1960's. Back then the Roman Catholic church sent abusers to counseling instead handing them over to civil authorities. At that time there would have been a genuine debate about whether this was the right course of action or not.

They also still protect the abuser. Same source quote:

"The Catholic Church also keeps sexually abusive clergy in positions of authority. A Massachusetts newspaper recently reported on a case where a priest had sex with a parishioner in the 1990s after leading her to believe he could cure her lesbianism by having sex with her. He remains in active ministry at a university, working with vulnerable young people."

You have to ask yourself, why would the Catholic church continue to employ a known sex offender, who is to be responsible for children?

Do you genuinly believe that there can never be rehibilitation? A priest broke his vow of chastity (what you describe pushed the definition of abuse). He was wrong to sleep with a parishioner, but it was 30 years ago. I think that people can grow and change, and that it is right to give them a second chance. Do you disagree?

By now, its not very far-fetched to assume the Catholic church provides a safe haven for sexual predators.

I mean, you are just making this up without evidence, so it does seem more than a little far-fetched.

[POI]

[Replying to bjs1 in post #6]

You would have some kind of a case if the Catholic church re-hired the offender as a night janitor for a location void of the opportunity to capitalize on vulnerability. However, I have backed up my position that the Catholic church protects their own. Even today, the Catholic church still knowingly allows for such documented offenders to be in a position of continued exposure to such parties. Tisk tisk.

Would you hire a babysitter with such a record, (even if it was 30 years old)? I doubt it. So please stop

[1213]

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

Is it the institution that abuses, or is it the people who do so?

[TRANSPONDER]

It's like this; When the scandal first broke, it was hard to know what was worse; what was going or the cover up they tried. To blame the men not the church means that it is just an organisation run by men and no better than any other organisation. In fact worse because they were not open to investigation.

The impression I got at the time was they promised they would sort this problem out themselves. I thought at the time "This has lost them a lot of respect and support, and if it turns out it is still going on, they shouldn't be trusted again". So, is this a matter of old cases from back then and they have in fact sorted it, or is it more of the same, in which case they should not be trusted to police themselves and the police should get involved. Religion should no longer give immunity.

Whether that can be done when Churches are a law unto themselves as much as they can trade on their undeserved public and official support, is another question.

But it hinges on whether these are old cases from before the clean - up, or is it the same old problem?

[The Nice Centurion]

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

Is it the institution that abuses, or is it the people who do so?

It is the institution.

Giving money to the Catholic church is the same as buying child porn for them.