On a scale of 1 to 10, I wonder how old that judge’s last sexual
partnervictim wasThe fact they would protect abusers just to comply with their faith speaks volumes about their priorities. I mean it’s no surprise when they already protect the predators within their ranks, so why not do the same with their followers?
That judge deserves a bullet in the head, or the next best thing, ignore his dipshit ruling. You. protect. Children. Period. There is no debate here.
We’re just thinking of the kids! Jeez!! Is that so hard to understand?? 😑
The legislation “places them in the position of either complying with the requirements of their faith or violating the law. The consequences for violating the law are serious and, as Plaintiffs assert, the implications of violating the Sacramental Seal are more serious still,” he wrote.
Attorney General Nick Brown’s office emphasized that the ruling only applies to “the Sacrament of Confession” and that, if clergy learn about abuse in any other setting, the injunction does not change that they will be mandated reporters. Brown did not provide any further comment.
Batshit insane first paragraph. The second is at least some small positive. I don’t know that this being overturned actually makes any meaningful difference in practice though though- if people can’t say they abused a child in confessional they won’t. I guess you might catch some people in the transmission, who didn’t learn about the change? That would be a positive. But I think long term people just wouldn’t confess to sexual abuses in the confessional anymore
I live in a place where clergy are legally required to report already. There’s still a regular stream of people who confess anyway and are then counseled to immediately report to the police as well, as clergy will be reporting within 24 hours.
Some people glaze over when told what the legal responsibilities are, and just go with what they were told from old movies, that confession is inviolate. Odd but true.
Huh… Thanks for sharing your perspective! it sounds like I was wrong
Luigi Mangione’s religion requires that sacrifice health care executives, but I don’t see any judges standing up for him.
I dont understand, Luigi is innocent, he was playing Mouse Trap board game with me at the alleged time.
A bit of a clickbait title (but only a bit) - the WA law moved to make priests required reporters, professions who are legally required by law to report child abuse. The injunction sought to exempt catholic priests from being required to report child abuse which was reported to them under the ‘seal of the confessional’ (the special super secret group chat that only exists between you, your priest and god) and after this injunction they are still required reporters in all other instances.
This is… at least a consistent ruling? For example religious leaders can’t be held as accomplices if they don’t report crimes that were told to them in a ritual setting (oversimplification) or be held liable if they don’t forewarn about someone planning suicide or some other crime and then said person goes thru with it. Predictably canon law is rife with examples of breaking the seal of the confession to prevent a suicide, of course, but lets just ignore that.
The rationalization for this is twofold: First freedom of religion from civil regulation. Second and more credibly that it would be allowing unfair weight into criminal proceedings because of the perceived sanctity of the confession and the upstanding character of priests (lol). The argument goes that testimony brought of things revealed in confession is by it’s nature hersay, but hersay that would be presented as being devout reporting of an unimpeachable confession, and that could unduly sway juries and in general get really messy so the law just doesn’t want to deal with it.
I strongly disagree with this ruling, the catholics get enough special treatment what with not being prosecuted for raping all those children, that’s just the background to the arguments being made about it.
The problem as I understand the religion, is the priests are going to do whatever the church(bishop, cardinal, pope) say is correct. Because the reward and punishment are infinite. For the true believers I think the only exception the church officially makes is to prevent a murder?
The new pope should be lobbied to change this but don’t get your hopes up.
Priests are bound to confidentiality for whatever was confessed to them during confession. It’s part of why people confess to them. Priests are then able to encourage people to seek help, talk to the police, etc., but they themselves aren’t supposed to report what is said to them. In a few flavors of Christianity, including Catholicism, confession is considered a sacrament. It’s between the believer, their priest, and their god.
That’s what this ruling is about. Priests are still mandatory reporters for anything they learn outside confession.
The argument goes that testimony brought of things revealed in confession is by it’s nature hersay
Testifying that someone confessed to a crime is not hearsay. Hearsay is “Person X told me that Person Y did Z”.
Testifying to someone confessing to you is exactly what cops do on the stand, when they testify about a confession a perp provided in an interrogation.
I mean, so if my religion says I can diddle kids and kill republicans, is that legal now?
No
But Republicans get to do it…
Just because someone gets to do it doesn’t mean it’s legal. This mentality gives justification/defense to these acts.
Specifically, this is about forced reporting of sex abuse against children to authorities, not about the act itself.
Ohhh “rules for thee” got it.
Just because someone gets to do it doesn’t mean it’s legal.
Legal or illegal is immaterial. Who is punished for it, and who is protected from punishment is what matters.
It would seem so.
In the like 40% chance you’re actually dumb enough to ask this unironically, no, what this means is if you work a confessional booth as part of your religion and somebody admits to diddling kids and killing republicans in the past tense then you not saying anything about it is legal.
I know what it means.
It the law only applies to some people.
It literally doesn’t, that’s kind of the point of the ruling.
The ruling allows churches to ignore child abuse. This ruling was BAD.
Okay sure, but why do you have to make false statements in response to the bad ruling? Why do you get upset when people correct you for that?
What false statements? I am not upset at all lol.
That its legal to rape and murder, you think thats a factual statement? That catholic priests are gaining special privileges by not facing charges for a law specifically targetting confessionals? You think these are all true?
Not only is it legal to keep quiet, you’ll face consequences from your religious institution if you report what you know.
It’s seem that two classes of
peoplepedophiles are protected in the country priest & billionairesA Texas cult tried that once. The answer is no. Or it was like 40 years ago idk
They just got a lot less obvious about it over the years. Fewer “compounds” and more “congregations” and “constituents”
I’ve heard in passing New York has some Catholic communities that are pretty culty. Not saying other types of Christian aren’t also, but specifically some branches of Catholic in New York state
I’ve never heard that. Not that it isn’t true….
Dunno if it’s New York, but one of our Supreme Court justices is part of a very culty sub-sect of Catholicism. It’s Barrett.
Looks like this is about confessionals, meaning it’s about privilege.
That being said, sexual abuse of a child is usually an exception to privilege for all professionals.
If you require priests to report what they hear in confession the only thing you accomplish is people stop going to confession. Furthermore, turning yourself in is generally part of your penance anyway.
And what good does going to confession accomplish?
Makes you feel better about being a piece of shit.
It allows the church to absolve your sins. The Priests are acting as representatives of God, and cannot tell anyone of anything during confession.
And as I said, what good does that accomplish?
Why should the government make allowances and set up privileges for grownups playing make-believe in order to get away with crimes?
It’s quite literally saving your soul from eternal damnation if you follow the religion. Just because you don’t believe in the religious practices doesn’t mean the experience is any less valid.
It’s quite literally saving your soul from eternal damnation if you follow the religion.
Except, it’s just bronze age mythology… Which has no place in the law.
Iron Age actually, and because you don’t believe it doesn’t make it any less real for believers.
Anyone can believe whatever mythology they enjoy. That doesn’t mean we need to codify their beliefs into law as a way of protecting criminals.
So pure selfishness then. A miscarriage of justice for the victim. The deliberate ignoring of societal problems. It only benefits the person who committed the crime by allowing them to get off scot-free. You think it’s a good thing for pedophiles to avoid justice, just so long as they appeal to your god. You think that’s how things should be.
I’ll bet you don’t even wonder how so many pedophiles found protection from their crimes and limitless opportunities to molest more victims simply by hiding within the authority of your church, for literally over a thousand years. And you believe them when they claim that they are the pathway to eternal paradise. Where is your god?
Catholics actually believe in Purgatory, where the priest saves your soul from damnation to Hell, you are still divinely punished before you enter Heaven. That is unless you get the apostolic pardon and sacrament of penance.
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+9%3A1-8%2CMark+2%3A1-12&version=GW
Jesus absolves people of sins and gives men the ability to do so. Your disbelief in the ability does not influence the believers. If you have an issue with it you can always rant with the Unitarian Universalists.
I’m sure you thought that was relevant.
So God himself molested all those children? Well that’s not very cool of him.
He’s a real bastard
Yeah Catholic church is so big on telling pedophiles turn themselves in that’s that’s what history shows.
A lot of other professions have mandated reporting. That is like saying because a therapist have to turn in their client, since they are mandated reporters, then there would be less people getting therapy.
It’s better to think of a Priest like a Lawyer. Attorney-Client privilege means the Lawyer cannot divulge information to police, same with a Priest during confessions.
A priest isn’t there to defend you in court room. THAT’S why lawyers have client privilege, not to protect rapists, but to be able to mount a legal defense.
A priest can save you from damnation and interprets divine law like how a lawyer can save you from prison and interprets mortal law.
Well, we have evidence that a lawyer can do what you claim, and none that a priest can…
Which is a non-issue anyways. Iron age mythology (Not bronze aged, as I was corrected) has no place in the laws governing a secular society.
Even a lawyer has to report child sexual abuse, and in places that they don’t it is still a may report instead of have to. They are also dealing with laws while priests are not dealing with laws. In almost all states anyone who deals with or takes care of a child are mandated reporters. Basically yes, lawyers are also mandated reporters in most states.
https://dcyf.wa.gov/safety/mandated-reporter
Washington’s list of mandatory reporters, lawyer is not on there.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/attorney-client_privilege
Attorney client privilege only faulters when you disclose you plan to continue committing a crime or are planning on commiting one. Or in some cases where a protective order or custody order is violated and only the lawyer and client are privileged to the child’s whereabouts. https://www.casemine.com/judgement/us/5914c52eadd7b049347d2545
What you tell a lawyer is confidential bar some rare exceptions. If you attain a lawyer and tell them you have commited the crime of child abuse they do not have to report unless you divulge a plan to continue abusing children. When you attain a priest during confession, you also have this confidentiality.
When you attain a priest during confession, you also have this confidentiality.
Only to protect rapists from the law, though.
Or any other crime. Confess you murdered a man and the priest is bound by confession.
And the priest has no right to claim such a privilege.
If you hire a defense lawyer and confess to them you killed someone, that is protected by attorney client privilege. If you hire a lawyer and confess your intention to kill someone, they are complicit if they don’t report it to the authorities, just like anyone else.
The duties of a priest have nothing in common with a lawyer under the legal system.
The duties of a priest deal with divine law, and are acting closer to a lawyer than you may think.
You’re not going to heaven.
I don’t think therapists should be turning in their clients, either. Criminals deserve effective therapy as much as anyone else.
I don’t care about penance, I don’t care about confession, and I don’t give a fuck about religion, I care about pedophiles facing justice.
Hooray! Abusers get to relieve themselves of the harm they’ve caused while protecting their ability to do it again. What a great country I live in.
FUCK!
Cruelty is the point. Innit.
It seems that protecting the children only works to weaken privacy and individual rights, not to actually protect children.
So they just need to classify Epstein as a religious leader?
kind of similar on how Christian conservatives push for child/adult marriage, because they believe the only damage of pedophilia is that it is out of wedlock, and it would be better for the child they are sent to live with a rapist and become their servant.
Ig sexually abusing kids falls under religious freedoms now. What a shithole country
More specifically, Washington State (and most other states) have mandated reporter laws regarding child abuse. If your profession is on the list, you are a mandated reporter. Construction workers are an example of people not mandated reporters. If they suspect abuse they should say something but aren’t legally mandated. Teachers, nurses, and clergy are examples of mandated reporters. They have to say something. The carve out is if the priest learns the information during a sacramental confession. Outside of the confessional, he still reports. But because people stop going to confession when priests don’t have the seal of the confessional, churches maintain that requirement. Child abusers aren’t going to confess to someone who will report that confession to the government so it isn’t like this law was going to stop any abuse. In fact, more abuse might happen when perverts have no one to turn to when they need someone to deal with their messed up psychology.
Teachers, nurses, and clergy are examples of mandated reporters.
Well, mandated, until they want to protect a rapist. Then they are protected from having to disclose they exchanged tips with a fellow child rapist.
