Submitted by kangarooturd t3_121swjs in nottheonion
Remote_Person5280 t1_jdn7dwe wrote
And why wouldn’t he?
He’s no longer a priest so it’s no longer a sin.
HarryHacker42 t1_jdnwv8r wrote
The church hasn't been turning them in for "sinning" so it isn't a crime either, even if you are a priest.
ryobiguy t1_jdpddwu wrote
Sounds like organized crime to me.
HarryHacker42 t1_jdpj4gs wrote
The Catholic Church helped murder thousands of children, in Canada and Ireland in gigantic cases, but throughout the world in dozens of small cases. But don't worry.. the USA lets churches do anything they want and still pay no tax.
WaytoomanyUIDs t1_je9ov6v wrote
Also involved in human trafficking in Ireland, Francoist Spain and Argentina under the Junta.
subzero112001 t1_jdp14lp wrote
“The church hasn’t been turning them in”
A pedophile from the church has never been turned in? That isn’t an accurate statement.
What you mean to say is “a few people occasionally brush things under the rug”.
HarryHacker42 t1_jdpi842 wrote
The Pope JUST SAID that they are going to continue to review charges of abuse and if it raises to a level they find compelling, they will turn the person in now. But note, the church is the one who decides if the child abuse is to a level they find unacceptable.
That is a revsion to the 2019 policy. Before that, it was "cover it all up and hide the accused". For 200 years that was the policy.
subzero112001 t1_jdptstg wrote
So the pope saying “ we will look into these issues” actually means “the church never really turned in pedophiles before but now we will ”???
You’re doing a whole lot of biased assumptions.
Your logic is completely sound. /s
HarryHacker42 t1_jdr0voz wrote
There are decades of proof the Catholic Church hid pedophiles from any investigation let alone prosecution. That is a written policy they had, that the current Pope said he is changing after 200 years. So they admitted to it. I don't know what kind of half-hearted defense you are trying. The only difference is that in 2019, they said they'd change and we're all waiting to see if they'll do something like start turning in all those they were hiding or just toss an occasional one under the bus.
The Church isn't innocent, it paid out millions in settlements:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Settlements_and_bankruptcies_in_Catholic_sex_abuse_cases
Canada found 200+ graves of children the Church killed:
subzero112001 t1_jdthlxa wrote
“There are decades of proof the Catholic Church hid pedophiles”
I never claimed that “the church never hid pedophiles.”
You’re trying to argue like it’s an all or nothing thing. It’s very possible for them to hide some pedophiles while turning others in. But you’re trying to act like they’ve never in the history of the church turned in a pedophile. You literally said “The church hasn’t been turning them in”.
“That is a written policy”
Oh? I’ve never heard of the Catholic policy of “We don’t turn in pedophiles”.
Source please?
HarryHacker42 t1_jdvit50 wrote
The vast amounts of detail coming from the 2019, 2021, and 2023 changes are making it hard to find anything that happened before then. But I challenge you to find a case where the Church turned over a person to the law enforcement who wasn't already being demanded by the law enforcement. A case where a priest or other employee abused a kid, and the Church said "here police, this guy did something". You'd think with the massive number of cases shown by the legal settlements, there would be somebody turned over BEFORE it made it to civil court.
subzero112001 t1_jdyoj4u wrote
You do realize that its the police that handle people breaking the law, right? Lemme break this down for you.
If the church says "This guy has been abusing kids, ARREST HIM!".
The police will ask "Do you have any proof?"
And if the church responds" No, but the......."
Then the police will say"We'll investigate the charges since you have ZERO PROOF".
​
Do you understand? How in the world do you not even know how our legal system works?
HarryHacker42 t1_jdz3ayn wrote
But that's not how it works. What happens is a kid says he's been touched in a way he found odd, and the parents want to know more about it. The church takes over the investigation, looks into it, and finds the priest was probably doing something illegal, again, and tells the kid it was normal and he was wrong, and tell the parents it was nothing, then they ship the priest off to another parish or another country. THAT is what happened. The police weren't called. The person bringing the accusation was told they were wrong and it was just a mistake.
And the church did it THOUSANDS of times, and settled for hundreds of millions of dollars when it caught up to them, but you know what didn't happen? Them turning over all those priests and the evidence they had to the police.
subzero112001 t1_jdzf8ye wrote
>The church takes over the investigation
What part of "the police are supposed to handle people breaking the law" did you not understand?
It's like no shit if you go to Burger King and tell them "The gas pump station stole my money at Conoco!" they're not gonna do anything about it. Why is this such a hard concept?
You're basing a bunch of your vile on stupid people not reporting something illegal to the ONLY PEOPLE WHO CAN ACTUALLY DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT. It's honestly really weird.
Also, since this apparently has to be said; THE CHURCH DOES NOT HAVE THE CAPABILITY OF ACQUIRING FORENSIC EVIDENCE TO PROVE/DISPROVE ACCUSATIONS. That's what the legal system is for.
The premise of your entire claim is completely flawed in every single way.
HarryHacker42 t1_je0fhuq wrote
I'm saying it happened ALL the time, which is why the Church paid out millions. The Church should stay the hell out of it. They don't have the ability to investigate, but they did, and then they did the priest. Are you unaware of history? Did you miss the list of payouts the church did for this?
Here is over a decade of payout after payout, over a billion dollars:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Settlements_and_bankruptcies_in_Catholic_sex_abuse_cases
Here's a list of priests hidden by the church:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parish_transfers_of_abusive_Catholic_priests
subzero112001 t1_je35moa wrote
>I'm saying it happened ALL the time
Is due to morons not doing anything right. It has nothing to do with the church. Because the church does not convict criminals. How many times do I have to say that????
>The Church should stay the hell out of it.
If you mean they should stay out of law enforcement, I agree. Because thats what the legal system is for.
>Here is over a decade of payout after payout, over a billion dollars:
And that averages about 8 victims a year. 8 victims out of.... 463,634 per year.
The church has ~ 8. Out of 463,634.
Now of course is anything over 0 bad? Absolutely. But you're acting like the church has a monopoly on it. And it's quite obvious that 8 out of 463,634 is nowhere near being a large portion,the main culprit, or even moderately responsible for the majority of those acts.
subzero112001 t1_jdp189e wrote
Or maybe being falsely accused shouldn’t mean someone should stop trying to be a good person?
Remote_Person5280 t1_jdp67f8 wrote
What makes you think he was falsely accused? Did you read the article? It said nothing like that.
He was defrocked after being accused of sexual assault and investigated by the church. He didn’t quit- he was fired.
According to a woman who has investigated hundreds of these cases he has followed a classic pattern for offenders.
Lastly, given the Catholic Church and its priests actions surrounding the rape of children and the concealment of said rapes it would be insane to give them the benefit of the doubt.
If he’d been accused of sexual assault, defrocked, and moved on to being a line cook, maybe.
He was accused of sex crimes against children, investigated, defrocked, and then chose to…. work with children.
In my opinion I think your statement that he was “falsely accused” demonstrates breathtaking naïveté.
subzero112001 t1_jdpfezk wrote
“What makes you think he was falsely accused?”
Probably the fact that it was a random board of religious people who made the judgement of “guilty” instead of using actual forensics to determine culpability.
“He was fired”
Being fired doesn’t mean you are guilty. It just means that keeping you around would make that group “look bad”. It’s a publicity thing. Aka societal manipulation.
“Given the Catholic Church and its priests actions surrounding rape”
It’s odd that you think that the Catholic Church is more likely to commit rape compared to other random people. I have yet to see any evidence which suggests that the Catholic Church has the monopoly on rape.
“He was accused….then continued to work with children”
A person should stop trying to help others if they’ve ever been falsely accused of a crime. Your logic is undeniable. /s
You’re basing this entire thing around an accusation that wasn’t proven in any way shape or form using any evidence based forensics or analysis or any legitimate standard.
Talk about mob mentality and mob justice huh?
But I guess people only care about due process when it’s themself getting the short end of the stick…….sigh….
Remote_Person5280 t1_jdpgjq5 wrote
I had a whole argument typed out but, you know what?
Fuck it.
You let this guy work with your kids. I’ll take mine somewhere else.
Have a nice night.
RelativisticTowel t1_jdpuvqa wrote
Check out their comment history. Gotta give them credit, might just be the highest effort reddit troll I ever ran into.
subzero112001 t1_jdpm1zr wrote
Yeah, it’s always easier to put your hands over your ears and ignore the other person than try to have a conversation. Good luck with that.
Remote_Person5280 t1_jdqrlsa wrote
There’s no conversation to be had here, it’s a waste of both of our times.
A member of an organization, which has repeatedly lied about and covered up sexual assault of minors by its members was credibly accused of sexual assault. After being investigated the organization- and let me repeat this, this organization is notorious for covering up and hiding this exact thing- fired this person.
This person then immediately sought another job working with children.
You look at that chain of events, and think “this person was falsely accused“.
I look at it and say “typical Catholic Church, deflection and victim, seeking behavior by the offender“.
There’s nothing to talk about.
subzero112001 t1_jdtc8sa wrote
Your conclusion is based upon a supposedly untrustworthy group(the church) yet you’re saying their actions of firing this person is somehow trustworthy enough to condemn him.
How can you not see the blatant contradictions?
[deleted] t1_jdra70r wrote
[deleted]
subzero112001 t1_jdtih1b wrote
.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments