Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/

Catholic Church claims it is above the law

24567…48

Comments

  • #32
    kildare.17hmr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,615 ✭✭✭kildare.17hmr


    bnt wrote: »
    Totally pointless discussion, if you ask me. Why? Because it won't change anything. What are the possible outcomes?
    1. Confessional remains private. Crimes confessed there are not reported. Justice is not served.
    2. Confessional no longer private. Crimes confessed there are reported. People stop confessing to crimes in confessionals. Justice is not served.
    The problem, as I see it, is this assumption that people go in to a confessional and tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. How is that conceptually different from blurting something out to your friends at the pub after ten pints? The fact that someone says something is not proof that a crime has been committed: a judge or jury makes a decision based on the evidence, not just on something you said.
    of course it will change things it will hold people responsible for what they have done for one. It all starts with someone speaking out then up to the gards to find the evidence so you think they should not be givin the chance to find evidence?

    I dispise the church and everything it stands for and i don't see a place for it in modern society


  • #33
    wild_cat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,291 ✭✭✭wild_cat


    mackg wrote: »
    Trying to explain this to people. "you have to get a child christened sure thats how you name the child". No you name the child by putting their name on a birth cert.


    I feel like crying.


  • #34
    Irish Slaves for Europe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 235 ✭✭Irish Slaves for Europe


    mackg wrote: »
    Hope Enda sticks to his guns here, there is a special place for the catholic church in Ireland: In the witness box helping to put paeodophiles behind bars. If they refuse this and you keep going to mass and dropping money in the plate you need to take a long hard look at yourself.

    The catholic church throughout this whole affair has made it clear they will defend and protect paeodophiles at all costs. They have no morals or values, they are evil to the core. What they do going forward is irrelevant as far as I'm concerned, it will only be a cynical PR tactic if they do start to co-operate with the investigations taking place. Anyone who continues to give money to the church is only supporting their actions. I can't work out why the government doesn't just seize their assets to provide appropriate compensation to the victims. If they need to introduce retrospective legislation then do so.


  • #35
    ejmaztec
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,281 ✭✭✭✭ejmaztec


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    Kind of handy for Enda this as well.

    He needs to save a few bob and closing the embassy in the Vatican will help.

    There would also be a vacant prime property up in The Park if he kicks out the Papal "Noncio".


  • #36
    seamus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 68,173 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    CatFromHue wrote: »
    by even mentioning it we've already strayed away from the areas that the church should be working on relating to child protection.
    In reality the church has very little work to do in relation to child protection. It's mostly in the State's hands to take all institutions out of the church's hands, or to arrange full audits of church-run instutions, insisting that all staff working there are subject to the full training requirements and security clearance processes as would be required by any other organisation.

    Our main issue is that the church was just allowed to run with these institutions, unaccounted for, for so long.

    If you remove the robes and collars from any of the various reports, the first question we should be asking is, "Why aren't all of the people named here being arrested for their failure to disclose this material information?".

    That's a state failure. If the church wishes to operate contrary to the laws of the land, that's fine, but the state should be nailing them to the cross every time they do.

    We're all fully aware that the church lives in an alternate reality. I don't see any reason to get bogged down in their internal stuff and ask them to change. Force them to change by slaughtering them for doing wrong to society.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    wild_cat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,291 ✭✭✭wild_cat


    Things like this make me be ashamed to be Irish. The BF said last night they should be burned at the stake like they did to the pagans.


  • #38
    problemchimp
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,025 ✭✭✭problemchimp


    We need to break all ties between government and Vatican and treat them like a rogue state. If people want to practise their Catholic faith well they have the right to do so, just like I go to GAA matches.


  • #39
    Pherekydes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,253 ✭✭✭✭Pherekydes


    ejmaztec wrote: »
    There would also be a vacant prime property up in The Park if he kicks out the Papal "Noncio".

    Wouldn't that be still the property of the Vatican?


  • #40
    jimthemental
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,004 ✭✭✭jimthemental


    wild_cat wrote: »
    The Catholic church will take years upon years to die out here. Especially when you have stupid people getting children christened for the sake of a piss up.
    mackg wrote: »
    Trying to explain this to people. "you have to get a child christened sure thats how you name the child". No you name the child by putting their name on a birth cert.

    I can understand where you are coming from here as I would have a fairly similar opinion but indoctrination and faith in the Catholic or any other religion is not the issue here.

    The issue is that a vast number of people had knowledge of children being treated in an inhuman way and they feel that because they came clean to one person and squared it with the church that they should not face trial and their victims should not have justice.


  • #41
    MitchKoobski
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,101 ✭✭✭MitchKoobski


    While they do need to prosecute people for witholding information when it comes to child abuse, as atheist as I am, I don't agree with making it illegal to withhold information given in confessionals.

    That's just trampling all over someones religion. Why would they go to confession knowing anything they said could be passed on? They'll just stop going. I'm all for catching the bastards and locking them away, but making one of the core practices of the religion illegal will just turn many irish people against how theyre handling it.

    I'd compare confession to doctor/patient confidentiality. If someone says something to their psychiatrist, are you then gonna put the psychiatrist in prison for not passing something on?


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    wild_cat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,291 ✭✭✭wild_cat


    jimthemental wrote: »
    I can understand where you are coming from here as I would have a fairly similar opinion but indoctrination and faith in the Catholic or any other religion is not the issue here.

    The issue is that a vast number of people had knowledge of children being treated in an inhuman way and they feel that because they came clean to one person and squared it with the church that they should not face trial and their victims should not have justice.


    And the congregation should show that they will not stand for this. Which the majority are not.


  • #43
    theteal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,590 ✭✭✭theteal


    Anybody want to fill out the census form properly now?

    By the time it comes around again this will all be a dull memory to most.




    Are they still paying fook all compensation leaving us to foot the majority of the bill?


  • #44
    wild_cat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,291 ✭✭✭wild_cat


    MitchKoobski wrote: »
    I'd compare confession to doctor/patient confidentiality. If someone says something to their psychiatrist, are you then gonna put the psychiatrist in prison for not passing something on?


    Yes. They have to report it. If you admit a crime you have they have to report it.

    Even if you mention that you were abused if that person is still living you have to divulge who they were.


  • #45
    jimthemental
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,004 ✭✭✭jimthemental


    MitchKoobski wrote: »
    I'd compare confession to doctor/patient confidentiality. If someone says something to their psychiatrist, are you then gonna put the psychiatrist in prison for not passing something on?

    Definitely. We are talking about predatory sex offenders here. It should be their duty as member of the human race to report a dangerous mind like this. It's just like an engineer should not sign off on a dodgy bridge.


  • #46
    Seachmall
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,041 ✭✭✭Seachmall


    MitchKoobski wrote: »
    While they do need to prosecute people for witholding information when it comes to child abuse, as atheist as I am, I don't agree with making it illegal to withhold information given in confessionals.

    That's just trampling all over someones religion. Why would they go to confession knowing anything they said could be passed on? They'll just stop going. I'm all for catching the bastards and locking them away, but making one of the core practices of the religion illegal will just turn many irish people against how theyre handling it.

    I'd compare confession to doctor/patient confidentiality. If someone says something to their psychiatrist, are you then gonna put the psychiatrist in prison for not passing something on?

    Yes, doctors have a legal obligation to report crimes involving children. The church should have the same. It's not trampling over their religion because you are not preventing them from getting absolution from God, you're just ensuring justice is served in this world regardless if it's served in the next or not.

    Doctors also have to abide by court mandates in disclosing information.


  • #47
    MitchKoobski
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,101 ✭✭✭MitchKoobski


    wild_cat wrote: »
    Yes. They have to report it. If you admit a crime you have they have to report it.

    Even if you mention that you were abused if that person is still living you have to divulge who they were.
    I agree with doctors passing information on when its taken on a case by case basis, given the serious nature of many crimes.

    But say for example someone over 18 goes to their psych to talk about how they were abused. They don't reveal who abused them. Is their doctor then going to report them for withholding information? The idea that your doctor should be forcing you to reveal who it was worries me. And if the doctor doesnt force you to reveal it, are they then going to be prosecuted for not pursuing it for more information?


  • #48
    Yahew
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,491 ✭✭✭Yahew


    Seachmall wrote: »
    Yes, doctors have a legal obligation to report crimes involving children. The church should have the same. It's not trampling over their religion because you are not preventing them from getting absolution from God, you're just ensuring justice is served in this world regardless if it's served in the next or not.

    Lawyers dont have an obligation to pass on information.

    In any case the State should demand that serious crimes be reported, the Church can refuse; however the individual priests should be arrested if it can be proven that the alleged perp turned up and confessed that actual crime ( something I imagine which would be quite difficult) and the priest should go to prison for his beliefs if he continues to withhold. If there are any laws which allow priests to legally withhold, remove them, however the Catholic Church can continue to protect the privacy of the confessional, if it chooses, at a cost to itself.

    Do any of the modern anti-Catholic atheists get a bit queasy when agreeing with an utter bigot like KeithAFC? You should: his attitudes pretty much exterminated your ancestors.

    mod: poster banned.


  • #49
    prinz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    Seachmall wrote: »
    Yes, doctors have a legal obligation to report crimes involving children. The church should have the same. It's not trampling over their religion because you are not preventing them from getting absolution from God, you're just ensuring justice is served in this world regardless if it's served in the next or not.

    Interesting. I wonder when the report into the GP's mentioned as being informed of child abuse in the Cloyne Report will be made public. What about parents if parents are aware of abuse and don't come forward to be put them in prison?

    I'm all for penalising the crime of omission when it comes to child abuse. As long as it applies to everyone.


  • #50
    Seachmall
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,041 ✭✭✭Seachmall


    MitchKoobski wrote: »
    I agree with doctors passing information on when its taken on a case by case basis, given the serious nature of many crimes.

    But say for example someone over 18 goes to their psych to talk about how they were abused. They don't reveal who abused them. Is their doctor then going to report them for withholding information? The idea that your doctor should be forcing you to reveal who it was worries me. And if the doctor doesnt force you to reveal it, are they then going to be prosecuted for not pursuing it for more information?

    It depends, if the doctor is led to believe the abuser may still be abusing children he would have to report it.
    In any case involving the welfare of a child, the child’s best interests are paramount. This may require disclosure of some content of the medical record – or details from it – to a social worker and/or the gardai. As a matter of good practice, you should always explain to the parents that you have a duty to refer your concerns to non-medical professionals and, where possible, obtain their consent to disclosure, except in rare circumstances, where to do so would put the child at increased risk.
    The public interest justification for disclosure usually turns on the threat of serious harm to others. Section 8 of the Data Protection Act lists a number of exceptions to the rules applying to data processing. This includes information held in a personal record that is “required for the purpose of preventing, detecting or investigating offences or prosecuting offenders” or “to prevent injury or other damage to the health of a person or serious loss of or damage to property”.

    - Confidentiality of Records
    Yahew wrote:
    Lawyers dont have an obligation to pass on information.
    Lawyers are there to represent individuals and thus are exempt as individuals have a right not to self-incriminate.
    prinz wrote:
    I'm all for penalising the crime of omission when it comes to child abuse. As long as it applies to everyone.
    I completely agree, anyone who allows child abuse to continue is guilty of a crime and should be punished.


  • #51
    SirenX
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 118 ✭✭SirenX


    I'd compare confession to doctor/patient confidentiality. If someone says something to their psychiatrist, are you then gonna put the psychiatrist in prison for not passing something on?

    are u serious???
    we are talking about hild molesters and rapists, not theives. that was the most ridiculous comment made so far in this thread


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    Latchy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,191 ✭✭✭✭Latchy


    Catholic Church claims it is above the law ? We'll just keep reminding them they are not .........wont we boyz ?


  • #53
    jimthemental
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,004 ✭✭✭jimthemental


    MitchKoobski wrote: »
    But say for example someone over 18 goes to their psych to talk about how they were abused. They don't reveal who abused them. Is their doctor then going to report them for withholding information? The idea that your doctor should be forcing you to reveal who it was worries me. And if the doctor doesnt force you to reveal it, are they then going to be prosecuted for not pursuing it for more information?

    It wouldn't really happen like that though. It should work the same as rape counselling does in non church related incidents. The victim still should have rights to privacy if they wish.


  • #54
    wild_cat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,291 ✭✭✭wild_cat


    MitchKoobski wrote: »
    I agree with doctors passing information on when its taken on a case by case basis, given the serious nature of many crimes.

    But say for example someone over 18 goes to their psych to talk about how they were abused. They don't reveal who abused them. Is their doctor then going to report them for withholding information? The idea that your doctor should be forcing you to reveal who it was worries me. And if the doctor doesnt force you to reveal it, are they then going to be prosecuted for not pursuing it for more information?

    In some cases a Councillor or Doctor will make you sign a form before any treatment can begin. This is the case with HSE day hospitals anyways. It usually lays out some ground rules of when they will contact the gardai. So if you go missing and they think you're in danger etc.


  • #55
    jimthemental
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,004 ✭✭✭jimthemental


    Yahew wrote: »
    Do any of the modern anti-Catholic atheists get a bit queasy when agreeing with an utter bigot like KeithAFC? You should: his attitudes pretty much exterminated your ancestors.

    Very much so, I agreed with one of his posts. Ever.


  • #56
    Zebra3
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,145 ✭✭✭✭Zebra3


    Yahew wrote: »
    Do any of the modern anti-Catholic atheists get a bit queasy when agreeing with an utter bigot like KeithAFC? You should: his attitudes pretty much exterminated your ancestors.

    Wow.

    Just, wow!!!

    :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:


  • #57
    Shenshen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,453 ✭✭✭Shenshen


    Yahew wrote: »
    Lawyers dont have an obligation to pass on information.

    If you made it obligatory for lawyers to pass on information, you essentially waive people's right to legal defense in court.


  • #58
    bnt
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,171 ✭✭✭✭bnt


    kildare.17hmr wrote: »
    of course it will change things it will hold people responsible for what they have done for one. It all starts with someone speaking out then up to the gards to find the evidence so you think they should not be givin the chance to find evidence?

    I dispise the church and everything it stands for and i don't see a place for it in modern society
    I have no time for any religion, Catholic or otherwise, but I think you've missed my point, slightly. All they can hope to do is get those who have confessed to crimes in the past. That's something, but it's not enough. The confessional is simply not that relevant in the long-term fight against child abuse. That was my point - I'm not supporting the Catholic Church in any way, shape or form.

    You are the type of what the age is searching for, and what it is afraid it has found. I am so glad that you have never done anything, never carved a statue, or painted a picture, or produced anything outside of yourself! Life has been your art. You have set yourself to music. Your days are your sonnets.

    ―Oscar Wilde predicting Social Media, in The Picture of Dorian Gray



  • #59
    Yahew
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,491 ✭✭✭Yahew


    Zebra3 wrote: »
    Wow.

    Just, wow!!!

    :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

    Jesus wept. Are people using :rolleyes: to simple remedial history now. I'll respond with four.

    :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:


  • #60
    Dyr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Dyr


    On a personal basis I consider the church to be one of the historic oppressors of us noble gaels, so the sooner they get their comeuppance, the better

    All that said, we generally approve of journalists protecting their sources from the law, and most journos are scummers. :pac:


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    Yahew
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,491 ✭✭✭Yahew


    Shenshen wrote: »
    If you made it obligatory for lawyers to pass on information, you essentially waive people's right to legal defense in court.

    Yes, I know. It was an example of a professional group who dont have to pass on information. Nobody had mentioned it previously in the thread, so I thought I would.


Advertisement