• Yetanotherpaolo@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    3 days ago

    The freedom of religion to continue enabling child rapists.

    Perhaps all religion should die along with the cunts in charge.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      15 hours ago

      Catholic doctrine is the privacy of the confessional is absolute. Plus there’s an argument that even the worst offender should have a place to unburden and beg forgiveness. Obviously forgiveness doesn’t need to be granted.

      • teamevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        13 hours ago

        I feel like absolute confidentiality for sins that harm yourself fine… but actively stealing the innocence of youth shouldn’t be protected, it’s reprehensible and anyone protecting abuse should be charged

        • AA5B@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          13 hours ago

          Of course it’s reprehensible, but confidentiality can be what lets them speak up. It’s not a matter of protecting or not protecting the victims, but attempting to encourage the perpetrator to admit their crime and take responsibility, at least to themselves.

  • Kage520@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    3 days ago

    Okay. I definitely get where everyone is coming from here. We all want to protect kids. I’m not sure this ruling is in the wrong though.

    Here’s why. We demonize pedophilia to the point that people would kill someone that is attracted to children. I’m making a specific point here to NOT include child molesters. That’s a separate but very related issue. If we took the time to address the mental health issues that caused them to be attracted to children in the first place (eg, molested as children themselves, some other issue that therapy could address, etc), maybe we could stop them from going so far with their problem and actually save kids before they were abused.

    Since they really don’t have anyone to talk to ever, maybe a priest could curb their behavior and act as a counselor to stop further abuse of children. If left unaddressed, maybe the molester would continue with many more victims, and the priest could stop them at 1. But if they no longer felt they could talk to a priest, then they continue.

    Basically, as a country we should be doing MUCH better to stop pedophiles from dealing with their issues alone and help prevent them from actually molesting children. Failing that (since we are failing that), why are we trying to take away the next level of therapy for them? It makes no sense to continue to push them into a lonely corner and expect them to do differently. If the priests’ silence allows them to keep the molester from touching more kids, that’s a much better outcome overall.

    • MiddleAgesModem@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 days ago

      the mental health issues that caused them to be attracted to children in the first place

      Question - do we know this is the case? Or is it like other sexual affinities, like S&M or fetishism?

    • dhork@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      The issue isn’t with therapy, or talking. The issue is what priests will do when they have evidence that a crime has occured.

      I have enough of a Catholic background to know that confession isn’t a “Get Out Of Hell Free” card. You are supposed to be repentant, and part of that is owning up to any crime you might have committed and turning yourself in. Because of you are confessing a crime to your priest, they can’t really be sure that you are truly repentant until you make good for your transgression with the legal authorities.

      But! Catholic priests have been caught diddling kids for years, and when the church found out about it, they preferred to deal with it “internally”. Instead of submitting the priests to secular authorities, they shuffled them off to some other parish to try to be repentant there. Often times, they just ended up doing it again. Where was the Catholic Church’s deeply held beliefs then?

      This is why there is so much hostility with the church right now, they can act all sanctimonious when someone tries to impose reporting requirements on them but we know that they have covered shit like this up in the past. Any goodwill they might have had being religious leaders is now depleted. Why shouldn’t we treat them like everyone else?

    • ameancow@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      No, we need hard-ass fucking laws to protect children because our moral-fiber as a nation has been eroded away deliberately by capital forces that would absolutely package underage children for consumers if they could get away with it.

      We are in a country where the average American thinks that one out of five people is transgender and many think that they are a threat to children, people who think our biggest threat comes from people in drag stalking public bathrooms, and yet are giving passes left and right to actual predators in positions of power. The conservative base in America broadly believes children are property, to be owned, enslaved, abused or used as desired. Right below this post is an update on Florida’s efforts to bring back child-labor on factory farms.

      We absolutely fucking need better, harsher, stronger laws to protect our vulnerable people, be it children or handicapped or elderly. Particularly from fucking PRIESTS who are one of the biggest groups of offenders who protect each other from consequence. Fuck off with this stinking mess we call “Christianity” in the United States, if Jesus came back he would be flipping every last table and smacking every “Christian” into last century.

      • Kage520@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        Let’s rephrase. Think of talking to a priest in this case a really poor level of free mental Healthcare. You think the best response is to take that away? I’m all for that if it’s replaced with something better. If we aren’t doing that though, then sure, you’d catch a few molesters when it is first announced. Then the other molesters stop talking to their last resort free counseling. And they continue to mess with children.

        The entire issue could be solved with better mental Healthcare in the first place. I like the comments that suggested priests be required to refer these people to a program designed for them. Not straight to jail, but straight to better help so they’d top touching kids, and others will still come through and benefit as well.

      • MiddleAgesModem@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        moral-fiber as a nation has been eroded away deliberately by capital forces

        For the love of fuck, can we stop blaming literally everything on capitalism? These issues long predate capitalism.

        • ameancow@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          I didn’t realize we were already entering the “leftism is bad now” arc. Just let me know when it rolls back around to being cool.

          The biggest issue we have right now is people generally are deeply unserious about anything. “Oh no, this thing I’m tired of hearing about again, pile that on top of Gaza and Epstein files with all the other cheap distractions that I don’t have the attention span or emotional intelligence to handle.”

  • MTK@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    3 days ago

    Freedom absolutism is great!

    You can’t take away my freedom to rape kids!

  • Plurrbear@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    Wow! But if I “overheard” part of this “confession” as a “mandated reporter” BY FED LAW (confessionals are NOT SOUND PROOF), I can go to jail if I do not report what I overheard and the government found out I knew… straight to court!

    Yet, these fucks get a hall pass to keep fucking with kids “because of religion”, religion doesn’t give you the freedom to fuck with kids but the Catholics would know the most about fucking with kids wouldn’t they?!?! Appalling! Our nation is fucked!

    I mean, am I surprised when our “president” is a know pedophile who talked about his own daughter sexually and was besties with Epstein!? WHERE IS THE CLIENT LIST!? We know Drumpf was probs the invite NUMBER 1 and FUNDED it! 🤦🏽‍♀️🤷🏽‍♀️

  • RagingSnarkasm@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    49
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    Luigi Mangione’s religion requires that he sacrifice health care executives, but I don’t see any judges standing up for him.

  • LordCrom@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 days ago

    Let’s get this straight.

    Psychiatrist are required to break doctor patient confidentiality if patient is a threat, right and report it.

    Lawyers must report crimes to law enforcement, breaking confidentiality too.

    But priests are ‘sprcial’ in the magic, secret telling closets?

  • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    4 days ago

    It’s weird how one group of people has such a warped idea of what “freedom” means.

    There was a really great article about the difference between Northern liberty vs. the Southern notion of “liberty”. The Southern is mostly about the “liberty” to rule over others.

  • Ginny [they/she]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 days ago

    I’m not a legal professional (merely an ill-informed amateur), and especially not an American one, but it seems to me like the judge’s order makes a pretty convincing argument that the injunction is legally warranted.

    Maybe we might consider that federal law might be the problem before we rush to accuse the judge personally of being a nonce?