Roman Catholic Priests to be violated in Australia

[Saint Jade IV]

So Roman Catholic priests, in a rather ironic twist, are claiming that proposed new laws will violate their most sacred and sacrosanct beliefs, by requiring priests to break the confessional seal and engage in the same mandatory reporting that every other profession is bound by.

Basically, if a priest confesses to paedophilia, they are required to report said priest to the authorities.

I'm unsure what the problem is.

[Czechanada]

So Roman Catholic priests, in a rather ironic twist, are claiming that proposed new laws will violate their most sacred and sacrosanct beliefs, by requiring priests to break the confessional seal and engage in the same mandatory reporting that every other profession is bound by.

Basically, if a priest confesses to paedophilia, they are required to report said priest to the authorities.

I'm unsure what the problem is.

Y'see, Roman Catholics have always liked to be above authority, as per the Great Schism.

I for one enjoy seeing oppressive religious establishments finally being reined in.

[Saint Jade IV]

So Roman Catholic priests, in a rather ironic twist, are claiming that proposed new laws will violate their most sacred and sacrosanct beliefs, by requiring priests to break the confessional seal and engage in the same mandatory reporting that every other profession is bound by.

Basically, if a priest confesses to paedophilia, they are required to report said priest to the authorities.

I'm unsure what the problem is.

Y'see, Roman Catholics have always liked to be above authority, as per the Great Schism.

I for one enjoy seeing oppressive religious establishments finally being reined in.

I just like the fact that finally the special privileges extended to the church and religious institutions in general are starting (slowly) to be repealed.

[The Emerald Dawn]

So Roman Catholic priests, in a rather ironic twist, are claiming that proposed new laws will violate their most sacred and sacrosanct beliefs, by requiring priests to break the confessional seal and engage in the same mandatory reporting that every other profession is bound by.

Basically, if a priest confesses to paedophilia, they are required to report said priest to the authorities.

I'm unsure what the problem is.

Churches typically don't enjoy when humans interfere with their bylaws.

The same way that governments don't enjoy it when churches interfere with their laws.

But since the child-raping scum are being held to account, I'm all for it.

[Gauthier]

And here I was hoping it would be a story about priests in Australia about to be buggered.

[Saint Jade IV]

So Roman Catholic priests, in a rather ironic twist, are claiming that proposed new laws will violate their most sacred and sacrosanct beliefs, by requiring priests to break the confessional seal and engage in the same mandatory reporting that every other profession is bound by.

Basically, if a priest confesses to paedophilia, they are required to report said priest to the authorities.

I'm unsure what the problem is.

Churches typically don't enjoy when humans interfere with their bylaws.

The same way that governments don't enjoy it when churches interfere with their laws.

But since the child-raping scum are being held to account, I'm all for it.

I find that governments seem to enjoy when churches interfere with their laws. It gives them a veneer of morality that is comforting to the voting public, for the most part.

[Auralia]

This is ridiculous, even from a pragmatic point of view. Priests would rather be held in contempt of court and thrown in prison than violate the confessional seal.

The title of this thread is extremely misleading.

[Saint Jade IV]

And here I was hoping it would be a story about priests in Australia about to be buggered.

I'm hoping that they make the application of "eye for an eye" one of the recommendations from the Royal Commission's report.

[Arthuriana]

Y'see, Roman Catholics have always liked to be above authority, as per the Great Schism.

I for one enjoy seeing oppressive religious establishments finally being reined in.

I just like the fact that finally the special privileges extended to the church and religious institutions in general are starting (slowly) to be repealed.

I don't. Different organisations are always accorded privileges granted to them by the government, why should religions not be given certain rights?

[Indeos]

Considering it's only applicable to a single type of crime that people tend to think is more "icky" than any other, I don't have a problem with this. I'd probably speak differently if they wanted priests and the equivalents from other religions with confession to report every single crime; that would essentially make confession as useful as turning oneself into the police, and it would quickly become useless for catching criminals.

[Coccygia]

This is ridiculous, even from a pragmatic point of view. Priests would rather be held in contempt of court and thrown in prison than violate the confessional seal.

The title of this thread is extremely misleading.

Yes, but amusing.

[Saint Jade IV]

This is ridiculous, even from a pragmatic point of view. Priests would rather be held in contempt of court and thrown in prison than violate the confessional seal.

Good - less priests to aid and abet the violating of children. And in prison, they may yet experience the same violations that the children they are endangering experience. It may make them more compassionate to people in the here and now, rather than the hereafter.

[Auralia]

And here I was hoping it would be a story about priests in Australia about to be buggered.

I'm hoping that they make the application of "eye for an eye" one of the recommendations from the Royal Commission's report.

That's sick. State-sanctioned rape, even against sex offenders, is wrong.

[Goodclark]

I am a devout Catholic and I am all for this. Child raping pieces of crap deserve to go to jail.

[Auralia]

This is ridiculous, even from a pragmatic point of view. Priests would rather be held in contempt of court and thrown in prison than violate the confessional seal.

Good - less priests to aid and abet the violating of children. And in prison, they may yet experience the same violations that the children they are endangering experience. It may make them more compassionate to people in the here and now, rather than the hereafter.

How shortsighted. Do you genuinely believe that most priests are pedophiles?

[Saint Jade IV]

I just like the fact that finally the special privileges extended to the church and religious institutions in general are starting (slowly) to be repealed.

I don't. Different organisations are always accorded privileges granted to them by the government, why should religions not be given certain rights?

Religious institutions should not be granted special exemptions simply because they are religious, especially when those exemptions endanger the lives of children or people.

[Goodclark]

This is ridiculous, even from a pragmatic point of view. Priests would rather be held in contempt of court and thrown in prison than violate the confessional seal.

Good - less priests to aid and abet the violating of children. And in prison, they may yet experience the same violations that the children they are endangering experience. It may make them more compassionate to people in the here and now, rather than the hereafter.

Here come the pedo stereotypes.

[Khornate Worshippers]

Considering it's only applicable to a single type of crime that people tend to think is more "icky" than any other, I don't have a problem with this. I'd probably speak differently if they wanted priests and the equivalents from other religions with confession to report every single crime; that would essentially make confession as useful as turning oneself into the police, and it would quickly become useless for catching criminals.

The problem is that why should it not be broken, then, for murder, too? Break it for all or none.

[Viridis Ventus Isle]

And here I was hoping it would be a story about priests in Australia about to be buggered.

I'm hoping that they make the application of "eye for an eye" one of the recommendations from the Royal Commission's report.

I'm hoping that they make the application of "eye for an eye" one of the recommendations from the Royal Commission's report.

That's sick. State-sanctioned rape, even against sex offenders, is wrong.

Agreed, also i think the Church needs to stop covering thise 'sins' up, cause how is ^ a sin that can be covered by the church?

[Ceannairceach]

I don't much care for forcing confidants to break confidence with the accused.

That said, I don't much care for molestation either.

Quite the predicament.

[Saint Jade IV]

I'm hoping that they make the application of "eye for an eye" one of the recommendations from the Royal Commission's report.

That's sick. State-sanctioned rape, even against sex offenders, is wrong.

It's also a joke.

Good - less priests to aid and abet the violating of children. And in prison, they may yet experience the same violations that the children they are endangering experience. It may make them more compassionate to people in the here and now, rather than the hereafter.

How shortsighted. Do you genuinely believe that most priests are pedophiles?

No but I believe that many priests forget that children experiencing violations here and now deserve protection over and above notions of sanctity or God's will.

The sanctity of children's right not to be violated is more important than the holiness of the confessional seal.

Priests should absolutely be required to report confessions that suggest children are being abused. Just like doctors, counsellors, lawyers and teachers.

[Neutraligon]

Good - less priests to aid and abet the violating of children. And in prison, they may yet experience the same violations that the children they are endangering experience. It may make them more compassionate to people in the here and now, rather than the hereafter.

How shortsighted. Do you genuinely believe that most priests are pedophiles?

We aren't talking about the non-pedophile priests. The right of a person to talk with a priest should be similar to a doctors. That is if a person talks to a doctor and says he/she has acted as a pedophile(rather than being a pedophile but not acting on those desires) that doctor is required by law to report that person to the police. Doctor patient privilege means nothing in those circumstances. The same should be true of priests.

[Indeos]

Considering it's only applicable to a single type of crime that people tend to think is more "icky" than any other, I don't have a problem with this. I'd probably speak differently if they wanted priests and the equivalents from other religions with confession to report every single crime; that would essentially make confession as useful as turning oneself into the police, and it would quickly become useless for catching criminals.

The problem is that why should it not be broken, then, for murder, too? Break it for all or none.

Because it won't do any good for priests to report every crime anyway. Religious confession is hardly evidence that will stand up in court; the best they can do is point the police at someone and hope they find something. Anyone who takes confession can do that anyway, and I think any who would file reports for reasons other than avoiding legal ramifications should an offender be caught after they hear the confession probably do so already. In short, it's pointless to destroy the entire practice of confession on the off chance a criminal will get caught because a priest reported them.

[NERVUN]

Excuse me for asking, but doesn't Australia have lawyer-client and doctor-patient privileges?

[Viridis Ventus Isle]

Excuse me for asking, but doesn't Australia have lawyer-client and doctor-patient privileges?

I think so, yes