Law The Trump administration is officially moving to overturn a law that requires clergy to report child sexual abuse, saying it violates priests' constit

[fedoriswar37]

Surprising they don't get along better.

Except Christians aren't following Jesus when they abuse children while Muslims are simply following in Mohammed footsteps.

 

[fedoriswar37]

These predators need to be ousted and completly removed from the church .

 

[KnightTemplar]

God bless America.

Amen.

It needs all the help it can get.

 

[HomeCheese]

Uh, kind of leaving out a pretty big part there, no? The lawsuit is specifically about reporting what is told to them in confession because the punishment for that is excommunication. They still report anything told to them outside of confession. The seal of confession has been around since the early 13th century, it's not some shit they made up last week, so obviously demanding under threat of criminal penalty that the entire Catholic church violate canon law because of a law Washington state did just make 10 weeks ago that hasn't even taken effect is a pretty obvious violation of religious freedom.

So you think religious superstitions are more important than US laws? More important than reporting a phile?

 

[nostradumbass]

So you think religious superstitions are more important than US laws? More important than reporting a phile?

The constitution IS US law, genius, and yes, the constitution supersedes state laws.

 

[Tayski]

The constitution IS US law, genius, and yes, the constitution supersedes state laws.

There should be exceptions when it comes to things like phelia and murder though.

 

[ermac88]

Cant even make this shit up.

MAGA just needs to do about face on ped0phelia and support it too like rapists at this point.

MAGA evangelical leader behind get-out-the-vote nonprofit charged with child porn​

MAGA evangelical leader behind get-out-the-vote nonprofit charged with child porn

Just before the hard drive full of child sex abuse materials was discovered, Yates wrote an op-ed complaining about ‘sexually deviant’ messaging aimed at children

www.independent.co.uk

 

[curryjunkie]

Cant even make this shit up.

MAGA just needs to do about face on ped0phelia and support it too like rapists at this point.

MAGA evangelical leader behind get-out-the-vote nonprofit charged with child porn​

MAGA evangelical leader behind get-out-the-vote nonprofit charged with child porn

Just before the hard drive full of child sex abuse materials was discovered, Yates wrote an op-ed complaining about ‘sexually deviant’ messaging aimed at children

www.independent.co.uk

Every accusation...

 

[Khaosan]

If only the Trump administration worked as hard for the American people as they do to protect philes.

 

[Crazy Source]

If only the Trump administration worked as hard for the American people as they do to protect philes.

There would be no hunger and everyone would have healthcare.

 

[nostradumbass]

There should be exceptions when it comes to things like phelia and murder though.

philia and murder are not the constitutionally protected rights, nor are the people you're suggesting we prosecute the murderers or philes, they already do get prosecuted and nobody is arguing they shouldn't.

I get that it's an easy way to emotionally manipulate people into giving up rights by thinking they're only taking them away from others, because you can easily get people to support taking rights from other people if you don't think it applies to yourself, but they are rights afforded to every citizen. I think there should be a baseline level of evidence for crimes where we shouldn't bother with a trial or giving the person a defense, but they still get one even when there's DNA evidence and video footage of them committing the crime.

First of all, the only time you could ever prosecute the priest is if the person who actually committed the crime is already arrested, tried and convicted, and you would then have to somehow prove that the criminal did confess to them when no proof could exist other than the sex offender claiming they told them, all just to have it appealed in federal court, and even if somehow that appeal didn't overturn it, it would then work its way up to the SCOTUS where 7 of the 9 justices are Catholic, and have about a 0% chance of upholding a conviction of someone for not taking a runny dump all over Catholic canon law.

Should siblings, friends, or any other children be arrested if they knew about it and didn't report it? I mean "philia", ipso facto any other kid who knew should be arrest too, right? What if it's a high school or middle school teacher who banged a student, or a student had sex with anybody over 18 and other kids knew about it but didn't report it? Surely they should all go to prison too for not reporting it, right?

 

[HomeCheese]

The constitution IS US law, genius, and yes, the constitution supersedes state laws.

I didn't ask about state laws. I asked about religious rules. Should federal law supersede religious "laws"?

 

[nostradumbass]

I didn't ask about state laws. I asked about religious rules. Should federal law supersede religious "laws"?

The thread is about a state law. The federal law is what protects the religious law. You did know there's a difference between state laws and federal laws, right?

 

[jefferz]

The thread is about a state law. The federal law is what protects the religious law. You did know there's a difference between state laws and federal laws, right?

Quit tap dancing. Answer the question.

 

[nostradumbass]

Quit tap dancing. Answer the question.

Can you not read? I did answer, federal law and the religious law do no conflict, it supports it, and the state law conflicts with both, hence the lawsuit the thread is about and the injunction a federal judge already granted a week ago.

 

[jefferz]

Can you not read? I did answer, federal law and the religious law do no conflict, it supports it, and the state law conflicts with both.

I didn't ask about state laws. I asked about religious rules. Should federal law supersede religious "laws"?

 

[Yehudim]

Not true. There are several states that have made laws similar to those in Washington; it's called mandatory reporting. Even in states that protect the seal, legal obligations and societal concerns around the protection of children sometimes override religious confidentiality in limited contexts (and well they should).

In my post I was showing how the entire First Amendment (both the freedom of speech AND the freedom of religion) have limits and should have limits.

That's how mandatory reporting works- they must be informed of limits of confidentiality before they go in. That's how it works for everyone else (including therapy where everything else is confidential), no reason it shouldn't work that way for them. If they choose to still report knowing the consequences, then they deal with them. ANY knowledge ANYWHERE is reportable; that's how mandatory reporting works.

The Aztecs sacrificed children painfully (they tortured them before they killed them to make sure they would cry a lot) because they believed their God (Tlaloc) liked children's tears. Is that going to be the next religious freedom?

The difference is that my team isn’t going to bat for the Aztecs

 

[nostradumbass]

Amendment I​

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

 

[joy2day]

The difference is that my team isn’t going to bat for the Aztecs

Religious freedom vs children's well-being. When it is one or the other, I'll take children's well-being.

 

[Rod1]

The Aztecs sacrificed children painfully (they tortured them before they killed them to make sure they would cry a lot) because they believed their God (Tlaloc) liked children's tears. Is that going to be the next religious freedom?

This is a very asinine argument though, torturing children to death is a crime whether its done for religious purposes or not.

Not telling on someone isn't a crime, unless you happen to be a religious person, then suddenly it becomes a crime?

In the first case you are talking about an action, in the second an inaction, if something suddenly becomes illegal because you are religious then it can be argued its against religious freedom.

Also it seems to put a regulatory burden on practitioners of religion to be able to properly identify, document and report abuse, something they may not be trained to do so, and it seems to establish criminal repercussions.

Whether we like it or not, seems to be like a gross violation of 1st Amendment rights, unless you make the law apply to every citizens.