$18.00
GeekGold Bonus for All Supporters: 129.89

7,656 Supporters

$15 min for supporter badge & GeekGold bonus
48.2% of Goal | left

Support:

Chengkai Yang
United States
Cupertino
California
flag msg tools
mbmb
http://www.sunherald.com/news/local/article112158582.html

Quote:
priest has no duty to report confidential information heard during a sacramental confession, the Louisiana Supreme Court ruled Friday in a bid to clear up what it called the “widespread confusion” caused by its decision two years ago in a long-running case involving the Roman Catholic Diocese of Baton Rouge.




Google turns up some previous case law examples in Ore vs Smith and Lemon v Kurtzman that I haven't fully read through. I don't feel like this is the right answer though, and it's quite a different from disclosure to a licensed attorney. If nothing else, this seems open to abuse and causes other issues when applied to other religions.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
rico mcflico
United States
Mill Valley
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Priests mostly get out of reporting abuse by claiming the Fifth.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Colorado
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
draxx01 wrote:
http://www.sunherald.com/news/local/article112158582.html

Quote:
priest has no duty to report confidential information heard during a sacramental confession, the Louisiana Supreme Court ruled Friday in a bid to clear up what it called the “widespread confusion” caused by its decision two years ago in a long-running case involving the Roman Catholic Diocese of Baton Rouge.




Google turns up some previous case law examples in Ore vs Smith and Lemon v Kurtzman that I haven't fully read through. I don;t feel like this is the right answer though, and it's quite a different from disclosure to a licensed attorney. If nothing else, this seems open to abuse and causes other issues when applied to other religions.


So maybe the legislature, you know those people that actually make laws, should do something about it instead of expecting the judicial side to make their own laws.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
BJ
United States
Eau Claire
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
You are full of poisonous refuse and insane foolishness.
badge
I had not supposed or expected your arrogant spirit to seek such a ridiculous and childish reason for lying; you should have better reasons.
mbmbmbmbmb
spoon wrote:
Priests mostly get out of reporting abuse by claiming the Fifth.


Crap, missed the opportunity for this joke by three minutes.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
G Rowls
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
so what do they do about the the first 4 just deny them?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Richard Keiser

Waunakee
Wisconsin
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
TheDashi wrote:
draxx01 wrote:
http://www.sunherald.com/news/local/article112158582.html

Quote:
priest has no duty to report confidential information heard during a sacramental confession, the Louisiana Supreme Court ruled Friday in a bid to clear up what it called the “widespread confusion” caused by its decision two years ago in a long-running case involving the Roman Catholic Diocese of Baton Rouge.




Google turns up some previous case law examples in Ore vs Smith and Lemon v Kurtzman that I haven't fully read through. I don;t feel like this is the right answer though, and it's quite a different from disclosure to a licensed attorney. If nothing else, this seems open to abuse and causes other issues when applied to other religions.


So maybe the legislature, you know those people that actually make laws, should do something about it instead of expecting the judicial side to make their own laws.


All the while, Priest McJolly gets to fingerbang as many acolytes as he sees fit. Great organization, that church thing.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Colorado
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
darthhugo wrote:
TheDashi wrote:
draxx01 wrote:
http://www.sunherald.com/news/local/article112158582.html

Quote:
priest has no duty to report confidential information heard during a sacramental confession, the Louisiana Supreme Court ruled Friday in a bid to clear up what it called the “widespread confusion” caused by its decision two years ago in a long-running case involving the Roman Catholic Diocese of Baton Rouge.




Google turns up some previous case law examples in Ore vs Smith and Lemon v Kurtzman that I haven't fully read through. I don;t feel like this is the right answer though, and it's quite a different from disclosure to a licensed attorney. If nothing else, this seems open to abuse and causes other issues when applied to other religions.


So maybe the legislature, you know those people that actually make laws, should do something about it instead of expecting the judicial side to make their own laws.


All the while, Priest McJolly gets to fingerbang as many acolytes as he sees fit. Great organization, that church thing.



Then get on the legislature to do what they are supposed to do.
Activist judges are assholes, no matter which way they go.
Interpreting the law does not mean they get to make law. No matter how much you leftists want them too.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Damian
United States
Enfield
Connecticut
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
TheDashi wrote:
draxx01 wrote:
http://www.sunherald.com/news/local/article112158582.html

Quote:
priest has no duty to report confidential information heard during a sacramental confession, the Louisiana Supreme Court ruled Friday in a bid to clear up what it called the “widespread confusion” caused by its decision two years ago in a long-running case involving the Roman Catholic Diocese of Baton Rouge.




Google turns up some previous case law examples in Ore vs Smith and Lemon v Kurtzman that I haven't fully read through. I don;t feel like this is the right answer though, and it's quite a different from disclosure to a licensed attorney. If nothing else, this seems open to abuse and causes other issues when applied to other religions.


So maybe the legislature, you know those people that actually make laws, should do something about it instead of expecting the judicial side to make their own laws.

Many states protect clergy-penitent privilege and many do not.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Richard Keiser

Waunakee
Wisconsin
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
TheDashi wrote:
darthhugo wrote:
TheDashi wrote:
draxx01 wrote:
http://www.sunherald.com/news/local/article112158582.html

Quote:
priest has no duty to report confidential information heard during a sacramental confession, the Louisiana Supreme Court ruled Friday in a bid to clear up what it called the “widespread confusion” caused by its decision two years ago in a long-running case involving the Roman Catholic Diocese of Baton Rouge.




Google turns up some previous case law examples in Ore vs Smith and Lemon v Kurtzman that I haven't fully read through. I don;t feel like this is the right answer though, and it's quite a different from disclosure to a licensed attorney. If nothing else, this seems open to abuse and causes other issues when applied to other religions.


So maybe the legislature, you know those people that actually make laws, should do something about it instead of expecting the judicial side to make their own laws.


All the while, Priest McJolly gets to fingerbang as many acolytes as he sees fit. Great organization, that church thing.



Then get on the legislature to do what they are supposed to do.
Activist judges are assholes, no matter which way they go.
Interpreting the law does not mean they get to make law. No matter how much you leftists want them too.


Yes, I see its activist judges that are forcing the defenseless priests to sodomize the moist areas of little boys - and then having the church hierarchy protect and hide them.

Yes... your dumb ideas are consistent.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Colorado
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
darthhugo wrote:
TheDashi wrote:
darthhugo wrote:
TheDashi wrote:
draxx01 wrote:
http://www.sunherald.com/news/local/article112158582.html

Quote:
priest has no duty to report confidential information heard during a sacramental confession, the Louisiana Supreme Court ruled Friday in a bid to clear up what it called the “widespread confusion” caused by its decision two years ago in a long-running case involving the Roman Catholic Diocese of Baton Rouge.




Google turns up some previous case law examples in Ore vs Smith and Lemon v Kurtzman that I haven't fully read through. I don;t feel like this is the right answer though, and it's quite a different from disclosure to a licensed attorney. If nothing else, this seems open to abuse and causes other issues when applied to other religions.


So maybe the legislature, you know those people that actually make laws, should do something about it instead of expecting the judicial side to make their own laws.


All the while, Priest McJolly gets to fingerbang as many acolytes as he sees fit. Great organization, that church thing.



Then get on the legislature to do what they are supposed to do.
Activist judges are assholes, no matter which way they go.
Interpreting the law does not mean they get to make law. No matter how much you leftists want them too.


Yes, I see its activist judges that are forcing the defenseless priests to sodomize the moist areas of little boys - and then having the church hierarchy protect and hide them.

Yes... your dumb ideas are consistent.


At least I would fix it the right way, instead of violating our system of government like you would.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Richard Keiser

Waunakee
Wisconsin
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
TheDashi wrote:
darthhugo wrote:
TheDashi wrote:
darthhugo wrote:
TheDashi wrote:
draxx01 wrote:
http://www.sunherald.com/news/local/article112158582.html

Quote:
priest has no duty to report confidential information heard during a sacramental confession, the Louisiana Supreme Court ruled Friday in a bid to clear up what it called the “widespread confusion” caused by its decision two years ago in a long-running case involving the Roman Catholic Diocese of Baton Rouge.




Google turns up some previous case law examples in Ore vs Smith and Lemon v Kurtzman that I haven't fully read through. I don;t feel like this is the right answer though, and it's quite a different from disclosure to a licensed attorney. If nothing else, this seems open to abuse and causes other issues when applied to other religions.


So maybe the legislature, you know those people that actually make laws, should do something about it instead of expecting the judicial side to make their own laws.


All the while, Priest McJolly gets to fingerbang as many acolytes as he sees fit. Great organization, that church thing.



Then get on the legislature to do what they are supposed to do.
Activist judges are assholes, no matter which way they go.
Interpreting the law does not mean they get to make law. No matter how much you leftists want them too.


Yes, I see its activist judges that are forcing the defenseless priests to sodomize the moist areas of little boys - and then having the church hierarchy protect and hide them.

Yes... your dumb ideas are consistent.


At least I would fix it the right way, instead of violating our system of government like you would.


Yes, you would fix those sodomizers.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Marco Mann
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
Stop persecuting these poor christians that are only doing god's work.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Richard Keiser

Waunakee
Wisconsin
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
AttackFactorZero wrote:
Stop persecuting these poor christians that are only doing god's work.


by having little boys blow them? What a sick God!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Based upon my poor understanding of history, science, and ethics...
United States
North Pole
Alaska
flag msg tools
Well. Lots of words. Little substance.

A) isn't the confessional anonymous?

B) Even if the priest thinks he knows who he is talking to, he could be wrong.

C) given that I am not mistaken in the previous 2, is it better to let a person confess and trust the priest to work within the confines of his vows to protect the child, and possibly alert responsible people to the situation behind the scenes, or keep the person who desires to confess from doing so?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Shawn Fox
United States
Richardson
Texas
flag msg tools
Question everything.
mbmbmbmbmb
Koldfoot wrote:
Well. Lots of words. Little substance.

A) isn't the confessional anonymous?

B) Even if the priest thinks he knows who he is talking to, he could be wrong.

C) given that I am not mistaken in the previous 2, is it better to let a person confess and trust the priest to work within the confines of his vows to protect the child, and possibly alert responsible people to the situation behind the scenes, or keep the person who desires to confess from doing so?

Yeah, the priests knows who it is, they aren't stupid. All those years you have been admitting to fucking sheep... they know man, they know who you are.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Richard Keiser

Waunakee
Wisconsin
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
sfox wrote:
Koldfoot wrote:
Well. Lots of words. Little substance.

A) isn't the confessional anonymous?

B) Even if the priest thinks he knows who he is talking to, he could be wrong.

C) given that I am not mistaken in the previous 2, is it better to let a person confess and trust the priest to work within the confines of his vows to protect the child, and possibly alert responsible people to the situation behind the scenes, or keep the person who desires to confess from doing so?

Yeah, the priests knows who it is, they aren't stupid. All those years you have been admitting to fucking sheep... they know man, they know who you are.


and they want Koldie to pay for their Herpes treatments.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Donald
United States
New Alexandria
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Koldfoot wrote:
...is it better to let a person confess and trust the priest to work within the confines of his vows to protect the child, and possibly alert responsible people to the situation behind the scenes, or keep the person who desires to confess from doing so?


This makes no sense. To protect the child the priest has to tell someone that Joe a molester. If the priest tells the cops little Timmy is being molested but not by who, they can't protect Timmy. If they put Timmy in a cinder block cube, what stops Joe from finding another victim?

Doesn't repentance only work if the offender takes all the consequences on their actions?

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Based upon my poor understanding of history, science, and ethics...
United States
North Pole
Alaska
flag msg tools
Donald wrote:
Koldfoot wrote:
...is it better to let a person confess and trust the priest to work within the confines of his vows to protect the child, and possibly alert responsible people to the situation behind the scenes, or keep the person who desires to confess from doing so?


This makes no sense. To protect the child the priest has to tell someone that Joe a molester. If the priest tells the cops little Timmy is being molested but not by who, they can't protect Timmy. If they put Timmy in a cinder block cube, what stops Joe from finding another victim?

Doesn't repentance only work if the offender takes all the consequences on their actions?



Not at all.

A friend comes to you, says something incriminating, you go to the cops, and what happens? Very likely not a fucking thing. The guy denies saying it, or explains the statement away.

Cops (I assume you meant gov't authority in general, as do I) are not great at following up on child abuse charges, absent physical evidence or corroboration. Let's face it, most accusations are not valid, rather are wild charges to get at an ex spouse or unfounded charges by people who don't know the situation. The system is already burdened, and there are frequently examples of big mistakes. They make a couple inquiries, have no evidence apart from statements, and move on to the next case.

A priest may easily be forced to break his vows just to have nothing done, and now the confessor shuts off communication with the priest.

If you (and I mean you) suspect child abuse, but have no evidence, you could insert yourself into the child's life, perhaps the child would say something. That would constitute an actionable piece of evidence that would get gov't motivated to do something. You could also talk to other people without revealing your suspicion, and see if your suspicion is founded. The priest is no different.

If the priest knows something, he can still act. He can talk to other people, perhaps bring up the child, find out if there is suspicion, then urge the other person to go to the cops with their suspicion, all the while keeping his vows.

I understand you have little imagination, you could poke holes in my off the cuff examples, and may completely miss the point. People can act on knowledge. Requiring priests to go against their vows cuts off one avenue of knowledge. Trust is required for the admission to be made.

A competent priest may be better able to protect the child than an army of overburdened social workers.

Furthermore, the priest may just go to the police. I suspect many do. What's more important? The vow or the child?

If the perpetrator can be certain that the priest WILL go to the police he will never confess.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robert Wesley
Nepal
Aberdeen
Washington
flag msg tools
designer
mb
Well, INSTEAD then go seek some School Nurse/Teacher/etc. of whom shouldn't "protect & enable" this any further. AVOID the Church-sort, since: BIASSHOLES. shake
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.