http://www.news.com.au/national/priests-could-be-ordered-to-report-confessions-of-sex-abuse-to-police/story-fncynjr2-1226428524648

Thoughts?

They can impose any rule they want, but I don't see the priests complying (unless the person in the confessional gives them permission). With that said, I would assume that priests in these situations will encourage the criminals to turn themselves in.

So priests will break the law to protect perverts?

Bad idea. Pedos need a place where they are more likely to tell someone they are a pedo. Laws like this result in more molested kids, not fewer.

It's already required in some jurisdictions where certain "problems" had been uncovered.

quote:

---

Bad idea. Pedos need a place where they are more likely to tell someone they are a pedo. Laws like this result in more molested kids, not fewer.

---

There are places to go and say your a pedophile. The distinction is that you can tell a priest you are an active pedophile who has molested kids. That should be reported

Here's a response from a similar law in Ireland.
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/catholic-church-will-never-violate-seal-of-confession-affirms-vatican-official/

quote:

---

“Confession is a private affair that allows the penitent to amend and purify himself. The seal is a necessary condition,” he said. “This does not mean that bishops should not guard against pedophiles and, once appropriate investigations have taken place, ask these individuals to pay for their crimes,” he added.

“If they want to violate confession, the Church’s answer will always be no.”

“All criminals have the duty to render an account of justice for the crimes they have committed, but this does not involve the confessor violating the seal. Confession is meant to cleanse the soul before God,” he recalled

---

quote:

---

There are places to go and say your a pedophile.

---

Brilliant. Of course, that amazing nugget of intellectual insight is completely consistent with what I said, which is that pedos need a place where they are likely to go and tell someone they are a pedo.

quote:

---

The distinction is that you can tell a priest you are an active pedophile who has molested kids.

---

You say "the distinction is..." bit then you don't distinguish between anything; you just state another obvious fact.

quote:

---

That should be reported

---

I can't know for certain that you are wrong, but I suspect that forcing priests to report such things would lead to pedos not telling them to priests, and not getting help, and molesting more kids than they might have otherwise.


Honestly, I don't really know why I ever respond to you. You might even be right about this, but you are utterly incapable of productive dialogue. There are FAR too many posters with that MO on this board.

I think you completely missed the distinction.

You can be a pedophile without ever having acted on the impulse.

I may confess I thought of killing someone, I can get help, go to gradoo. If I confess I did murder somebody, it should be reported.

Yes, there is a distinction between people who are tempted to molest kids (but haven't) and people who are tempted to molest kids (and have). But that distinction has literally zero normative impact regarding the question of whether or not the state should legally obligate priests to report to a state official every time someone confesses, in Confession, that he or she has molested (a) kid(s).

quote:

---

It's already required in some jurisdictions where certain "problems" had been uncovered.

---

This case does not involve the seal of the confessional.

I have 48 hours to report suspected child abuse.

Priests have chosen that role as "confessor," so let them be subject to the same laws.

You originally said...

quote:

---

Bad idea. Pedos need a place where they are more likely to tell someone they are a pedo. Laws like this result in more molested kids, not fewer.

---

To which I responded pedophiles have places to go. Your argument that priests shouldn't report this because they have nowhere to go is false. They should and do have places to go before they commit a crime.

quote:

---

Yes, there is a distinction between people who are tempted to molest kids (but haven't) and people who are tempted to molest kids (and have). But that distinction has literally zero normative impact regarding the question of whether or not the state should legally obligate priests to report to a state official every time someone confesses, in Confession, that he or she has molested (a) kid(s).

---

Priests should be legally and morally obligated to report a crime, especially one where the victim still may be suffering.

[This message has been edited by tysonbam (edited 7/17/2012 4:32p).]

Dumb idea. An affront to religious liberty (r.e. seal of Confession). Curious how the Aussies would enforce this.

Those of you cheering this idea more than likely have no clue how Confession works. Pray tell, how do you envision this working?

Those of you cheering this idea more than likely have no clue how Confession works. Pray tell, how do you envision this working?
************************
Until the advent of mental health providers, priests and ministers were the only "professional listeners." I say leave the priests alone as they still serve a purpose.

quote:

---

Your argument that priests shouldn't report this because they have more to go is false.

---

First, Huh?

Second, that wasn't my argument.

Third, arguments aren't false. None of them. Ever.

If you need a formal argument, here you go:

1. If a law is passed requiring priests to inform the police of people who confess to having molested a child, then a smaller percentage of people who have molested a child will confess to priests of having molested a child.

2. If a smaller percentage of people who have molested a child confess to priests of having molested a child, then fewer of them will get help.

3. If fewer of them get help, then more children will be molested.

4. Therefore, If a law is passed requiring priests to inform the police of people who confess to having molested a child, then more children will be molested.

5. If passing a law requiring priests to inform the police of people who confess to having molested a child results in more children will be molested, then the law should not be passed.

6. Therefore, the law should not be passed.

That's an argument. It is valid. I think it is sound, though I'm not sure about (3), as it falls to account for children that won't be molested as a result of people who get caught as a result of the law.

quote:

---

Until the advent of mental health providers, priests and ministers were the only "professional listeners." I say leave the priests alone as they still serve a purpose.

---

I can't tell if you are changing your position from your first posts, or if you are inferring that the priests serve no purpose, or both.

I am not a Catholic, but the Catholics I know speak of Confession as a VERY helpful thing.

I doubt the potential positive molesters benefit from talking to a priest outweigh the negative from molesters who do confess and aren't caught. Just my opinion though.

I'm with gradoo. It's my duty to immediately report child abuse, impending suicide and impending homicide. If I don't, I'm basically an accomplice. I don't see a difference. Priests have an equal duty to victims as they do to the offenders.

If the priests are willing to go to jail to protect the sanctity of confession, then good for them. If a priest was the only one besides the offender who knew that my child was being abused and they said nothing I would want them in jail.

Lot's of opinions, yet no one willing to imagine how the scenario works out in reality. Figures. Lotsa fantasy footballin' in here.

quote:

---

Lot's of opinions, yet no one willing to imagine how the scenario works out in reality. Figures. Lotsa fantasy footballin' in here.

---

In reality some kids continue to get molested thanks to this. In reality priests have no special qualification or ability to stop people from molesting kids.

In reality there just doesn't seem to be any way priests protecting perverts is good for society.

tyson - Your response did not address 747Ag's question. Do you even have any idea how the sacrament is carried out?

When I still believed in god I was nerve so silly as to think god was so weak to need me to converse through a priest. I have never gone to the farce of congestion and I would love for you to justify to me why kids should continue to get molested because priests get a ridiculous right to keep quiet.

They can keep their vow and go to jail or choose to stop hearing confessions if they have a problem with not being allowed to protect child predators. They certainly aren't helping sitting there praying a guy doesn't molest another child.

I don't care about the law. It's unenforceable anyway.

I don't know about other denominations, but the umc requires pastors to inform authorities if they know about or suspect abuse of a child. Protecting the sacrament is far less important than protecting the vulnerable. However the church can do that should be done without apology or concern for the legal status of clergy.

Your post is nothing but trolling tyson, trying to raise the ire of Catholics. Not one thing you posted addressed 747ag's question.

I don't even know what the question you are referring to is. I don't know how confession works. I don't care. It isn't justifiable to knowingly put a child at risk so priests can keep secrets. I already stated in practice why I don't think priests keeping these secrets is good. What exactly have I not answered?

Terrible idea. I'd hate to see America continue to chip away at our liberties - including priest/ penitent privilege.

This is how you do it. Take the ugly crimes and use them to manipulate people into protesting against their own rights and privileges.

We already have laws to prevent future crimes from occurring. Even the attorney/ client privilege doesn't extend to this.

Next comes spousal privileges, then doctor/ patient (which is barely privileged any longer thanks to the power of insurance companies), etc.

If you have a right or privilege, it's stupid to give it up.

quote:

---

Lot's of opinions, yet no one willing to imagine how the scenario works out in reality.

---

In other words how do you propose to enforce this ruling?

You let priests decide what they want to do. If it comes out that a priest knew about a molester you prosecute him.I'm not advocating interrogating them.

I'd volunteer to do fake confessions to see if they are reporting. It'd be like when tabc takes minors around to see if places will sell them beer.

[This message has been edited by tysonbam (edited 7/17/2012 8:19p).]

quote:

---

I'd volunteer to do fake confessionals to see if they are reporting.

---

Again it shows how little about you know about the hows and wherefores of the sacrament.

So you advocate entrapment, prosecuting priest on the basis of fake confessions. How does that protect children?

JK,

Exactly.

quote:

---

Again it shows how little about you know about the hows and wherefores of the sacrament.[/quote

---

Did you figure that out all on your own or from my post a few back where I said I don't know how your hocus pocus sacrament works, I don't care how it works, it isn't an excuse for priests to protect criminals that are hurting others.

I'm no legal scholar but it seems to me very similar to tabc letting minors try and buy beer. Perhaps we would have to use actual sex offenders so the confession is real. I am sure we could find a few priests to confess since they know how the sacrament works.

Having priests tell of child abuse could help children. Pretending priests keeping secrets for molesters in no easy helps children. Maybe you just have the law on the books. Some priests will do the right thing. Some will get caught through unusual circumstances. It's absolutely sickening to advocate protesters allowing abuse to continue. I'd lock such despicable gutless creatures away for a long time.

quote:

---

Did you figure that out all on your own or from my post a few back where I said I don't know how your hocus pocus sacrament works...

---

Yet you are willing to criticize something you do not fully understand. Typical of you. You just throw mud in hopes of some of it sticking.

quote:

---

I don't care how it works, it isn't an excuse for priests to protect criminals that are hurting others.

---

You do realize that the penitent can chose to be completely anonymous? The seal of the confessional isn't there to protect criminals.

quote:

---

I'm no legal scholar but it seems to me very similar to tabc letting minors try and buy beer.

---

The difference being, TABC uses real minors.

quote:

---

Perhaps we would have to use actual sex offenders so the confession is real.

---

Still a fake confession even if the sin is real because the purpose is not absolution but entrapment.

Please explain to me how such stings will actually help those being abused?

It will help those abused by idiots who confess. Right now they have no chance for help.

If you don't know who confessed then not much to report, give what info you can.

The real minors don't intend to keep the beer so if a real molester confesses then fair game.