Catholic Chruch spends $2M fighting anti-child abuse laws

[Cosmic Charlie]

Um....

....how do we feel about this ?


Personally I'm more than a little bothered by it.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/pol...rms-block-n-y-kid-rape-laws-article-1.2655010

Filings show the lobbyists were retained, in part, to work on issues associated with “statute of limitations” and “timelines for commencing certain civil actions related to sex offenses.” Other issues included parochial school funding and investment tax credits.

“They are willing to spend limitless money in order to basically keep bad guys from being accountable for their actions,” said Melanie Blow, chief operations officer of the Stop Abuse Campaign. “I think they’re doing it because they don’t want to have to pay out settlements.

”

 

[LivingWordUnity]

Here's an article about it:

Bill Donohue comments on two articles posted yesterday by the New York Daily News on pending bills that lift the statute of limitations on offenses involving the sexual abuse of minors:

The big news, as determined by the Daily News, is that the New York State Catholic Conference hires lobbyists to push for desired legislative outcomes. Of course, it has been doing so all along. Moreover, it hardly has a monopoly on lobbying: virtually every secular and sectarian organization in New York State that is in any way impacted by Albany lawmakers hires lobbyists. However, it is rarely headline news when they do so. There is a veiled message here: Just how kosher is it for the Catholic Church to lobby Albany?

One of the articles, “Child-Abuse Law Reform Died in 2009 Senate Power Struggle,” is startling for its grand omission: it never mentions that in 2009 the teachers’ unions spent a small fortune trying to kill a bill that included public entities; it would have made it easier for kids raped by public school employees to sue, no matter how long ago it occurred. Usually, these bills on the sexual abuse of minors never blanket the public schools, so it was interesting to see the public school establishment jack up its efforts once it was included in the legislation.

How much do the New York public schools spend on lobbying? A whole lot more than the Catholic Church. Between 2007 and 2016, the New York Catholic Conference spent $2.1 million. In the first six months of 2014, the public schools spent more than $10 million!

One of the principal organizations opposing the Catholic Church’s efforts to stop unjust legislation—it is unjust because it gives public schools a pass and its purpose is to stick it to Catholics—is the Stop Abuse Campaign. I tried to find out who is contributing to its coffers, but when I got to the webpage, “Financial Information,” up popped, “Coming Soon.” How cute. That, too, should be of interest to the Daily News, but it isn’t.

Source

 

[Martinius]

Comparing lobbying dollars detracts from the real issue. The problem is that the Catholic Church is paying lobbyists and lawyers to prevent justice from being carried out, to stop the truth from being publicized. It is shameful. It is happening in other states as well, anywhere that laws extending protections for abused children are proposed. Various dioceses have spent tens of millions and even hundreds of millions of dollars to fight claims against them. The bishops are comforted knowing that many victims no longer have legal recourse, and want to keep it that way. There are still several dioceses in the midst of contentious bankruptcies, lawsuits and investigations. This problem is not yet in the past.

 

[Cosmic Charlie]

Here's an article about it:


Source

By "we" I was referring to people who actually posted on this board.

I'm sure Big Bad Bill (hey everyone does it) Donahue thinks that entire NY legislature are anti-Catholic.

What's YOUR opinion ?

 

[LivingWordUnity]

What's YOUR opinion?

My opinion is that Bill Donohue is usually spot-on with his observations.

 

[Martinius]

Donahue likes to make inane comparisons to downplay the issue, and he likes to look for conspiracies and hidden agendas to, and distract people from the real problems. The issue is NOT the people who are trying to change the law, the issue IS that the Catholic hierarchy is still clueless about how this is all perceived and still more interested in protecting their image (which is very tarnished) than in protecting and helping victims.

 

[Cosmic Charlie]

My opinion is that Bill Donohue is usually spot-on with his observations.

You could have added that to your original post instead of just coping it. We're not mind readers here, a little help with what you'd like us to get out of the stuff you post would go a long way to furthering the conversation.

 

[LivingWordUnity]

You could have added that to your original post instead of just coping it. We're not mind readers here, a little help with what you'd like us to get out of the stuff you post would go a long way to furthering the conversation.

I don't really have anything to say about it at this time. But since I wanted to offer something, I posted what Bill Donohue said about it since he's usually spot-on in his observations.

 

[Cosmic Charlie]

I don't really have anything to say about it at this time. But since I wanted to offer something, I posted what Bill Donohue said about it since he's usually spot-on in his observations.

"I think Bill Donahue is usually spot on with his observations" IS something to say.

Copy, Paste AND comment dude
Copy, Paste AND comment.

 

[Davidnic]

I do not have a problem if they are opposing them until they include all entities. I know that was one of the main issues here was the original version of a bill exempted the public school system. And that should not happen. So I have a problem if they lobby against them unless it is to make them more inclusive and less targeted.

So I have a big problem when anyone lobbies against these kinds of measures unless it is in order to include more groups who are being exempted, so if the limitations are removed they are removed for everyone.

 

[imind]

shameful to see some are supporting this...donahue is NOT "spot on" in this instance.

 

[Rhamiel]

yes, lets just yell "it's to protect CHILDREN" and then throw our brains in the trash

goodness people
try THINKING

from the article that Charlie posted
"represents a worthwhile investment to the Catholic Conference if it can continue to block legislation that would eliminate the statute of limitations on child sex abuse civil cases"

some people here would see justice trampled down
we have a statute of limitations for a reason
over time the memory of individuals fades, some physical evidence is corrupted, witnesses die
the statute of limitations is not something just made up by mean old men in order to get away with crimes, it is used to help prevent lawsuits that are useless, to prevent scammers

the fact that public schools would be exempt is VERY telling, the Government knows that this is something that can be easily used by scammers and they are trying to protect themselves

 

[Rhamiel]

shameful to see some are supporting this...donahue is NOT "spot on" in this instance.

why do you think there are statutes of limitations?

 

[LivingWordUnity]

"I think Bill Donahue is usually spot on with his observations" IS something to say.

Copy, Paste AND comment dude
Copy, Paste AND comment.

My first comment was "Here's an article about it".

 

[Paidiske]

Rhamiel, I don't have time to trawl through all of the relevant statutes of limitations in American states, but there is a table here: https://apps.rainn.org/CrimeDef/landing-page-statutes.cfm

However, even a quick scroll tells me that the limitation might be as little as a year.

As someone who has had some involvement in supporting people through the process of reporting abuse, I can tell you that is not long enough. Someone who is abused before they are ten, for example, will not yet even be a teenager before the statute of limitations has expired. Yet in that time, they are expected to find the courage, the resilience, the social support and the mental health resources to be ready to face reporting and all that comes with it?

This abuse can be so profoundly damaging that it takes decades before people have healed enough to be ready to face the further damage of the reporting process. Denying them the opportunity to do so only compounds the damage done to them; not only then have they been damaged by their abuser, and by the social context which did not prevent or stop the abuse at the time that it occurred, but they are then damaged by an indifferent society which denies them the ability to pursue justice in any public sense.

If it comes to the point and there are not witnesses or evidence, the courts will work that out. But to deny people even the opportunity to be heard - to silence them by telling them that it's too bad it took them so long to find a voice - I'm sorry, that is profoundly wrong.

 

[Martinius]

The Church has used persuasion, guilt and threats for decades to prevent people from reporting abuse. Changing the time limits for legal action would make it more difficult for the Church to use these tactics to avoid arrest and prosecution.

 

[Rhamiel]

If it comes to the point and there are not witnesses or evidence, the courts will work that out. But to deny people even the opportunity to be heard - to silence them by telling them that it's too bad it took them so long to find a voice - I'm sorry, that is profoundly wrong.

the courts will work it out

yes, but lets say that there is an old priest who is retired, not even a good priest, someone who did some bad things
now someone can wait 40 years, the main pastor and secretary might be dead, other key figures might be dead or senile

oh the court can work out that there is no proof in the law suit
but the person is hoping for an out of court settlement
and then every day in the news the media hyping up the headlines "MOLESTER PRIEST"

so,
simple question, do we have a statue of limitations for a reason or not?
maybe it should be made longer, but this unjust law wants to get rid of it all together
a travesty of justice

 

[Rhamiel]

The Church has used persuasion, guilt and threats for decades to prevent people from reporting abuse. Changing the time limits for legal action would make it more difficult for the Church to use these tactics to avoid arrest and prosecution.

the media has used guilt, persuasion, and threats
the government has used all that and police officers

I am more worried about those two then I am about a bunch of priests

you choose to ignore the question of "does the statue of limitations have a purpose or not?"

what about the exemption of public school? I do not hear you crying about that, is that because you love the State more then you love Christ and His Church?

 

[Davidnic]

In the abuse crisis we should all be this guy

http://www.post-gazette.com/local/r...es-conspiracy-of-silence/stories/201603020096

 

[Martinius]

but the person is hoping for an out of court settlement and then every day in the news the media hyping up the headlines "MOLESTER PRIEST"

First, victims generally are not taking action in order to get money in an out of court settlement. What you hear from them is they want to prevent abuse from happening to others and they want the Church to actually take action to stop priests from abusing. I have read through many documents, reports and depositions, and the quest for justice and closure is paramount. Church officials and lawyers worked for a private settlement, verbally promised to remove the priest from contact with possible future victims, but usually did nothing but move the priest around (in essence providing them with a new batch of unaware victims). You are seriously mis-characterizing what victims are seeking.

Second, out of court settlements have usually included a provision requiring silence by the victims and their families, which means no media headlines.

the media has used guilt, persuasion, and threats
the government has used all that and police officers

I am more worried about those two then I am about a bunch of priests

you choose to ignore the question of "does the statue of limitations have a purpose or not?"

what about the exemption of public school? I do not hear you crying about that, is that because you love the State more then you love Christ and His Church?

I am not ignoring it, as I do not know if that provision is included in all the legislation that has been proposed or already passed. It does not directly affect abuse by priests and others representing the Church, and it sounds like a red herring being used to detract from the real issue. In this instance I would not be in favor of exempting anyone, as it would appear to be discriminatory.