All the senior priests and the vicar general ended up in prison.
Anglican archbishop Hepworth was a victim of the same catholic clergy's version of a welcome to the priesthood. He was raped by three priests and, surprise surprise, the catholic church offered him compensation for being raped by the two priests who are now dead but denied any crime committed by the currently still alive priest.
A priest, James Fletcher, in Newcastle raped a child and the bishop admitted that the money collected when the plate was passed around at christmas was used to help pay for his lawyer.
Ronald Conway was a psychologist who assessed candidates to the priesthood and part of his assessment involved masturbation. This was generally known by the senior clergy. Cardinal Pell gave him a glowing epitaph when he died but then that wasn't unusual because Pell was known to turn up at court to give moral support to paedophiles instead of the victims. Risdale was one of the rapists openly supported by Pell.
If you want to know a little about the institutionalised nature of the rapes check out the Broken Rites website.
When you read some of the stories you will wonder why a judge can give a man life for a rape of a woman but give a priest 3 years with time off for good behavior after raping dozens of children.
You don't want to go into the many other reasons for hating 'rich people' because you know that they are all just pure cr@p as well! Your hatred of 'rich people' sounds to me no different to the baseless hatred of a racist.As i said before, i don't want to go into the many other reasons as unlike you i don't spend countless hours wandering around this forum while contributing remarkably little. I haven't the time. I spend more time reading than i do spouting. You should try it.
Last edited by Adultmale; Feb 29 2012 at 03:59 PM.
It's not a thread derail. Adultmale made the comment that he would be supporting Katter's party. My post was directly related to Katter's myopic efforts to cut the suicide rates among a specific part of the economy. Katter's focus seems to be on a specific industry in a small corner of the country and yet he wants people to take a new national party seriously. One thing he could highlight is that in the driest continent on earth many farmers are trying to farm the wrong crops in the wrong place and use up scarce water resources.
My assertion was that if you want to cut suicide in Australia you start with the most common cause which is child abuse. Then you deal with the suicide rate among indigenous communities. Then you deal with the diminishing manufacturing industry which tends to indicate why a lathe operator is four times more likely to suicide than a farmer. Then you deal with the health industry which has a suicide rate double that of farmers.
A national government doesn't govern for the smallest most sparsely populated areas of Australia that's why the Country Party chose to rebadge themselves as the National Party. Check any National party member's website and you will find their focus has shifted from the country to a national focus.
Katter's party is the Aussie version of the US teaparty which will never be taken seriously while it seeks to appeal to the redneck vote.
For those that do not seem to understand.
We elect a person to represent US, whether we be a farmer in outback Queensland, or a doctor in Macquarie Street Sydney, smoking bongs in Nimben or working in the mines in WA. Their primary job is to represent their constituents, their needs and problems. It is their sworn duty to stand up in the House of Representatives and represent their constituents.
The leader of the ruling party is asked to select a cabinet from any elected member of Parliament. It is then their job, as well as representing their constituents, to overseer the portfolio/s assigned to them.
However some very misguided people think that if they do try to represent their constituents then they are doing the wrong thing, unless of course it's YOUR representative, then of course they are doing a good job.
The National party members in adjacent state and federal electorates have even gone to the extent of blaming him for road deaths on the Pacific Hwy because he got more money for Lyne that their electorates. They seem to ignore the fact that people like Luke Hartsuyker was in the Howard government and did nothing for the Hwy upgrade in his electorate while he had the chance. Now the NSW LNP government look like they will reneg on their election promise to complete the entire upgrade by 2016.
You justified the suck-it-and-see action of moving a priest to a new parish to see if he does it again. Your quote was "Its one way of determing likeleehood of guilt in a circumstance where no evidence exists." You have to laugh at someone who believes that moving a criminal to new territory where they can easily commit the same crime in order to catch them is a good idea.
You seem to approach the whole subject from the point of view of whether the child is lying rather than whether the priest is a sexual predator.
You don't seem to understand the meaning of 'institutionalised'. Yes there are many cases of abuse where men and women have power over kids but in the case of the catholic church the abuse is organised and protected. As I said in another post the St Gerard Majella society was an organisation of paedophiles. They institutionalised the abuse and actually created future paedophiles by raping novitiates. The senior clergy actively protected these men as long as they dared. This has been duplicated in a number of parishes. When the church couldn't cover it up any more they liquidated the assets of the society to make it more difficult for victims to sue an organisation that no longer had assets.
I know many people, men and women, who were abused and I'd love to see their response to someone who described what happened to them as being diddled but then I get the impression that your use of this childish term probably means you're quite young so you could be forgiven for that.