The Catholic Church (thorugh its highest authority in the US) assisted in the rape of children. They put known child rapists in close contact with children and warned nobody. They still have not released all the information they have about how they helped these rapist, who these rapists are, and if they are still assisting these rapist. In fact, releasing this information is grounds for excommunication (by the highest Catholic authority). How can this group be allowed to legally exist? They have assisted in the rape of children and will not release information about this assistance nor will they release information of whether they are currently protecting and/or still assisting these rapists or if they are still assisting the rape of children.
The First Amendment to the Constitution?
How can that protect a group that assisted in the rape of children and continues in a cover up? Surely the 1st amendment does not give a religious group the right to assist in the rape of children.
Hey, you’re the one who seems to think it should be outlawed. You tell me what statute gives the government the power to ban a religion.
If dozens or hundreds or even thousands of Catholics were tried and convicted of conspiracy, the “group” can’t outlawed.
Are there not statutes that outlaw organizations that engage in criminal conspiracies like RICO? Surely there are statutes to go after an organization that actively assisted in the rape of children.
People went to jail for their involvement in the crimes you’re talking about, although I think there were a lot of other people who should have gone to jail. None of that means the RCC itself could or should be “outlawed.”
But the Church is still covering things up. Look at the letter from the current Pope (then Cardinal). Excommunication for the release of information. We do not even know if they are still actively assisting in the rape of children. The Church itself is still covering up these crimes through it highest officials.
You’re not making sense. Either the RCC is covering up the crimes, or it could be covering them up. You’re saying both at the same time.
I understand the situation, and in any case, all you’ve done in this thread is repeat the same thing four or five times. The Church hasn’t been outlawed because that would be blatantly unconstitutional, period. Would you care to address that concern instead of repeating yourself?
I don’t know if priests and officials who are not cooperating have been subpoenaed or jailed; maybe they should be. But comparing the Church to the Mafia is over the top and I doubt the argument will fly for anybody here.
Of course it could; in fact, given that it’s under the control of the Vatican, a foreign country, we could have declared war on them. Rounded up the entire American church hierarchy as enemy agents, stuck them in POW camps, and bombed the Vatican flat. And if somplace like Liechtenstein had been behaving like the Catholic Church, I expect that’s pretty much what would have happened. They were and are treated with kid gloves because they are a religious organization.
I think that’s the weirdest and most unlikely theoryI’ve ever seen posted here.
Diplomatic relations with Lichtenstein aren’t guaranteed by the Constitution. Free exercise of religion is. Minor difference there.
I didn’t say it was at all likely to actually happen; that was kind of my point.
Free up to a point. Pedophila and criminal conspiracy should be well beyond that point.
Andrew Bird, just a tip - posting such strong partisan rhetoric is not a good way to make your introduction here. It seems that we always have guests whose first few posts are attacking one religion or another. I’m not accusing you of being a “troll” or “sock” but we have SO many people who come here solely to post anti-religious stuff. Unlike trihs, who I respect, most of them are idiots. So it makes you look bad to post stuff like this so early. I’m just saying.
While I personally will have nothing to do with organized religion, and in fact am generally very skeptical and distrusting of it, I do respect that people hold their views, including Catholics (like my girlfriend’s family, for instance, who are great people) or anyone else. Like the situation with Muslim terrorists, the misdeeds of a few do not reflect on the majority, and like Marley23 said, outlawing the Catholic church is unconstitutional anyway.
Well, first off, it was never a practice or policy of the organization to engage in those behaviors.
In 1989, the U.S. bishops held a meeting to address the growing concern regarding pedophile priests at which a number of recommendations were made to deal with the perpetrators and assist the victims.
In 1992, a second meeting was held because there was a perception among the bishops that the 1989 guidelines were either ineffective or not being followed.
At this point, it must be noted that every diocese is an independent entity that is subject only to Rome. There are a (very) few instances in which an archbishop may step in to address problems in his episcopal province (gnerally each state is a province), but they do not include the issues addressed, here. The U. S. Council of Catholic Bishops has no authority to take action against any rogue bishop or diocese in the country.
Ecclesiastically, each diocese reports to the Vatican.
Under civil law, each diocese is an incorporated entity in the state in which it is located. Claims that bishops are foreign agents of the Vaticvan State are just silly, having no basis in reality.
Following the 1992 meeting, a number of diocese continued to fail to implement the guidelines set out in that meeting. However, unlike the follow-up to the 1989 meeting, those bishops who failed to take appropriate actions appear to have been quite careful to conceal their actions. When Cardinal Law’s handling of the Fr. Geoghan case came to light, it was a surprise to most American Catholics (including the bishops) who had thought that the 1992 guidelines were being carried out.
I have no idea what sort of idiocy Cardinal Law suffered to continue ignoring the 1989 and 1992 actions, but his actions were contrary to church policy.
From what I can tell, (I have undertaken no systematic survey), roughly two thirds of the diocese in the U.S. did follow the 1992 guidelines while maybe as many as a third either were lax in implementing them or ignored them completely.
Following the brouhaha in Boston, the USCCB met in Dallas to come up with even stronger guidelines. The recommendations from that meeting were sent to Rome for approval so that they were no longer mere guidelines but became official rules for the church in the U.S. These included the appointment of lay groups to oversee the process so that the bishops would be held accountable outside normal ecclesiastical channels.
The statement from (then) Cardinal Ratzinger, while widely quoted by people (legitimately) upset with church response in 2001, repeated a rule set forth in 1960 or 1961 that was intended to address a different issue. Regardless, that statement was superseded by the decison of the Dallas conference. The current church ruling on the issue is that local law enforcement is to be notified, immediately, on the report of any claim of improper conduct. At the same time, the diocese have been ordered to cooperate in any investigations of earlier crimes. This has been a point of contention because not all diocese have good records of earlier events and many local prosecuting attorneys are not eager to devote the manpower to actually pursue cases that may have passed the statute of limitations (because when a state increases the statute of limitations from seven years to 35 years, a crime committed eight years prior to the change in law is not (depending on state law) grandfathered into effect).
To recap: “the church” did not officially (or even secretly) promote or accept the pedophilic behavior; individual bishops in individual diocese (that are, in fact, legally independent both under church law and U.S. law) committed those crimes of conspiracy. One cannot outlaw as a single organization 270 separate entities.
The bishops that behaved so reprehensibly were acting contrary to church policy as well as contrary to civil law.
The claim that “the church” is still covering up crimes is nonsense. It is not even accurate to say that the individual diocese are covering up crimes (although, given humanity, I will not be surprised to discover that some bishops in some diocese are either dragging their heels or even obstructing some actions.
I know. It’s still weird.
I’ll give you this much: if we were talking about a “cult” as opposed to the RCC, things might have been handled differently. But you still can’t outlaw a religion.
A religion and a Church aren’t the same thing. No, you couldn’t outlaw Catholicism, but if the government wanted to bad enough I don’t see why the Catholic Church itself couldn’t be declared a criminal organization and dismantled. Otherwise, why couldn’t someone start the Church of Mafia or something ? 
Mafia guy : “Okay, the Godfather’s the High Priest, I’m a bishop, and you’re a preacher.”
Thug : “Why call me a preacher ?”
Mafia guy : “Cause you spend your time layin’ hands on people.”
Why stop at children? What about organizations that have covered up any type of rape from an individual within the org? You can go after the individuals involved, but you can’t take down an entire belief system based on the actions of a few bad apples.
They were pretty systematic and widespread for “a few bad apples”. Worldwide, in fact. How many “bad apples” do there have to be before it’s more than just a “few” ?
“Just a few bad apples” is the standard excuse for any evil or amoral organization.
And no, it doesn’t matter much to me if it’s children or any other type of rape; I’m just as offended at the reports I’ve heard of widespread rapes of nuns by priests in the Third world, not to mention the coerced abortions.
I am not a Catholic or a Christian but it seems absurd to suggest outlawing a religion because it has some bad apples. In your logic the whole United States should be unlawful because there are a lot of law breakers here. and plenty of child molesters and rapists.
Monavis
And by your logic organizations like the Mafia or Al Qaeda shouldn’t be regarded as outside the law because they have some bad apples.