Getting priests who abuse kids out of their positions is a good goal. It’s still far from what they should be doing, such as turning them over to the cops, but it’s a start. For some reason, the Catholic church just doesn’t seem to have the slightest shred of ethics, here’s what they did:
Cardinal Timothy M. Dolan of New York authorized payments of as much as $20,000 to sexually abusive priests as an incentive for them to agree to dismissal from the priesthood when he was the archbishop of Milwaukee…
A spokesman for the archdiocese confirmed on Wednesday that payments of as much as $20,000 were made to “a handful” of accused priests “as a motivation” not to contest being defrocked. The process, known as “laicization,” is a formal church juridical procedure that requires Vatican approval, and can take far longer if the priest objects.
“It was a way to provide an incentive to go the voluntary route and make it happen quickly, and ultimately cost less,” said Jerry Topczewski, the spokesman for the archdiocese. “Their cooperation made the process a lot more expeditious.”
Cardinal Dolan, who is president of the national bishops’ conference and fast becoming the nation’s most high-profile Roman Catholic cleric, did not respond to several requests for comment.
Could they possibly sink any lower?
(Via the Atheist News group on Atheist Nexus)
Permalink
Hey Dwnomad,
I know what you mean, Some people think their belief in a God or afterlife is somehow more genuine than someone else’s belief in the same things. Many Christians believe in Heaven and Hell but think the idea of the Wiccan Summerland or what Jehovah’s Witnesses believe are utterly absurd what makes one belief anymore valid than another?
All the Best
Permalink
* to her? What precisely about this indnecit is the catalyst for an incorrect act on the guy\’s part? Is it simply the implied sexual nature of the request (come back to my room)? Or was it that the guy spoke to her at all? If he merely said, hey, I really enjoyed your presentation. You made some great points. would that too have crossed the line?Or was the actual verbal interaction not the problem at all was it the fact that he got into the elevator alone with her in the first place? Was it the time of this encounter (4am)? And what times are permissible?Does it apply to strangers only? What about someone who you\’ve seen regularly for years but don\’t know well (you live on the same floor in an apartment building, for instance)?Should this just apply to women? Should a single man abstain from getting onto an elevator with another man (a stranger) at 4am? What about two women?Is this only about sexual assault? Or is it about violence generally? (Maybe at 4am, the six-foot-four biker dude with the skull tattoos shouldn\’t try to get on the same elevator as five-foot-six wimpy pizza delivery guy).And if we establish this as etiquette, what should our reaction be if someone ignores it? If someone does try to get on that elevator should the etiquette demand that the elevator passenger attempt to block the way? Should they vacate the elevator? What if they feel uncomfortable taking any of these actions?I\’m genuinely in the dark about what kind of outcome is being sought here. What kind of society am I being asked to help build?