Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

bedlog t1_j90b9gq wrote

so the fox will be guarding the chickens after all

18

zer05tar t1_j91cvt6 wrote

What law could you pass that criminals would follow?

−18

4bethany t1_j91onwh wrote

No clergy confession should be more protected than the rights of an abused child. To say otherwise is ignorant and egregious. The Mormon church is going through a lawsuit because for six years the Mormon clergy knew that a man was raping his two young daughters, but never reported it. Protecting the confession rights of criminals over the safety of children is the definition of evil from these so called religions.

57

FalseAnimal t1_j91soql wrote

With the Mormon practice of the elders having one on one sessions with children where they're "interviewed" about sexual matters, I bet there is a "the call is coming from inside the house!" type situation as well.

15

cegr76 t1_j91t55x wrote

Agree. FWIW, many denominations require this of their clergy already. Independent, non denominational churches may be different.

7

jslayerjeep t1_j92jzut wrote

"Child abuse" can of course be a horrible thing.
Who doesn't want well for the kids!
On flip side, I do not trust the government to define child abuse well. This is probably my biggest issue with this.

I generally hate compelled speech.
I generally hate forced tattling.
They represent a society that reminds me of Nazi Germany.
As I said, I do not trust the government to define child abuse well. I wouldn't want to live in a society that is set up to punish people for saying things against their own best judgement.

Compelled speech, and forced tattling, is not a society I would want my kids to grow up in.

−13

afishda t1_j936vc2 wrote

Here comes the catholic lobbyists to defend child predators, how you can remain in the church and stand by this behavior is beyond me.

Has a very cult feeling!

7

reroboto t1_j93sohq wrote

The lowest of the low abuse children and animals. What a screwed up world when we have to mandate trying to stop it. Edit to clarify: Reporting it should be a universal standard

2

Lch207560 t1_j94cjkj wrote

Never gonna happen. The clergy is far too powerful in government to allow it

1

MyLittlePIMO t1_j956n3y wrote

Also, doctors and teachers and therapists already are mandatory reporters with the same standards.

This isn’t remotely unreasonable or a high burden.

Also, Texas and West Virginia and there other states already make clergy mandatory reporters with no exceptions and it has worked out perfectly fine. Literally the only argument I’ve heard against this is slippery slope nonsense that hasn’t played out anywhere it’s been implemented.

This is a no brainer. Every politician who opposes it should be figuratively beaten over the head as a pedophile protector when they run for re election. Jim Walsh’s rant against this bill should literally be played straight as an attack ad by whoever runs against him.

2

MyLittlePIMO t1_j956xdc wrote

Don’t be a doomer.

Texas and West Virginia both passed clergy mandatory reporting with no exceptions.

And it’s worked out fine.

If Texas can do it, Washington can. Don’t let congressmen like Jim Walsh and Tom Dent off the hook for opposing this.

1

MyLittlePIMO t1_j9573gg wrote

This makes no sense. You hate compelled speech?

Are you against courts? Courts can subpoena people to share what they know. Except clergy currently under the current law.

Requiring people to report crimes is perfectly reasonable. If you subscribe to some kind of ideology that says it’s not, then you are completely disconnected from evidence based policy.

2

Ponsugator t1_j97ekmu wrote

Right now clergy feel like they can’t report, if they can then clergy have the power to protect children. There is an Arizona case where a man sexually abused his two children for seven years, and the bishop felt he couldn’t report it and it kept going. If he would have been able to report, then these two little girls lives could have been saved

1

MyLittlePIMO t1_j98zikg wrote

You might not be fully understanding the law. It only applies to child sex abuse.

Not child abuse in general.

There’s a pretty clear line when it comes to sexual abuse of a child.

1

MyLittlePIMO t1_j9hpfy8 wrote

I think we can understand each other here :) yeah, if this were about child abuse only, I could see a slippery slope argument. Is spanking abuse? Is grounding your kid very strictly abuse? Eye of the beholder.

But child sex abuse is so far over the line that it’s a lot easier. If you’re debating about whether something counts as sexual abuse of a child, something has gone horrible wrong đŸ˜”â€đŸ’«

And, I’d also point out “mandatory reporting” does not equal conviction. It just lets the police have it on the record. If they can’t prove it they won’t press charges - but it’s incredibly helpful to store that info in the record (that the clergy was aware and can be called to testify later).

I personally know a case where the clergy knew a man had raped his children- a panel of multiple clergy had investigated and questioned him and confessed - but he got off because it was his word vs the mother’s, and a toddler struggles to express being raped in court.

The police either didn’t know they could have gone to the clergy, or didn’t have the legal power to question them, due to the current state of WA law.

They at least charged the guy and he plea dealed to a lesser charge of regular child abuse- good for him (no sex offender listing), ok for the prosecutor (they weren’t sure they could get a conviction on only the very traumatized mother’s word), and bad for the community (a known child rapist is walking around free without being listed anywhere).

The clergy have a confession in writing I’m fairly sure but the police couldn’t get to it.

I know these kids and the clergy involved personally and it’s a big part of why I’m an adamant supporter of this law.

2