Herbert and Catherine Schaible asked God to heal their 8-month-old baby son with magic while he spent days struggling to breathe. He died last week. They were still on probation for manslaughter after letting their two-year-old son die of pneumonia in 2009 under similar circumstances: they sought the aid of supernatural beings with magical powers rather than doctors with medical degrees.
Imagine Herbert and Catherine Schaible had killed a toddler in 2009 with a savage beating or by neglecting it in favor of watching Star Trek DVDs for a week straight while it coughed itself to death. Would they have gotten probation for that or would they still be sitting in prison today? How likely is it that, once placed in the hands of a jury, Herbert and Catherine Schaible will ever spend time in prison for killing the second of two small children with religiously motivated medical neglect?
You might want to Google similar cases before you post your thoughts on the matter.
When Jerry Sandusky was accused of raping a child, his superiors didn't report him to the police. Here in the U.S., we still don't have mandatory reporting for such things in most states, and if you believe that schools and sports programs have been perfect or even good about reporting for "decades" with no reporting law in place you are just being naive. The prevailing norm until relatively recently was to try to protect the child from public exposure, and just quietly force the resignation of the perpetrator.
By all means, Robert. Post a list of the federal laws and US states which allow 'education' as an exemption or as a defense to child abuse, child neglect, felony crimes against children, misdemeanors, manslaughter, murder of a child, and child neglect resulting in death.
Crackpot: "Well your honor, my toddler was in her crib gasping for breath. I sang 'Now I Know My ABCs' to her. Then I played some Beethoven. Sure I could have given her some food and water. Sure I could have taken her to the hospital down the street. But would she have learned anything from it? She died three days later. *SOB*"
Judge: "Jeepers that's rough, buddy. I just want you to know that I too believe in the value of education. Start 'em early, I say. And Beethoven? Whoa! That's some serious brain boosting! You're free to go!"
Gallup: Did you know anyone personally who was sexually molested by a Catholic priest?
Robert: Yes, sadly. And by a family member, and another by a teacher/coach, and by a lay married couple who seemed to like doing sex ed with a number of children in their youth group. I take it I now know another?
No, you don't. I wasn't molested, Robert. This is quite clear after even a cursory reading of the original post. Your streak for missing the point continues.
I can assure you, whether you experience it firsthand, or only witness the blasted landscape of devastation it leaves behind in someone else for a LIFETIME, it does not get "old hat".
Please forgive me for bringing an academic discussion to a situation which may be deeply personal. Anyone who has been a victim of such things is entitled to be angry, and indeed such anger is a necessary part of healing. They don't need a silly old professorial type droning on. My sincerest apologies.
Your words were not academic. It's not my forgiveness you should be begging for and not me you should be apologizing to. Your behavior in this thread has been deplorable, Robert. The victims don't need your prayers. They need you to stop the downplaying and the defending of the indefensible.
I think if you look back in the thread you'll find that it was @JimmyRussell and yourself that brought it up, actually. It seems to be a favorite whipping horse here that comes up in many threads on unrelated topics.
I didn't say you brought it up. I said you made this thread about the Catholic Church sex abuse scandal. And that's exactly what this thread has become primarily about.
And it's not an unrelated topic. We've already cited examples in this thread where the Catholic clergy raped and abused children and got away with it. This even reach the point where high-ranking members of the church covered it up, allowed the crimes to continue, and refused to cooperate with police investigations.
Here in the U.S., we still don't have mandatory reporting for such things in most states,
Yes we do, Robert. All 50 US states currently have mandatory reporting laws for "such things". The laws mention physicians; medical interns; hospital personnel engaged in the examination, care or treatment of persons; medical examiners; psychologists; emergency medical technicians; dentists; nurses; chiropractors; podiatrists; optometrists; osteopaths; photo developers; the general public; and allied mental health and human services professionals, and clergy.
Failure to report is a felony or misdemeanor in 46 states and a punishable offense in all 50 states. But one occupation on that list get a special exemption from facing criminal charges for failing report the rape, beating, or neglect of a child.
Care to guess which one?
"Priests, rabbis, clergy members, ordained or licensed ministers, leaders of a church or religious body or accredited Christian Science practitioners do not need to report if the information was communicated to them through a confession or similarly confidential communication in other religious faiths."
You have to be careful in matters of law, @Gallup. Mandatory reporting laws are for child abuse and neglect, and in most states only parents or legal guardians can commit child abuse or neglect by definition. The reporting laws were designed to pierce the special relationship and protections under the law that parents have in controlling their children, not to create a situation like the old Soviet system where people were required to report their relatives and neighbors for all suspected crimes. Mandatory reporting in child abuse and neglect cases is to an agency that does confidential investigations, not to law enforcement.
Sexual abuse by non-custodial adults or others is the crime of battery, and that is different under the law.
You have to be careful in matters of law, @Gallup.
The information posted comes from the Rape Abuse and Incest National Network, the nation's largest and most respected anti-sexual violence organization. If you want them to "be careful" about it, you'll have to take that up with them.
Mandatory reporting laws are for child abuse and neglect, and in most states only parents or legal guardians can commit child abuse or neglect by definition.
Which is relevant how? Millions of parents and legal guardians are religious or clergy. The staggering list of loopholes I posted above-- the ones that excuse the abuse, neglect and murder of children-- apply to them.
Mandatory reporting in child abuse and neglect cases is to an agency that does confidential investigations, not to law enforcement.
And if the investigating agency finds reasonable suspicion of child endangerment-- beatings, neglect, rape-- the child is taken from the parent, put in a foster home, and criminal charges are filed against the parent. With the lengthy list of exceptions made for religion.
Failure to report, as I've already said, is a crime. It allows the abuse of the children to continue. Clergy are excused when they commit these crimes.
I said clergy and the religious are prosecuted less often for the crimes they commit. You've got the supporting evidence you asked for. None of your feeble responses refute that.
Well, I think I have lost the point entirely, I'm afraid.
Not at all, Robert. Now that you've dragged the Catholic Church sexual abuse scandal into this, and have made some astonishing claims along the way, the conversation might as well run its course.
Robert: "The scale of abuse cases was on the order of those that occur in the general population worldwide, among coaches and teachers and others."
Gallup: "A claim. Now provide evidence and reasoning."
Robert: "I thought you said you read the Jay report, which goes into some detail about abuse allegations across various youth serving organizations and provides substantial evidence for my claim."
The John Jay Report was limited to the United States and only covered sexual abuse in Catholic dioceses. It did not extend worldwide or to other occupations, so this is not evidence of your claim.
You claimed to have knowledge of sexual abuse (and presumably the rate at which it gets covered up) as it occurs worldwide, relative to the Catholic clergy and coaches, teachers, and "others". Post your sources of information to back this claim and specify who these "others" are. You still have 192 countries and the non-Catholic parts of the US left to go.
That, or you can admit you yanked a log out of your ass to defend your raping priests, and the Bishops and Cardinals who spent decades covering for them.
I have to ask why they have their kids. I would have hoped there would have been at least a psychiatric evaluation done as to mental stability. Kids aren't to blame as much as parents in this scenario. Kids can be taught to think. The parents in this case i suspect not as much. I think the failure comes in when courts see a religious case and suddenly get nervous about media. It took ages for things to come to light about that vatican
Come on, Barry. You saw what Robert posted.
I mean, to "take one variable, religion, and treat it as dichotomous when there is in fact a range of religious teaching on a topic is really quite irrational".
So we can't blame religion for that man tossing a newborn baby into a bonfire in the belief that she was the antichrist. (Even if her mom did approve.) Heck no. We can blame "a complex interplay of competing ideas and pressures". But not religion.
Roast the babe alive for God? Maybe you'll go to jail. Watch the babe suffocate for God? Maybe you'll get probation.
See? It's all perfectly rational.
When I saw your reply in my email, I almost freaked out that you were serious so thanks for the link that provided context.
As a theist, I could not disagree more with Robert.
Me Robert? I'm actually much more a Bob. I think only my grandmother ever called me Robert.
What would you disagree with, @Barry?