I'm all in favor of forcing religious organizations out of the education business. Sexual predators have hidden behind their magic books and clerical collars for far too long. When the victims spoke out, the churches circled the wagons, protected the abusers, and blamed the victims.
Like climate change, insurers against risk are adverse to obvious risk. We'll soon be free of insurance...but never risk. And like climate change/globo warming, we've ignored religious risk for far too long. Whatever benefits religion bestows are fast being overshadowed by the damage it causes.
Meanwhile in the US people are protesting at public schools because they think that's where the 'groomers' are. Australia is becoming what the US could have been if the Republicans hadn't got into bed with Christianity and Rupert Murdoch. It's no wonder he came here, Australia probably wouldn't have put up with his shenanigans.
I have rather mixed feelings on this. While it's certainly a great argument for getting religion out of schools on a permanent basis, the way the taxpayer is being forced to foot part of the bill still seems a bit dubious to me. Unless and until these protect-the-predator churches are forced into bankruptcy such that every last stick of furniture is sold off to the highest bidder, they're getting off too easy in my book; the associated schools should suffer the same.
Now, if the government were to offer to purchase the school property, scrub the religious images away, and then run the school properly, I'd be good with that. Seems to me that everyone would better off that way; but I'm not in Australia so I'll admit I could be wrong there.
If the schools and social safety net programs are not safe for the people who need them, they need to be trashed. If the Anglican and Catholic Churches are not willing to properly address the issues, let them die. They should not be protected by insurance anyway, they need to pay the punishments themselves and not be allowed to include the debts in any bankruptcy settlements.
Fuck ‘em. Let them go. The government should have been doing that work all along.
So ... the Anglican Church now as well, eh? Anyone surprised here? Anyone at all? Honestly, if there is a church on the face of this planet where child sexual abuse has NOT occurred, that would be far more the headline at this point.
Also, I'm hearing a lot civil suits in this article, but 𝗪𝗛𝗘𝗥𝗘 𝗔𝗥𝗘 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗖𝗥𝗜𝗠𝗜𝗡𝗔𝗟 𝗖𝗛𝗔𝗥𝗚𝗘𝗦???
"Documents seen by the Guardian also reveal that private insurers have abandoned a significant number of schools owned and operated by the Anglican church in southern Queensland, refusing to cover them for new claims of child sexual abuse."
What this tells me is that the church/schools have not done anything/enough to stop future cases of abuse from occurring to the satisfaction of the insurance companies and their risk assessors.
This means in a very practical sense, you would have to be mad or a monster to send your child to one of their institutions.
If the Australian governement wants to put the last nail in the coffin it can ask the Anglican institutions to reimburse them the compensation money given to the victims. It's what we do for divorced parents who bail out on alimony.
OT : tomorrow DM will have her second round of chemo. Since it will end around lunch time I asked her if we should eat at the shop. She prefers I buy something in case the hospital book an ambulance for her.
Me : "What should I buy for you ? Meat ? Fish ? Vegetarian ? Vegan ? You have time to think about it."
I'm all in favor of forcing religious organizations out of the education business. Sexual predators have hidden behind their magic books and clerical collars for far too long. When the victims spoke out, the churches circled the wagons, protected the abusers, and blamed the victims.
Like climate change, insurers against risk are adverse to obvious risk. We'll soon be free of insurance...but never risk. And like climate change/globo warming, we've ignored religious risk for far too long. Whatever benefits religion bestows are fast being overshadowed by the damage it causes.
Meanwhile in the US people are protesting at public schools because they think that's where the 'groomers' are. Australia is becoming what the US could have been if the Republicans hadn't got into bed with Christianity and Rupert Murdoch. It's no wonder he came here, Australia probably wouldn't have put up with his shenanigans.
Why does the Christian religion need insurance? Isn't their all-powerful god protection enough?
Seems like a lack of faith is being exhibited here.
I'm surprised that you can get insurance that pays out for criminal activity.
I have rather mixed feelings on this. While it's certainly a great argument for getting religion out of schools on a permanent basis, the way the taxpayer is being forced to foot part of the bill still seems a bit dubious to me. Unless and until these protect-the-predator churches are forced into bankruptcy such that every last stick of furniture is sold off to the highest bidder, they're getting off too easy in my book; the associated schools should suffer the same.
Now, if the government were to offer to purchase the school property, scrub the religious images away, and then run the school properly, I'd be good with that. Seems to me that everyone would better off that way; but I'm not in Australia so I'll admit I could be wrong there.
I wish insurance companies in the US would start doing the same. The wailing and gnashing of teeth over the "persecution" would be hilarious.
If the schools and social safety net programs are not safe for the people who need them, they need to be trashed. If the Anglican and Catholic Churches are not willing to properly address the issues, let them die. They should not be protected by insurance anyway, they need to pay the punishments themselves and not be allowed to include the debts in any bankruptcy settlements.
Fuck ‘em. Let them go. The government should have been doing that work all along.
So ... the Anglican Church now as well, eh? Anyone surprised here? Anyone at all? Honestly, if there is a church on the face of this planet where child sexual abuse has NOT occurred, that would be far more the headline at this point.
Also, I'm hearing a lot civil suits in this article, but 𝗪𝗛𝗘𝗥𝗘 𝗔𝗥𝗘 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗖𝗥𝗜𝗠𝗜𝗡𝗔𝗟 𝗖𝗛𝗔𝗥𝗚𝗘𝗦???
"Documents seen by the Guardian also reveal that private insurers have abandoned a significant number of schools owned and operated by the Anglican church in southern Queensland, refusing to cover them for new claims of child sexual abuse."
What this tells me is that the church/schools have not done anything/enough to stop future cases of abuse from occurring to the satisfaction of the insurance companies and their risk assessors.
This means in a very practical sense, you would have to be mad or a monster to send your child to one of their institutions.
If the Australian governement wants to put the last nail in the coffin it can ask the Anglican institutions to reimburse them the compensation money given to the victims. It's what we do for divorced parents who bail out on alimony.
When you're so scummy that even the 𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘶𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘺 wants nothing to do with you...
OT: Soon you may need a VPN to view porn.
https://www.theverge.com/2023/7/3/23782776/pornhub-blocks-mississippi-virginia-age-verification-laws
Preying on homeless kids, that feels even more despicable than the abuse at all, and I didn't think that was possible.
OT : tomorrow DM will have her second round of chemo. Since it will end around lunch time I asked her if we should eat at the shop. She prefers I buy something in case the hospital book an ambulance for her.
Me : "What should I buy for you ? Meat ? Fish ? Vegetarian ? Vegan ? You have time to think about it."
DM, while I was leaving her bedroom : "Vegan !"
POS test. https://scontent-ord5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/357079032_2072103349800296_6872642087532419252_n.jpg?_nc_cat=109&cb=99be929b-59f725be&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=8bfeb9&_nc_ohc=St9fznSdCIAAX8cKcqV&_nc_ht=scontent-ord5-1.xx&oh=00_AfCOhnXLu63mDCL2QRCL161oLiQVYKZcb6l6FVqeZTKcJA&oe=64A8BE61