"Just last year, the state of Washington agreed to a settlement to exempt Confession from a mandatory reporting bill that purposely didn't include it after facing a lawsuit backed by the Trump administration."
The regime of child abusers protecting child abusers. How very unsurprising.
We need to be asking the religious why kiddie rape - a practice they publicly condemn is protected if it comes out in a confession? That protection harms children and I believe, Jesus was inclined to protect them - “suffer the little children to come to me.” This is a current burning question. And the religious keep coming down on the wrong side of the question.
Or rip out their guts and put it on a fence. Invite a couple of vultures over to eat; I am sure the clergy watching would find it educational. 🤔
Take the clergy to the Grand Canyon; rip out their entrails and loop it around a rock then push the clergy over the cliff and watch a see if the entrails snaps when it extends to its farthest point or springs back like a rubber band! 🤔
Of course I am not really serious, well not too much anyway!
MAGA, Christian Nationalism, National Socialism, Fascism, Marxism (as applied in the former Soviet block and China; and still in North Korea) and the effects of late-stage capitalism are showing us that morally and ethically, societies have not made nearly as much progress in the last 2000 years as we like to think we have.
The 20th century featured a record number of ethnic cleansings and mass murders.
Well, to be fair, once secularists succeeded in moving them out of positions of power, the crusades, witch burnings, and inquisitions got tamped down quite a bit. Of course, we know they'd fire them up again if they ever regained any of their former political power.
When has the safety of children 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳 been a priority for the Church? It has always been about power, and protecting the powerful. They will continue to protect priests over kids to maintain that power. They will never admit to it to protect the reputations of the powerful.
“ He feared that this bill would be a slippery slope to ending the sanctity of Confession and added that opponents were “legislating a vendetta.”
More than 55 years ago, there was a huge rally at the university of Hawaii against the Vietnam war. One of the speakers was comedian Alan Sherman, who is probably forgotten by just about everybody who isn’t old. He was commenting in his speech about Nixon saying that the United States would “lose face” if it unilaterally ended the war and sued for peace. Sherman‘s response: “the face of this country is not worth the life of my son.“
I think Sherman’s response is appropriate here. The sanctity of confession is not worth the wreckage of my son’s or my daughter‘s life. The rather privileged belief that a law like this was legislating a vendetta is also not worth the wreckage of my sons or my daughter’s life. What privileged religious people may believe others think of them is also not worth the wreckage of my son’s or daughter’s life.
But underneath all of this is one hell of an admission. They know that the abuse is going on. And they don’t fucking care. They would rather blame drag queens, gay people, and transgender people for the abuse that God‘s representatives are visiting on innocent children. This is what they’ve been doing for years, decades, centuries, especially the Catholic Church. That little abuse scandal is at least 1000 years old
And that’s says worlds about what they actually believe and value.
The "sanctity of confession," and indeed the concept of religious sanctity, full stop, is a load of hooey. The Catholic Church overuses words like sanctity (presuming it didn't INVENT the word, flat out!) to establish and hold its self-presumed authority over its sheep ... oops, I meant "parishioners." And that's just part of a systematic process of brainwashing and indoctrination which they have been about since the inception of Roman Catholicism.
And breaking the sheep of their shepherd will take no small amount of effort.
Postscript: I remember Allan Sherman. He was great fun back in the day, and you haven't lived until you've heard his symphonic work. "Symphonic work?!?" Oh, you betcha!
So, Kansas priests are now mandated reporters for child sex abuse ... EXCEPT when that information comes through the confessional. I have to ask a question: that being the case WHEN does the Kansas state legislature expect ANY priest to report ANYTHING? On top of that, since this bill will doubtless become common knowledge to Kansans, why would anyone admit to any such transgression anywhere other than the confession booth?
From where I sit, the bill is useless, WORSE than useless, because it pretends to fix something while supplying an obvious loophole. Bluntly foolish.
If one has sexually abused a child -- or anyone, for that matter, the Confessional and the Rite of Penitence should not be a cover for legal accountability for that crime.
A great time to receive absolution of the sin of sexual abuse of another person is BEFORE that action occurs. If therapy is required in order not to offend, then the potential abuser should seek therapy. Once the abuse occurs, a victim is involved (the person who was abused) and shielding the perpetrator from the consequences of sexually abusing another person re-injures the victim and allows the perpetrator to re-offend, without consequences.
If one willfully sexually abuses another person, that abuser deserves pretty much whatever punishment they receive.
I've forgotten who it was that suggested that absolution be withheld in such cases, pending a separate confession: to local law enforcement. The Church will never go for it, but there's no changing the fact that should be SOP.
If priests were actually looking to end child abuse they would require the abuser to turn themselves in. But since the majority of people who will confess this to a priest are their fellow priests they never will require them to turn themselves in.
It's been suggested several times by a number of individuals, including myself. There really is no reason at all that absolution should not include going to the authorities to admit the crime and acceptance of the state-mandated punishment for said crime; other than that 'might keep people away from confession!!!' so often touted by priests. If someone is kept away from confession by the possible consequences of their actions, then it's pretty obvious to me they aren't nearly as sorry as they're claiming.
Many of Liszt's pieces were built on pieces Schubert composed; and Schubert's pieces were built on pieces Beethoven composed; and Beethoven's pieces were built on pieces that Haydn and Bach composed.
Each one of these composers wrote their own, individual music in their own, individual style; but all of them were influenced by, and indebted to, composers who lived before them.
I'm a composer. I'm strongly influenced by Steve Reich and John Adams; Ferruccio Busoni; Franz Liszt -- and Alfonso X Il Sabio (Spain, 12th century), Leonin and Perotin (12th-13th century).
Speaking for myself a Christian, I can support a separate confession to local law enforcement COMPLETELY.
Too often, we Christians indulge in "cheap grace": we tell God we have sinned; or tell a priest we have sinned, get our absolution, and go off and do the same damn thing again.
When our actions -- be they sexual abuse, physical abuse, or even spiritual abuse --have severely damaged someone, part of the grace of absolution has to include ACCOUNTABILITY FOR OUR ACTIONS. Saying that our transgression is "covered by the Blood of Jesus" DOES NOT CUT IT.
I've said it many times, here and elsewhere: Sin is ONE thing. Crime is ENTIRELY ANOTHER. Priests can absolve sin all they want. That has NO EFFECT OR IMPACT WHATSOEVER on the CRIME.
[“The Church’s child protection policies have been highly successful in preventing and responding to misconduct]
I suppose that technically could be true depending upon the parameter of time you are using. If you are talking about last Tuesday when a majority of priests had the flu and were bedridden, this statement could technically be correct.
If you are talking about the history of the Catholic church in the United States, well, might want to grab the fire extinguisher for your pants, Liar.
Thanks. Over ice with a dash of Amaretto, I can actually put down a fair amount of that stuff. But I do have to be careful about operating heavy equipment (and man do I have some heavy equipment) 😜.
The entire premise behind the "seal of confession" confidentiality when it comes to confessing to a clergy serious crimes (that one can be genuinely repentant of a horrible act of lawbreaking AND not go to law enforcement authorities to confess it) is absurd and a mockery of what it means to be "repentant" about something.
I was told that confession could only elicit absolution for sins; if the penitent is truly sorry then (s)he should also confess to the crime with the local police. Similarly, the clergyman could report the crime without affecting forgiveness of the sin. To make the decision easier for the penitent perhaps the church could use the sanctioned penance. It's in the book:
Mark 9:42 And whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea.
Repeated in Matthew 18:6 and Luke 17:2
That should keep everyone happy: well, nearly everyone.
This bill is just as useless as a one legged horse! This was all about appearing to do something without actually doing anything! In a phrase: GODDAMM FUCKING POLITICAL THEATRE, and nothing more!
> "G any duly ordained minister of religion, as defined in K.S.A. 60-429..."
I don't know what that definition is but I wonder if it's a loophole for non-denominational preachers? Is Jim Bob, who preaches out of a storefront church, an "ordained" minister? How about other church officials...the secretary, the choir director, the youth group coordinator? They're not ordained ministers but they may have a vested interest in protecting the church leaders and fellow congregants rather than the children.
“regular minister of religion” means one who as his or her customary vocation preaches and teaches the principles of religion of a church, a religious sect, or organization of which he or she is a member, without having been formally ordained as a minister of religion, and who is recognized by such church, sect, or organization as a regular minister; (3) the term “regular or duly ordained minister of religion” does not include a person who irregularly or incidentally preaches and teaches the principles of religion of a church, religious sect, or organization and does not include any person who may have been duly ordained a minister in accordance with the ceremonial, rite, or discipline of a church, religious sect or organization, but who does not regularly, as a vocation, teach and preach the principles of religion and administer the ordinances of public worship as embodied in the creed or principles of his or her church, sect, or organization;
"Just last year, the state of Washington agreed to a settlement to exempt Confession from a mandatory reporting bill that purposely didn't include it after facing a lawsuit backed by the Trump administration."
The regime of child abusers protecting child abusers. How very unsurprising.
We need to be asking the religious why kiddie rape - a practice they publicly condemn is protected if it comes out in a confession? That protection harms children and I believe, Jesus was inclined to protect them - “suffer the little children to come to me.” This is a current burning question. And the religious keep coming down on the wrong side of the question.
"Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest." -- Denis Diderot
Or rip out their guts and put it on a fence. Invite a couple of vultures over to eat; I am sure the clergy watching would find it educational. 🤔
Take the clergy to the Grand Canyon; rip out their entrails and loop it around a rock then push the clergy over the cliff and watch a see if the entrails snaps when it extends to its farthest point or springs back like a rubber band! 🤔
Of course I am not really serious, well not too much anyway!
I’ve always admired the creativity of that image.
Baby steps.
Unfortunately, this baby is 2000 years old.
An in that time has matured not in the least measure.
And not just regarding sexual abuse.
MAGA, Christian Nationalism, National Socialism, Fascism, Marxism (as applied in the former Soviet block and China; and still in North Korea) and the effects of late-stage capitalism are showing us that morally and ethically, societies have not made nearly as much progress in the last 2000 years as we like to think we have.
The 20th century featured a record number of ethnic cleansings and mass murders.
Well, to be fair, once secularists succeeded in moving them out of positions of power, the crusades, witch burnings, and inquisitions got tamped down quite a bit. Of course, we know they'd fire them up again if they ever regained any of their former political power.
𝐼𝑓 𝑦𝑜𝑢 𝑤𝑜𝑢𝑙𝑑 𝑟𝑎𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑡𝑒𝑐𝑡 𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑛 𝑘𝑖𝑑𝑠, 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑛 𝑦𝑜𝑢𝑟 𝑜𝑟𝑔𝑎𝑛𝑖𝑧𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑠ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑙𝑑 𝑗𝑢𝑠𝑡 𝑎𝑑𝑚𝑖𝑡 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑎𝑓𝑒𝑡𝑦 𝑜𝑓 𝑐ℎ𝑖𝑙𝑑𝑟𝑒𝑛 𝑖𝑠𝑛’𝑡 𝑎 𝑡𝑜𝑝 𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑜𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑦.
When has the safety of children 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳 been a priority for the Church? It has always been about power, and protecting the powerful. They will continue to protect priests over kids to maintain that power. They will never admit to it to protect the reputations of the powerful.
“𝑇ℎ𝑒 𝐶ℎ𝑢𝑟𝑐ℎ’𝑠 𝑐ℎ𝑖𝑙𝑑 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑡𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑝𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑒𝑠 ℎ𝑎𝑣𝑒 𝑏𝑒𝑒𝑛 ℎ𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑙𝑦 𝑠𝑢𝑐𝑐𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑓𝑢𝑙 𝑖𝑛 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑝𝑜𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑡𝑜 𝑚𝑖𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑑𝑢𝑐𝑡, 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑡ℎ𝑢𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑐ℎ𝑢𝑟𝑐ℎ 𝑠𝑢𝑝𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑎𝑑𝑜𝑝𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑖𝑚𝑖𝑙𝑎𝑟 𝑝𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑒𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑚𝑎𝑦 ℎ𝑒𝑙𝑝 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑚𝑖𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑑𝑢𝑐𝑡 𝑖𝑛 𝑜𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑟𝑔𝑎𝑛𝑖𝑧𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑠 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑤𝑖𝑑𝑒,” 𝑊𝑒𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑠𝑎𝑖𝑑.
Weber's eyes are brown because he is full of shit.
“ He feared that this bill would be a slippery slope to ending the sanctity of Confession and added that opponents were “legislating a vendetta.”
More than 55 years ago, there was a huge rally at the university of Hawaii against the Vietnam war. One of the speakers was comedian Alan Sherman, who is probably forgotten by just about everybody who isn’t old. He was commenting in his speech about Nixon saying that the United States would “lose face” if it unilaterally ended the war and sued for peace. Sherman‘s response: “the face of this country is not worth the life of my son.“
I think Sherman’s response is appropriate here. The sanctity of confession is not worth the wreckage of my son’s or my daughter‘s life. The rather privileged belief that a law like this was legislating a vendetta is also not worth the wreckage of my sons or my daughter’s life. What privileged religious people may believe others think of them is also not worth the wreckage of my son’s or daughter’s life.
But underneath all of this is one hell of an admission. They know that the abuse is going on. And they don’t fucking care. They would rather blame drag queens, gay people, and transgender people for the abuse that God‘s representatives are visiting on innocent children. This is what they’ve been doing for years, decades, centuries, especially the Catholic Church. That little abuse scandal is at least 1000 years old
And that’s says worlds about what they actually believe and value.
The "sanctity of confession," and indeed the concept of religious sanctity, full stop, is a load of hooey. The Catholic Church overuses words like sanctity (presuming it didn't INVENT the word, flat out!) to establish and hold its self-presumed authority over its sheep ... oops, I meant "parishioners." And that's just part of a systematic process of brainwashing and indoctrination which they have been about since the inception of Roman Catholicism.
And breaking the sheep of their shepherd will take no small amount of effort.
Postscript: I remember Allan Sherman. He was great fun back in the day, and you haven't lived until you've heard his symphonic work. "Symphonic work?!?" Oh, you betcha!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9tnOWAillk
A brilliant man whose career was cut tragically short.
So, Kansas bought a pig and piled on the lipstick.
So, Kansas priests are now mandated reporters for child sex abuse ... EXCEPT when that information comes through the confessional. I have to ask a question: that being the case WHEN does the Kansas state legislature expect ANY priest to report ANYTHING? On top of that, since this bill will doubtless become common knowledge to Kansans, why would anyone admit to any such transgression anywhere other than the confession booth?
From where I sit, the bill is useless, WORSE than useless, because it pretends to fix something while supplying an obvious loophole. Bluntly foolish.
That loophole will be used by abusers to connect with other abusers to facilitate more abuse.
Of course it will. Kansas state legislators demonstrate a degree of cluelessness which goes a fair distance beyond disturbing.
It wouldn’t surprise me in the least that the Kansas state legislators have plenty of skeletons in their closets that the police should look into!
It's Monday, February 23rd, 2026. Is he dead yet?
Not yet. Damn. How can someone with all his physical and mental problems still be breathing?
Proof there is no god.
If one has sexually abused a child -- or anyone, for that matter, the Confessional and the Rite of Penitence should not be a cover for legal accountability for that crime.
A great time to receive absolution of the sin of sexual abuse of another person is BEFORE that action occurs. If therapy is required in order not to offend, then the potential abuser should seek therapy. Once the abuse occurs, a victim is involved (the person who was abused) and shielding the perpetrator from the consequences of sexually abusing another person re-injures the victim and allows the perpetrator to re-offend, without consequences.
If one willfully sexually abuses another person, that abuser deserves pretty much whatever punishment they receive.
I've forgotten who it was that suggested that absolution be withheld in such cases, pending a separate confession: to local law enforcement. The Church will never go for it, but there's no changing the fact that should be SOP.
If priests were actually looking to end child abuse they would require the abuser to turn themselves in. But since the majority of people who will confess this to a priest are their fellow priests they never will require them to turn themselves in.
It's been suggested several times by a number of individuals, including myself. There really is no reason at all that absolution should not include going to the authorities to admit the crime and acceptance of the state-mandated punishment for said crime; other than that 'might keep people away from confession!!!' so often touted by priests. If someone is kept away from confession by the possible consequences of their actions, then it's pretty obvious to me they aren't nearly as sorry as they're claiming.
I suggested that but I doubt it was an original thought.
Not everything has to be completely original.
Many of Liszt's pieces were built on pieces Schubert composed; and Schubert's pieces were built on pieces Beethoven composed; and Beethoven's pieces were built on pieces that Haydn and Bach composed.
Each one of these composers wrote their own, individual music in their own, individual style; but all of them were influenced by, and indebted to, composers who lived before them.
I'm a composer. I'm strongly influenced by Steve Reich and John Adams; Ferruccio Busoni; Franz Liszt -- and Alfonso X Il Sabio (Spain, 12th century), Leonin and Perotin (12th-13th century).
Your suggestion is quite valid.
Speaking for myself a Christian, I can support a separate confession to local law enforcement COMPLETELY.
Too often, we Christians indulge in "cheap grace": we tell God we have sinned; or tell a priest we have sinned, get our absolution, and go off and do the same damn thing again.
When our actions -- be they sexual abuse, physical abuse, or even spiritual abuse --have severely damaged someone, part of the grace of absolution has to include ACCOUNTABILITY FOR OUR ACTIONS. Saying that our transgression is "covered by the Blood of Jesus" DOES NOT CUT IT.
I've said it many times, here and elsewhere: Sin is ONE thing. Crime is ENTIRELY ANOTHER. Priests can absolve sin all they want. That has NO EFFECT OR IMPACT WHATSOEVER on the CRIME.
BINGO!!!
[“The Church’s child protection policies have been highly successful in preventing and responding to misconduct]
I suppose that technically could be true depending upon the parameter of time you are using. If you are talking about last Tuesday when a majority of priests had the flu and were bedridden, this statement could technically be correct.
If you are talking about the history of the Catholic church in the United States, well, might want to grab the fire extinguisher for your pants, Liar.
A useless bill that still shields xtian child rapists and their enablers.
Ba-da-bing.
And where is the xtian god in all this? Why isn't it smiting all those who harm children? Especially those who claim to speak for that god?
Either said god is deaf and blind or it approves of its agents on Earth violating the bodies and minds of innocents.
🎶 Jesus loves the little children, all the children of the world...🎶
just not enough to help them when they are hungry, sick, or abused.
Or the third most likely option is that GODDYBITCH DOES NOT EXIST! Every one here already knows that!
Well, not quite everyone. (cough, cough, DG, cough)
Nor the meaning of the phrase: Burden of Proof
See what I mean about him repeating the same errors after having been endlessly corrected?
True, then why does davyboy come here. If he is unwilling to learn, is he trying to convert us. Good luck with that!
[TS hands DA a bottle of Dayquil.] You should do something about that cough, really!
Thanks. Over ice with a dash of Amaretto, I can actually put down a fair amount of that stuff. But I do have to be careful about operating heavy equipment (and man do I have some heavy equipment) 😜.
Ooooo, HEAVY equipment! 😁
The entire premise behind the "seal of confession" confidentiality when it comes to confessing to a clergy serious crimes (that one can be genuinely repentant of a horrible act of lawbreaking AND not go to law enforcement authorities to confess it) is absurd and a mockery of what it means to be "repentant" about something.
One more reason why religion is horrible.
I was told that confession could only elicit absolution for sins; if the penitent is truly sorry then (s)he should also confess to the crime with the local police. Similarly, the clergyman could report the crime without affecting forgiveness of the sin. To make the decision easier for the penitent perhaps the church could use the sanctioned penance. It's in the book:
Mark 9:42 And whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea.
Repeated in Matthew 18:6 and Luke 17:2
That should keep everyone happy: well, nearly everyone.
Unfortunately, the clergy seems not to follow that verse, or any interpretation of that verse!
This bill is just as useless as a one legged horse! This was all about appearing to do something without actually doing anything! In a phrase: GODDAMM FUCKING POLITICAL THEATRE, and nothing more!
A one legged horse has potential as meat.
There's very little meat here.
Just a whole lot of gristle and accompanying hand-waving.
> "G any duly ordained minister of religion, as defined in K.S.A. 60-429..."
I don't know what that definition is but I wonder if it's a loophole for non-denominational preachers? Is Jim Bob, who preaches out of a storefront church, an "ordained" minister? How about other church officials...the secretary, the choir director, the youth group coordinator? They're not ordained ministers but they may have a vested interest in protecting the church leaders and fellow congregants rather than the children.
My thoughts also about the un-ordained ministers.
https://codes.findlaw.com/ks/chapter-60-procedure-civil/ks-st-sect-60-429.html
Rather lengthy but there’s this part:
“regular minister of religion” means one who as his or her customary vocation preaches and teaches the principles of religion of a church, a religious sect, or organization of which he or she is a member, without having been formally ordained as a minister of religion, and who is recognized by such church, sect, or organization as a regular minister; (3) the term “regular or duly ordained minister of religion” does not include a person who irregularly or incidentally preaches and teaches the principles of religion of a church, religious sect, or organization and does not include any person who may have been duly ordained a minister in accordance with the ceremonial, rite, or discipline of a church, religious sect or organization, but who does not regularly, as a vocation, teach and preach the principles of religion and administer the ordinances of public worship as embodied in the creed or principles of his or her church, sect, or organization;
FFS, I’m an ordained clergy of the Universal Life Church.