208 Comments
User's avatar
wreck's avatar

"With this law, the State of Washington is specifically targeting religious conduct by inserting the government into the Catholic tradition"

If your tradition is abetting criminal behavior (and it most certainly is), somebody needs to step in. So fuck all the way off.

Expand full comment
Troublesh00ter's avatar

"With this law, the State of Washington is specifically targeting religious conduct by inserting the government into the Catholic tradition..."

Actually, what they're doing is insisting that the Catholic Church behave in a responsible fashion as regards the abuse of children. The fact remains that abuse of children by the hands of Catholic priests continues to this day, and if the officials of the Catholic Church cannot bring themselves in line with the law, there should be consequences for their failure.

It is long past time the Catholic Church was called on the carpet for behavior which, anywhere else, would not just instantly be castigated, but brought before the bar of justice.

Expand full comment
Joe King's avatar

"With this law, the State of Washington is specifically targeting people who have a vested interest in hiding pedophiles from prosecution." Fixed it. Someone needs to ask AAG Dhillon, on the record, why she is so intent on preventing child abusers from being prosecuted.

(Edit: correcting gender for AAG Dhillon)

Expand full comment
Jarred Harris's avatar

>> One of the only voices arguing against the no-compromise bill was Bishop Frank Schuster of the Archdiocese of Seattle, who said, predictably, that it would be “impossible for a priest to comply with this bill” because “the penalty for breaking that seal [of confession] is excommunication.”

In such a case, if that priest were half the Christian Huckleberry "Fine! I'll go to hell then!" Finn was, he'd proudly accept excommunication.

There should be around the clock ads naming the people who oppose this bill with a simple message: "These people value religious (some) traditions more than protecting children." And they should point out the silence and complicity of all those transphobes that are oh so "concerned" about "groomers."

"Some" because that's the other thing: They already want to decide which religions and religious traditions are valid and deserve protection. (See for example, the number of people who say the laws shouldn't protect Satanists who want to exercise their rights.)

Expand full comment
Troublesh00ter's avatar

This continues the great Catholic tradition of being in it but not of it, never mind talking out of both sides of their mouth about child abuse at the same time. I'm still waiting for someone to hold the Catholic Church's feet to the fire and get them to understand that their church and its dogma do not exist in a vacuum.

Expand full comment
Joan the Dork's avatar

Sam Singleton: Atheist Evangelist had a great little "sermon" about Huck Finn, back in the day. It doesn't seem to be on youtube anymore, though (not surprising; the most recent video remaining on his channel is ten years old). I think it was called "What a friend we have in Huckleberry" or something like that.

I miss that act; he was funny.

Expand full comment
Jarred Harris's avatar

I would have loved to watch that.

Christian blogger Fred Clark has talked about the scene from the book multiple times and how it's a better representation of Jesus's message than you've find in most white evangelical churches. I think we can say it's better than what you'll get in most (American) Catholic churches as well.

Expand full comment
Black Hole and DM mourner's avatar

Remember that it's the same catholic church, that excommunicated doctors abd the mother of a little girl for providing the latter with an abortion to safe her life, but not her stepfather who raped her since she was 6.

Expand full comment
Stephen Brady's avatar

It is not at all surprising that the religious are tying themselves into ethical pretzels... They have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo - the kiddies be damned. Where it will get interesting is in the courts. The Bondo Bimbo has decimated the Civil Rights Division. Just who will conduct the investigation? She will probably just tell them/order them what their findings will be. However, when this wends its way to the SCOTUS, 6 of the Supremes are RCC fans.

Expand full comment
Claudia's avatar

That's a horrible case!

Expand full comment
Maltnothops's avatar

As in, the movie?

If so……

“Brazil” came into the theaters almost immediately after I sublet a bedroom from a young couple. I saw it. They asked me what I thought. I raved about how great it was. The next evening they went to see it. Afterwards they returned, looked at me kinda funny, and the woman asked, with a certain odd tone in her voice, what EXACTLY I liked about that movie.

They did not kick me out and we became friends. The woman even went jogging with me thru otherwise deserted woods without fearing for her life.

Expand full comment
NOGODZ20's avatar

From the mind of Terry Gilliam. Can't go wrong with TG.

Expand full comment
Val Uptuous NotAgain's avatar

I’m tired. Tired of this same fight over and over again. The RCC, as well as all the other sects of Christianity or religions, has a chronic institutional problem with child molestation and abuse. Some religions, LDS for example, built its foundation on raping children (it’s okay though, they were girls and the church only wanted to build big strong families). So, of course they will fight tooth and nail to avoid accountability and attempts to end the abuse.

But what do I know? I’m just a lapsed catholic woman, I don’t have mental capacity to understand the machinations of God and the church.

Expand full comment
NOGODZ20's avatar

And it's not just Christianity. The Jewish and Muslim faiths have their share of sexual offenses against the young. Even Buddhist monks have engaged repeatedly in child molestation.

Religion is inherently broken.

Expand full comment
Troublesh00ter's avatar

Actually, you don't just have the mental capacity. You have something of considerable value which those who continue to accost and rape kids don't have.

Empathy.

Expand full comment
NOGODZ20's avatar

Surprised that Bildo hasn't gone nuclear over this law...yet.

Wake up and smell the incense, protectors of sexual predators. You are NOT the good guys and never have been. You are ogres enabling ogres.

Expand full comment
Joe King's avatar

His fax machine must be broken.

Expand full comment
NOGODZ20's avatar

He's certainly broken.

Expand full comment
Fran's avatar

Of course Trump would support other abusers. Birds of a feather…..

Expand full comment
Larry Desmond's avatar

And his attitudes toward females is that of a sexual predator. Funny that female republican Trumites don't object to his past revolting behaviours and haven't tied them with his campaign threat at Green Bay, Wisconsin, to protect women whether they want it or not - that is the language of a rapist. FYI - Trump showing what he is, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSC8Q-kR44o&pp=0gcJCdgAo7VqN5tD

Expand full comment
NOGODZ20's avatar

Read this story in this morning's Seattle Times.

Trump's DoJ is launching a civil rights investigation? Oh, NOW they care about civil rights?

I guess the only rights that the alleged pro-life crowd show any concern for are fetuses in women/girls wombs. Once outside the womb, they're fair game for predators (sexual and otherwise) and those who want to protect predators (sexual and otherwise).

Expand full comment
Joe King's avatar

The cruelty is the point. Provide life saving medical care to a woman who desperately needs it? Arrest them! Lock them up in a foreign torture prison! Abuse children? No prosecution for you, religious freedom means we don't have to report it.

Expand full comment
NOGODZ20's avatar

Nothing says "pro-life" quite like "Screw the kids!" (in more ways than one).

Expand full comment
Len Koz's avatar

"When Jesus said 'Suffer the little children come unto me', that's not what he was talking about!" - George Carlin

Expand full comment
Val Uptuous NotAgain's avatar

Confession is a religious sacrament when child abuse is the subject. But when it provides information for blackmail or financial gain, the secrecy is just a suggestion.

The RCC has a long history of blackmailing political leaders with information gleaned from confession when it was expedient for them.

Whatever, no matter how loudly they bleat on about being a moral authority, the RCC (and the rest of the religious world) have the weakest moral compass.

Expand full comment
Joan the Dork's avatar

They've also tried to claim now that fetuses aren't people if (and only if) a wholly-owned subsidiary of the RCC gets sued for killing one. There is no depth of hypocrisy that plague of an institution won't plumb.

Expand full comment
Val Uptuous NotAgain's avatar

It’s a person if it keeps the women oppressed, but it’s not when it might negatively affect the church. Or a man.

Expand full comment
Joe King's avatar

𝑇ℎ𝑒 𝐶𝑖𝑣𝑖𝑙 𝑅𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡𝑠 𝐷𝑖𝑣𝑖𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑤𝑖𝑙𝑙 𝑖𝑛𝑣𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑔𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑎𝑝𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑓𝑙𝑖𝑐𝑡 𝑏𝑒𝑡𝑤𝑒𝑒𝑛 𝑊𝑎𝑠ℎ𝑖𝑛𝑔𝑡𝑜𝑛 𝑆𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑒’𝑠 𝑛𝑒𝑤 𝑙𝑎𝑤 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑓𝑟𝑒𝑒 𝑒𝑥𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑖𝑠𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑟𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑔𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑢𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑟 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝐹𝑖𝑟𝑠𝑡 𝐴𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡, 𝑎 𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑠𝑡𝑜𝑛𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑈𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑆𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑠 𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑡𝑢𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛.

“𝑆𝐵 5375 𝑑𝑒𝑚𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝐶𝑎𝑡ℎ𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑐 𝑃𝑟𝑖𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑠 𝑣𝑖𝑜𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑖𝑟 𝑑𝑒𝑒𝑝𝑙𝑦 ℎ𝑒𝑙𝑑 𝑓𝑎𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝑖𝑛 𝑜𝑟𝑑𝑒𝑟 𝑡𝑜 𝑜𝑏𝑒𝑦 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑙𝑎𝑤, 𝑎 𝑣𝑖𝑜𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑡𝑢𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑎 𝑏𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑐ℎ 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑓𝑟𝑒𝑒 𝑒𝑥𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑖𝑠𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑟𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑔𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑐𝑎𝑛𝑛𝑜𝑡 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑢𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑢𝑟 𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑡𝑢𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑠𝑦𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑚 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑛𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡,” 𝑠𝑎𝑖𝑑 𝐴𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑡 𝐴𝑡𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑛𝑒𝑦 𝐺𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑙 𝐻𝑎𝑟𝑚𝑒𝑒𝑡 𝐾. 𝐷ℎ𝑖𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝐽𝑢𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑒 𝐷𝑒𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑡𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡’𝑠 𝐶𝑖𝑣𝑖𝑙 𝑅𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡𝑠 𝐷𝑖𝑣𝑖𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛.

Christian Nazionalists currently in power are demanding that the Free Exercise clause reign supreme over any other law. They are Free Exercise absolutists -- when it comes to Christianity. They do not care how much harm it may cause. They do not care how many teens will end their own lives from the religion imposed shame of something they should never have to endure.

Assistant AG Dhillon: Are you unaware of the fact that the government is allowed to impose restrictions on the Free Exercise clause if there is a compelling government interest? Not only does case law support that, the Establishment Clause, immediately preceding the Free Exercise Clause, demands that. It is why it did not violate the First Amendment for the US to demand that the LDS church give up polygyny before Utah was admitted to the union. Are you going to release Warren Jeffs from prison? He is guilty of the same sort of thing these priests you so desperately want to protect have done. He was also freely exercising his beliefs the way you think the Washington state priests are.

What about other religious practices that are prohibited? Will you make sure that no indigenous person is prosecuted for possesion of peyote? Will you allow Santeria priests to ignore animal cruelty laws when sacrificing? I suspect not. You only want to protect the power of the conservative white evangelical/Catholic coalition that placed you where you are. The real goal of Trump's DOJ is not protecting religious freedom, but protecting Christian Fucking Privilege.

Expand full comment
Joe King's avatar

The votes in the Washington legislature:

All the Democrats and these two Republicans (Connors (R-8), Couture (R-35)), voted yea in the house. Three House Republicans and one Senate Republican did not vote.

Voting Nay: Representatives Abbarno (R-20), Abell (R-7), Barkis (R-2), Barnard (R-8), Burnett (R-12), Chase (R-4), Corry (R-15), Dent (R-13), Dufault (R-15), Dye (R-9), Engell (R-7), Eslick (R-39), Graham (R-6), Jacobsen (R-25), Keaton (R-25), Klicker (R-16), Ley (R-18), Low (R-39), Manjarrez (R-14), Marshall (R-2), McClintock (R-18), Orcutt (R-20), Schmick (R-9), Schmidt (R-4), Steele (R-12)

Voting Nay: Senators Boehnke (R-8), Braun (R-20), Christian (R-4), Dozier (R-16), Fortunato (R-31), Gildon (R-25), Goehner (R-12), Harris (R-17), Hasegawa (D-11), Kauffman (D-47), King (R-14), MacEwen (R-35), McCune (R-2), Muzzall (R-10), Schoesler (R-9), Short (R-7), Torres (R-15), Wagoner (R-39), Warnick (R-13), Wilson, J. (R-19)

All of you who voted nay: How Dare You! You voted to actively prevent the prosecution of child rapists. You should be hanging your heads in shame and resigning your offices instead of (likely) campaigning on this, calling it protecting religious liberty. You are now complicit in the abuse of children. For Shame!

Expand full comment
NOGODZ20's avatar

To the two Democrats who joined Rethuglikkkans and voted nay: WTF is wrong with you?

Expand full comment
cdbunch's avatar

Asleep and didn't realize what they were voting for? Wanted something even more severe?

Well paid for their votes?

I know which I think more likely.

Expand full comment
Black Hole and DM mourner's avatar

Someone should check the skeletons in their closet.

Expand full comment
Guerillasurgeon's avatar

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvEk3LXYUds

I'm a bit late posting this, but I had to order a new credit card/debit card. Something which the young lady on the end of the phone was very patient with.

Expand full comment
Black Hole and DM mourner's avatar

"I will est and drink while I think about what I will eat"

"Le poisson est moelleux mais a un goût de poisspn" 🤣

No broccoli, I feel cheated.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment deleted
2d
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
Guerillasurgeon's avatar

Well George Bush certainly wouldn't be queueing up would he? Funnily enough, it's pretty much the only green vegetable my son will eat. In any recognisable Quantities anyway.

Expand full comment
Black Hole and DM mourner's avatar

I would have gone there every day with Rhaps.

Expand full comment
NOGODZ20's avatar

Unfortunately, I had to delete the link because it was only good for 24 hours and has now changed.

Expand full comment
Kay-El's avatar

No religion should be exempt from mandatory reporting on child abuse. Period. If you need a detailed explanation on why, you’re part of the problem. If you don’t agree with this law (which should be in all 50 states), you’re even a bigger problem.

Expand full comment
Jane in NC's avatar

This whole argument boils down to the catholic church arguing for special rights under state law, not available to everyone else, because of the alleged 'sanctity of the confessional.' A sanctity, BTW, that's been abused for decades as priests have covered up for other priests and lay people who go to confession to relieve their guilt, rather than facing law enforcement and actual punishment. And, FTR, as a recovering catholic, I was always taught that for absolution to be granted, a penitent had to confess, repent, and swear before god never to repeat the sin. But we KNOW that child sexual abusers are the group of criminals with the highest recidivism rate. So confession and absolution mean exactly nothing.

We should also note that other privileged communications are not absolute - even the attorney-client privilege is subject to the crime-fraud exception. Same should apply here. This is a crime exception.

The church's hyperbolic reaction to this law is way out of line with what the law actually requires. And, frankly, the Trump DOJ jumping in here to side with the catholics reeks of damage control after Trump flaunted the Vatican dress code request at the late pope's funeral, as well as the posts he put up on his dime store social media site of himself dressed as the new pope. Neither the catholic church not the Trump administration are good faith actors in this case. What a shock, eh?

Expand full comment
larry parker's avatar

"According to BishopAccountability, the Catholic Church has paid over $4 billion in claims and settlements through over 8,600 cases. That number is likely to continue to grow by another $4 billion and 5,000 new cases, per the Associated Press."

I didn't see a date, but I think this is several years old.

Expand full comment
Troublesh00ter's avatar

I have to make this point again. Yeah, the Church is out billions ... but HOW MANY PRIESTS HAVE ACTUALLY GONE TO JAIL???

I will insist with my dying breath that, until the RCC pays a PERSONAL PRICE for their behavior, this will just keep on happening.

Expand full comment
NOGODZ20's avatar

For the most part, those priests always seem to die w/o ever being held accountable for their monstrous violations of children's bodies and minds. Bet they die peacefully and with a smile on their lips over all the young flesh they corrupted.

Expand full comment
Troublesh00ter's avatar

Too true. They use their position and authority, first to groom, then to threaten, in order to keep the secret of their perfidy.

I SO want to see them – ALL of them – get the punishment they so rightfully deserve.

Expand full comment
Black Hole and DM mourner's avatar

One, in Australia, until a judge gift him with a free out if jail card. I am not sure barbarin* even saw the inside of a cell.

* Not in mood to google anything about this rape apologist.

Expand full comment
ericc's avatar
2dEdited

I'm frankly more concerned with the directors than the confessors. Very much like a drug cartel, cut the little fish breaks to get the big fish.

IOW, when a priest hears a child molester give confession and doesn't report because his bishop orders him not to, cut a deal with the priest to testify so you can prosecute and jail the bishop. The government probably only needs to jail a few bishops before they stop ordering the regular priests to disobey the law. At that point I expect the priests themselves will start obeying the mandatory reporting laws, because they no longer fear losing their job for doing so.

Expand full comment
Troublesh00ter's avatar

Good concept. Question becomes: can it work in practice? I'd LOVE to see someone at least TRY.

Expand full comment
ericc's avatar

I'm fairly confident it would work. It's the whole 'obedience to authority' thing; there are few truly bad people, but many normal people who will follow bad orders if the order comes from someone they recognize as a legit authority over them. So you need to get rid of the bad authority figures, not the normal people.

Expand full comment
Walt Svirsky's avatar

So, Mom and Dad, when that collection plate comes your way, double up on your tithe. Gotta pay those bills!

Expand full comment
Jarred's avatar

And to think, that $4 billion could have went to other causes, like building housing for the homeless, providing food for nutrient insecure people, or paying for the tuition of students at private religious-based schools connected to the RCC. Actual works of charity as Jesus stated.

Expand full comment
Daniel Rotter's avatar

The Venn diagram between people who believe Democrats/liberals are "soft on crime" and people who believe it's better for a priest to shield a child abuser than to be an excommunicated FORMER priest (for reporting the confessor for the aforementioned crime) has got to be a rather large one.

Expand full comment
Joan the Dork's avatar

It's just a circle, at this point.

Expand full comment