[quote]smh_23 wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]smh_23 wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
I’m not anti-Catholic either. I’m anti overreacting to isolated cases of events [/quote]
This, Sloth. It could have been any case of abuse. The point was about the weakness of instantial evidence, not about the Catholic Church.
*However, as an aside, it is the covering up, rather than the abuse itself, that puts the Church in something of its category. How many examples can we find of a teacher abusing a kid and then simply being transferred by the principle to a different school?[/quote]
Glad you asked, I just posted concerning this.
Now ask yourself, how has this not been impressed upon the public? A public whose children are far likelier to be found in a public school than a Catholic institution…
Easy. Either the media–almost as a whole, apparently–is made of negligent twits. Or, a bit of willful narrow-sightedness. Not much else explains it.
[/quote]
Yep, and your argument is well-cited and accepted by me. [For the record, I wasn’t making an argument I can support with evidence–I don’t follow the issue at all closely. Rather, I was commenting on the perception. More on that in a second.]
However, there are some distinctions. A superintendent failing to “follow up to ensure that molesting teachers did not continue teaching elsewhere” is not necessarily–as in, not in every conceivable case–as egregious as an up-hierarchy, intentional shuffle-around. i would have to look further into each case in order to comment further. Why accept retirements and resignations, also? Less noise.
Also, numbers are important, and it would be interesting to see, if possible, the numbers side by side–specifically related to intentional high-authority coverups. If the numbers were comparable, your point would be flawless. If the Church’s numbers were worse, you would still have a good point, but the prevailing perception would also be afforded some measure of vindication. [I am not saying that these numbers exist or can necessarily be collected.]
As for the media, well, it isn’t a coincidence that you linked to one of the good papers. An even more important point is this: fair or not, news takes much of its value from the old “dog bites man, man bites dog” adage. Because priests are generally considered to be highly moral people–morality being more central to their profession than it is to just about any other–there is more “man bites dog” value to the story.[/quote]
I’m really not angry with anybody here. I don’t blame the perception on victims, or the lay public itself.
I would disagree with one thing here, and question the soundness of another.
-
The not-following up bit I would absolutely classify as shuffling/passing the trash. Where is the police report? Where is the mark on his record during a background check? It’s clearly a case of “he/she isn’t my problem anymore” to me. “I did all (and only, if not less) than what was required of me.”
-
First, you called into question the fairness of it, so this isn’t directed at you. Why would anyone be more concerned if the molester was clergy, or a teacher? As if almost to say, “well, yeah, I mean, you have to expect that with teachers.” If the attitude is something of that nature, then you know you’re putting a bigger problem on the back-burner.
I can only speak for my Diocese, but every Sunday the bulletin reminds parents to contact a group made up of clergy AND laity that do nothing else but deal with this issue now. If there are ANY concerns, suspicions, contact them. Every Sunday. I can not begin to guess how many times the Priest has led us through prayer, asking for forgiveness (as a community of people) on this issue. For comfort for the victims. While put delicately, and not directly, this is done with children in attendance.
How many parents receive a weekly reminder in writing from their public school system? How many times in a year has the principle used school time to address this issue? Even if it didn’t happen in his or her school, specifically. There are very heavy hearts over this issue in the Church. And there should be, it’ll keep us more vigilant. That’s not my issue. It’s the bias outside, and the sort of ‘weaponizing’ of the issue that chaps my hide.
And none of this is even meant to throw mud on a noble vocation, the teacher. Let me repeat, my posts aren’t meant to make evangelical clergy, or teachers, the replacement butt of child-molestation jokes. I would rather we live with it than wish it on someone else. Few taunts legitmately hurt me. This is one of them. It’s a horrible thing to be made fun of about. Heart-breaking.
If the protection of all children should come first (flat out agree), and the issue is; ignored, pushed back, manipulated through negligence or deliberation…By an institution or institutions, what does the make the media, generally speaking, guilty of?