It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Vatican win: Judge says priests aren't employees

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 08:57 PM
link   

Vatican win: Judge says priests aren't employees


washingtonexaminer.com

The plaintiff tried to show that Ronan and all priests are employees of the Vatican, which is therefore liable for their actions.

Mosman made a previous decision strictly on legal theory and determined that, if all the factual assertions made by the plaintiff's lawyers in the case were true and applicable, then the Vatican would indeed employ Ronan. But on Monday, Mosman said he looked at the facts in the case and didn't find an employer-employee relationship.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 08:57 PM
link   
so yet again the "Holy See" gets to protect its financial interests - which is really what this was about - not victims can only sue "local" branches of the RCC, rather than the money-hungry church state!

It might have rested on a technicality in the law, but I think the last paragraph of the article sums it up:


"It's a shame that, once again, top Catholic officials successfully exploit legal technicalities to keep clergy sex crimes and cover ups covered up," Clohessy said. "The truth is that the Vatican oversees the church worldwide, insisting on secrecy in child sex cases and stopping or delaying the defrocking of pedophile priests."


washingtonexaminer.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 09:16 PM
link   
I am intrigued. If the Catholic Priests are not employees what are they? Do they receive payments of any type that could be viewed as wages? Do the priests have overseers or supervisors? Do the priests enter into a contract of any type that has a 'job' description?

The Catholic church are desperately trying to hang on - the fissures and cracks in their organisation are becoming more and more obvious. Psychopaths, sociopaths and narcissists NEVER take blame for their actions. The church is trying yet again to wriggle free from responsibility.

Too many people are awakened and can see the truth especially the inequities of the legal system.

Much Peace...



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 09:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 

Maybe that sinful 'karma' will work outside of the courts. Aren't they(Catholic church) losing memberships at a rapid pace?
I bet the victims and their families are livid.
Do the priests draw paychecks from the Vatican or a proxy?
Who do they ultimately answer to? Who set forth the laws and guidelines for priesthood?

Mosman said that if he accepted the plaintiff's argument that the Vatican maintains absolute control over all priests, and is therefore their employer, then all Catholics everywhere could similarly be considered employees of the Holy See.

I guess the key word is "absolute" control over priests.

It's a shame that, once again, top Catholic officials successfully exploit legal technicalities to keep clergy sex crimes and cover ups covered up

Wow, so a prosecutor could not exploit any loopholes like so many others do? Maybe they should call in some tax lawyers to give it a go.
edit on 20-8-2012 by speculativeoptimist because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 09:26 PM
link   
The church gets another pass on something?

What are the odds of that? I wonder, if the ever the SHTF, if the Vatican would open itself to the people, feed them and spend their coin to help rebuild the world?

What would the other major religions do?

Unfortunately, the reality is that faith is good business, it's very profitable.

And as we all know, the biggest businesses get the biggest perks.

~Tenth



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 09:29 PM
link   
Maybe... Someday....The Goivernment will get the point. Religion is a *NO GO* Zone. It isn't a 'go when you really really have to' and it's not a 'go when there is absolutely no other choice'. It is NO GO PERIOD. Can't redefine terms of Priests.... Can't force equal opportunity laws on internal workings of the Church after having them declared employees over this other issue for the lawyers.

Church = NO GO... EVER EVER.


Now... If that ever actually CHANGES.... Well... As much as some think the Catholic Church needs torn up and shaken to see what falls out......I feel EXACTLY the same way about the Mosques and Religious Schools funded by Saudi Arabia in particular.

I can't see them get shaken down and shaken out though...and I'm sure they're very happy for that. Nor can the Christian Churches get meddled with at every turn. If a Priest broke the law, fine... Prosecute him and throw the key away,,, Works for me



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 09:36 PM
link   
Unbelievable.

Okay, not employees...since there are no wages....but certainly they have a hierarchy...do something wrong and the Bishop will come down and ruin your parade. And, it used to be that you had to ask permission for certain things.......

The Church could have avoided all of these problems centuries ago...by allowing priests to be married.
Instead...

This is just horrible and does a huge injustice to the clergy out there who are NOT predators and to the remaining faithful who must wonder just what the Catholic PTB are thinking.



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 10:19 PM
link   
I S/F'ed the thread after coming back because something just occurred to me. I'm sure it occurred to the Church as well, but obviously priorities are what they are and arguing as strongly as they have against being called and termed something on one hand would have cost them everything in return.

By everything...the stakes here were a WHOLE lot higher than molester Priests and the victims. Goodness..What would declaring them employees done? What was the purpose here? 100% about lawsuits and cash. Oh.. I know.. for the victims and thats fair. Really.. but this was about backing the Vatican into a legal corner there was no way out from. Honest to God (no pun intended) lawsuits? Based on black letter law and legal precedent?

Umm.. Those mean discovery. ...and if your suing the Vatican and it's for an amount which could be argued represents a reasonable concern for their ability to meet ..or whatever theory a legal team wants to use...... Discovery, to the Vatican itself.....and record of assets.
The stakes on this could have been historical, with no overstatement, IMO.

Anyway... What they actually admitted here in all but word is what I've grown up hearing Catholics rail hard against ever being called.

The Catholic Church is the earliest and world's largest Franchise. I'll bet winning this case didn't make anyone in Rome the least bit happy with themselves... lol..



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 10:27 PM
link   
reply to post by DontTreadOnMe
 





The Church could have avoided all of these problems centuries ago...by allowing priests to be married.


really? Can you explain to why many married men prey on children for sex?..and I mean married men who are having sex on a continual basis with their partners.






edit on 20-8-2012 by WhisperingWinds because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-8-2012 by WhisperingWinds because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 11:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by WhisperingWinds
reply to post by DontTreadOnMe
 





The Church could have avoided all of these problems centuries ago...by allowing priests to be married.


really? Can you explain to why many married men prey on children for sex?..and I mean married men who are having sex on a continual basis with their partners.






edit on 20-8-2012 by WhisperingWinds because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-8-2012 by WhisperingWinds because: (no reason given)



"Many" men? Would that be like a "whole bunch"? Perhaps you could be a little more vague?

LIsten, there are sicko's in every group. You probably shook hands with a couple today. But, inarguably, the molesting of children by clergy would be far improved were RCC priests allowed to marry.



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 01:15 AM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 

I guess I'd have to agree with others in saying that Marriage or the lack of it has nothing to do with being a pedophile. As far as I have read and understand this by studies, it's a pretty valid illness. I say 'pretty valid' because some actually do believe child rapers can be rehab'ed. I disagree personally...

If Marriage is remotely related though, then what does that do for likelihood for a divorced person or just a guy who can't find that special someone? I say we just make sure those who are accused are investigated and tried, if appropriate. Send them into the system like any other pervert....but they were perverts before they became priests. I don't buy that being a priest or single created that defect in them. Just my two cents..


edit on 21-8-2012 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 01:28 AM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 





"Many" men? Would that be like a "whole bunch"? Perhaps you could be a little more vague?


what is vague about saying many ?

How many coaches who are married have been guilty of molesting young athletes they coach ?

How many married uncles, and grandpas have been guilty of molesting young children ?

Pedophilia has nothing to do with being married or not, and many..yes..many..(irregardless of how vague you may think that sounds) married people are guilty of this crime.




LIsten, there are sicko's in every group. You probably shook hands with a couple today. But, inarguably, the molesting of children by clergy would be far improved were RCC priests allowed to marry.


I totally disagree. Pedophile priests who would be allowed to marry, would only make victims out of their children.



edit on 21-8-2012 by WhisperingWinds because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 02:06 AM
link   
Some paedophiles get married purely as a 'front' for their Child molesting activities. It is the same for people who make their profession a 'front' for access to Children. It is a well established medical fact that many many many many paedophiles make it their mission to gain employment in education, policing, driving the school bus,becoming a school cleaner or gardener - they all have direct access to Children. Priests are no different.

The Vatican has been covering up for paedophile behaviour among the priesthood for as long as the church has been established. The Vatican made a huge mistake - not by covering up the paedophile behaviour but by not coming clean and seeing the guilty priests arrested by the same legal system as everyone else.

The lies and deceits of the Vatican are emerging and nothing on earth or in heaven can prevent the truth from becoming known. The Vatican like any other criminal can no longer hide behind their lies or pretence - the truth will catch up. Children are subject to the same laws as the non-clergy paedophiles so I see that Catholic clergy and any other clergy should be arrested, charged and subjected to the same legal system - that is supposed to protect the Children.

Much Peace...to all abused Children everywhere...



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 05:36 AM
link   
reply to post by WhisperingWinds
 


"Many" seems to be a S.W.A.G. (some wild ass guess). Yes, i can agree that "many" do....but if you are going to use it to refute someone's point It would seem that you have an onus to quantify "many" a little better than the vagueness. Perhaps I am wrong.
But as a married man who has no desire for anyone other than his wife, it seems somewhat insulting to me that we would just accept "many" as a quantifier. Why isn't it only "some" instead of "many"? Or how about "a portion"? What is your cutoff line? Or was it a word choice made to support your point without having to look up any data that actually supports it? Would it be any more proper to say "How come many black people molest children?" or "How come many white people can't jump?" While it may truly be innocent, it seems to imply that there is a propensity of married men to be child molesters.

Let me ask you.....how many prisoners do you think are really gay? I mean, there is no shortage of gay sex in prisons....how many are really gay? I would venture to say that "many" would be an overstatement. Yet they have gay sex.....

....because men, being sexual creatures, tend to enact their urges. If no woman is present, a man will do. Thus, I would posit that putting celibate men around people who are less sophisticated and more easily victimized (i.e., children) may not be the safest thing.

Unless you are a man, you may not understand the power of the male sexual urges. No, I do not make excuses for other men, as I believe our DUTY as humans is to learn to control the animal inside. I am just stating what I, having lived 40 years on this planet as a man, believe to be true.



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 05:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 

I guess I'd have to agree with others in saying that Marriage or the lack of it has nothing to do with being a pedophile. As far as I have read and understand this by studies, it's a pretty valid illness. I say 'pretty valid' because some actually do believe child rapers can be rehab'ed. I disagree personally...

If Marriage is remotely related though, then what does that do for likelihood for a divorced person or just a guy who can't find that special someone? I say we just make sure those who are accused are investigated and tried, if appropriate. Send them into the system like any other pervert....but they were perverts before they became priests. I don't buy that being a priest or single created that defect in them. Just my two cents..


edit on 21-8-2012 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)



I don't disagree that some are simply pedophiles that use their "job" as a way to enact their illness.

But I would also posit that it is equally likely that some are not. And, as I mentioned, prisons are a good example of why I believe this.

Men who are deprived of sex will often tend to sexualize just about anything. We could talk on and on about what causes the farmer who has sex with his sheep, or the prisoner that has gay sex while incarcerated, or even the teenager who is browsing anime and is turned on by one of the cartoons and fap's. Male sexual urges are just as likely to be a la minute as they are to be planned proclivities.



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 05:53 AM
link   
IMO (and it is just an O) is that he peculiar position priests are put in must screw them up (sic) - they are given almost unquestioned power by believers, they are lauded and looked to for guidance, they dispense sacraments - they forgive sins, they turn water and wine into a cannibal feats, they are supported by the parish, resolve disputes, get given room & board and want for little although they are not rich per se.

And then they also have to be celibate, cannot actually have any romantic relationships at all (over and above being celibate), don't date, don't get to party much, might be drunkards in british sitcoms and occasionally in real life but generally aren't allowed to practice any vices at all.....

So yeah - they have warped personalities ....even when they aren't pedo's, which most aren't of course - it's just a weird way of life - so they either go into it weird, or it makes them weird.



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 10:34 AM
link   
its all aboyut protecting the holy sees pocket book. think aboutb it in an affluent parish with say 2oo families if each family makes 200 grand and they give up 20 grand a year in tribute,tithe . that makes 4million then add in bake sales and other fund raisers the church does a parish like this might make up to 10 million a year no takes where does the bulk of this money go why to vatican banks of course. now when a local priest is accused of child rape they move him out of area to protect that local parrish and they will say that that branch has fallen on hard times and the money they were generating will disappear through creative bookkeeping to protect popes money. it really is disgraceful.



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 02:57 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 

Well, on this point...We really don't agree at all I'm afraid. You equate the rape of children to male prisoners finding sexual release in prison. Of course...those males you talk about in prison as somehow being an example to understand the child rapers.....would tear those perverts limb from limb and then beat them to death with the pieces they tore off them. Literally..and it's actually happened more than some would want to talk about at prisons around the nation.

You seem to be coming at this from a position of sexuality with children being a 'natural' (?) or at least predictable path of release for an otherwise healthy male human being that simply finds themselves with no OTHER outlet.

I come at this from the position of something being fundamentally defective and outright malfunctioning about the human brain that sees a child as a sexual object to take by force and rape. Priest or not? Doesn't matter... Sick is Sick is Sick...and this defines sickness at the most vile and base level.

So.... While you may see the monster of a baby/child raper being the product of circumstance, I see it as a pure failure of the physiology that makes us all tick and forms one man into an Einstein while another can barely tie their own shoelaces. The same differences, in my view, separate a healthy and normal human male from the two legged animals that would brutalize children in the worst imaginable way.

I don't think we'll ever see common ground on this issue, at any level. We're just starting from two positions TOO far apart and polar opposite in cause/effect.



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 04:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 

Well, on this point...We really don't agree at all I'm afraid. You equate the rape of children to male prisoners finding sexual release in prison. Of course...those males you talk about in prison as somehow being an example to understand the child rapers.....would tear those perverts limb from limb and then beat them to death with the pieces they tore off them. Literally..and it's actually happened more than some would want to talk about at prisons around the nation.

You seem to be coming at this from a position of sexuality with children being a 'natural' (?) or at least predictable path of release for an otherwise healthy male human being that simply finds themselves with no OTHER outlet.

I come at this from the position of something being fundamentally defective and outright malfunctioning about the human brain that sees a child as a sexual object to take by force and rape. Priest or not? Doesn't matter... Sick is Sick is Sick...and this defines sickness at the most vile and base level.

So.... While you may see the monster of a baby/child raper being the product of circumstance, I see it as a pure failure of the physiology that makes us all tick and forms one man into an Einstein while another can barely tie their own shoelaces. The same differences, in my view, separate a healthy and normal human male from the two legged animals that would brutalize children in the worst imaginable way.

I don't think we'll ever see common ground on this issue, at any level. We're just starting from two positions TOO far apart and polar opposite in cause/effect.



It is wholly predictable. Humans are animals. Animals act on desire.

Just like it is predictable that people with power hungry personalities will be drawn to political and law enforcement positions.

I don't see it as a monster of circumstance, either. I believe that it takes a warped worldview to want to be a priest.

If you would spend less time trying to mischaracterize what I am saying as being an excuse for child molesting, you may understand what I am saying. but judging from everything you ahve said, you seem not to. For example:

RE: the prison situation....the only parallel there is that it is a sexless "society". The human animal tends to act out and find that which is missing: sex. See the parallel or not....i am not going to continue to defend my viewpoint from your "for the children" mischaracterizations.



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 04:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
You seem to be coming at this from a position of sexuality with children being a 'natural' (?) or at least predictable path of release for an otherwise healthy male human being that simply finds themselves with no OTHER outlet.



As an example, the above is a mischaracterization. It is, in essence, putting words in my mouth. It is moving the discussion into an argument that was never there to begin with.

First, I never said "otherwise healthy males". Those are your words.

Next, I do not imply that there is "no other outlet".

Finally, I don't say it is "natural" in any form.

What I HAVE said is that a sexless society of priesthood certainly doesn't help. And the free access to young children (especially boys) along with the position of being above reproach as a priest, is the obvious perfect draw for the mentality of person who would exploit children. Matter of fact, the only other person that I can imagine being enticed by such a "job" would be the religiously fanatic. Neither of these seem to be healthy personalities.

I would pose that allowing marriage would at least put some kind of draw in place for people with the kinds of values that it takes to raise a family. Someone who fully understands what being human is all about. Someone who can empathise not because the bible says to, but because they ahve walked on those streets and have fought those fights. Truly experienced leaders worthy of leading a flock of spiritually thirsty parishioners.

Instead, we get a system that draws people who lack a large, large portion of perspective on the human condition by missing out on all romantic elements, including raising a family.




top topics



 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join