STATUE OF LIMITATIONS BILL IN MARYLAND

0 Kudo

Forum Jump

Author	Comment
Believer4	STATUE OF LIMITATIONS BILL IN MARYLAND		Lead	[-]
Posts: 537 02/03/09 18:48:50	Tags : None READ ENTIRE ARTICLE: http://www.catholicreview...dnew-new.aspx?action=5553 Bill would devastate parishes, schools and ministries B.S. UNLESS THERE'S A BUNCH OF GUILTY PRIESTS IN THE STATE. EACH CASE MUST BE WON ON IT'S OWN MERIT. MARYLAND The Catholic Review By George P. Matysek Jr. The Catholic Review A Senate bill that would lift the statute of limitations on child sexual abuse cases in Maryland would have a devastating impact on parishes, schools and ministries in the three dioceses serving the state, Catholic leaders said. Introduced by Sen. Delores Kelley, a Democrat representing Baltimore County, SB 238 would create a two-year window during which individuals claiming to be sexually abused as children could file civil suits against the perpetrator and private institutions such as dioceses, parishes and schools. The bill would allow multi-million-dollar civil lawsuits to be brought against Catholic dioceses, their parishes and schools for decades-old cases. The bill would also extend the age when claims could be filed from 25 to 50. "We reject the claim that this bill is about protecting children," said Sean Caine, director of communications for the Archdiocese of Baltimore. Mr. Caine noted that the bill contains no child protection measures to increase the awareness of child abuse, promote counseling, toughen criminal penalties or mandate background checks. Posted by Kathy Shaw at 4:30 PM Believer4 Dick Regan
Interact My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Invite Blocking Ignore User's Posts	Reply Quote
PegyJ		#1	[url]	[-]
Posts: 290 02/03/09 23:03:38	Sean Caine is right- lengthening state's statutes of limitations on childhood sexual abuse is not about protecting children - BUT the lengthening IS about giving justice to children that were NOT PROTECTED BY THE CHURCH (AND OTHERS), BUT SHOULD HAVE BEEN! Dick who do we need to contact in Maryland to get this bill passed?
Interact My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Invite Blocking Ignore User's Posts	Reply Quote
LiberteBelle		#2	[url]	[-]
Posts: 160 02/16/09 17:24:03	Sean Caine wrote of SB 238: "We reject the claim that this bill is about protecting children," said Sean Caine, director of communications for the Archdiocese of Baltimore. Mr. Caine noted that the bill contains no child protection measures to increase the awareness of child abuse, promote counseling, toughen criminal penalties or mandate background checks. Mr. Caine is wrong. The very act of trying to pass such a bill has already increased awareness of child abuse, by calling attention to cases that can't be prosecuted when statutes of limitation are in effect. This also has the effect of toughening criminal penalties when pedophilic priests can't elude prosecution by simply hiding out in other states or countries until particular statutes of limitations are behind them. Finally, the Church will only perform more stringent background checks when their liability insurance premium payments are threatened with escalation over having to pay out hefty settlements for having ordained and retained priests who are sexual addicts and perverts.
Interact My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Invite Blocking Ignore User's Posts	Reply Quote
Believer4	FOR YOUR INFORMATION.	#3	[url]	[-]
Posts: 540 02/16/09 19:16:41	Response To The Opposition Child Victims Act of New York You may hear the opposition say: This bill unfairly targets the Catholic church. This simply is not true. Please read the bill. It targets all predators, not just Catholic priest predators. You may hear the opposition say: Why make institutions pay today for something that happened decades ago? Because wrong-doing has consequences. And if there are no consequences, wrongdoing continues. You may hear the opposition say Catholics today shouldn't have to pay for past mistakes. But the truth is that they already have, long ago. For decades Catholics have unknowingly paid for defense lawyers and public relations firms and secret settlements and, most of all, for tons of insurance policies to cover abuse. They have also paid with the innocence of their young sons and daughters who were victimized. You may hear the opposition say: Other interest groups will want some kind of retroactive window. Look at California which has had the one-year window since 2003. It hasn't happened there. You may hear: Catholic officials boast about the numbers of volunteers and employees who have had background checks and been educated about child sexual abuse. But that is merely good business. Every institution that serves children does this and most started doing so decades ago. You may hear the opposition question: How can a dead accused molester defend himself? He doesn't have to. The burden is on the victim to prove the case. You may hear the opposition question Why should the church have to pay for an accuser who died long ago? Many victims are still suffering even if their perpetrator is dead. If the institution enabled the predator to abuse dozens of children it should be held accountable for its wrongdoing. The victims still need help and the enablers should be exposed and held accountable. You may hear the opposition say: Focus on the individual predators, not the employers. Because police go after BOTH the low-level street corner dealer AND the big supplier or king pin both the individuals and their enablers need to be held accountable. Pursuing those who hire and shield predators will deter others from similar recklessness. You may hear the opposition question: How will non-profits be able to get insurance? Again, look at California. No one has offered a shred of evidence suggesting that non-profits in California have experienced any financial burden as a result. You may hear the opposition say: This will break the church. Again, there is no evidence that it has in California or anywhere else. None. Challenge church Believer4 Dick Regan
Interact My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Invite Blocking Ignore User's Posts	Reply Quote
LiberteBelle		#4	[url]	[-]
Posts: 161 02/16/09 19:35:57	Thanks for posting "You may hear ..." Believer4 as it will prep me for hearing similar opposition when I initiate a bill to have New Mexico's state professional conduct codes amended to include clerics and religious counselors. As of right now, the professional conduct codes only cover psychotherapists, doctors, attorneys and other "helping professionals." In short: if a lay therapist counsels a couple having marital difficulties, and becomes sexually involved with the wife or husband in the course of counseling them, that therapist can have their professional license revoked and be sued. A couple counseled by a priest who becomes sexually involved with either of his counselees need only plea, "It was consensual sex" to elude repercussions. Nevermind that he's committing adultery ... Variations on what you posted, applicable to adult cases, will be lobbed at me as I seek to close the legal loophole in my state's codes. Mind if I borrow some of your responses?
Interact My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Invite Blocking Ignore User's Posts	Reply Quote
Believer4		#5	[url]	[-]
Posts: 541 02/16/09 21:01:16	LiberteBelle...use any part of it that will help your cause. And, good luck. Believer4 Dick Regan
Interact My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Invite Blocking Ignore User's Posts	Reply Quote
LiberteBelle		#6	[url]	[-]
Posts: 163 02/17/09 14:42:31	Thanks, Believer4. I'll keep you (all) posted on progress with my bill proposal. Some of the "You may hear ..." arguments amused as well as annoyed me. I have a friend who's dubbed me "Catholic basher" for initiating a bill that will actually apply to ALL clerics of all faiths. Or it never fails to amaze me how much egocentricity and hubris Catholics attach to the issue of clergy abuse -- as if it is uniquely their stigma and scandal. In fact, the biggest single settlement awarded, to date, to a clergy abuse victim involved a Mormon victim. The "You may hear ..." that virtually lept out at me was Catholics today shouldn't have to pay for past mistakes In that case: the late Pope John Paul should never have apologized for Inquisitional-era atrocities (among other things), because that could (and maybe should) open up the Church to lawsuits from descendants of people who were sadisticly tortured and executed as heretics and witches. In ancient times, the Church would seize all the property and goods of any accused heretic or witch, and only return it to surviving family members -- two generations removed from the accused! -- if they petitioned the Church for return and were granted a decision in their favor. Or the Nazis who stole valuable property from those they exterminated, had nothing on the Church in terms of ability to add insult to injury. Or, I wonder what would happen if today's Catholics found out they could, in theory, be faced with having to put the Vatican up for sale, because it was built, in part, on profits realized from executing people as witches and heretics and seizing the their estates? And what if the Church found itself compelled to track down all the descendants of those executed during The Inquisition and Crusades and pay them settlements? Last Edited By: LiberteBelle 02/17/09 14:56:26. Edited 1 time.
Interact My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Invite Blocking Ignore User's Posts	Reply Quote
PegyJ	Bills/laws just misunderstood	#7	[url]	[-]
Posts: 292 02/19/09 11:28:51	Hi LiberteBelle, Your 'friend' calling you a 'Catholic Basher' just goes to show that she or he really doesn't understand the bill that you are proposing. The bills and statutes that include clergy on the list of professionals that would hold clergy just as accountable as a teacher or a law enforcement officer when becoming sexually involved with those they serve is really doing the opposite of 'bashing'. These bills and statutes are attempting to uphold the sanctity, purity, integrity of what religion and clergy should be. Through these bills and laws we are making religions safer, and stronger for lay people by getting rid of the scum that give religions a bad name. Religion is getting a bad rap because of all of the indiscretions by clergy. I want to change that, and bring back righteousness to religion. That is what these laws will do - not 'bash' but bring together all the good that religion can be.
Interact My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Invite Blocking Ignore User's Posts	Reply Quote
LiberteBelle		#8	[url]	[-]
Posts: 164 02/19/09 15:07:48	Peggy, I couldn't agree with you more! Though it seems so hard to get some people to see that we're really trying to restore churches to what they're intended to be -- especially in terms of being able to trust church leaders to actually be the men (or women) of God, they all profess to be! Like you and all the other people on this board, I was taught moral values by the very people whose actual behavior, in some cases, seems to be a living contradiction of everything they allegedly hold to be sacred, above all! Ironically, the friend who refers to me as a "Catholic basher" has also privately thanked me for being an advocate. One of her cousins entered a seminary a few years ago, and before he did she quietly admitted, "Maybe he'll be 'safer' now, because of the efforts of people like you (me)." So, I'm still trying to make sense of why she feels compelled, at the public level, to declare me a "Catholic basher." Too afraid, I guess, to let others know that she actually agrees with a lot of what I'm doing and openly support me. I can't help but think there are an awful lot of other Catholics out there like her, who simply don't have the guts to openly oppose what's wrong with the Church, while otherwise content to let people like you and me take the flack for doing what needs to be done. Last Edited By: LiberteBelle 02/19/09 15:11:32. Edited 1 time.
Interact My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Invite Blocking Ignore User's Posts	Reply Quote

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Add Reply

Yuku free message boards

STATUE OF LIMITATIONS BILL IN MARYLAND

STATUE OF LIMITATIONS BILL IN MARYLAND

Quick Reply