The truly disturbing aspect of the Catholic Church's child rape scandal has been the fact that the bishops and others in high authority have escaped criminal prosecution for covering up the crimes.

 

In most cases that I've come across (and I have had a direct hand in some cases) the bishops were dead, or at very least wasting away in nursing homes. There are many people who claim that "others in high authority" have known about the scandal and have had a hand in covering it up, but for the most part, that has just been plain untrue.

In most cases that I've come across (and I have had a direct hand in some cases) the bishops were dead, or at very least wasting away in nursing homes. There are many people who claim that "others in high authority" have known about the scandal and have had a hand in covering it up, but for the most part, that has just been plain untrue.

I don't buy the too-infirm-to-prosecute argument. Why hasn't Roger Mahoney, the former L.A. archbishop, been charged with a crime? Church records ordered released within the past couple months revealed that Mahoney plotted to conceal child molestation by priests from law enforcement. Why isn't he in the hoosegow right now awaiting trial? Why was the bishop of K.C. only charged with a misdemeanor for failing to report child porn on a priest's computer?

^Maybe I'm wrong on this, but is failing to report it a more serious crime than a misdemeanor? I don't know the answer to that, just asking the question. I do agree with you on the "too infirm to prosecute" aspect though.

I don't buy the too-infirm-to-prosecute argument. Why hasn't Roger Mahoney, the former L.A. archbishop, been charged with a crime? Church records ordered released within the past couple months revealed that Mahoney plotted to conceal child molestation by priests from law enforcement. Why isn't he in the hoosegow right now awaiting trial? Why was the bishop of K.C. only charged with a misdemeanor for failing to report child porn on a priest's computer?

 

I would tend to agree with you regarding the too-infirm issue, but it's not my call to make, and I can't answer specifically for the Cardinal Mahoney case or the Bishop Finn in Kansas City. The Catholic Church simply cannot bring legal charges against anyone, though. It is not something they are able to do. However, Mahoney was permanently removed from any and all duties within the Catholic Church. As for Bishop Finn, I cannot personally say what recourse should be taken for his failure to report the priest, but that's not my call. Legally, again, that is the legal authorities' responsibility to make. As for his duties within the Church go, Finn's position as an individual with a permanent vocation to the Church is slightly different from someone who is simply an employee of a company, but logic tells me that the Church should be reviewing his case to see whether or not he needs to be removed from his office.

So what is your moral reason for opposing abortion?

 

The final result of not having an abortion.

Who's not willing?

 

I've asked on here before and most who said they were against abortion and even considered it the equivalent of murder would NOT support sentencing the mother like a traditional murderer. I believe I would find the same with a "man on the street" survey.

I am pro-life from the moral sense but, as I've stated numerous times on here, I can't support a law that jails a woman for having an abortion. I'd tell them not to have the abortion and consider other options but I'm not going to suggest they should go to jail.

 

I also disagree with the Church's view on gay marriage.

 

Not 100% sure convinced one way or the other on female priests.

 

I don't look at birth control as evil.

 

In other words, I'm Catholic.

 

Another problem I have with pro-choice argument. Would I send a mother to jail for knowingly killing her child. So your asking me should we send someone to jail who knowingly broke a law and ended another life? My answer is a firm yes. No problem. Murder is murder.

Another problem I have with pro-choice argument. Would I send a mother to jail for knowingly killing her child. So your asking me should we send someone to jail who knowingly broke a law and ended another life? My answer is a firm yes. No problem. Murder is murder.

 

I appreciate your opinion. We disagree.

The final result of not having an abortion.

 

I don't follow.

I appreciate your opinion. We disagree.

 

I'm confused on what your moral issue is with abortion? Do you believe it to be murder? If so why would you struggle to prosecute the criminal. If you do not believe it is murder then what is the moral dilemma?

I'm confused on what your moral issue is with abortion? Do you believe it to be murder? If so why would you struggle to prosecute the criminal. If you do not believe it is murder then what is the moral dilemma?

 

I do not equate aborting a one-month or two-month fetus with killing a breathing human being. Simple as that.

I don't follow.

 

I am against eliminating the chance for a child to enter this world.

 

No, I do not equate that to murder.

I am against eliminating the chance for a child to enter this world.

 

No, I do not equate that to murder.

 

Okay. Thanks for clarifying.

I've asked on here before and most who said they were against abortion and even considered it the equivalent of murder would NOT support sentencing the mother like a traditional murderer. I believe I would find the same with a "man on the street" survey.

 

If Roe v Wade is ever overturned I'd be for punishing the mother in the event she was caught with a coathanger as gruesome as it may be, or a physician performing them illegally. Should the penalty be the same? I doubt it. However, like every crime on the book, the punishment should fit it. I imagine that there would be heated debate over the appropriate punishment if it were made illegal at some point.

I am against eliminating the chance for a child to enter this world.

 

No, I do not equate that to murder.

 

When do you start to value a child as a human being?