"Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties. Truth was never put to the worse in a free and open encounter..."
~ Milton
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
~Benjamin Franklin

A Fistful of Euros
Andrew Tobias
Angry Liberal
Bad Attitudes
Common Dreams
Informed Comment
Madelaine Kane
Obsidian Wings
Off the Kuff
Sarah Kendzior
War and Piece
Washington Monthly

The Emerging Democratic Majority (Judis & Teixeira)
Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them (Franken)
Rush Limbaugh Is A Big Fat Idiot (Franken)
The True Believer (Hoffer)
Still Being Bushwhacked

All Book Reviews
Race, Gender, and Sexuality
It's always "us" vs "them"
Women's March on (fill in your location)
Children learn what their parents teach them.
You Got My Support. But.
Even Endangered Penguins Do It

All Race, Gender, and Sexuality
Campaigns and Voting
Where do we go from here?
It's always "us" vs "them"
Some interpretations
On and on I go
Just appalled

All Campaigns and Voting
Lecture Circuit
It Was 40 Years Ago Today
July 2, 1964
May 14-15, 1970
The Erotica of Bare Knees

All Lecture Circuit
The Liberal Media, At It Again
Fairly UNbalanced
What's this?

All Media
Big Brother
Shoulda' Guessed
Where did my country go?
You know what you never thought you'd read?
Not in his name
Sleight of Hand

All Big Brother
World O'Blog
It's Vocabulary Time!
They wrote it
Mighty-fine blogging
Other People Said....

All World O'Blog
Aimless Ranting
It's always "us" vs "them"
So, I'm thinking with half my brain
Do You Know Peter?
Long, Little Privacy Rant
My Takeaway

All Aimless Ranting
February 05, 2017 - February 11, 2017
January 22, 2017 - January 28, 2017
January 15, 2017 - January 21, 2017
November 13, 2016 - November 19, 2016
October 09, 2016 - October 15, 2016

All Weekly Archives

Open Secrets
Political Wire Exit Polls
Polling Report

American Research Group
Center for Democracy and Technology
Center for Public Integrity
Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
Congressional Report Cards
Death Row Roll Call
Democracy Now
Economic Policy Institute
FairVote Colorado
Foreign Policy In Focus
Global Exchange
Human Rights Watch
Independent Judiciary
Institute on Money in State Politics
Institute for Public Accuracy
Lying in ponds
Media Reform
Media Transparency
Move On
One World
Open Democracy
Pew Research Center
Project Censored
Public Citizen Health Research Group
Stockholm International Peace Research Institute
Take Back The Media
The Urban Institute
WHO Outbreak News

Peevish for PDA

Blog Directory


Powered by Movable Type

Site Design by Sekimori

All content © 2002-2005 Anne Zook

May 28, 2004

One of the wars in Sudan is the subject of a peace agreement, leaving the country only the second war to worry about.

On the other hand, in Somalia, things seem to be heating up again.

More about the floods in the Caribbean.

The Vatican sends another signal about its position on sexually abusing children and the clergy and that signal is "not that big of a deal". How else can you explain a man forced to resign in disgrace over having helped protect pedophiles being reassigned to a "prestigious church post in Rome"?

I still don't understand why people aren't in jail over this. Is there some law that says you can't put criminals in jail if they're clergymen? I'm pretty sure "separation of church and state" didn't mean church members weren't bound by the law.

As someone who used to post frequently with "trembling fingers" I found this interesting, but it's worth reading for other reasons, like the following quote:

"A lot of so-called conservatives today don't know what the word means," Barry Goldwater said in 1994, when the current cult of right-wing radicals and "neocons" had begun to define and assert themselves.

For the joggers among you, read Jogging in the twilight zone, about a runner taking his first job through Baghdad's Green Zone.

Posted by AnneZook at 07:15 AM


Actually, a long, long time ago, separation of church and state did mean that you couldn't put churchmen in jail: http://hnn.us/articles/1692.html. It doesn't necessarily mean that anymore, though there is quite a bit of resistance to the thorough investigation and prosecution of priests.

Posted by: Jonathan Dresner at May 28, 2004 11:57 AM

You know, right after I posted that, I thought I remembered that there was some kind of clerical protection issue that colonists brought over originally from Europe.

But I think it's time and past time that it was put to rest. A criminal is a criminal, even if they wear their collar backward.

Posted by: Anne at May 28, 2004 12:10 PM

I agree, though confessional confidentiality is still worth preserving, within the current limits.

The problem is that members of a church are often unwilling to press charges against it, allowing it to be handled internally. Then they find out nothing was done, and different lawyers get involved.....

Posted by: Jonathan Dresner at May 28, 2004 02:34 PM

I'm not sure I agree about the confidentiality thing.

If you commit a crime and confess it to a psychiatrist or doctor (or if you confess you're about to commit one), aren't they required to report you? I don't see why archaic practices of religious orders should be treated differently than that.

If someone has a long history of child abuse and I know about it and help them cover it up, then I'm liable as an accessory after the fact. As as an accessory before the fact when I put them in a position to commit the same crime again and again.

I'm not religious, okay? In spite of my rants on the subject, I don't really care if other people are religious (as long as they don't use it to persecute me or others), but there are things I do object to and being able to use religion to shield yourself and other criminals from prosecution is one of them.

Posted by: Anne at May 28, 2004 03:34 PM

Technically, I think they are only required to report an imminent crime, not a past one: nothing they can do about the past, the theory goes, but they have an obligation to prevent further harm to another. And yes, I think serial child abuse qualifies, and the Roman Catholic Church has been hiding behind technicalities for too long.

Posted by: Jonathan Dresner at May 28, 2004 11:07 PM