Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
AKA Smith
Published Letters: 6540 Editor's Choice: 93
the need to extend the statute of limitations for crimes such as child molestation. As the law is now, the victims do not get their day in court simply because they are minors. In a sense, they are raped twice, first by their abusers and then by the system.
Parents, who often seek only to protect their children, do not always report the abuse. It is natural that Catholics who have been taught to trust the church would report abuse to the church rather than to the police. Part of the reason is the shame surrounding the abuse and with being uncomfortable with what they wrongly think is an issue involving homosexuality.
These pedophiles are not necessarily or even often homosexuals. However, much of the general public is quite uneducated about this fact. Doesn't it strike anyone as odd that the Catholic Church is harsher to homosexuals than it is to child predators?
In any case, states should extend the statute of limitations on child molestation so that those victims whose interests were not served by the Church or the judicial system may at last have their day in court.
Also, I was a little nonplused by an earlier poster who seemed to think that the rape of a young child must necessarily be more horrendous than the ongoing abuse of an older child. The trauma of sexual abuse is not merely physical. The psychological trauma often lasts much longer. Children who are abused by people whom they would normally be able to trust -- such as parents, stepparents, teachers, and religious leaders -- struggle all their lives with the emotional damage and with issues of trust.
As to Guiliani, I have to say that even if he believes in his old friend's innocence, the fact that he employs someone of such a dubious background calls into question his judgment in matters of public trust.
Courts of law have to abide by an intricate bunch rules and judges have tremendous power and discretion within those rules, but they are also aware that they may be overturned on appeal. No one in a court of law has complete freedom speech. No one should.
Please people! Leave the freedom of speech arguments for those legal cases where such a concept is actually at issue. This case isn't one of them.
The issue in a criminal case is a just trial and the guilt or innocence of the accused. Period. Full stop.
Not if you have any sense.
Pedophilia in a friend is not the loss of bloom. It is root rot, canker, and mildew all at once. In my opinion, anyone who valued their children would ditch the pedophile friend at once.
Considering the case at hand, it is sufficient that the Placa acted on behalf of the church to cover up crimes against children of sexual nature. Others have pointed to graver accusations against him. The fact that the statute of limitations has run out does not make Placa innocent.
Now I know that people will respond to my last argument by saying that we should consider him innocent since he has never been proven guilty. What naive nonsense! It is only triers of fact such as judges and juries who must consider the accused to be innocent until proven guilty. The general public need have no such compunction. They can consider him guilty. They can consider him innocent. They can hire him to babysit their children. However, I wouldn't hire him to babysit mine.
Anyone familiar with the mechanisms of child sexual abuse understands that swearing victims to secrecy is part of the abuse itself. It is part of what continues to plague victims in their struggle to come to terms with what has happened to them. Silencing victims is a form of abuse. Victims can only become re-empowered by being allowed to exercise their own choices about silence and speaking out.
I did not know that silence imposed upon victims was part of the official policy of the Catholic Church. Thank you for informing me.
Bullshit. It is a behavior.
That it is a compulsive behavior does not make it a disease. That is shares some similarity to addictive behavior does not make it a disease. That pedophiles have an attraction to children does not make it a sexual preference. That is is hard to treat does not give it medical diagnosis.
Don't waste your breath with me Tyler_Mason. I used to be a victim advocate and a CASA. I can assure you that more pedophiles go free, even after encountering the legal system, than ever see the inside of a prison.
Your friend has showered an icy chill of winter snow upon those roses. I predict withering.
The victim in the matter we are discussing here would be a child. A child has absolutely no understanding of the so-called escape clause you mention.
I am not religionist but I do know that Jesus said something along the lines of "suffer the little children to come unto me." He did not say it is okay for my followers to engage in sexual behavior with children and then use the church to cover it up.
Also, ChrisW, your suggestion that every adult who charged Catholic priests with molestation is somehow part of a conspiracy to bring down the church is ludicrous. Do you really think that no priests sexually abused children?
If you will look at an earlier letter, he equates victims trying to get compensation from the church as trying to take his money and the money of the poor; the assumption being that because he gives money to the church and the church helps the poor that the church should be exempt from responsibility for the missteps of the priests.
Strange logic.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
219 Democrats and one Republican join in favor of the legislation, which passed by a narrow margin
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Salon headlines in your mailbox
