Abbott's comments on Sexual Abuse Inquiry and George Pell

[CM86]

No. Just pointing out that if every pollie gets held literally to everything they say, they all say stupid s**t. As I'm sure does every one of us.

If you set the bar at a certain level, then either you use the same level for all, or you're a one eyed hypocrite.

So what are you?
You had a go at Shorten for the interview... I assume you are also having a go at Abbott for what he said?
You're not a one eyed hypocrite, are you?

 

[CM86]

Who pushed this thread so far off topic??

This is about our Prime minister, ignoring the findings (while starting a royal commission into the pink bats), and supporting Pell.

Back on topic, he should have had a moment to read it by now, or at least had someone explain the summary to him. Why is he still standing by his original comments, and why do some people want to defend him????

 

[Pie eyed]

I'm sure that Abbott would like to see the RC disappear or be substantially downgraded.

But it won't happen, he is not that stupid. There is too much support for it. It would be political suicide on his part.

Just watch the Royal Commission into the Pink Batts idiocy take a front seat to religious wrongdoing.

 

[Power Raid]

Just watch the Royal Commission into the Pink Batts idiocy take a front seat to religious wrongdoing.

plenty of time to do both. I would prefer don't bother with the pink bats (on the provision the families of the dead waive the review).

 

[Chief]

Never forget this one:

 

[Chief]

The only upside is it provides a career and lifestyle for those that have something to hide and repress. May be priesthood is a good thing if one is a paedophile or ashamed of any other sexual deviance.

In defence of priests, it used to be a big thing for your child to join a holy order. You can't really lay blame at the feet of a person sent off in their teens after a life time of indoctrination. Beats cutting peat down on the bog.

You can't really lay blame at the feet of parents who are intimidated after a life of bad education on the authority of the church and on the shame of even discussing sex and sexuality.

You can't specifically blame priests for being so warped by this process or parents who don't know how to handle revelations of abuse. However any priests that commit crimes should receive the full consequences of their actions. Anybody who should know better but protects these people should likewise be subject to consequences.

 

[Chief]

I like the use of ellipses in that article. They have neatly trimmed out all Abbott's disclaimers around his remarks.

Simple fact is he was wrong. Why not say "I have not yet read the report, but when I do I promise I will make a full statement"?

Wayne Chamley, of advocacy group Broken Rites, said Mr Abbott needed to ''check the history''. The first senior cleric to tackle sex abuse by clergy was Sydney Bishop Geoffrey Robinson in the 1990s.

As the architect of the national church abuse protocol Towards Healing, Bishop Robinson quit in 2004, disillusioned with the church's response. Just weeks before that protocol, Cardinal Pell launched the Melbourne Response, which only applies in that city and deflects responsibility for responding to victims away from the archbishop.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/abbotts-response-to-child-sexual-abuse-by-clergy-angers-victims-20131114-2xjpo.html#ixzz2lEYQzC4J​

 

[Chief]

Abbott went into bat for an alleged paedophile priest and helped get him off,

God damnit now I can't get that image out of my head!

 

[Dont be a lemon]

His kids seem pretty intelligent and well adjusted. They also don't seem to hate him. Must have done something right.

Child are at their most authentic when stage managed.

 

[Gus Poyet]

Child are at their most authentic when stage managed.

They showed enough during the campaign to show they are their own women.

 

[CM86]

Has Abbott had a chance to read the report yet?

Amazing that this is yet another Abbottism that we ignore as par for the course.

 

[Power Raid]

Has Abbott had a chance to read the report yet?

Amazing that this is yet another Abbottism that we ignore as par for the course.

Isn't this a criminal issue?

 

[CM86]

Isn't this a criminal issue?

I'm having trouble understanding your post.
Sarcasm, insult, honest question, etc.

 

[Power Raid]

I'm having trouble understanding your post.
Sarcasm, insult, honest question, etc.

sorry, if there is sexual abuse which in my mind is certain.

doesn't this become an issue for the courts rather than politics?

 

[CM86]

sorry, if there is sexual abuse which in my mind is certain.

doesn't this become an issue for the courts rather than politics?

I guess my point is that I find it disgusting that our prime minister supports and gives credence to a man who tried to hide the abuse, of which you are certain.

It's not politics, it's an example of a persons values and morals. This person happens to be leading our country, and holds Pell in high regards, and as a mentor.


I'm still not entirely sure what point you are trying to convey?

 

[Power Raid]

I guess my point is that I find it disgusting that our prime minister supports and gives credence to a man who tried to hide the abuse, of which you are certain.

It's not politics, it's an example of a persons values and morals. This person happens to be leading our country, and holds Pell in high regards, and as a mentor.


I'm still not entirely sure what point you are trying to convey?

1) Personal view - despite a "treaty" with the separation of church and state where religion doesn't control politics and politics doesn't interfere too much with religion I would like to see strong action over this issue.

I would have no issue if a government read the riot act and closed down particular religious institutions, if under review it was found to have wide spread abuses or worse where the management of these institutions were involved in cover ups. If BHP covered up a crime, I am sure the directors and shareholders would feel when caught out. I see no reason why religious organisations would be treated any different.

The Roman Catholic Church would be close to the worst and should be "sent home" decades ago. The concept of "sent home" would represent civil action and potentially creating a sex offenders register for organisations and banning their existence in Australia.

As for the individuals, appropriate criminal and civil action should follow.

The massive risk would be our international relations with places like Sth America, the US and Africa could suffer.


2) I have no idea what the scope of the report is but if it states the obvious that a criminal investigation is to follow. Is it sensible to politicise the issue and prejudice a court case before it starts?

I dare say a report is to assess what type of resources, activities and scope the next activities are to follow. May be the report points to mental health or may be it highlights criminal issues. Either way, these are not for public entertainment.

 

[Pessimistic]

Its been mentioned that the catholic church consists of several orders which dont report to a central Australian catholic authority, but to several parent isstitutions in italy and elsewhere.

Not sure if this was accidental or deliberat but surely it means certain orders could be removed from our shores without the others kicking up ?

Even if it did it would be crocodile tears before they move in to take up market share so to speak