A former Los Angeles catholic priest was arrested on Tuesday this week, suspected of sexually molesting a child from a parish in Pacoima between 1988 and 1991.
The priest in question was accused recently of molesting four people who were among the over-500 people who recently were awarded massive child-abuse settlement (in the order of $660 million US) by the Los Angeles Archdiocese.
However, these charges were based on new evidence.
According to the complainants, the priest "reveled in the pain he inflicted", and he was "brutal and vicious".
References:
Wednesday, 25 July 2007
Reverend found guilty of stealing $200,000 from church funds
A reverend of a church in Chicago this week was found guilty of stealing somewhere in the order of $200,000 of church funds, with the majority of the money being used to pay for, and buy goods for a male stripper.
These thefts were not limited to electronic funds theft, but included stealing from the collection plate at the church; it was these thefts that led to parishner's discovering his less than moral understanding of ownership and funds distribution.
The investigation conducted revealed that the reverend had taken almost $40,000 from church collections alone, paid $1,000 a month to a male stripper, and charged purchases to the parish account, as well as writing cheques to himself from the parish account.
Clearly this was not the work of a moral person.
References:
These thefts were not limited to electronic funds theft, but included stealing from the collection plate at the church; it was these thefts that led to parishner's discovering his less than moral understanding of ownership and funds distribution.
The investigation conducted revealed that the reverend had taken almost $40,000 from church collections alone, paid $1,000 a month to a male stripper, and charged purchases to the parish account, as well as writing cheques to himself from the parish account.
Clearly this was not the work of a moral person.
References:
Sunday, 22 July 2007
Christian prime minister of Australia frequently disobeys one of the 10 commandments
A soon to be published biography of John Winston Howard, the current prime minister of Australia, further highlights his 'morals'.
John Howard can already be credited with telling one of the greatest bald-faced lies in Australian politics. In 1995, the federal liberal party was roundly defeated in an election which seemed impossible to lose; the liberal party at that point went into the election planning on introducing a goods and services tax (GST) in Australia if they were elected.
The election lost, their party in disarray, Howard took over the leadership of the party yet again and in a public media scrum, in front of dozens of cameras, microphones and eyewitnesses, squarely declared:
This however is not the end of the man's perfidity; indeed, the release of his biography has shown how little respect Howard has for the notion of truthfulness and honesty. The seventh commandment, that being "Thou shalt not bear false witness" is widely accepted as the notion that you shouldn't lie. From what can be gathered by Howard's actions, it's possible to circumvent this through sophistry and weasel words.
Not lying indeed is an admirable trait; honesty is a good moral attitude to have, and while there may be valid reasons from time to time to stretch or bend the truth, doing so for self gratification and self achievement seems a less than moral reason.
When challenged once of his reneging an election promise, "Honest John", as he was once misleadingly nicknamed coined the term "non-core promise"; that being that some election promises were core promises which must be fulfilled, and others were seemingly non-core promises which could be ignored at will.
A non-core promise? A non-binding promise? Ah, a lie. A dirty, rotten, sneaky lie. Let's be honest, a promise that you do not intend to fulfill is not to be obscured by weasel words or sneaky alternate definitions, it is a lie, a dishonorable statement of non-fact.
So, it should come as no surprise to anyone then what his wife is quoted as having told the authors of the recent biography, as reported in the Sydney Morning Herald. It is, indeed, most enlightening.
Or, to boil things down to the roots of the matter, here is a christian man who apparently frequently lies in order to get things, and sometimes (not often) what he promises will be real, not a lie.
It would seem that the Australian penchant of giving people nicknames which are the opposite of their literal meaning (e.g., calling redheads 'bluey') was dead on the mark in declaring Howard "Honest John".
References:
John Howard can already be credited with telling one of the greatest bald-faced lies in Australian politics. In 1995, the federal liberal party was roundly defeated in an election which seemed impossible to lose; the liberal party at that point went into the election planning on introducing a goods and services tax (GST) in Australia if they were elected.
The election lost, their party in disarray, Howard took over the leadership of the party yet again and in a public media scrum, in front of dozens of cameras, microphones and eyewitnesses, squarely declared:
There's no way that a GST will ever be part of our policy. Never, ever. It's dead. It was killed by the voters in the last election. Any suggestion that I left the door open is absolute nonsense. I didn't. I never will. The last election killed the GST. It's not part of our policy and it won't be part of our policy at any time in the future.It is impossible to argue that this is anything but an unwavering promise that the GST would never be reintroduced by the liberal party, yet, just a little more than 3 years later, Howard reneged on his promise, proving it to be a lie, and introduced the GST into Australia.
This however is not the end of the man's perfidity; indeed, the release of his biography has shown how little respect Howard has for the notion of truthfulness and honesty. The seventh commandment, that being "Thou shalt not bear false witness" is widely accepted as the notion that you shouldn't lie. From what can be gathered by Howard's actions, it's possible to circumvent this through sophistry and weasel words.
Not lying indeed is an admirable trait; honesty is a good moral attitude to have, and while there may be valid reasons from time to time to stretch or bend the truth, doing so for self gratification and self achievement seems a less than moral reason.
When challenged once of his reneging an election promise, "Honest John", as he was once misleadingly nicknamed coined the term "non-core promise"; that being that some election promises were core promises which must be fulfilled, and others were seemingly non-core promises which could be ignored at will.
A non-core promise? A non-binding promise? Ah, a lie. A dirty, rotten, sneaky lie. Let's be honest, a promise that you do not intend to fulfill is not to be obscured by weasel words or sneaky alternate definitions, it is a lie, a dishonorable statement of non-fact.
So, it should come as no surprise to anyone then what his wife is quoted as having told the authors of the recent biography, as reported in the Sydney Morning Herald. It is, indeed, most enlightening.
We also know from Janette Howard that, in the Prime Minister's household, there is a clear understanding between a firm commitment and a non-firm commitment ... "You talk about a whole lot of things when you're trying to convince people to do things ... but you don't go back and honour every single one of those unless you have made a firm commitment about it, and John wasn't into making firm commitments." (SMH, "One roast could save another", July 21 2007, Peter Hartcher)So, here we have a man (and his wife for that matter), espousing christian values while blithely discussing the notion of a promise which is binding and a promise which is not binding.
Or, to boil things down to the roots of the matter, here is a christian man who apparently frequently lies in order to get things, and sometimes (not often) what he promises will be real, not a lie.
It would seem that the Australian penchant of giving people nicknames which are the opposite of their literal meaning (e.g., calling redheads 'bluey') was dead on the mark in declaring Howard "Honest John".
References:
- Sydney Morning Herald, "One roast could have saved another"
Wednesday, 18 July 2007
Christian school claims serious criticism is "devil's work"
In Texas, America, a christian school has recently come under severe criticism after it expelled a student based on his MySpace personal web-page.
Were the only criticism to do with the expelling, that might have been the end of the story; however; the further allegations that have been raised are most disturbing. Multiple teachers have claimed that they were forced to change failing grades to passes, and both parents and students have accused the school of ongoing preferential treatment of particular students.
Apparently not willing to directly deal with the accusations of grade fixing, the principal of the school has come out fighting on an entirely different front, saying that the accusations are the work of the 'devil' (a fictional character in the mythology of various religions).
These criticisms are not coming from third parties with a vested interest in seeing a competing or religious private school closed; these are coming as sworn statements from teachers, parents and students.
Religion should not be used as an excuse to avoid dealing with serious accusations. (Even the catholic sect has recently learned this.)
If these allegations prove to be true, then the school may be guilty of violating some of the most serious responsibilities of a teaching organisation, namely, to ensure that people leave with the best skills they have been able to learn, and their grades are honest. To fight such allegations with trite responses is immoral.
References:
Were the only criticism to do with the expelling, that might have been the end of the story; however; the further allegations that have been raised are most disturbing. Multiple teachers have claimed that they were forced to change failing grades to passes, and both parents and students have accused the school of ongoing preferential treatment of particular students.
Apparently not willing to directly deal with the accusations of grade fixing, the principal of the school has come out fighting on an entirely different front, saying that the accusations are the work of the 'devil' (a fictional character in the mythology of various religions).
These criticisms are not coming from third parties with a vested interest in seeing a competing or religious private school closed; these are coming as sworn statements from teachers, parents and students.
Religion should not be used as an excuse to avoid dealing with serious accusations. (Even the catholic sect has recently learned this.)
If these allegations prove to be true, then the school may be guilty of violating some of the most serious responsibilities of a teaching organisation, namely, to ensure that people leave with the best skills they have been able to learn, and their grades are honest. To fight such allegations with trite responses is immoral.
References:
- Houston Chronicle: "Allegations plague Texas Christian School"
Religious group insist on keeping diseased animal alive
While the Hindu notion of cows being sacred is well known, the downside of this trait became apparent in the recent finding of a court in Wales.
A Welsh Hindu group, who have several cattle on their monastery grounds, recently appealed the death sentence handed down to one of their cows when it was tested positive for bovine tuberculosis.
Their argument? Destroying the cow was an infringement on their religious freedom.
Bovine tuberculosis is a serious disease; it can spread as tuberculosis to humans either via ingestion of contaminated milk, or even via aerosol spray (e.g., mucus, etc.)
In order to protect other cattle and humans, most developed nations have policies of destroying infected cattle.
Religious freedom is one thing, but to do so at the risk of jeopardizing the health of other animals and people seems a morally specious notion.
References:
A Welsh Hindu group, who have several cattle on their monastery grounds, recently appealed the death sentence handed down to one of their cows when it was tested positive for bovine tuberculosis.
Their argument? Destroying the cow was an infringement on their religious freedom.
Bovine tuberculosis is a serious disease; it can spread as tuberculosis to humans either via ingestion of contaminated milk, or even via aerosol spray (e.g., mucus, etc.)
In order to protect other cattle and humans, most developed nations have policies of destroying infected cattle.
Religious freedom is one thing, but to do so at the risk of jeopardizing the health of other animals and people seems a morally specious notion.
References:
Sunday, 15 July 2007
Former priest found guilty of child sexual assault
A jury on Friday 13 July found a former episcopalian priest guilty on charges of multiple sexual assaults against three boys over a period of five years.
The man, who has been both a priest and a school teacher, as well as having served as a foster parent, preyed on children as young as six, turning his home into what prosecutors described as a "Disneyland" style environment which included candy, games, computer games and a hot tub. The not-so-Disneyland-like aspects of his environment however included framed pictures of naked boys, a hot tub, and the man frequently walking around naked.
Taking only three hours, the jury found the former priest guilty and sentencing will be conducted before the end of July.
The man originally pleaded guilty in 2002, but the guilty plea was overturned after further victims came forward claiming they too had been abused.
Yet another high moral standard being set.
References:
The man, who has been both a priest and a school teacher, as well as having served as a foster parent, preyed on children as young as six, turning his home into what prosecutors described as a "Disneyland" style environment which included candy, games, computer games and a hot tub. The not-so-Disneyland-like aspects of his environment however included framed pictures of naked boys, a hot tub, and the man frequently walking around naked.
Taking only three hours, the jury found the former priest guilty and sentencing will be conducted before the end of July.
The man originally pleaded guilty in 2002, but the guilty plea was overturned after further victims came forward claiming they too had been abused.
Yet another high moral standard being set.
References:
- MyFox Colorado: "Former priest guilty to sexual assaulting boys"
- RockyMountain News.com: "Priest's 'Disneyland' emerges at sexual assault trial"
$2.1 billion paid to US catholic abuse victims so far
The San Jose Mercury News reports on 14 July of some of the larger payments which have been made by the catholic church in the United States since 1950.
The figures, quite frankly, are astounding, and it's not the money that is scary, but the number of affected people. Quite frankly, the money isn't enough. How does one put a price on the cost of destroying a child's innocence, or ruining a person's life?
By paying money the church has tacitly acknowledged the victim status of these people. How many innocents however are still out there, afraid to come forward, or unable to come forward, or not willing to come forward?
Some of the numbers reported by the San Jose Mercury include:
That's an average of 244 victims per diocese. The LA Times, also covering the payout for the Los Angeles Archdiocese, cited research from Cardinal Roger Mahony which found that:
References:
The figures, quite frankly, are astounding, and it's not the money that is scary, but the number of affected people. Quite frankly, the money isn't enough. How does one put a price on the cost of destroying a child's innocence, or ruining a person's life?
By paying money the church has tacitly acknowledged the victim status of these people. How many innocents however are still out there, afraid to come forward, or unable to come forward, or not willing to come forward?
Some of the numbers reported by the San Jose Mercury include:
- Archdiocese of Los Angeles: approximately 500 victims
- Archdiocese of Boston: 552 victims
- Archdiocese of Portland, Oregon: 175 victims
- Archdiocese of Louisville: 243 victims
That's an average of 244 victims per diocese. The LA Times, also covering the payout for the Los Angeles Archdiocese, cited research from Cardinal Roger Mahony which found that:
3 out of every 4 parishes in the archdiocese had been assigned a priest accused of sexual abuse.While parts of the report were challenged, the LA Times goes on to say:
Later review showed that seven cases of suspected pedophiles who had been allowed to remain in the ministry were not disclosed in the report. Complaints against four other priests were identified, but with omissions. The church has said the report was never intended to be comprehensive.It is unimaginably vile to think that this many people have been abused and robbed of their innocence by supposed "moral" guardians.
References:
- San Jose Mercury News: "Some major settlements in Catholic clergy abuse cases"
- LA Times: "Archdiocese settles abuse case for $660 million"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)