Dolan Calls Child Victims Act "Unjust" To Church

[brooklynite]

Source: NY Daily News

Timothy Cardinal Dolan hit Albany for a round of lobbying on issues close to the heart of the Catholic Church, with those ranging from abortion to same-sex marriage. Per our Glenn Blain, Dolan also spoke at length about a subject arguably as controversial as either of those: The Child Victims Act, which would extend the statute of limitations in clergy sexual abuse cases.

“We feel that this is terribly unjust. It singles [out] the church and it would be -- and I use the word purposefully -- devastating for the life of the church," Dolan told reporters gathered in the LCA, as you can see from the pic at right from Blain's Twitter feed.

...snip...

A bill sponsored by Assemblywoman Margaret Markey would extend the statute of limitations by five years, until victims turn 28, in civil and criminal cases. State Sen. Andrew Lanza has a similar bill in his chamber.

...snip...

Later, Dolan told reporters of his lobbying against the Child Victims Act, even when judgments are brought in years-old cases involving the church, "the people that -- the perpetrators don’t suffer. There is no burden on them. What suffers are the services and the ministries and the apostolates that we’re doing now. Because where does the money come from? So the bishops of 30 years ago that allegedly may have re-assigned abusers, they don’t suffer. They’re dead, all right? So the people that suffer are those who are being served right now by the church. And we feel that is a terribly unjust burden. That schools close and charities shrink, all the good work that the church does."

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dailypolitics/2012/03/dolan-calls-child-victims-act-unjust-to-church

---

I didn't know the Catholic Church was hurting financially; maybe they should take up a collection.

[Politicalboi]

1. Well if the church

Didn't hide and move the pedophiles, they wouldn't be in this mess. Fuck the catholic church. I hope they get sued till they are no more.

[truedelphi]

21. And let the Ctholic Church start paying taxes. It serves as a poltiical

Entity on countless issues and occasions.

The fact that Dolan is out speaking against legislation means his diocese should now officially be considered a political force, and not a "Church."

[olegramps]

44. I whole heartedly agree with you.

This law applies to ANYONE who has abused a child. It is not restricted to those who were abused by their beloved pedophile priests. This includes their "saintly" Pope John Paul II who was a close friend and supporter of Father Marcial Maciel who was accused of abusing numerous young boys and fathering children. He protected him until hs death because he was a major source of recruitment of young boys, almost entirely in poverty, with a promise of a free education who were encouraged to become priests.

When Cardinal Ratzinger was elected pope, he removed Marciel from his position as head of the Legions of Christ and ordered him to spend the remainder of his life in solitude with no public ministry. When the scandal became known, many church leaders called for the disbandment of the Legions of Christ and would not allow them to operate in the dioceses. Those who opposed their recruitment tactics believed that this was a primary contributing factor that resulted in the pedophile scandal. Young boys and girls who attended Catholic schools were subjected to the propaganda that a life of celibacy and dedication was a noble cause that was a blessing and the most pleasing to God. It is not in the least an exaggeration that sex of any sort was considered to be a filthy topic that was only excused by procreation. Young boys were threaten that masturbation was a sure ticket to hell as was "impure thoughts" and if they faltered they should rush to confession least the die and be burn in the fires of hell for eternity. Unfortunately, for those who bought this nonsense, their quest to suppress their sexual nature far too often had tragic consequences when it manifest itself in abuse of children. It appeared to mental health care professionals that their indoctrination had left them in a state of perpetual warped adolescence with inablity of establish mature sexual relationships. It was certainly not a problem of homosexuality that the church attempted to attribute to their actions, but the direct result of suppression of healthy and nomal sexual development with association of sex with depravity and lust.

[truedelphi]

53. Very good points that you bring up. And I also wonder

The effects on parishioners when they are turning for spiritual guidance to people who are so warped. No wonder we are primed to fight endless wars and be in continual desperate shakes in terms of access to everything we need.

The entire Church dogma reeks of self sacrifice for us plebians, and rewards of the flesh for our spiritual handlers. Double standards and cognitive dissonance from the git go.

And so we end up with Gitmo.

[awoke_in_2003]

2. "devastating for the life of the church"...

one could only hope.

[jerseyjack]

29. It could result in half of their employees in jail.

[saras]

42. Well, now we know that the "life of the church" is

[closeupready]

3. Your church sexually victimized boys and girls - now you need

to make matters better, as best you can. That means money, in part. That's how it works.

[LadyHawkAZ]

4. They should have worried about that BEFORE

they started to play Child Molester Shuffle.

[hedgehog]

5. I have as much sympathy for Dolan as he appears to

have for any of the victims!

On edit : If this "breaks" the Church, what it will break is a centuries old structure for running the Church. As more and more of the laity realize that the bishops and their lackeys knew what was going on and actively hid the criminals and silenced the victims "for the good of the Church", they pay less and less attention to the bishops.

[cstanleytech]

6. Hmm its only a 5 year increase so I dont buy that its aimed at the church, if that was the case the

could have increased it to the age of 65.

[freshwest]

7. No, the law singles out pedophiles, not an organization. Can't Dolan see the difference?

Why does he identify the Catholic church with acts of pedophilia? Not everyone does.

There should be no statute of limitation on going after those who commit crimes against children, since there is no limit on their suffering for the rest of their lives from abuse.

Dolan's complaint shows he's either clueless, or else complicit. Quit whining and do your duty. Just 'Man Up.'

[muriel_volestrangler]

49. The Cardinal is lying, to save himself power and prestige, and his church money

He's not clueless; he's just lost all the moral guidance his religion was supposed to give him. He wants to cover up rape, because the truth is inconvenient to him.

For reference for everyone, here's the bill - no mention of religion, churches or Catholics: http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?default_fld=&bn=A05488&term=&Summary=Y&Text=Y

[freshwest]

51. He's really making a fool of himself, then. And those who follow him.

Thanks for the link.

[msanthrope]

8. "Unjust" to the machinery that would protect pedophiles??? nt

[JHB]

9. Think of it as an incentive to not repeat history....

...and no, not all of them are dead.

And I think it would have the opposite effect on collections: people might be more willing to give if they had a real sense that this was being cleaned out, not just swept under the rug yet again.

[PDJane]

10. The Catholic Church is land poor.

They have a lot of land and buildings, some of which are falling into disrepair. They have a lot of relics and beautiful works and illuminated manuscripts which require things like restoration and preservation.

They have been forced to come up with cash, real money, to pay for some of those lawsuits, with the spectre of more to come. They can go bankrupt, of course. It's unlikely, but possible.

The church has, unfortunately, done as much harm as good, and that's the problem, and there are a host of people who have been harmed by the church who have not been compensated; a number of them are aboriginals around the world.

As for the people who suffer, abuse is still going on in the Catholic church, and is part of the Catholic heirarchy. It is so endemic that it is not only ignored, it is condoned as part of the process of bringing a sinner to God.

Since I'm one of those people who is convinced that God is a man-made construct, I feel the futility of all of this as the most painful result of the God myth, ruined lives and ruined families for self-delusion.

[Clouseau2]

35. The amount of damage they've done goes far and wide

Think of all the gay kids who have killed themselves or suffered mentally because they are being told by the Catholic Church that the way they were born is sinful and they will go to hell.

Think of all the extra HIV that is spread in Africa because of Catholic priests, cardinals and popes lecturing poor and uneducated people about the evils of condoms.

Think of all the suffering caused by telling women in poverty in these countries they cannot use contraceptives and that God will provide for their families even though they can barely feed the children they already have.

[Brickbat]

11. "The perpetrators don't suffer" -- and whose fault is that? Many people's fault, but certainly the

church's and the leadership of the church. Disgusting.

[snagglepuss]

12. The Church just spent over $57 million to buy the Crystal Cathedral.

I'd like to know what Dolan thinks of that.

[midnight]

14. Is that the one in California?

[snagglepuss]

16. Yes. It was the Hour of Power church.

[freshwest]

17. There goes the impoverished church argument, huh?

How many lesser things without buying another building could they have done with that?

Do they expect the tithes to pay for that place, when they still go to government for faith-based funding to handle the poor?

Since the First Amendment won't make them account for their funds, how do we know if the Crystal Cathedral is being purchased with our tax dollars or not?

Are we all on the hook to keep these entities going even if they don't respect us?

[Igel]

40. A couple of points.

"Tax dollars" could only be money that you think that should have been taxable. They have to account for any public monies they get for running charitable programs.

They go to the government for faith-based funding for the same reason that people that don't need Medicare do so. It's money they can get for using for their purposes. You don't pass up free money. If there's anything that's un-American in 2012, that's it.


But more importantly, the money for the "cathedral" is unrelated to money in other dioceses. There are nearly 200 financially independent "Catholic Churches" in the US. We may talk about "the" Catholic Church, but when it comes to finances it's ludicrously inaccurate (and, since this has been pointed out numerous times, people either don't notice the facts, can't remember the facts, or are uninterested in the facts).

In other words, what bankrupts one leaves the others untouched. If one diocese is filthy cash-rich--unlikely, but let's talk hypothetical here--it says nothing about any other diocese. "Cash-rich" is unlikely because a lot of diocese have public works to deal with--buildings or hospitals, schools or charitable outreach. In some cases they have historic buildings that require upkeep--tear them down and get raked over the coals, use money for them instead of feeding the poor and get raked over the coals.

Note that those dioceses are entirely separate from the See. They contribute a bit to the Catholic Church's central operations, and from there some money flows to the Vatican, but that's about it.

[The Magistrate]

13. Protecting Pedophiles And Forcing Pregnancy On Women Are the Sole Aims Of Catholicism Today

What a disgusting piece of shit this man is.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

15. Dolan ain't too bright

Thanks for reminding everyone, Timmy boy, why the Catholic Church has ZERO RIGHT to complain about anything in this country. Fucking monsters.

[GopperStopper2680]

18. Let me be CLEAR about something Catholic Clergymen:

When Jesus said 'Suffer the little children to come unto me' That is NOT what he had in mind. Nobody is being singled out. The Catholic church has a detestable reputation for child molestation and child exploitation. It has brought this dark cloud upon itself and I think it's high time something was done to bring this issue into the light of day where it can get the dealings it deserves.

[truedelphi]

25. And the Church is quite happy to condemn an individual woman who seeks an abortion,

Yet too many of their millionaire congregation members own and operate factories where the toxins create the cause of many a miscarriage.

Clean up the factories, clean up the products we are sold, stop allowing the sins of the millionaires, and be true to the actual teachings of Christ.

[MsPithy]

19. WHAT?

If the Church was serious about reform, this is what they would say.

"As far as the Church is concerned, there is no statute of limitations. Any member of our flock who has been damaged by the clergy will always be supported by us in every way possible, for their entire lives. If it takes monetary damages, we will pay them. If we have to sell some of our riches, we will sell them. As a church, it is our first responsibility to do no harm. When we fall short, we will not stop until the people who we damaged are no longer suffering. This is what Jesus would do."

But, that's just me.

[wellstone dem]

31. Amen.

Amen.

[safeinOhio]

20. They could pray that

God's will be done.

[libinnyandia]

22. There is a special place in hell for those who sexually abuse children and those who enable

them.

[happyslug]

23. So age 23 is NOT good enough, what should be the cut off?

The actual proposed law:
http://open.nysenate.gov/legislation/bill/A5488-2011

In most states the Statute of Limitations for Civil Actions is generally Four years, in New York State it appears to be Five years. Given that the Statute of Limitations does NOT start to run till a Child turns 18, that means that a Victim can sue till he or she turns 23 years of age at the present time. The debate should this be extended to age 28?

The problems with extending the Statute of Limitations for such Civil Suits are immense. Remember, most Child abuse occur within families (Something like 90%) do we extend the statute of limitation in such cases to 10 years after the child turns 18? and will Lawyers take such cases were it is hard to collect on any judgement entered against such family member?

Yes, no one is denying the rights of someone age up to 23, to file a lawsuits, that is the present law. The issue is how far beyound 22 should the law permit someone to wait before filing a lawsuit? Remember the Statute of Limitation only starts to run when the child turns 18, even if it incurred 18 years before. Thus a victim must file a lawsuit by the time he turns 23.

Please note We are NOT talking of CRIMINAL actions, but Civil Actions, i.e. lawsuits. The Act does extent Criminal Statute of Limitation to forever, but that is NOT an issue. No one wants to protect the person who actually did the crime, the issue is when should that person's supervisors be held for the actions of the prepetrators?

The Bishop makes a point, while the perpetrators are named in such lawsuits, no one is looking at them for payment, the Church is being ask to PAY for these acts, even while the perpetrators walks free. How is that Justice?? Now, technically the Church is being held for its failure to control its own employee on its own property (There is a Pennsylvania Case where a then 12 to 14 years agree to met a priest at a Motel, the court ruled that was OUTSIDE the employer-Employee relationship and struck down the judgement against the Catholic Church) but how long can a victim be permitted to sue such employers for the actions of their employees?

Please note, if the organization was a Public School, the Public School is NOT liable for the act of the perpetrators at all, even if they do MORE then what any of the Catholic Bishops did. Why? Sovereign Immunity. You can NOT sue the State for the Actions of its Agents WITHOUT permission of the State. Thus if a School Board covers up for a Teacher (And there have been a lot of such cases) when the cover up is found out, the only person the Victim can sue is the Teacher, maybe the principal but NOT the School. Worse if the Teacher and/or Principal is married, it becomes almost impossible to collect on such Judgement do to the fact you can NOT take marital property for the debt of one spouse. i.e in such lawsuits no one is looking at the perpetrators to pay up, they are looking at the perpetrators' employer to pay up on the legal grounds that a employer is liable for the acts of an employee when such acts are done as part of the employee's employment by the employer.

The reason we have NOT heard of similar problems in the Public School System is lawyers will NOT take such cases. Lawyers want paid, and if you sue a Public School system for some cover up you will LOSE against the School, you may win against the teacher and maybe even the Principal, but NOT against the School. Given that most such principals and teacher either do NOT have much money OR are married, it becomes almost impossible to collect on such judgments, thus most lawyers will take them.

The reason we hear of the lawsuits against the Catholic Church is lawyers will take such cases for Judgement against the Catholic Church are permitted AND the Church has assets to pay such Judgments (unlike the lawsuits against day care centers that were popular in the early 1990s. very popular for a few years till the Lawyers found out such Daycare centers had no assets and thus no way to pay the Judgments).

Would it NOT be "FAIR" to permit such lawsuits against Public School where similar incidents occurred? It is NOT even being suggested for the State knows it will have to foot the bill for such lawsuits and does NOT want to pay.

This brings me to the Center of this debate, Where do we draw the line as to WHEN someone can sue in a pedophile case? Furthermore should ANY AND ALL employers of such employees be liable i.e. permit people to collect from Public Schools? The State will gladly extend the Statute of Limitations for the State knows it will NOT have to pay (For it is NOT paying now) but should it? and should the State also permit recovery from School Boards that permit such actions? A debate that is NOT occurring for no one wants they taxes to go up to pay for such actions in the Public School System (I would go into the move to private Schools to replace public schools, but that move is to new for such cases to hit the parents let alone the papers).

[The Magistrate]

27. To Cut Through The Squid's Ink, Sir

The Catholic Church for decades, literally decades, functioned as a ring for providing pedophiles with victims and protecting them from legal consequences. In large measure they have gotten away with it. In the last few years there have been some attempts to bring the organization to book, which necessarily involve some changes to extend the span of time over which legal consequences can be pressed on the organization. There is nothing in the slightest unfair about bringing the Catholic Church to book for what it has done, no reason at all it should not be driven into bankruptcy, diocese by diocese, as a small measure of deserved punishment for its misdeeds.

[happyslug]

48. By the same Logic when two Milwaukee Police officers turn over to Dahmer one his victims?

In the early morning hours of May 27, 1991, 14-year-old Konerak Sinthasomphone (by coincidence, the younger brother of the boy whom Dahmer had molested) was discovered on the street, wandering naked, heavily under the influence of drugs and bleeding from his rectum. Two young women from the neighborhood found the dazed boy and called 911. Dahmer chased his victim down and tried to take him away, but the women stopped him. Dahmer told John Balcerzak and Joseph Gabrish, police officers dispatched to the scene, that Sinthasomphone was his 19-year-old boyfriend, and that they had an argument while drinking. Against the protests of the two women who had called 911, the officers turned him over to Dahmer. They later reported smelling a strange scent while inside Dahmer's apartment, but did not investigate it. The smell was the body of Tony Hughes, Dahmer's previous victim, decomposing in the bedroom. The officers did not make any attempt to verify Sinthasomphone's age and failed to run a background check that would have revealed Dahmer was a convicted child molester still under probation. Later that night, Dahmer killed and dismembered Sinthasomphone, keeping his skull as a souvenir.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Dahmer

This seems to have been the policy of the Milwaukee Police force among Homosexual lovers for decades, should Milwaukee taxpayers be force to pay for what they police have been doing for decades? Should the City of Milwaukee be liable for the failure of their Police Force to protect Konerak Sinthasomphone? Note the Police Officer turned over Konerak Sinthasomphone to Dalmer, that is more then any member of the Catholic Hierarchy is charged with (The Catholic Hierarchy has been held liable for NOT preventing the abuse NOT be helping them, as was the case with Dahmer and the Milwaukee Police). The Courts have rule NO, sovereign Immunity. The Victim's family could sue the Officers but NOT their employer.

Thus the issue is what is "Fair" to everyone. Any law that affects the Catholic Church MUST extend to everyone, and do we really want that? Do we want local government made bankrupt do to the illegal actions of their employees, actions the local government does NOT know of? What should be the cut off?

I will NOT go into the Legal Concept of "Latches" i.e. that the action can NOT be defended for the people who could provide a defense are no longer alive (In most of the cases we are talking about the cases involve priests who are NOW died). You can NOT bring in the alleged perpetrators to court, for they are dead, how do you defend? My point is there has to be some cut off as to the time to bring such actions, not only to be fair to the victim, but to anyone ALLEGED to have committed the case (They are cases where it became clear that the alleged victim was lying, no way could the alleged actions took place anywhere near the time and place he or she claims it did, by over time evidence that shows something could NOT have happened gets lost, the purpose of Latches and Statute of Limitations is to acknowledge such problems in any defense and thus force anyone filing an action to do so when it is possible to mount an adequate defense).

Thus what should be the Cut off, not that such a cut off should exist and again goes back to my original point, by when should we require people to bring an action by?

[The Magistrate]

52. More Squid's Ink, Sir, Spiced With Waving A Homosexual 'Red Shirt'

The Catholic Church systematically, routinely, frequently, acted to shield pedophiles from the law. Leading clergy saw to it pedophile outrages went unreported to the law, both by failing to do so themselves, and by intimidating victims and their families. They systematically, routinely, frequently moved men they knew beyond doubt were pedophile predators into positions where they knew they would have access to more children. To pretend that a single instance of poor, on the spot judgement, by a pair of police officers, is in any way equivalent to the systematic, routine, frequent abetting of pedophile predation by the Catholic Church is nonesense, and further, you know it to be nonesense, and do not really expect anyone to show that pathetic attempt at 'argument' a scintilla of respect.

Now a decent case could be made that police departments routinely cover-up bad behavior by police officers; brutality complaints are not dealt with properly, violent crimes by police against citizens often go unpunished. This is an outrage and an injustice, which most here oppose. It should be remedied, and with criminal prosecution and civil money judgements. It would not trouble me in the slightest were laws passed to extend the term of years for which police departments were liable for such things. But the incident you have referenced has nothing to do with the real faults of police departments, and the things for which they actually ought to be, and often are not, to great public detriment, held liable.

The point you are pressing is, in its broadest outline, even more ridiculous. Your plea is, basically, that of a man charged with burglary who cries aloud in court that there are other burglars who have not been caught, and that it cannot be just to punish him for burglary until every other burglar in the city has been apprehended. The Catholic Church has been caught engaged in systemic promotion and covering up of pedophile predation over a period of several decades: punishing it is appropriate and just, and remains so even if some other institution may be getting away with the same thing.

The Cardinal reveals himself to be a despicable, contemptible, even an evil person, with his attitude in this matter. To defend him, to align with him, is to partake, in some small but perceptible degree, of his revealed nature.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

46. Why it should be extended -

Being molested by a trusted person who is part of a trusted and powerful institution is devastating, and something that can take YEARS to come to terms with personally, let alone go public with and seek redress.

I second The Magistrate's thoughts -- the Catholic church deserves to be bankrupted for what they did, and their victims deserve as much time as they can get to achieve their redress. I say this as a cradle Catholic.

[HereSince1628]

24. Don't forget that Dolan sees himself as having a great chance to be il papa

What he says is rather more about that than the ministrations of a church corroded by priests who saw themselves as above secular law.

[Kalidurga]

26. Sounds like a confession.

We have so many abusive priests that the church will go broke paying off settlements. Five more years is fair given that this organization actively interfered with the prosecution of pedophiles not just moving them around, but by buying or intimidating victims into silence.

[Skittles]

28. they're more concerned with keeping the cash cow flowing

disgusting

[jerseyjack]

30. Disgraceful and disgusting.

[MsPithy]

32. "devastating for the life of the church,"

Life of the church? The church does not have a life.

The inclination to protect the church, instead of protecting their most vulnerable parishioners is how and why they made the terrible crimes even worse!

[Dawson Leery]

33. The Bishops and Cardinals know there is a good chance

their life of living off of other people's money may come to an end.

It's about time!

There is no excuse for what the church did to these children.

[nobodyspecial]

34. The unjust burden is put on the people

who have been scarred for life and been denied justice.

[Orrex]

36. Isn't his statement a de facto admission of guilt?

If the church is innocent of the crimes attributed to it, then what's the harm in extending the statute of limitations by five or ten or fifty years? Innocent then is innocent now, I should think.


Of course, Dolan can go fuck himself.

[Joseph8th]

37. This law would be...

..."devastating to the Church"... really?

REALLY?

Pass it now.

[Dont call me Shirley]

38. Dolan is on incredibly mentally ill person. The VICTIMS are the SUFFERERS.

It can be said that abusers do suffer, but abusers choose to recommit the same crimes which had been done unto them. Keeping the cycle of violence alive. This is the real work the church must be doing, ending the cycles of abuse.

[Aerows]

39. Uh yeah

"the people that -- the perpetrators don’t suffer. There is no burden on them. What suffers are the services and the ministries and the apostolates that we’re doing now. "

The Church as an organization suffers - that's the idea. See, the organization covered this up, and it's going to have to make reparations. That's going to include suffering a tremendous financial hit. That's called punishment.

If the Church hadn't have covered this up, then it wouldn't be the Church's problem. The Church did cover it up, however, and is just as guilty as the people who did it - because they enabled them to go on doing it elsewhere. Instead of worry about abortion and contraceptives, the Church needs to clean up around it's own moral front door. Whining about how much it might cost the Church makes the Church look even worse. If they don't get that yet, they are completely tone deaf.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

41. Wow

Shows him for who he is.

[DaDeacon]

43. As my father would say...

"A hit dog will holler ", Confession ( and jail time ) are good for the soul!

[Marrah_G]

45. I can't even write on here what I would say to this man's face. nt

[truebrit71]

47. Fuck that cult of child-buggerers...

...So because some of the perverts and their enablers may eventually die we should just let them ALL of the hook??? I don't fucking think so...

[Odin2005]

50. The RCC can eat shit and die.

[Solly Mack]

54. The church protected the guilty for years.

Now Dolan wants to use the "they're dead" as an excuse.

What a fuckwad.