Federal Grand Jury & RICO for sex abuse?!?

  • Thread starter Thread starter nordskoven
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
N

nordskoven

Guest
My diocese recently turned in a priest who was taking up-skirt porno shots of girls at his Kansas City parish. SNAP, purporting to aid victims, is here pushing for women priests, as if the lax protocols in place wouldn’t allow abuse by women. Kansas City, MO Bishop Robert Finn knew about the allegations for over a year as voiced by the parish school’s principal. Various church officials ignored the principal’s concerns, one pushing the file back at her over their chancery desk.

Father Shawn Ratigan is now under arrest, but is it time to seek a Federal Grand Jury and possible RICO racketeering for these by-the-book cover-ups that have paid out some three billion in hush money to victims? I think the best cure would be to take reparations, not out of the general funds, but out of priests’ retirement funds. I think only then would attention to security of children be high. In fact, isn’t it past time for the feds to step in?
 
I can understand wanting to give the bishops incentive to do the right thing, and hitting the pocketbook is generally a good way to do that, but taking reparations from “priests’ retirement funds” would seem to punish the vast majority of priests who’ve done nothing wrong.

Usagi
 
Racketeering? Hardly.

Not a good solution to punish all the good priests who reach retirement age either. How would this help anyone?

This doesn’t sound like a problem that can be solved by money.
 
Taking sex abuse victims’ reparations from priests’ retirement funds wouldn’t punish good priests because the problem would stop in a New York minute. Cardinal Mahony of LA auctioned off a Gutenberg Bible to pay up. That theoretical sketchy guy wouldn’t have even made it out of seminary if it was Mahony’s retirement cash. Real controls would be put in place, like lie detector testing as used in human resource departments for security purposes. Real priests would take the forefront, not those pin-striped interior decorators at the chancery.

Why is it preferable to let whole dioceses go bankrupt as in the many Democrat venues where this is tolerated? All I know is that in RINO Republican Kansas, when one parish priest was caught sexually abusing kids, he wound up in prison. However, another was having sex with a mentally handicapped teenager who was legalistically “of age” and he just disappeared. It’s not OK to victimize those who can’t legally give their consent FYI.
 
nordskoven,

Do we do the same thing to the public school teacher retirement funds? When a public school teacher is caught. This by the way is a way largeer issue than The preist scandel just does not get the same coverage.
 
“SNAP, purporting to aid victims, is here pushing for women priests”

My own impression of SNAP is that of an organization ostensibly Catholic, but which merely uses the abuse crisis to push for a change in fundamental Catholic doctrine.
 
Usagi said:
I can understand wanting to give the bishops incentive to do the right thing, and hitting the pocketbook is generally a good way to do that, but taking reparations from “priests’ retirement funds” would seem to punish the vast majority of priests who’ve done nothing wrong.

Usagi
Click to expand...
Paying reparations out of the general funds is punishing the parishioners who donate that money. What’s the difference? I wish that every person who sues the Church for abuse and is given money realizes that it is the equivalent of taking that money right out of the pockets of the parishioners of that diocese. It is literally robbing Peter to pay Paul. They are punishing the parishioners for something they had no involvement in. They are going to have to answer for it to Jesus personally. He is going to remind them that the theme of Christianity is “forgive one another”, not “sue for damages”.
 
Scott_Lafrance said:
Paying reparations out of the general funds is punishing the parishioners who donate that money. What’s the difference? I wish that every person who sues the Church for abuse and is given money realizes that it is the equivalent of taking that money right out of the pockets of the parishioners of that diocese.
Click to expand...
Haven’t you ever heard of deep pockets? A case could be made by a skillful attorney that the parishioners are partially responsible because they supported the perpetrator:“… there was a society of men [lawyers] among us, bred up from their youth in the art of proving, by words multiplied for the purpose, that white is black, and black is white, according as they are paid. To this society all the rest of the people are slaves." – Gulliver’s Travelers, AD 1726.
… They are going to have to answer for it to Jesus personally. He is going to remind them that the theme of Christianity is “forgive one another”, not “sue for damages”.
Click to expand...
This is all well and good, but something tells me they don’t believe in the Gospel.
 
sedonaman said:
Haven’t you ever heard of deep pockets? A case could be made by a skillful attorney that the parishioners are partially responsible because they supported the perpetrator:
“… there was a society of men [lawyers] among us, bred up from their youth in the art of proving, by words multiplied for the purpose, that white is black, and black is white, according as they are paid. To this society all the rest of the people are slaves." – Gulliver’s Travelers, AD 1726.
This is all well and good, but something tells me they don’t believe in the Gospel.
Click to expand...
You make two very good points.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top