Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Freedom Fighter who wrote (108466)	7/18/2007 5:48:11 AM
From: Skeeter Bug	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 132070

Wayne, i understood "confused" as you meant it. surely you aren't suggesting all those abused by priests were 16 or 17. seriously. many of these kids were quite a few years younger. heck, one girl was done by 7 priests and impregnated before she turned 17. then mahoney's cover up occurred until she exposed the church sanctioned darkness. cbsnews.com also, it isn't about the child's state of mind. it is about adult responsibility. a 14 year old with the body of 18 year old super model can be raging to get in a 50 year old's pants and it is still illegal for the 50 year old to "partake," if not all jurisdictions. a regular citizen would face criminal charges, unlike a covered up catholic priest. throw in an authority figure position and it just gets more immoral - using authority to rape (legal definition) children. stop insinuating this was all about 16 or 17 year olds who had the hots for the priest and the priest just couldn't resist. almost all these priests were predators... they preyed on a certain kind of person... and had their way with them when they found the personality that they could control. guys like law and mahoney covered up all their dirty little criminal deeds so they could keep doing them and avoid facing the criminal justice system. if it were a painting, it would be ugly. very ugly.

To: Freedom Fighter who wrote (108466)	7/18/2007 8:58:00 AM
From: Pogeu Mahone	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 132070

Again I ask: WTF is wrong with you? How about an ethical catholic church? How about a moral catholic church? Does this article suggest any thing got fixed in the church with the $660,000,000 millon dollar settlement? NO The pedophile problem got worse because the so called leadership of the church is so corrupt they do not even punish the guilty but reward them! ----------------- A cardinal's shameless struggle for survival By Jason Berry \| July 18, 2007 NEW ORLEANS THE RECORD $660 million settlement that the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Los Angeles has agreed to pay victims of clergy sex abuse marks the denouement of a strange legal drama. The litigation turned into a survival struggle for Cardinal Roger Mahony. Mahony waged an expensive fight, which he lost at every rung of the ladder, to prevent release of clergy personnel files. The documents have still not been released. In 2002, church lawyers blocked the Los Angeles district attorney's subpoenas for files of priests targeted for criminal investigation. As the clock ticked on statutes of limitations, several cases died. Meanwhile, as civil cases mounted, release of the disputed clergy personnel files became a core issue for survivors, who wanted the truth revealed. What is Mahony hiding? Mahony's personal judgment has long been suspect. Consider Father Carl Sutphin, who shared living quarters with Mahony in two cathedrals over seven years until a 2002 Los Angeles police investigation of charges that Sutphin molested two sets of brothers. Only then did the cardinal force his retirement. In 1991, Mahony had sidelined Sutphin, a classmate of his in seminary, when a Phoenix man informed the cardinal that the priest had abused him and his twin brother years earlier. Sutphin went to St. Luke Institute in Suitland, Md., for treatment after which he became chaplain in a retirement home. At the time of his suspension, Sutphin was a resident with Mahony at Our Lady of Angels Cathedral. Consider also Monsignor Richard A. Loomis, who was for several years Mahony's vicar of clergy, responsible for the investigation of sexual abuse allegations. After Loomis was sued civilly as an abuser himself, Mahony stood by Loomis -- until a second victim came forward. One could go on, and on, with accounts of the cardinal's support of predators and callous disregard for victims. That pattern of governance was central to the litigation. Mahony has made public apologies, while hiding behind the argument that therapists advised him to reassign repeat offenders. How many children must a priest abuse before a cardinal deems him morally unfit? The cold print in the priests' files is Mahony's nightmare. Mahony's lawyers used a First Amendment ruse, arguing that constitutional freedom of religion cloaked a bishop's paper trail with pedophile priests. Stiff-arming judges, plaintiff attorneys, prosecutors, and abuse survivors, Mahony was buying time to protect himself, hoping media coverage would die down. The news behind the news now centers on Pope Benedict XVI, who used uncommonly strong language as a cardinal about priest perpetrators, saying that "filth" had crept into the clergy. In contrast, Pope John Paul II lavished praise on the notorious Father Marcial Maciel -- founder of the Legionaries of Christ, and one of the worst clergy perpetrators -- even after Maciel stood charged in a Vatican court. In May 2006, Pope Benedict banished Maciel from ministry. As Catholics, we have no power to remove a bishop who violates the trust. Cardinal Bernard Law resigned as archbishop of Boston after a sex abuse scandal only after a group of brave priests publicly called for his departure. Even then, the Vatican rewarded Law by appointing him pastor of a basilica in Rome. The Los Angeles scandal has dragged on several years. Mahony's misconduct summons memory of Nixon in the bowels of Watergate. By any logic of decency, Roger Mahony should stop apologizing, and take responsibility for his personal disgrace by resigning. He is unfit to be archbishop of anywhere. Yesterday, Father Peter Lombardi, a Jesuit spokesman for the Vatican, said that the church had "decided to commit itself in every way to avoid a repetition of such wickedness" and now had a "a policy of prevention and creation of an ever more secure atmosphere for children and young people in all aspects of (its) pastoral programs." There can be no such policy until those who tolerate sexual crimes are themselves removed. By any logic of Catholic ethics, Roger Mahony should go. If Pope Benedict XVI is serious about the church's so-called policy of prevention, he should remove Mahony immediately -- without a cushy post in Rome. Mahony's ouster is years overdue. Jason Berry is author of "Lead Us Not Into Temptation" and coauthor of "Vows of Silence," an investigation of the Maciel case, and the subject of a forthcoming documentary film. © Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company