I guess the Pope is looking for credit now?

But for whatever reason, he did not take that step.

They are dedicated to their religious beliefs that the church hierarchy is above secular law.

Also gives the child rape apologists ammo to claim the RCC is actually doing something besides telling the rapists the devil made them do it.

Hardly surprising.

Understood.

So no, you did not understand.

So have you made up your mind yet?

what would change?

Would predators give up predation, or give up Confession?

Experience suggests the latter.

What you posted was not an answer.

Do you feel their religious belief that they are above the law is justified?

Yes or no.

If US law allows for this, as it allows for legal confidentiality, the answer is obvious. My opinion is irrelevant. But their are reasons that legal confidentiality and the seal of the Confessional are allowed.

Why are you afraid to provide it? Are you ashamed?

I understand.

So do you accuse the entire US legal system of some sort of conspiracy?

If so, good luck with your narrative.

You refuse to provide it.

Narratives indeed.

Your opinion might be irrelevant, but you could still share it. You never seem willing to do so, though.

I'll share mine, though:

No law should allow any religious exemption from notifying authorities of criminal acts.

That's my opinion. You're welcome to share yours.

But given that my job as a union representative required knowledge of applicable labor law, and handbooks and manuals specific to my union, my view is that if it is legal, there is a reason for that.

You may not agree with the logic behind the reason, but that is irrelevant.

What does it have to do with not reporting crimes that occur. What does that have to do with religious exemptions from doing so.

Many laws have been changed because they were actually immoral and wrong. Slavery was once legal, but has always been wrong. Eventually, laws that made it legal were changed, because it was wrong

It has always been wrong to have sex with children. There are laws requiring most people who have contact with children to report even the suspicion of sexual abuse against them. There is a legal exemption for priests. That exemption is immoral and wrong. It allows crimes against children to continue, even though they are known, but are not reported due to that exemption.

Immoral laws must be changed. Immoral laws should not be followed. If slavery was legal, would you own slaves? If it was not illegal to have sex with children, would you have sex with children.

It is legal for priests not to report people who confess they have had sex with children. That is an immoral law, because the safety and personal rights of a third party are involved. It is against the law to have sex with children. There should be no exemptions from reporting known violations of such laws. Not for anyone.

You say you follow the laws. Are there no possible laws you would not refuse to follow? There certainly are for me.

Legalism can lead to harm to innocent victims. That is the real question here. Are you, then, a legalist?

But until they are, we have what actually exists.

You might have heard about that somewhere.

C'mon Monsieur B. Really?

And is ashamed to admit it.

Yes, indeed, it does.

Some people use discussion forums as playgrounds. Some children on playgrounds find it amusing to throw sand in other people's eyes. Eventually, someone throws sand into their eyes, in return. That becomes an object lesson for some people. For others, it simply creates a need to escalate.

It's easy to provoke people. That doesn't take a lot of intellectual capacity. It's harder to actually argue a point. Too hard for some for whom throwing sand in people's eyes suffices as an amusement.

Some people are very persistent in their quest for amusement. Still, one can only sweep sand under the rug for a while.

See here:
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1218313666

This morning, and from a reputable news source.

Are things not news, in your opinion, until you find them at your source?