TWeaK

joined 2 years ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 4 points 2 months ago

Small correction, a lawyer is only obligated if they believe there is a specific ongoing risk. It's the difference between saying you committed a crime in the past and saying that you are going to commit one in future.

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 8 points 2 months ago

If some random Catholic confessed to a priest that he was diddling kids, you can bet that as part of the penance, the priest would tell that person to turn themselves in to the authorities. But we know what has happened when the confessor was a priest.

This is the thing that's bugging me. People are taking the Catholic church's history with priests committing child abuse, then making a blind logical leap that Catholics in general are child abusers (or a significant number of them). It's twisting the feelings about Catholic priests and targeting them at a wider group. What's happening here is insidious.

How many Catholics are child molesters, and how many of them are confessing in church, and what penance were they given?

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

though I think it’s unlikely to directly have the intended effect and will probably just prevent people from confessing instead.

That's the thing, if you violate the confidentiality of confessionals then people simply won't confess, and then you lose the avenue for a priest to try and convince someone to address their behaviour. Maybe that's not very effective, but it's more effective than not having it.

In line with your assessment of the article's agenda, I have to question how much of an issue this even is. Like, the Catholic church has a long history with child abuse, but wasn't that primarily about Priests abusing children in their parish, and the church protecting its priests? This is an accusation that Catholics themselves are a bunch of child molesters, which is not something I've seen any evidence in support of.

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 22 points 2 months ago (3 children)

That's not quite accurate. Therapists are required to break confidentiality if they believe there is an ongoing risk to others, not because someone tells them of child abuse they committed in the past. In that sense, a confessional would probably be the same - you don't confess to things that haven't happened yet. You're more likely to express ongoing risk in therapy than in confession.

If the confessor indicated that they were going to continue doing things, that's when a confession should become reportable, if we're want the law to be secular and equitable.

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 9 points 2 months ago (5 children)

Peaceful does not mean lawful. You can peacefully break the law.

The law is not always right - that is why it has the facility to be changed - and when laws are wrong it is a good citizen's duty to break them, as that is the first step to changing them.

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 4 points 3 months ago (5 children)

The logs were deleted, sounds like there isn't any proof left.

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 5 points 3 months ago (8 children)

a) The logs were deleted, so there isn't much evidence left. b) We don't even know if this is a university project and not just a side project.

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 26 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The EU does already have them under some control. They restrict MC/VISA transaction fees to like 0.3% - literally the day Brexit happened the fees went up to 1.5%. However that was all before covid, no idea what fees are everywhere now.

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 6 points 3 months ago

It never was, for any of them. They claim fair use under "research", but the very next step after determining the category is to consider the commerciality. Their research is not an academic pursuit in the public interest and they don't publish their research data (because that would be incriminating); the entire activity is commercial product development. Such a venture is very clearly and obviously not fair use.

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 1 points 3 months ago

I don't think it's you being paranoid, however at the same time your husband is perhaps more on the front line of things, so should have a better idea.

I would say that as a journeyman lineman he'll be pretty decently qualified and probably wouldn't have as hard a time finding work abroad. It might be a tough sell with lower salaries on paper, but you often find that the standard of living improves and makes it more than worthwhile.

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 18 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Apparently this was from Threadless. They don't have this anymore, but they do have a KISS one:

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 14 points 3 months ago

The koala thing is slightly different, at birth they can't digest eucalyptus leaves. The necessary gut bacteria is passed down from mother to child through coprophagy.

Bunnies and guinea pigs just eat their poop to ensure complete digestion.

view more: ‹ prev next ›