They Vandalized our Cathedral

[HeIsRisen2018]

Look at the sign ,part of it is still there and the article said its was removed

Oh yeah, I didn't notice that before lol

 

[daninthelionsden]

Sending an innocent man to jail is no justice to anyone, especially the real victims

I know the details of the case inside out

What part of the prosecutions case do u feel was enough to prove the Cardinal was guilty of the allegation beyond reasonable doubt?

In order to comment on that, I would have to study that case in detail. Since I don't care to go back over it in detail. I choose to let go and let God.

 

[daninthelionsden]

That's wrong, the church authority should have never covered up such crimes.

In the case of George Pell he did the complete opposite of that.
He created a "response" which reached out to victims and condemned the perpetrators within the church...

The state police is at it again. Their already looking to charge him for a claim that was supposed to have happened in the 1970s...

View attachment 9631

This isn't just an attack on the Cardinal. It's not an attack on pedophilia.
It's all a part of the attack on Christianity

It's strange how the police in your country go after what they interpret as institutionalized pedophilia, but here in America, intstitutionalized pedophilia is now protected and it's the victims who are oppressed. In an article of an online newspaper The Houston Press titled "Don't Ask Don't Tell". The comment section was completely deleted after I let it be known that I too had suffered sexual abuse at the hands of the Episcopal Church. 2009 was the last year lawsuits were allowed against the Episcopal Church. No suit since then is allowed to come forward nor are the victim's stories allowed to come forward. A campaign is waged by pedophile colluders/sympathizers to invalidate/trivialize and generalize the stories of the victimsin order to control/silence them.

 

[Barbarian]

There have been many abusers among the Catholic Clergy; about as many per capita as you find in the public generally. Most of the convicted deserve it. I don't know if Pell was justly convicted or not. But this is the chilling thing I read about Pell's case:

Dr. Cathy Kezelman, president of the Australian victim support group the Blue Knot Foundation, said in statement that for an accuser to "have to prove that you were abused and betrayed can be more than overwhelming given the profound impacts of trauma."

So it seems her thought is "who cares about the truth; the accusation should be enough." The idea of "innocent until proven guilty" has been abandoned by this person. And that's an evil as bad as child abuse.

I don't know the facts on Pell, or why the high court overturned his conviction. For all I know, he could be guilty. I won't assume either in the absence of evidence. But the law should assume innocence until there is compelling evidence of guilt.

 

[Barbarian]

If it was overturned and he was found innocent then it should be turned around and now the accuser goes on trial for false accusations. It means he was falsely accused.

Not a good idea. There are "counselors" who have a habit of "recovering repressed memories" that turn out to have been inserted through subtle manipulation, er "counseling." Often the accuser is unware of that manipulation,and honestly believes the charge is true. Other times, there might actually have been abuse, but the evidence was insufficient to get a conviction.

 

[Corn Pop]

There have been many abusers among the Catholic Clergy; about as many per capita as you find in the public generally. Most of the convicted deserve it. I don't know if Pell was justly convicted or not. But this is the chilling thing I read about Pell's case:

Dr. Cathy Kezelman, president of the Australian victim support group the Blue Knot Foundation, said in statement that for an accuser to "have to prove that you were abused and betrayed can be more than overwhelming given the profound impacts of trauma."

So it seems her thought is "who cares about the truth; the accusation should be enough." The idea of "innocent until proven guilty" has been abandoned by this person. And that's an evil as bad as child abuse.

I don't know the facts on Pell, or why the high court overturned his conviction. For all I know, he could be guilty. I won't assume either in the absence of evidence. But the law should assume innocence until there is compelling evidence of guilt.

That is crazy. You have to be proven guilty otherwise anyone could accuse anyone for anything and the accused would get a penalty. That's just insane.

 

[HeIsRisen2018]

That is crazy. You have to be proven guilty otherwise anyone could accuse anyone for anything and the accused would get a penalty. That's just insane.

Agreed of that's the way that it should be. Unfortunately, a lot of the time it's guilty before proven innocent and not the other way around as Barbarian already pointed out.