Next time Father Johnson wants you to pet his namesake or next time Friar Paul takes all the kids swimming but wants them to change into their bathing suits one by one dont worry about it-the church has insurance.

What a joke. People in the ultimate position of power over children (controlling the entrance to the afterlife-a personal connection to GOD himself)-it doesnt get much more powerful and intimidating.

Anyone who can support allowing churches to be insured for such things should be sick to their stomach. Why protect a church which would allow such things to go on-they SHOULD be sued into complete bankruptcy.

RML Returns:

Next time Father Johnson wants you to pet his namesake or next time Friar Paul takes all the kids swimming but wants them to change into their bathing suits one by one dont worry about it-the church has insurance.

What a joke. People in the ultimate position of power over children (controlling the entrance to the afterlife-a personal connection to GOD himself)-it doesnt get much more powerful and intimidating.

Anyone who can support allowing churches to be insured for such things should be sick to their stomach. Why protect a church which would allow such things to go on-they SHOULD be sued into complete bankruptcy.

If you really believe that, then work to remove the legal protection that public schools enjoy. After all, a Department of Education study conducted by Charol Shakeshaft of Hofstra University in 2004 concluded that the sexual abuse problem--and yes, the cover-ups as well--is at least 100 times worse in the public schools than in the Catholic Church. But as recently as June 20 a bill removing the statute of limitations in Delaware was passed without an amendment that stated "that equal protection is given to all children, not just children in private institutions or private settings"--so the public schools are still free to carry on as before without worrying about any lawsuits.

By all means sue the PEOPLE in both cases. The difference is that a public school could not possibly have GOD as their authority giving license to the sick acts of a pervert--I know few kids who fear the power of the school system as it is far more likely that the school will fire the teacher in question without so much as an investigation.

The church on the other hand likes to send the perverts on to molest kids elsewhere and then "talks" to the parents about forgiveness or worse plays down the whole thing.

A study is like most statistics questionable at best. How about we just look at the court cases? Is Deleware protecting the offenders? Nope. Just protecting a public school from being blamed for what is clearly the act of the individual in question. The Church could enjoy the same protection if it wasnt protecting the offenders instead-they choose to defend the perverts-time to take the church and their lies to task.

Actually, Insurance also protects (to some extent) the victim by ensuring that there is a pot of money to recover from.

In the case of the article here, the insurance companies are kicking in $227 million; that's money that might not otherwise be available to compensate the victims.

A better example is car accidents; if somebody with no assets injures you, and they have insurance, at least you will get some money. If they do not have any money then you will not be compensated at all for you damages.

However, I understand your point; there is a possibility that having insurance makes people more reckless because they know they won't have to pay the consequences. On the other hand, these churches have incentive to prevent "covered" abuses because the insurance companies will dramatically increase their premiums if the risk continues. So, having insurance is not a blank check or green light for harmful behavior.

It is a sad commentary on the church's inability to provide institutional control if they feel the need to carry this sort of insurance.

NightSwimmer:

It is a sad commentary on the church's inability to provide institutional control if they feel the need to carry this sort of insurance.

Again, the Department of Education estimated that the abuse problem is at least 100 times worse in the public schools than in the Catholic Church.

And the government forces you to send your kids to the public schools, where their grades--and their future--depends on how well they please their teachers. So who uses fear more? (Maybe that's why the problem is worse in the public schools.)

Do you have a link to support the estimate of 100 times worse in public schools?

middleview:

Do you have a link to support the estimate of 100 times worse in public schools?

The study was conducted by Charol Shakeshaft of Hofstra University for the Department of Education, under the "No Child Left Behind Act", in 2004. You google it.

You'll find that the teachers' unions argue that the accusations against teachers are "based on hearsay"--well, what do you think the accusations against Catholic priests who died decades ago are based on?

In my local public school district first-grade boys were being molested in the bathrooms until a father found out about it and stormed into the principal's office. Even then the principal refused to contact the police and the father had to contact them himself. Later on, since the principal was required to contact the police by law, he claimed that he used a secret telephone number that no records exist of. Again, the school district was required by law to report these incidents to the state Department of Education but didn't.

When the parents threatened to sue they were informed that you can't sue a public school district unless it lets you.