iain
Lib Dem
Posts: 11,431 
|
Post by iain on Oct 31, 2020 9:12:23 GMT
Early numbers are looking relatively good for Labor; One Nation down across the board.
|
|
|
|
Post by pragmaticidealist on Oct 31, 2020 9:44:58 GMT
Green is reluctant to call it due to the large postal and prepoll vote, understandably.
|
|
|
|
Post by pragmaticidealist on Oct 31, 2020 9:51:44 GMT
The ALP's Jackie Trad looks to have lost South Brisbane to the Greens. Less expectedly, ex-LNP leader Tim Nicholls is in a fight in Clayfield.
|
|
iain
Lib Dem
Posts: 11,431
|
Post by iain on Oct 31, 2020 11:45:18 GMT
Antony Green projects that Labor will form the next government.
|
|
|
|
Post by pragmaticidealist on Oct 31, 2020 12:46:00 GMT
ABC's current prediction is ALP 51, LNP 35, Others 7.
|
|
|
|
Post by matureleft on Oct 31, 2020 12:46:12 GMT
Projection is Lab 51 (+3), LNP 35 (-4), Katter 3, Green 2 (+1), One Nation 1, Ind 1
|
|
Georg Ebner
Non-Aligned
Roman romantic reactionary Catholic
Posts: 9,807
|
Post by Georg Ebner on Oct 31, 2020 16:15:40 GMT
With Labor's law demanding from priests to break in the case of ChildAbuse their seal of confession - what is totally inacceptable for Catholics - they would have deserved to be deselected.
Thus i expected them to be reelected by the vulgus...
|
|
|
|
Post by matureleft on Oct 31, 2020 16:41:22 GMT
With Labor's law demanding from priests to break in the case of ChildAbuse their seal of confession - what is totally inacceptable for Catholics - they would have deserved to be deselected. Thus i expected them to be reelected by the vulgus... It's worth saying that this law had the support of the opposition as well. |
|
maxque
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,301
|
Post by maxque on Oct 31, 2020 16:53:44 GMT
With Labor's law demanding from priests to break in the case of ChildAbuse their seal of confession - what is totally inacceptable for Catholics - they would have deserved to be deselected. Thus i expected them to be reelected by the vulgus... I suspect most Catholics are supporting the law. Only the corrupt establisment doesn't. |
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Oct 31, 2020 17:05:29 GMT
The ALP's Jackie Trad looks to have lost South Brisbane to the Greens. Less expectedly, ex-LNP leader Tim Nicholls is in a fight in Clayfield. Amy McMahon is now too far ahead on preferences to lose in South Brisbane. The Greens came a good third in Cooper and McConnel as well with 30.6% and 28.2% respectively, sadly not enough to make the final round in either of those divisions. |
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Oct 31, 2020 17:09:12 GMT
Jason Costigan, who formed New Queensland First after being wrongly expelled from the LNP, finished a poor third in Whitsunday with 9.6%.
|
|
Georg Ebner
Non-Aligned
Roman romantic reactionary Catholic
Posts: 9,807
|
Post by Georg Ebner on Oct 31, 2020 20:43:05 GMT
With Labor's law demanding from priests to break in the case of ChildAbuse their seal of confession - what is totally inacceptable for Catholics - they would have deserved to be deselected. Thus i expected them to be reelected by the vulgus... I suspect most Catholics are supporting the law. Only the corrupt establisment doesn't. Not a single real catholic can support it. |
|
maxque
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,301
|
Post by maxque on Oct 31, 2020 20:50:46 GMT
I suspect most Catholics are supporting the law. Only the corrupt establisment doesn't. Not a single real catholic can support it. Are you doubting me and my family religion? I don't really need the approval of a church mouse like you. |
|
Georg Ebner
Non-Aligned
Roman romantic reactionary Catholic
Posts: 9,807
|
Post by Georg Ebner on Oct 31, 2020 21:10:57 GMT
Not a single real catholic can support it. Are you doubting me and my family religion? I don't really need the approval of a church mouse like you. No, i have no doubts on Your "catholic" faith... |
|
maxque
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,301
|
Post by maxque on Oct 31, 2020 21:13:46 GMT
Are you doubting me and my family religion? I don't really need the approval of a church mouse like you. No, i have no doubts on Your "catholic" faith... At least, unlike you, I accepted Vatican II, at least. |
|
CatholicLeft
Labour
2032 posts until I was "accidentally" deleted.
Posts: 6,718
|
Post by CatholicLeft on Oct 31, 2020 23:06:03 GMT
No, i have no doubts on Your "catholic" faith... At least, unlike you, I accepted Vatican II, at least. A simple point to make - a priest cannot break the Seal of the Confessional. An accusation made that something is said in the Confessional cannot be defended, so a priest has no way to defend himself. However, this law is so daft as to be beyond belief - sexual abusers do not believe they have done anything wrong therefore they are not very likely to confess. If somebody does approach a priest for absolution, and if they have no intention of making right what they have done( that is, admit their guilt to the authorities so as to begin to put right the pain they have caused by their actions) they will not receive Absolution. The law that was passed is as ridiculous as the laws used to put to death Catholic priests in England after the gunpowder plot - the plotters must have gone to priests for absolution and therefore the priest were guilty. A nonsensical argument that led to the execution of several priests with no proof. Something that will now have its modern equivalence. Of course, what makes this worse and shows the utter banality of the law is that the one way in which an abuser might try to change their ways and admit their behaviour and be convinced to hand themselves in has now been closed off. A daft law, targeting the church for political points, having the opposite effect from what it intends. Bear in mind, I worked for 12 years in High Security prisons with sex offenders, and I battled against the waste of money which was the Sex Offender Treatment Programme, which was supported by successive governments with liberal agendas (of all stripes) in the UK, Australia, etc. Instead of trying to spend money helping other prisoners learn skills, we wasted time on trying to 'cure' that which was uncurable - many sex offenders played along, were released and re-offended. Not hearing any calls for the psychologists, prison administrators, politicians, authors, et al to be threatened with prison. No, let's just attack the old enemy on the basis of an old piece of bigotry - that the Confessional is a place of conspiracy. maxque , I do not doubt your faith, I do, however, think you lack an understanding of the role of Confession and who the real establishment are in this case. |
|
|
|
Post by Adam in Stroud on Oct 31, 2020 23:47:22 GMT
At least, unlike you, I accepted Vatican II, at least. A simple point to make - a priest cannot break the Seal of the Confessional. An accusation made that something is said in the Confessional cannot be defended, so a priest has no way to defend himself. However, this law is so daft as to be beyond belief - sexual abusers do not believe they have done anything wrong therefore they are not very likely to confess. If somebody does approach a priest for absolution, and if they have no intention of making right what they have done( that is, admit their guilt to the authorities so as to begin to put right the pain they have caused by their actions) they will not receive Absolution. The law that was passed is as ridiculous as the laws used to put to death Catholic priests in England after the gunpowder plot - the plotters must have gone to priests for absolution and therefore the priest were guilty. A nonsensical argument that led to the execution of several priests with no proof. Something that will now have its modern equivalence. Of course, what makes this worse and shows the utter banality of the law is that the one way in which an abuser might try to change their ways and admit their behaviour and be convinced to hand themselves in has now been closed off. A daft law, targeting the church for political points, having the opposite effect from what it intends. Bear in mind, I worked for 12 years in High Security prisons with sex offenders, and I battled against the waste of money which was the Sex Offender Treatment Programme, which was supported by successive governments with liberal agendas (of all stripes) in the UK, Australia, etc. Instead of trying to spend money helping other prisoners learn skills, we wasted time on trying to 'cure' that which was uncurable - many sex offenders played along, were released and re-offended. Not hearing any calls for the psychologists, prison administrators, politicians, authors, et al to be threatened with prison. No, let's just attack the old enemy on the basis of an old piece of bigotry - that the Confessional is a place of conspiracy. maxque , I do not doubt your faith, I do, however, think you lack an understanding of the role of Confession and who the real establishment are in this case. Also true of client confidentiality for a number of other organisations/professions (though not all, it depends on the nature of the service offered and whether or not the latter is of use to a shameless offender). Unfortunately both the Catholic and other churches have put themselves in bad odour by their very poor record on dealing with allegations of abuse by victims and on facts coming to rise while investigating such allegations (which are of course very different issues from the chimera of abusers confessing during the sacrament.) I would hope that in an "innocent until proven guilty" legal system it would be hard to prove beyond all doubt that a priest knew anything in the face of a defence which pointed out the unlikelihood of an abuser having enough remorse to seek absolution but insufficient to act on the requirement to demonstrate remorse, combined with a plea of "case not proven" |
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Nov 1, 2020 4:39:10 GMT
I suspect most Catholics are supporting the law. Only the corrupt establisment doesn't. Not a single real catholic can support it. That's the no true Scotsman fallacy. |
|
|
|
Post by matureleft on Nov 1, 2020 8:54:34 GMT
At least, unlike you, I accepted Vatican II, at least. A simple point to make - a priest cannot break the Seal of the Confessional. An accusation made that something is said in the Confessional cannot be defended, so a priest has no way to defend himself. However, this law is so daft as to be beyond belief - sexual abusers do not believe they have done anything wrong therefore they are not very likely to confess. If somebody does approach a priest for absolution, and if they have no intention of making right what they have done( that is, admit their guilt to the authorities so as to begin to put right the pain they have caused by their actions) they will not receive Absolution. The law that was passed is as ridiculous as the laws used to put to death Catholic priests in England after the gunpowder plot - the plotters must have gone to priests for absolution and therefore the priest were guilty. A nonsensical argument that led to the execution of several priests with no proof. Something that will now have its modern equivalence. Of course, what makes this worse and shows the utter banality of the law is that the one way in which an abuser might try to change their ways and admit their behaviour and be convinced to hand themselves in has now been closed off. A daft law, targeting the church for political points, having the opposite effect from what it intends. Bear in mind, I worked for 12 years in High Security prisons with sex offenders, and I battled against the waste of money which was the Sex Offender Treatment Programme, which was supported by successive governments with liberal agendas (of all stripes) in the UK, Australia, etc. Instead of trying to spend money helping other prisoners learn skills, we wasted time on trying to 'cure' that which was uncurable - many sex offenders played along, were released and re-offended. Not hearing any calls for the psychologists, prison administrators, politicians, authors, et al to be threatened with prison. No, let's just attack the old enemy on the basis of an old piece of bigotry - that the Confessional is a place of conspiracy. maxque , I do not doubt your faith, I do, however, think you lack an understanding of the role of Confession and who the real establishment are in this case. Thoughtful and well-informed (of course).
The point that struck me was how very marginal this would be in practical terms. For action against a priest to take place there would have to be evidence of a confession sufficiently substantial to be the basis of prosecution. Since a confession involves just two people it's hard to see how that would come about unless the priest chose to confirm what was said, presumably by the person confessing, and that, presumably, would be a breach too?
Of course there are contacts outside the confession where the priest and church authorities should act appropriately.
I can (and I am sure you can) see why steps like these have been taken in Australia (though interestingly not in all Australian states). That appalling history doesn't make those steps either right or particularly helpful (my point) in preventing repetition.
|
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Nov 1, 2020 12:47:01 GMT
This might be the first time in an Australian thread where the Australian Labor Party aren't the most factional organisation under discussion!
|
|
