Talon Posted January 5, 2005 #1 Share Posted January 5, 2005 US diocese makes $100m abuse deal The Roman Catholic Church in California is to pay $100m (£53m) to the alleged victims of sexual abuse by clergy members, a US judge has announced. The settlement, in Orange County, is the largest made by any Roman Catholic diocese in the United States. It exceeds the payment made by Boston's diocese, where claims of abuse within the Church in America first emerged. Bishop Tod Brown made an apology at a press conference, which was attended by some of the 87 victims. "I seek their forgiveness, I hope for reconciliation and I know they have now begun their healing process," he said. Some of the details of the settlement emerged last month when the Church announced it had reached a deal after two years of talks. The diocese will pay half of the $100m settlement, and eight insurance firms will pay the rest. "Let this be what everyone remembers from today: that nothing is more important than the protection of our children and our youth," said Bishop Brown. He promised changes to personnel policies to ensure "as much as humanly possible, that these things will never happen again". Threat to church Some of the plaintiffs attending the hearing were tearful. "The acknowledgement of what happened to us makes the difference," said Max Fisher. "We are no longer just alleged victims. It means more to me than anything." The amount exceeds the payment of $85m (£44m) to more than 500 plaintiffs two years ago in Boston. Thousands more cases are still pending in Los Angeles and other parts of the US, with several dioceses reportedly facing possible bankruptcy as a result. The scandals, which surfaced in Boston in January 2002, have threatened the Roman Catholic Church in the US and beyond. Details of the Orange diocese settlement have not been given, but payouts will be based on the length and severity of the abuse and other factors. The allegations dated from 1936 to 1996 and were made against 31 priests, 10 lay workers, one religious brother and two nuns, the Associated Press reported. Story from BBC NEWS: http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/worl...cas/4147431.stm Now we know why the churches aren't donating money, their using it all to pay off their victims. Still, if that one state has that much money, I bet the rest of them to pay something worth a d*mn up rather than saying they'll offer prays. Prays never put a roof over someone's head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
girty1600 Posted January 5, 2005 #2 Share Posted January 5, 2005 When are these "religious" people going to realize that you can't solve a problem by throwing money at it. I feel horrible for the kids that had to go through these types of ordeals and I hope the money goes to good use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Talon Posted January 5, 2005 Author #3 Share Posted January 5, 2005 Why are you putting "religious" in inverted commas as if they are called religious but really not. They are religious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AztecInca Posted January 5, 2005 #4 Share Posted January 5, 2005 Money wont solve anything, the damage has already been done, what happened to those people can never be taken back, those responsible should be locked away for life! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bizeebutt Posted January 5, 2005 #5 Share Posted January 5, 2005 Isn't anyone going to question why one single Diocese has $500,000 to go towards a settlement!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Talon Posted January 5, 2005 Author #6 Share Posted January 5, 2005 Isn't anyone going to question why one single Diocese has $500,000 to go towards a settlement!? No, because we've always known the church was a multi-billion pound a year profit institution. They make a fortune from donatations etc, thats why it exists, cause its the most profitavle business ever. Course one single Diocese would have that kind of money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
girty1600 Posted January 5, 2005 #7 Share Posted January 5, 2005 Why are you putting "religious" in inverted commas as if they are called religious but really not. They are religious. 436852[/snapback] To promt a sassy remark at my own expense. Why do you end a question with a period? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Talon Posted January 5, 2005 Author #8 Share Posted January 5, 2005 Why didn't you answer the question? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
girty1600 Posted January 5, 2005 #9 Share Posted January 5, 2005 I guess it's because I feel lumped in with all these people that do horrible things either in the name of God or with His defense. I consider myself a religious person because of how I live my life and my personal relationship with God. Not because of what faction of religion that I associate. I don't even believe organized religion is a good thing for me because I see too much corruption in it. I placed the word religion in quotes because it pains me to think I am looked upon the same way as the people that commit and cover up these types of crimes. I don't believe you have to be a member of mindless mass to convey your faith to others and believe what you believe. We as individuals can live the way we want to live without defending every act that is carried out in the name of God. So, to answer your question: religion had become a term ( to me ) that is synonymous with hatred and greed rather than compassion and learning. Talon, do you understand where I was coming from even if you don't agree? If you don't I could try and explain my rational further if you wish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Talon Posted January 5, 2005 Author #10 Share Posted January 5, 2005 Just because their religious doesn't mean that suddenly we think all religious people are like them. I get your meaning. I thought you were pulling a Zpher or whatever that guy from Iran's called in his claim that terrosist arn't Muslims only pretending to be to discredit it. I thought you were claiming these people weren't religious just trying to discredit it. Glad to know you weren't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
girty1600 Posted January 5, 2005 #11 Share Posted January 5, 2005 Nope, I wasn't. Glad you understand where I was coming from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now