Adrian Lowe, 30/4/10
One of eight students molested by a staff member at a prestigious Melbourne private school has told of the betrayal of trust by the man he once considered a friend. Another boy has described how he felt he ”could never be happy again” after being abused by someone he thought had cared about him. Cameron Tweeddale Smith worked as a first-aid attendant at Brighton Grammar School between 2002 and 2007. He also was a volunteer with St John Ambulance and ran the school’s program with the service.
See: http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/molested-students-reveal-betrayal-20100429-twlt.html
Tags: Australia, Pedophilia
Adrian, these students could feel no more bertayed than our own Catholic
ones.
At least they were believed and it was acted upon.
In some intances to their own detriment, some priests have continued in their ministry with full knowledge of their Bishops.
I have never understood why Australian NGO’s and Human and Childrens Rights organisations have never spoken out.
It isn’t because they never knew, the media has seen to that including Catholic ones to their credit.
Political correctness has left many wanting and I’m sure the day will come when they regret it.
Lynne – “In some intances to their own detriment, some priests have continued in their ministry with full knowledge of their Bishops.” however this does not really answer anything clearly and does not define a genuine position taken in this regard.
Some instances could refer to St John of God for example where 100% were classifiable as pedophile according to the psychologist treating them.
Some instances could also refer to x (an undefined number or percentage) of the now more than 6,000 convicted/credibly accused priests in the US or it could refer to the number of priests (once again unknown) in the Melbourne diocese who were permitted to continue in ministry or does ‘some instances’ refer to the implied fact that this action was detrimental to the priest?
re not understanding why NGOs, human/childrens rights do not speak out – mostly that seems to be because these things are not against the law – as in there is not law to cover this particular aspect. History shows that the Catholic church in particular has a long history of involvement in the making of the laws of the country – just as the lawyers for pedophile priests employed by the church are aware of innocence or guilt they are also aware of the requirements for the existence or non existence of particular laws or regulations – a review of the global history of the support by the church towards the implementation of statute of limitations laws, of course they spoke out in support of the victims – they always do that publicly while at the same time their lawyers and lobbyists were working overtime to see them implemented as well as fighting any endeavor since to have them removed or to open up windows for the victims.
When you become involved in the sexual abuse of children by Catholic clergy within the confines of politics you realize that political correctness is not its name, rather it is the political manipulation of government and politicians. We unfortunately have the notion of separation of church and state and our governments attempt to display that through not passing legislation in those areas – this is overcome through the use of Catholic (and other) religious bodies as providers of extension of government services bringing to the people proxy religious regulation – all done without a single piece of legislation.
The church on the other hand (and many of its followers) see nothing amiss even though the church’s canons are littered with references to civil/criminal matters (theoretically the preserve of the state if both parties are to hold with a separation of church and state). What that brings to the people of Australia is a dualistic law/legal system.
The two views are diametrically opposed in many ways, they cannot harmoniously exist with one another. The religious philosophy is that the religious teachings are right/correct/biblical etc and therefore they must be implemented (hence the lobbying/politicking/buying etc) whereas the opposing view is that religious belief/philosophy should be a personal matter and should not be permitted to organize to the point where they can lobby/politic/buy etc. What we have today is the result of more than 100 years of this and what we have today is a series of health/community/political/legal/services etc crisis as a result.