Regardless of the credibility of the Catholic Church (or anybody else for that matter), a politician's role is to make law, not exercise it.
We have courts for the latter.
Was that the sound of the bow string snapping ?Yes even though the thought of burning pedophiles at the stake has some appeal politicians are notorious for lying or being deceitful to suit their cause Abbott being a prime example LOL
That's why it's better to have courts decide these matters, not politicians.Those of you who think that Senator Xenophon was wrong seem to be in a minority.
This is the current poll on the Adelaide Adveriser...
This is the essence of the issue imo.As long as the Senator is prepared to repeat the allegations outside the parliament then I guess that would be OK.
If he won't then he is abusing Parliamentary privilege IMO.
Privileges are actually immunities from the ordinary law:
‘The privileges of Parliament are immunities conferred in order to ensure that the duties of members as representatives of their constituents may be carried out without fear of intimidation or punishment, and without improper impediment... a privilege of Parliament is more properly called an immunity from the operation of certain laws, which are otherwise unduly restrictive on the proper performance of the duties of Parliament.’
[Senate Committee of Privileges, ‘Committee of Privileges 1966 - 1996, History, Practice and Procedure,’ 62nd Report June 1996 page 1.]
Julia said:So, if we accept the above definition, it would seem Senator Xenophon was in fact acting within the accepted boundaries of parliamentary privilege.
Archbishop Hepworth said he was "saddened" by the way the matter was being played out.
"It is being played out now in a crude way and megaphone diplomacy often doesn't work, I know that from my politics," he told ABC radio.
Archbishop John Hepworth has revealed that in 2007 he told the Adelaide Archdiocese, including Archbishop Philip Wilson and Vicar General and outgoing Social Inclusion Commissioner David Cappo, of repeated abuse at the hands of three men, two of whom are deceased.
Archbishop Hepworth, 67, has revealed he was the victim of violent rapes at the hands of three priests beginning in 1960 when he was a 15-year-old studying to be a priest.
Claims against deceased priests were settled in Melbourne.
But claims relating to the third priest, who still runs a parish in SA and denies the claims, are not yet resolved.
Archbishop Hepworth said the processes in Adelaide and Melbourne were very different.
He said he offered the report from Melbourne to Monsignor Cappo to read but that did not happen.
"I actually offered for Monsignor Cappo to read the report from Melbourne in my presence, a lot of deeply personal stuff; it's a nearly a sixty-page report on all their weekends taping interviews with me and so on," he told ABC radio.
"He dipped into a bit and the diocese solicitor with him said: 'well, we are going to give this to the guy you've named'.".
"I said 'I can't give it to you as it stands, there is too much there. Why on Earth would you give him all this stuff'. He put it to one side and said `well, we are not going to read it'."
Accusing someone of rape is not a "duty" of an MP. And even if it is, then what about protecting Mr Dempsey's rights (who is also a constituent) which under South Australian law means accused rapists names are not released until a guilty verdict.
It's disgraceful that a man has been tarred as a rapist without trial. Surely as a member of the legislature Mr Xenophon should be upholding this fundamental tenet of our democracy, not trampling on it.
Senator Xenaphon used Parliamentary privilege to force the Catholic Church to face up to a particularly distasteful episode that it wanted to string out for as long as possible. There is a very revealing interview published in a WA newspaper that might explain why the Senator was so fed up with the stalling tactics of the Adelaide Catholic Church.
Since when did the Catholic Church become the arbiter of criminality? The police are who should be investigating this, not Sen Xenophon and certainly not the Catholic Church.
Once again you have just proven that you are commenting on something that you have no understanding of
You do not understand or I would confidently say that have never heard of Canon Law (that also applies to a few other generic commentators on here too).
You do not understand or I would confidently say that have never heard of Canon Law .
It that like Sharia?
It that like Sharia?
Show me the bit where the Catholic Church's internal law overrides Australian law.
I won't hold my breath.
Instead of writing why not do some reading then you would not need to ask that question.
Could be worse Wayne if it is abused (not that that would ever happen).
What commentator's on here don't understand is that it takes Parliamentary Privilege to comment on it.
Boggo, perhaps you could just, for the sake of all of us who are ignorant of this Canon law, outline the situation as you see it.Instead of writing why not do some reading then you would not need to ask that question.
Canon law is the body of laws and regulations made or adopted by ecclesiastical authority, for the government of the Christian organization and its members.
Canon law.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_law
Does it override common law ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law
Nick Xenaphon should apologise or he will lose all my respect.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?