19 Jan 16
Originally posted by robbie carrobieRead the whole thread robbie - you said many things and made many assertions and offered various reasons, to your way of thinking, that justified your organization covering up sexual abuse of children by its members. Read the whole thread. Read all the arguments you made.
yes I have and this is a direct quotation from that thread, so you will now tell how how you get from,
The matter is quite clear, in the UK there is mandatory reporting which supersedes that of penitent privilege, meaning of course that a minster of God is under duress to report any instances of child abuse to the relevant authorities as soon as ...[text shortened]... the cover up of people having sex with children' - FMF
from the thread that you have cited.
19 Jan 16
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIf people want to go and read that thread and they come to the conclusion that you were not defending the cover up of child abuse in your religious organization and therefore they think I have been lying, then I'm fine with that.
Dude it wont make it real no matter how many times you repeat it. You have been caught making assertions of a very serious nature that you have so far failed to substantiate and you are being held accountable for your own words. Surely this is simply the same standard that you hold out to others? Well lets watch you dance.
19 Jan 16
2 edits
Originally posted by FMFI have read it again, now you will explain how you get from
Read the whole thread robbie - you said many things and made many assertions and offered various reasons, to your way of thinking, that justified your organization covering up sexual abuse of children by its members. Read the whole thread. Read all the arguments you made.
The matter is quite clear, in the UK there is mandatory reporting which supersedes that of penitent privilege, meaning of course that a minster of God is under duress to report any instances of child abuse to the relevant authorities as soon as they come to light. Penitent privilege does not prevent this nor can it be used to prevent access to information or hinder in any way investigations by civil authorities.
So if a kid came to me and said that they were being abused, I would drive them to the nearest police station, which is not far from me and give the matter into the hands of the police. I am a minster of God, I have been trained to deal with sin, I have not been trained to deal with criminality. It is a matter for the police. - robbie carrobie *
to
'you have defended the cover up of people having sex with children' - FMF
from the thread that you have cited, which I have read again.
19 Jan 16
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFYes i welcome it and infact i have even produced a direct quotation from that thread something that you, for reasons known only to you, seem incapable of doing. So lets hold you to your words shall we, how do you extricate from this statement here, from the thread that you yourself have cited and which I have read,
If people want to go and read that thread and they come to the conclusion that you were not defending the cover up of child abuse in your religious organization and therefore they think I have been lying, then I'm fine with that.
The matter is quite clear, in the UK there is mandatory reporting which supersedes that of penitent privilege, meaning of course that a minster of God is under duress to report any instances of child abuse to the relevant authorities as soon as they come to light. Penitent privilege does not prevent this nor can it be used to prevent access to information or hinder in any way investigations by civil authorities.
So if a kid came to me and said that they were being abused, I would drive them to the nearest police station, which is not far from me and give the matter into the hands of the police. I am a minster of God, I have been trained to deal with sin, I have not been trained to deal with criminality. It is a matter for the police. - robbie carrobie *
to
'you have defended the cover up of people having sex with children' - FMF
really FMF I am interested in your reasoning and your thought process, tell us how you did it?
19 Jan 16
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThe thread is there for anyone to look at. I advise them to look at everything you said page after page and not just a couple of sentences from right near the end when you realized your pants were at your ankles.
I have read it again, now you will explain how you get from
The matter is quite clear, in the UK there is mandatory reporting which supersedes that of penitent privilege, meaning of course that [b]a minster of God is under duress to report any instances of child abuse to the relevant authorities as soon as they come to light. Penitent privilege do ...[text shortened]... aving sex with children' - FMF
from the thread that you have cited, which I have read again.
19 Jan 16
3 edits
Originally posted by FMFYes so you keep saying but you are not being asked if the thread exists nor whether anyone is free to read it, what you are actually being asked is how you get from,
The thread is there for anyone to look at. I advise them to look at everything you said page after page and not just a couple of sentences from right near the end when you realized your pants were at your ankles.
The matter is quite clear, in the UK there is mandatory reporting which supersedes that of penitent privilege, meaning of course that a minster of God is under duress to report any instances of child abuse to the relevant authorities as soon as they come to light. Penitent privilege does not prevent this nor can it be used to prevent access to information or hinder in any way investigations by civil authorities.
So if a kid came to me and said that they were being abused, I would drive them to the nearest police station, which is not far from me and give the matter into the hands of the police. I am a minster of God, I have been trained to deal with sin, I have not been trained to deal with criminality. It is a matter for the police. - robbie carrobie *
to
'you have defended the cover up of people having sex with children' - FMF
the only person having anything near his ankles at this moment in time seems to be you FMF when confronted with actual evidence. Did you think that your lies would carry? Did you pin your hopes on the emotive and controversial nature of the subject hoping you could use it to make threats and vile accusations so as to stigmatize me, wow lets watch you dance.
19 Jan 16
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThe thread is there for anyone to look at. They should read it all and not just a couple of sentences you tagged on at the end when you were trying to bail out and distance yourself from the hideous immoral stance you'd taken. They should read pages 1-9 too.
the only person having anything near his ankles at this moment in time seems to be you FMF when confronted with actual evidence. Did you think that your lies would carry? Did you pin your hopes on the emotive and controversial nature of the subject hoping you could use it to make threats, wow lets watch you dance.
19 Jan 16
3 edits
Gentle reader I encourage you to learn from FMF's example, this is what happens when you pin your hopes on vile insinuations and outright lies. Here he is, the great scourgey windbag reduced to a smoldering wreckage, wagon wheels fallen off, unable to substantiate his claims and being made to dance, jaggy nettle underpants on the forum floor. What a sad and pathetic individual who had sought to use an emotive and serious subject as ammunition for his baggy scourging ways the irony of it being that the only windbag thats needs scourging is him. Lets watch him dance.
19 Jan 16
3 edits
Originally posted by FMFYes so you keep saying and I welcome anyone to go and look there for if they do they will find this statement here,
The thread is there for anyone to look at. They should read it all and not just a couple of sentences you tagged on at the end when you were trying to bail out and distance yourself from the hideous immoral stance you'd taken. They should read pages 1-9 too.
The matter is quite clear, in the UK there is mandatory reporting which supersedes that of penitent privilege, meaning of course that a minster of God is under duress to report any instances of child abuse to the relevant authorities as soon as they come to light. Penitent privilege does not prevent this nor can it be used to prevent access to information or hinder in any way investigations by civil authorities.
So if a kid came to me and said that they were being abused, I would drive them to the nearest police station, which is not far from me and give the matter into the hands of the police. I am a minster of God, I have been trained to deal with sin, I have not been trained to deal with criminality. It is a matter for the police. - robbie carrobie
from which FMF manages to extract
'you have defended the cover up of people having sex with children' - FMF
and yet seems unable to tell us how he did it. Lets hope hes a better dancer than a liar.
O.k., gents, why don't you settle this now once and for all?
1. Has child abuse taken place in Robbie's organization? Yes or no?
2. Should it be brought to the attention of the judicial authorities? Yes or no?
If Robbie says yes and yes to the above, then you, FMF, will be a
gentleman and tell Robbie you were wrong and apologize for having
misinterpreted his earlier views. If he stutters or answers other than
yes to the above, then I'll join you in a feast of pitchforks and torches,
and we'll take him together to the village plaza and burn him alive.
Everybody should have the opportunity to evolve in his/her views and to
adjust earlier misjudgments. In life and on RHP.
19 Jan 16
Originally posted by SeitseBut dude FMF was just getting into his routine, lets me shoot some more bullets at his feet so i can watch him dance?
O.k., gents, why don't you settle this now once and for all?
1. Has child abuse taken place in Robbie's organization? Yes or no?
2. Should it be brought to the attention of the judicial authorities? Yes or no?
If Robbie says yes and yes to the above, then you, FMF, will be a
gentleman and tell Robbie you were wrong and apologize for having
misinterp ...[text shortened]... opportunity to evolve in his/her views and to
adjust earlier misjudgments. In life and on RHP.
19 Jan 16
1 edit
Originally posted by Seitserobbie's explicit and unequivocal argument that child abuse at his religious organization ought to be kept secret from authorities is laid out in Thread 162947. If he has changed his stance since the thread in question and he now does not support or endorse the covering up or withholding of information from law enforcement authorities of sexual abuse of children by his organisation in any circumstances, then I will welcome it.
1. Has child abuse taken place in Robbie's organization? Yes or no?
2. Should it be brought to the attention of the judicial authorities? Yes or no?
19 Jan 16
Originally posted by FMFYes so do I and perhaps they will have more success than you in attempting to substantiate any claims they make on the basis of having done so.
I suggest anyone interested ought to read all the things you said on the nine pages before you beat your undignified self-contradicting retreat on page 10. People should read the whole thread, by which I mean pages 1 to 9 too.