19 Jan 16
Originally posted by FMFI have provided a statement from the thread that you cite where i have unequivocally advocated the reporting of child abuse to the authorities and from which you seem unable to tell us how you get from,
robbie'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 your organisation in any circumstances, then I will welcome it.
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
19 Jan 16
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYour insults are nothing but a blur of repeated catchphrases and cliches.
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 ...[text shortened]... the irony of it being that the only windbag thats needs scourging is him. Lets watch him dance.
19 Jan 16
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFDude start dancing,
Your insults are nothing but a blur of repeated catchphrases and cliches.
Does this statement here appear to you or any rational person to advocate the reporting of child abuse to the relevant authorities or does it advocate covering it up as you have alleged, here it is again, from the thread that you yourself have cited,
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 *
19 Jan 16
Originally posted by SeitseIf robbie's views have evolved, then I welcome it. However, the way he has been rattled to the core by mention of the thread in which he assiduously defended his organization's covering up of abuse would suggest that he is still conflicted and hasn't evolved much beyond meeting confrontation over what he actually said with a torrent of red herrings and insults. If he is willing to denounce what he argued page after page of that thread, then I sincerely welcome such an evolution of his moral mind map.
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 robbie carrobieI suggest anyone looking at that thread read everything you argued for page after page and not just a couple of sentences you added right near the end when you were trying to distance yourself from what you'd been saying all along.
Dude start dancing,
Does this statement here appear to you or any rational person to advocate the reporting of child abuse to the relevant authorities or does it advocate covering it up as you have alleged, here it is again, from the thread that you yourself have cited,
The matter is quite clear, in the UK there is mandatory reporting which s ...[text shortened]... ve not been trained to deal with criminality. It is a matter for the police. - robbie carrobie *
19 Jan 16
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFI am not rattled at all and in fact I am having great fun watching you dance. Difficult to argue with empirical evidence isn't it FMF. Is that why you have been unable to comment on the extract from the very thread that you yourself have cited other than to reiterate the same nothingness bereft of anything other than your unsubstantiated opinions. Did you think you would get away with it on the basis of the emotive nature of the subject?
If robbie's views have evolved, then I welcome it. However, the way he has been rattled to the core by mention of the thread in which he assiduously defended his organization's covering up of abuse would suggest that he is still conflicted and hasn't evolved much beyond meeting confrontation over what he actually said with a torrent of red herrings and insults. ...[text shortened]... age after page of that thread, then I sincerely welcome such an evolution of his moral mind map.
19 Jan 16
Originally posted by FMFI suggest that you answer the question, here it is again, does this appear to you to advocate covering up child abuse as you have alleged
I suggest anyone looking at that thread read everything you argued for page after page and not just a couple of sentences you added right near the end when you were trying to distance yourself from what you'd been saying all along.
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
19 Jan 16
Originally posted by robbie carrobieBut I have commented and made it very clear what those sentences tacked on at the very end ~ of nine pages of your unambiguous defence of cover ups ~ represent.
I am not rattled at all and in fact I am having great fun watching you dance. Difficult to argue with empirical evidence isn't it FMF. Is that why you have been unable to comment on the extract from the very thread that you yourself have cited other than to reiterate the same nothingness bereft of anything other than your unsubstantiated opinions.
19 Jan 16
2 edits
Originally posted by FMFyes but you have still failed to tell us whether the statement is advocating the covering up of child abuse as you have alledged. Its from the thread that you yourself cited, so why don't you tell us how it advocates covering up child abuse, here it is again, lets see if you can bring yourself to acknowledge its sentiments, shall we
But I have commented and made it very clear what those sentences tacked on at the very end ~ of nine pages of your unambiguous defence of cover ups ~ represent.
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 has somehow managed to extricate 'you have defended the cover up of people having sex with children' - FMF
Perhaps someone will come to your aid after reading the thread FMF, perhaps they will be able to help you determine whether or not it advocates covering up child abuse as you have alleged or whether it in fact advocates the reporting of matters to the relevant authorities as it seems to be saying.
19 Jan 16
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWhy have you not quoted any of the arguments defending the cover up of child sex abuse that you made in exchanges with posters such as twhitehead, divegeester, googlefudge, stellspalfie, Proper Knob and myself on the first nine pages of that thread?
yes but you have still failed to tell us whether the statement is advocating the covering up of child abuse as you have alledged. Its from the thread that you yourself cited, so why don't you tell us how it advocates covering up child abuse, here it is again, lets see if you can bring yourself to acknowledge its sentiments, shall we
The matter is ...[text shortened]... in fact advocates the reporting of matters to the relevant authorities as it seems to be saying.
19 Jan 16
1 edit
Originally posted by SeitseYes if FMF apologizes to me and gives alms to some poor fellow I will forgive him.
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
Originally posted by FMFA beggarly loaded question, how so very very PATHETIC.
Why have you not quoted any of the arguments defending the cover up of child sex abuse that you made in exchanges with posters such as twhitehead, divegeester, googlefudge, stellspalfie, Proper Knob and myself on the first nine pages of that thread?
19 Jan 16
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIf you denounce the suggestion that your religious organization has any kind of obligation to child rapists and abusers to keep their sex crimes secret and that there should be no cover up or attempt to withhold information about sex crimes or allegations of sex crimes from law enforcement agencies, and in so doing ditch the arguments you were putting forward during the 2015 thread in question, then I will welcome it and will congratulate you.
Yes if FMF apologizes to me and gives alms to some poor fellow I will forgive him.