Louisiana Judge Rules That Priests Don’t Have to Report Abuse if They Hear It During Confession

[trotsky]

147. It is one thing to state that rights should be universal as applied to *people*.

It's quite another to state they should be universal as applied to *religion*.

Religions are ideas. They hold different things sacred. In the case of the Aztecs, human sacrifice was indeed sacred. You can't really say they wouldn't be allowed to sacrifice people if you're going to declare items that are special "enough" in a religion to be protected, and given special accommodations in secular law, as you are arguing in the case of confessional. Your logic forces you to accept all acts done under the guise of sincere religious belief, no matter how illegal they would otherwise be.

A Hindu is under no obligation to tell a priest he did anything wrong, a devout Catholic is.

Do you think every Catholic who has ever lived, has declared every sin they ever committed to a priest? Does every Catholic follow every dictate of the church? I think we both know the answers to those questions.

Who is encumbered by laws Catholics are free from?

I am a little taken aback by how unfamiliar you are with the specifics of this situation. But then again that could explain your simple, blanket statements here. Mandatory reporters, people in virtually the same situation as the confessional priest, who become aware of a crime - particularly as it applies to young children - are required to report it. Catholic priests are not. A special accommodation has been made simply because a certain religious practice is privileged. I don't believe this accommodation is warranted. You do, but you still haven't been able to come up with a consistent, logical justification.

Not my job to do your homework, either.