Believe me, I'm tired of it, too. There are a lot more interesting things to write about than you.
But you and your pointy-hatted American pals just can't seem to let a week go by without a serious moral outrage. And, being neither a woman seeking health care coverage nor someone seeking to marry within my gender nor a Catholic nor, in light of today's oh-too-cute move, a survivor of priestly abuse, I feel sufficiently objective to toss the penalty flag.
The New York Times reports today on your organization's latest attempt to sweep decades of abuse under the cassock, this time by crippling the group dedicated to helping those abused by your servants.
Turning the tables on an advocacy group that has long supported victims of pedophile priests, lawyers for the Roman Catholic Church and priests accused of sexual abuse in two Missouri cases have gone to court to compel the group to disclose more than two decades of e-mails that could include correspondence with victims, lawyers, whistle-blowers, witnesses, the police, prosecutors and journalists.Of course, your organization can't comment on an ongoing case. Sad that you didn't bother muzzling your pet attack dog, William Donohue, who gave away the game with his comment to reporters: "SNAP is a menace to the Catholic Church."
The group, the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, known as SNAP, is neither a plaintiff nor a defendant in the litigation. But the group has been subpoenaed five times in recent months in Kansas City and St. Louis, and its national director, David Clohessy, was questioned by a battery of lawyers for more than six hours this year. A judge in Kansas City ruled that the network must comply because it “almost certainly” had information relevant to the case.
The network and its allies say the legal action is part of a campaign by the church to cripple an organization that has been the most visible defender of victims, and a relentless adversary, for more than two decades. “If there is one group that the higher-ups, the bishops, would like to see silenced,” said Marci A. Hamilton, a law professor at Yeshiva University and an advocate for victims of clergy sex crimes, “it definitely would be SNAP. And that’s what they’re going after. They’re trying to find a way to silence SNAP.”
And, of course, Donohue is right. Because SNAP provides advice and assistance to the victims of your organization's longtime program of hiding abusers and maintaining them in positions where they can continue their crimes, SNAP represents a genuine threat to your organization's continued financial health.
So you intend to crush them. Under mountains of paperwork. Suck them dry with thousands of billable attorney-hours.
Way cute, dude. Too cute for me.
So, to level the field a little, I'm offering SNAP this bit of advice, free of charge:
As the fellow once known as Cardinal Ratzinger has been named in Church documents as abetting accused child molesters and hiding them from authorities, I suggest SNAP and those for whom it works bring suit against Mr. Ratzinger, demanding that he
disclose more than two decades of e-mails that could include correspondence with victims, lawyers, whistle-blowers, witnesses, the police, prosecutors and journalists.And priests, bishops, cardinals, etc.
I have no doubt that a competent judge would rule that Mr. Ratzinger "'almost certainly'” had information relevant to the case."
Update: kestrel9000 suggests that readers of this thread may find this site of interest. I agree.
Another update: pasadena beggar notes that SNAP has a petition asking that the Church stop the legal bullying of those it's trying to assist.
Upping the date again: Per Inland's suggestion, SNAP's donation page is here.