|
|
Post by goz on Jun 13, 2019 1:02:05 GMT
goz Put it this way, regardless of this particular subject... when someone is accused of a crime it's up to the person accusing them to produce proof. it's the whole 'innocent til proven guilty' thing and the way the law works. so what's so disgraceful about that? that stuff cannot be ignored otherwise someone can simply accuse someone of a crime and they are guilty because a person said they were without any proof. that's how innocent people get screwed over. you can surely see this much, right?
p.s. while I might be biased for the Catholic church, your clearly biased against it (along with the mainstream media in general). that's why what I said above is best as it removes bias, for or against, and relies on facts/evidence instead of accusation.
What is disgraceful is the way the Catholic Church and now Catholic apologists like yourself covered up the evidence of these crimes for so many years so that it would be ore difficult for the victims who were mostly children at the time to be believed, and THEN claim that they are 'fake' claims.
|
|