Push to Require Clergy to Report Child Rape Stalls in Mormon Utah

A push to mandate members of religious clergy report child sexual abuse when it's brought to their attention is facing pushback from churches throughout the United States

By Associated Press

March 1, 2023, at 1:01 a.m.

SALT LAKE CITY (AP) — Lindsey Lundholm looked out over hundreds of people at the Utah State Capitol last year and felt a deep sense of healing. Abuse survivors, religious leaders and major party politicians were all gathered to rally for an end to a legal loophole that exempts religious clergy from being required to report child sexual abuse once it comes to their attention.

Lundholm, one of the rally's organizers, recalled telling the crowd how, growing up as a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Idaho, she told her bishop about her painful abuse only to see it go unreported.

Unearthing the trauma wasn't easy, but back in August she hoped reforms could be forthcoming so others would not face what she did.

“There was really a lot of momentum," said Lundholm, now a teacher in northern Utah. “Everyone we were talking to was like, ‘This is a no brainer. This is something that needs to be changed.’”

It hasn't.

Proposals to reform laws that exempt clergy from child sex abuse reporting requirements went nowhere in Utah’s statehouse this year, failing to receive even a hearing as lawmakers prepare to adjourn for the year. Efforts were stymied by a coalition of powerful religious groups, continuing a yearslong pattern in which Catholics, Latter-day Saints and Jehovah’s Witnesses have defended the exemptions as survivors like Lundholm fight for reform.

In Utah, where the majority of lawmakers are members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, state law requires most professionals — therapists, doctors and teachers among them — report abuse, yet clergy are exempt from alerting authorities about abuse they learn of through confessions.

Republicans and Democrats announced plans last year to reform laws that exempt religious clergy from reporting child sexual abuse cases revealed in conversations with parishioners.

Behind-the-scenes conversations between legislative leaders in Utah and what Senate President Stuart Adams said was “a broad base of religious groups” helped thwart four separate proposals to add clergy to the list of professionals required to report child sexual abuse.

“I think they have First Amendment rights and religious protections,” Adams, a Latter-day Saint himself, said, noting fears among religious leaders that clergy could be punished for breaking vows of confidentiality.

Each proposal was introduced or announced after an Associated Press investigation found that the Utah-based Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints' sexual abuse reporting hotline can be misused by its leaders to divert abuse accusations away from law enforcement and instead to church attorneys who may bury the problem, leaving victims in harm’s way.

In lawsuits detailed in the investigation, attorneys from the faith widely known as the Mormon church have argued clergy-penitent privilege allows them to refuse to answer questions and turn over documents about alleged sexual abuse.

Church officials declined to comment about the stalled legislative efforts. The Catholic Diocese of Salt Lake City did not respond to requests for comment but campaigned against them, saying in January that priests and clergy were different from other professionals mandated to report sexual abuse.

“Legislation that would require a priest to (report sexual abuse) violates our right to practice our religion,” Bishop Oscar Solis, of the Salt Lake City Diocese, wrote in a Jan. 25 letter to parishioners.

Utah Gov. Spencer Cox last month said he “had no problem with the bills moving forward” and receiving consideration in the statehouse.

“I think it’s an important conversation to have. We’ve encouraged the Legislature to look at this and make sure that our model is the right model,” he told reporters.

Marci Hamilton, chief executive of the abuse prevention nonprofit Child USA, said churches have maintained the same playbook for decades in opposing more disclosure.

Routinely it involves a two-pronged approach, defending clergy-penitent privilege in statehouses and using it to avoid damaging disclosures in court cases, said Hamilton, also a University of Pennsylvania law professor.

"They have not veered from it. Both institutions are hoping that time will simply let everybody start trusting them again," Hamilton said, referring to Catholics and Latter-day Saints.

But, she added, "by preventing the public — and especially the sincere believers — from getting the full story you don’t create the accountability that these organizations should be held to and the secrets continue.”

“The problem in the United States — and this is particularly acute in state like Utah — is that the lobbying power of these religious organizations is so extraordinary,” Hamilton said.

Laws in 33 states exempt clergy — regardless of religion — from laws requiring people report child sexual abuse allegations to authorities. Religious leaders have systematically fought efforts to expand the list of states. They currently oppose efforts from Vermont to Washington, where a proposal advanced through the state Senate Tuesday.

Kansas lawmakers introduced multiple proposals on penalties for not reporting suspected child sexual abuse, including one in the state Senate that would have added clergy to a list of mandatory reporters. It faced especially fierce public rebukes from Catholic leaders because it didn’t exempt confessions. No proposal received even a hearing before an initial deadline this year.

In the wake of the AP's investigation last year, Republican state Rep. Phil Lyman and Democratic Rep. Angela Romero announced plans to reform Utah's clergy-penitent privilege loophole. Lyman, who served six years as a Latter-day Saints' bishop, said at the time lawmakers should want to reexamine the loophole “regardless of religious or political affiliation.”

“People should be able to go and confess their sins to their bishop without fear of being prosecuted up until when they are confessing something that has affected someone’s else life significantly,” he told the AP in August.

Lyman ultimately released a proposal that broadly affirmed clergy's exemption from mandatory reporting. It didn't advance or receive any hearing as lawmakers prepare to adjourn Friday. He did not respond to repeated requests for comment.

Proposals from Democratic Reps. Romero and Brian King, and Sen. Stephanie Pitcher to close or narrow the loophole have also not moved forward amid opposition from religious groups.

Both Pitcher and Romero, who is Catholic, said they planned to reintroduce their proposals next year.

“With AP uncovering what they uncovered, you'd think this would be a matter of urgency for this Legislature and for Legislatures across the country. But again we are allowing these institutions to dictate what we mandate,” Romero said, referring to the Catholic Church.

Several Utah lawmakers told AP that opponents of limiting clergy-penitent privilege regarding child sexual abuse had circulated research that they claimed suggests mandatory reporting reform doesn't result in more confirmed reports of sexual abuse and may deter perpetrators from speaking to clergy.

“What most of the research shows is that if people aren’t able to come to them for fear of being reported on, they’re not able to provide the help and support they need,” Sen. Ann Milner said.

However, conclusions drawn from the study, which the Catholic Diocese also circulated in opposition to a similar bill from Romero in three years ago, have been challenged by its authors.

University of Michigan law professor Frank Vandervort and his co-author, Vincent Palusci, a pediatrics professor at New York University, told the AP last year the study was limited, partly because churches often wouldn’t give them access to relevant data.
“A single article should not be the basis for making policy decisions,” Vandervort said. “It may be entirely the case that there’s no connection between the changing of the laws and the number of reports.”

Lundholm said Utah lawmakers adjourning without having a “true public discussion” on any clergy-penitent privilege reform proposal provoked eerily familiar feelings for survivors. Though she never expected political change to happen overnight, she said survivors like her who had abuse go unreported — once again — feel unheard.

“Maybe the worst part is that this is something that survivors experience often, and unfortunately, it’s rare when their stories are heard,” she said.
___
The story has been updated to correct the spelling of the first name of Lindsey Lundholm.
___
Associated Press writers Joey Cappelletti in Lansing, Michigan, and John Hanna in Topeka, Kansas, contributed to this report.
Copyright 2023 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
 
So what you're saying the average Catholic Priest doesn't possess a conscience and wouldn't urge a child to report such an act, or offer any advice on who to report it to? That's a bit of an assumption.

I know shit about Catholics though maybe they have no souls as you've implied.
I'm saying if you enable child sexual abuse you should be shot. Not reporting child sexual abuse to the authorities you know about is enabling it. What is hard to understand about that? Are you a pedophile?
 
Not reporting child sexual abuse to the authorities you know about is enabling it. What is hard to understand about that? Are you a pedophile?

I have trouble understanding how you think I'm pedophile, when I think it important to respect religious freedom, yet at the same urge a child to report sexual abuse? Okay. Another loon.... seems to be a few on this site.
 
I have trouble understanding how you think I'm pedophile, when I think it important to respect religious freedom, yet at the same urge a child to report sexual abuse? Okay. Another loon.... seems to be a few on this site.
When you learn about child sex abuse, you call the police as soon as possible. You don't put the onus on the child to solve the problem on their own, because they are a child, you horrible piece of shit.
 
When you learn about child sex abuse, you call the police as soon as possible. You don't put the onus on the child to solve the problem on their own, because they are a child, you horrible piece of shit.

Maybe Priests have made anonymous tips to the Police before, theres no way we can know.
 
It's pretty clear by the article there are reasons and then there are "reasons" why people want this law passed. In an ever growing age of "its not abuse, don't call us groomers, no your the groomer!". One wonders why the hyper-focus on Christians.

This law is about nothing more than digging up evidence that Christians are just as abusive to children as the approved groups are. That drag queen rape hour and co. are not that bad, because "look, the Christians are totally doing the exact same thing!"

A very easy solution to this, is to make it a crime to not report abuse of children, when you as an adult have knowledge of it. Of course that'll burn more fags than priests and that's not what they want.
 
It's pretty clear by the article there are reasons and then there are "reasons" why people want this law passed. In an ever growing age of "its not abuse, don't call us groomers, no your the groomer!". One wonders why the hyper-focus on Christians.

This law is about nothing more than digging up evidence that Christians are just as abusive to children as the approved groups are. That drag queen rape hour and co. are not that bad, because "look, the Christians are totally doing the exact same thing!"

A very easy solution to this, is to make it a crime to not report abuse of children, when you as an adult have knowledge of it. Of course that'll burn more fags than priests and that's not what they want.
The law is being proposed because priests are given an exception to reporting child sex abuse. It has nothing to with deflecting from "dragtime story hour" or whatever the hell you are talking about. It's about closing a loophole in an existing law.
 
Children that report being raped should be given a high priority in all circumstances. If the police beleive it's not real, it won't lead to a prosecution. I can't believe you're so autsiticaly mad at me you're saying child molestation shouldn't be reported and investigated and using Twitter whore metoo cases as pretext.


It's the topic of the thread. You want your thread, go make one.


For one, I don't care about you at all, neither hate or anything else. You're on the internet. Chill out. lol

Second, you're not addressing the topic of the thread. If Mormons were so concerned with stopping child abuse, how about passing the law in OP instead of obstructing it? What harm could it possibly cause?
you sure seem to make a lot of threads targeting Mormons, could have fooled me.
Probably because the DOJ and Media now pushes Christians of any stripe are potential terrorists? So if I was a Christian I wouldn't trust them even if I was falsely accused of just grabbing someones ass.

View attachment 4685020

View attachment 4685018
First off read the thread, thanks man for everything. We are Christian. We have other books, yes. But the Bible we read is the King James Version, the oldest, most crotchety one there is out of all of them. The old Testament especially is on hard mode in terms of getting down to read it in the KJV, yet we do.

And yes, this is why. Separation between church and state works both ways. I should be able to consult with my Bishop without the feds then raiding my house. A Bishop on his own holds tremendous sway in his community. If he needs to take action he will. He is the mod if you will. In these situations it might cause people NOT to come forward, as 30 FBI agents raid their home and possibly kill everyone inside. Feds hate all Christians, no matter our stripe, we should give them no more power over our lives.
 
Sucks to be a rapist or killer, I suppose.
Or anyone else, for that matter, regardless of what crime they committed-- or even if they're confessing a crime in the first place.

Crime-doers will learn to not confess those specific crimes to their priest. Alternatively, priests won't break the confessional seal under penalty of law if they care about their job, and you'll end up with the state effectively interfering with religious practice for no gain. Don't try to tell me that these priests just want to protect child rapists, because nearly all of them do not, which is also why nobody says that "the priests will just lie" (nobody will be able to prove what was said in a two-man conversation, but they likely also will not lie regardless).

Do Catholics think Jesus would keep the secrets of predators? What's the logic here?

The purpose of the seal of confession is not to protect child rapists-- it is to encourage the penitent to openly confess their sins in the presence of another and God, receive counsel and discipline for the sake for fleeing from said sins, and receive particular assurance that their sins are forgiven (the priest acts as the stand-in or "minimum required" for the community witness-- since, in the very early church, this was a public rite that actively involved the entire congregation). You cannot accomplish this if the penitent has reason to believe that you'll reveal his sins to other people. Additionally, because many people are confessing things that aren't legal crimes, they'd be equally affected for legally lesser matters.

Therapists have a similar duty, sans God (this article lies, for the record-- not just federally, but in terms of Utah's state law), which is why those communications are similarly privileged.

Teachers, as an example, do not have this duty, however-- none of the above is their job. They are not trained for any of that. Furthermore, there's no reason why a parent would tell a teacher that they're molesting their child, for the teacher to not report this. But in the first place, they would have reason to report suspicion that one of their students is being molested, especially when the child tells them: not only is there no reason for them to have communication privilege, it's the victim reporting that they're being victimized.

If you were to extend the "loophole" "fix" to the other professions/relationships where it applies (aside from lawyers and therapists, spousal and physician-patient communications are privileged in some American jurisdictions (including federal), those relationships are similarly undermined. It does not just affect those who admit to crimes. Even tailoring such a "loophole" "fix" around specific categories of crimes (as opposed to state of crime, i.e. whether the crime is being contemplated, in progress, or complete) immediately makes clearer what someone is claiming communication privilege for when they do, which is why exceptions are as broad as the privilege itself.

There is a reason why at least some of these types never protest any other privilege in the multiple other professions where it exists, and there is a reason why they aren't protesting-- or at least maligning priests-- not reporting any other crime confessed to them, such as burglary: they want to undermine the legitimacy of religion in societal consciousness (put aside the disgrace that poorly acting orders bring onto themselves), and they understand Americans at large still have a vestigial but logic-overriding interest in protecting children when they're not cheering for the mutilating of their genitals or their victimization at the hands of men in dresses claiming to be True and Honest Women.

And in OP's case, she's just relieving her glory days of trolling Catholics on Reddit.
 
Last edited:
Mormons are not Christians. While there is differences between branches of Christianity, none of them are as insanely deep and cavernous as those between Mormon dogma and any Christian church.

That cartoon has the same narrator as Smithee Dune

Also yeah I totally expected this to be about some insane mormon child rape contraption
 
How is it a strawman argument? I'm agreeing something should be done. Just observing that your zeal on this topic makes me think you want to give it priority.
From what I've noticed, people who want to avoid talking about abuse in one area will say stuff like "b-but these other guys are doing it worse!" I see it a lot when people criticise Islam; someone will talk about the genuinely misogynistic horse shit in it and there will inevitably be some idiot who says "BUT CHRISTIANITY IS NO BETTER!" even when the person making the criticism isn't Christian. If anything, I'd say it's a red herring.

Not that it's your intention, but that might be how people read it.
 
Do Catholics think Jesus would keep the secrets of predators? What's the logic here?
Because nobody would confess their sins to begin with if the priest went around telling people about what he heard from them?

The number of sex abuse cases for which the only evidence is something said in confession is so miniscule it's a nonstarter.
 
Because nobody would confess their sins to begin with if the priest went around telling people about what he heard from them?

The number of sex abuse cases for which the only evidence is something said in confession is so miniscule it's a nonstarter.
I don't think it matters that the number is minuscule, as much as it matters that the overwhelming majority of people confessing sins to a priest aren't confessing crimes to a priest (most people aren't criminals, many criminals aren't concerned with things like confession) but would be impacted by the same loss of confidentiality.
 
I don't think it matters that the number is minuscule, as much as it matters that the overwhelming majority of people confessing sins to a priest aren't confessing crimes to a priest (most people aren't criminals, many criminals aren't concerned with things like confession) but would be impacted by the same loss of confidentiality.
Exactly, it would accomplish nothing because nobody would confess if what they said wasn't kept sealed. So it doesn't accomplish anything anyways...and I doubt a pedophile abusing children is a faithful Catholic confessing their crimes on a regular basis.
 
Do Catholics think Jesus would keep the secrets of predators? What's the logic here?
Don’t you remember some retards here making up some shit about you being a pedo?

Imagine if your priest/lawyer/psychologist said that.
 
Don’t you remember some retards here making up some shit about you being a pedo?

Imagine if your priest/lawyer/psychologist said that.
Immeasurably more impact. And they would be inclined to overreact under threat of the law. So say you were just thinking something bad, but had absolutely zero intent, or even the capability of carrying it out. Psych ward, house raided, life torn to shreds. Youll be lucky if the Judge hears you out.
 
The law is being proposed because priests are given an exception to reporting child sex abuse. It has nothing to with deflecting from "dragtime story hour" or whatever the hell you are talking about. It's about closing a loophole in an existing law.
Priests are no more an exception as any common person is. There is no "loophole" unless you think it the mandatory obligation of every single person to report abuse and that there should be a law that says so. (Which if you do, good.)

Don't sit here and bullshit me that journoscum like in the article aren't out to deflect from accusations of groomers. Note how all this could be easily fixed if a general "You must report" law was passed.

And further more, let's say for the sake of argument there is massive amounts of abuse being carried out in Christians organizations. It would be better to force churches to make people aware of services and what abuse is. Instead of trying to get some Hail Mary shot in the dark via confessions and priest testimony.
 
Total mystery why religious leaders don't want to be mandated to report child rape.

Real head-scratcher.
Maybe they don't want to be seen as homophobic, most of these cases involve faggots after all.

Or anyone else, for that matter, regardless of what crime they committed-- or even if they're confessing a crime in the first place.
Why? If I tell the priest I want to fuck my neighbors' wife there's nothing for him to run to the cops about, so no law would pressure him to ever speak of it. I don't think a reasonable version of a law compelling criminal reporting would even include lesser offenses such as theft. Murder and rape are quite a bit different.

Crime-doers will learn to not confess those specific crimes to their priest. Alternatively, priests won't break the confessional seal under penalty of law if they care about their job, and you'll end up with the state effectively interfering with religious practice for no gain. Don't try to tell me that these priests just want to protect child rapists, because nearly all of them do not, which is also why nobody says that "the priests will just lie" (nobody will be able to prove what was said in a two-man conversation, but they likely also will not lie regardless).
If criminals just learn not to confess to priests who won't rat them out anyway then it's back to square one, nobody knows their crimes.

No right is absolute, I don't mind the state interfering in religions concealing rapists and killers one bit, especially since there's nothing Jesus ever said to that effect whatsoever.

The purpose of the seal of confession is not to protect child rapists-- it is to encourage the penitent to openly confess their sins in the presence of another and God, receive counsel and discipline for the sake for fleeing from said sins, and receive particular assurance that their sins are forgiven (the priest acts as the stand-in or "minimum required" for the community witness-- since, in the very early church, this was a public rite that actively involved the entire congregation). You cannot accomplish this if the penitent has reason to believe that you'll reveal his sins to other people. Additionally, because many people are confessing things that aren't legal crimes, they'd be equally affected for legally lesser matters.
Nothing there changes except the killers & rapists go to jail at the end. They can still confess their sins and be assured they're forgiven. They can even be reassured once they go to prison because you can still seek a priest there, and continue to receive those services.

Everyone else could rest easy knowing the law won't compel priests to report to them, and so business as usual.

Therapists have a similar duty, sans God (this article lies, for the record-- not just federally, but in terms of Utah's state law), which is why those communications are similarly privileged.
They have an even lesser reason not to report, then. At least Catholics--as far removed from Christ's teachings as they may be--have some more complicated reasons for exemption.

Teachers, as an example, do not have this duty, however-- none of the above is their job. They are not trained for any of that. Furthermore, there's no reason why a parent would tell a teacher that they're molesting their child, for the teacher to not report this. But in the first place, they would have reason to report suspicion that one of their students is being molested, especially when the child tells them: not only is there no reason for them to have communication privilege, it's the victim reporting that they're being victimized.
The duty is arbitrary if therapists have it too. They could just as easily develop a law protecting teachers if they wanted to, and I better shut up before they get any ideas.

If you were to extend the "loophole" "fix" to the other professions/relationships where it applies (aside from lawyers and therapists, spousal and physician-patient communications are privileged in some American jurisdictions (including federal), those relationships are similarly undermined. It does not just affect those who admit to crimes. Even tailoring such a "loophole" "fix" around specific categories of crimes (as opposed to state of crime, i.e. whether the crime is being contemplated, in progress, or complete) immediately makes clearer what someone is claiming communication privilege for when they do, which is why exceptions are as broad as the privilege itself.
I might be misunderstanding, I don't see a scenario where other people are effected. Can you provide some examples?

There is a reason why at least some of these types never protest any other privilege in the multiple other professions where it exists, and there is a reason why they aren't protesting-- or at least maligning priests-- not reporting any other crime confessed to them, such as burglary: they want to undermine the legitimacy of religion in societal consciousness (put aside the disgrace that poorly acting orders bring onto themselves), and they understand Americans at large still have a vestigial but logic-overriding interest in protecting children when they're not cheering for the mutilating of their genitals or their victimization at the hands of men in dresses claiming to be True and Honest Women.

And in OP's case, she's just relieving her glory days of trolling Catholics on Reddit.
It's obvious there's ulterior motives at play. This is largely a diversionary tactic by Atheists and groomers, but it doesn't mean a problem doesn't exist.

Don’t you remember some retards here making up some shit about you being a pedo?

Imagine if your priest/lawyer/psychologist said that.
Libtards slander everyone like that if called out on their grooming, projection is their only other tactic aside from calling someone a racist or homophobe. I don't see how that ties into priesthood and all that.
 
Back