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.
 
They never should've built those child rape stalls.
RAPE STALL - MORMON CHURCH.gif
 
Oh you didn't get this one too. Lmfao.
Here's a hint:
>back peddling this hard

Yeah okay. Anyways, the Scooby Doo poster has a good point. Also found another great article. lol
 
You mean my idea that child rape should be reported to the police?
Shortest flounce ever good job.
You really want to actually argue now?

You've barely met the minimum requirements to be considered sentient. Much less capable of being "debated" with.
Your ethos is shit, your logos is histrionic, and I have no pathos for you.

Try calling me a pedophile again. Your spite is more persuasive than your persuasion.

Obligatory sentence so it's four paragraphs so you won't read any of this.
Holy shit it worked. lmao.
 
  • Mad at the Internet
Reactions: Mothra1988
Iirc correctly, one of the moral conundrums which is often put to priests in seminary is what to do if a man comes into confession before mass and tells the priest that he poisoned the communion wine. Generally, one of the more acceptable resolutions is for the priest to drain the whole chalice so that nobody else is killed by the poison wine, but the seal of confession remains intact. History is full of examples of arrogant rulers trying to crush people acting under genuine religious conviction, and it generally doesn't end well for them even if they justify their repression in the most evocative way possible - someone willing to kill themselves over what many see as a quibbling doctrinal issue isn't going to be able to be effectively threatened.

It's retarded to think that things like religious freedoms or attorney-client privilege need to be leveled and trampled over in order to chase down evildoers. Things like that exist because men have proven time and time again that we're too stupid and morally frail to act with perfect righteousness while pursuing justice. These little refuges have been carved out in order to create shelters from the foibles of human nature. People need someone to talk to who is guaranteed to keep their confidence for various reasons.

When it comes to confession, any decent confessor will tell the murderer/rapist that part of his penance is to confess his crimes to the authorities before it can be forgiven. The priest may well be the only point of contact for this person, and the only one who can convince him to turn himself in. Requiring the priest to inform on penitents is driven by the sort of moronic 'cutting open the goose that lays the golden egg' logic that even children can see through. It doesn't mean that you will start netting all the bad people who confess crimes to priests. It means that you will catch a handful, and then they will stop confessing to priests, and society will lose that point of contact.

With attornery-client privilege, it exists because nobody knows if someone is guilty or innocent except for the accused himself. His guilt has to be proven, and he has the right to be represented. If the attorney can be forced to make a judgement as to his client's guilt and inform on him, then even an innocent man will have his ability to defend himself damaged - he will see his own attorney as someone that he has to convince of his innocence, and may not be frank with him, he will not be able to build the best case possible because there will be no trust in the relationship. It's kind of obvious that people who can't grasp this are painfully autistic and don't understand how basic human relationships work.

Overall, I think the famous exerpt from 'A Man For All Seasons' describes it best:

Roper: So now you’d give the Devil benefit of law?
More: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?
Roper: I’d cut down every law in England to do that!
More: Oh? And, when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you – where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country’s planted thick with laws from coast to coast – man’s laws, not God’s – and, if you cut them down – and you’re just the man to do it – d’you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I’d give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety’s sake.
 
When it comes to confession, any decent confessor will tell the murderer/rapist that part of his penance is to confess his crimes to the authorities before it can be forgiven.
And the murderer/rapist doesn't confess to the authories and goes on to murder and rape again. Good job, priest, you sure helped people. Yeah, thank God I'm not Catholic and don't place non-biblical sacrament guidelines above basic morality and the welfare of victims.
 
  • Autistic
Reactions: Skeletonized Cow
And the murderer/rapist doesn't confess to the authories and goes on to murder and rape again. Good job, priest, you sure helped people. Yeah, thank God I'm not Catholic and don't place non-biblical sacrament guidelines above basic morality and the welfare of victims.
Woman that thinks everyone is a pedophile espouses her morality is based.
Woman moment.
 
  • Mad at the Internet
Reactions: Mothra1988
And the murderer/rapist doesn't confess to the authories and goes on to murder and rape again. Good job, priest, you sure helped people. Yeah, thank God I'm not Catholic and don't place non-biblical sacrament guidelines above basic morality and the welfare of victims.
It's not a priest's job to stop murderers and rapists from killing and raping. It wasn't even in the Middle Ages at the height of the Church's power, or during the days of the early church. That goes for most other religions - look at the story of Buddha and Angulimala. Peter was so enraged by Christ being captured that he tried to raise his sword and fight off those who had come for Him, and was told to put away his sword. The early Christians didn't butcher the mob that crucified and mocked God. When God found out that Paul was hunting down and killing his faithful, he didn't come down in a cloud of glory to implore some prince to seize Saul of Tarsus and throw him into jail in order to 'minimize harm'. He forgave Paul and turned him into one of his greatest apostles.

It's a priest's job to listen to a person's sins and then tell them what they have to do to find absolution (penance). A thief returns what he stole, a murderer or a rapist turns himself in to the people who have the authority to punish them - the secular, worldly powers. I don't see why you think this is a Catholic thing - Catholics are generally more strict. There's no 'born-again' get-out-of-hell-free card - every confession has a penance, and most of those penances involve paying appropriate legal consequences for your actions.

But maybe @derpherp2 is right, and the concept that different people in society have different roles to play is literally too complicated for you to wrap your head around.
 
Last edited:
It's not a priest's job to stop murderers and rapists from killing and raping.

Yeah, it should be everyone's duty to stop it. Everyone with a conscience and basic morality that is. People that don't report child sexual abuse are culpable in the child sexual abuse that occurs that they did not act to prevent.

But maybe @derpherp2 is right, and the concept that different people in society have different roles to play is literally too complicated for you to wrap your head around.

Have you considered this attitude is perhaps responsible for the Catholic Church currently being infamous for covering up child sexual abuse cases? Are Catholics completely oblivious to what non-Catholics think about their church hierarchy that protected literally thousands of child abusers?
 
Yeah, it should be everyone's duty to stop it. Everyone with a conscience and basic morality that is.
For someone that thinks everyone is a pedophile you're certainly doing a lack of reporting pedophiles. Lazyass wants an entire religion to do her work for her. Woman moment.
 
  • Dumb
Reactions: Mothra1988
The Varg guy who said "the sacrament of confession is bigger than a diddled kid" worships a guy who hates Christianity and burnt down ancient churches. Just food for thought.
First of all, it's a funny username on known tranny hate site KiwiFarms, you dumb fucking retard, not a necessarily a statement of affiliation.

Secondly, and more importantly, I know it's hard for the female brain to comprehend shit like "understanding multiple points of view" and "being able to put yourselves in the shoes of others", but most adults DO have the ability to see things from the perspectives of others, such as why the centuries old tradition of priest-flock confidentiality is something I think may not want to be subverted into another aspect of police-state fuckery, even if I'm not a Christian myself.

So far in this thread you've demonstrated a complete inability to understand nuance and have done nothing but appeal to the emotions of the other people in the thread by bringing up "muh child rape", which, like I said in my first post, is exactly what your kind do any time there is any sort of crisis (real or imagined), and whose hysterical energy is used by the powers that be to push for the further stripping of people's freedom.

Every time there's a mass shooting the hysterical women get out there and scream about how we need gun control now, how the rights of 100 million people aren't worth 1 dead child, how we need to get rid of the 2nd Amendment, and how if you disagree, you literally just want more schoolchildren to die. They are emotional creatures and cannot see past their emotions to understand that their proposed "solutions" are unreasonable. To them, any actions, no matter how draconian or overbearing, taken to prevent 1 more dead kid is laudable and anyone who doesn't take those actions for whatever reason is the enemy.
 
First of all, it's a funny username on known tranny hate site KiwiFarms, you dumb fucking retard, not a necessarily a statement of affiliation.

Secondly, and more importantly, I know it's hard for the female brain to comprehend shit like "understanding multiple points of view" and "being able to put yourselves in the shoes of others", but most adults DO have the ability to see things from the perspectives of others, such as why the centuries old tradition of priest-flock confidentiality is something I think may not want to be subverted into another aspect of police-state fuckery, even if I'm not a Christian myself.

So far in this thread you've demonstrated a complete inability to understand nuance and have done nothing but appeal to the emotions of the other people in the thread by bringing up "muh child rape", which, like I said in my first post, is exactly what your kind do any time there is any sort of crisis (real or imagined), and whose hysterical energy is used by the powers that be to push for the further stripping of people's freedom.

Every time there's a mass shooting the hysterical women get out there and scream about how we need gun control now, how the rights of 100 million people aren't worth 1 dead child, how we need to get rid of the 2nd Amendment, and how if you disagree, you literally just want more schoolchildren to die. They are emotional creatures and cannot see past their emotions to understand that their proposed "solutions" are unreasonable. To them, any actions, no matter how draconian or overbearing, taken to prevent 1 more dead kid is laudable and anyone who doesn't take those actions for whatever reason is the enemy.

Everyone knows who Varg is. He's famous for being a murderer, burning churches, and marrying an autistic woman. I knew about him a long time before I started reading KF. He wants Christianity replaced with the completely dead and unpreserved viking religion.

However, an un-biblical centuries old tradition of protecting child molesters is not something that should be preserved. My main beef is that Catholics are so retarded they have to be told to report child rape by force of law. You can argue constitutional issues all you want, but this is still a pathetic state of affairs when someone who is supposed to be a figure of morality would not turn in a murderer, rapist or child molester to authorities. That wouldn't be a church I would want to be part of. It's a defect of Catholocism that they are so entrenched in sex abuse of children. It's not the fault of detractors. If they would clean up their own bullshit, laws wouldn't need to be enacted.
 
You mean my idea that child rape should be reported to the police?
I agree with you that it should be reported, but the idea of mandated reporting (which is the core problem here) is unconstitutional and applying it to churches opens a can of worms on the state vs church issue. Also teachers are mandated reporters too and we see how that is working out for them with the ungodly amout of sexual abuse that goes on in schools

You're sperging in defence of an idea that is unconstitutional and doesn't even work in the first place. Calm down.
 
I agree with you that it should be reported, but the idea of mandated reporting (which is the core problem here) is unconstitutional and applying it to churches opens a can of worms on the state vs church issue. Also teachers are mandated reporters too and we see how that is working out for them with the ungodly amout of sexual abuse that goes on in schools

You're sperging in defence of an idea that is unconstitutional and doesn't even work in the first place. Calm down.
Okay since you know so much about the topic and how it's an unconstitutional law, can you cite the Supreme Court case where this and other such laws were stuck down? Thanks.
 
Okay since you know so much about the topic and how it's an unconstitutional law, can you cite the Supreme Court case where this and other such laws were stuck down? Thanks.
It is long held that compelled speech is unconstitutional and I believe that mandated reporting fits in that category due to the criminal punishments that can follow if you failed to report intentionally or not.


Also, it is bullshit that a mandated reporter can go to jail for not reporting, but cops are free to neglect their duties to protect the public or CPS not being punished failing to do their job which puts children in danger too.

Also, you didn't address how useless mandating reporting is, given how much abuse is prevalent with teachers who are mandated reporters.
 
It is long held that compelled speech is unconstitutional and I believe that mandated reporting fits in that category due to the criminal punishments that can follow if you failed to report intentionally or not.


Okay so it's just your theory it's unconstitutional then. There's a lot of theories for a lot of laws being unconstitutional. What I want to see is relevant case law that would have an impact on this jurisdiction. Without that, you are talking in hypotheticals about how you perceive courts would rule in the future, and there's no way to know that, making it a moot point until the courts make such a ruling.

Also, it is bullshit that a mandated reporter can go to jail for not reporting, but cops are free to neglect their duties to protect the public or CPS not being punished failing to do their job which puts children in danger too.

That's a whataboutism argument like the people mad that I'm not talking about abuse that happens in schools when that's not the topic of this thread. Maybe they should lose their jobs or go to jail for fucking up that bad. I don't think anyone would really disagree with cops or CPS workers being held to high standards.

Also, you didn't address how useless mandating reporting is, given how much abuse is prevalent with teachers who are mandated reporters.

I don't know about the inside baseball details of why mandated reporting in school is ineffective as you claim, but in this case it's straight forward. Perpetrator confesses heinous crime to priest, priest does nothing. Heinous crime goes unsolved, perpetrator is free to kill or rape more people. Child tells priest about abuse because they believe the priest is a moral figure they can trust. Priest does nothing. Child continues to be molested or ends up dead like a lot of CSA victims do.

In both cases, the priest is at fault for not acting, and there is no mistaking the victim/perpetrator's direct testimony. But I guess Catholics are fine with their priests being fucked up creeps that allow children to be molested (if they aren't doing it themselves), so it's supposed to be fine I guess. It's almost like there's a huge problem in an institution if child sexual abuse victims aren't given a priority over the institutional rules designed by the institution.
 
Last edited:
guys
guys
stop arguing

child rape is really not that bad - try it yourself if you don't believe me.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: XYZpdq Jr.
Back