Both the Yanks and the Ozzies are finally realising that we should all be screwed up about sex and should adapt accordingly.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-40920714

"expanding grooming laws to include grooming a victim's relatives or caregivers"

WHAT!?

Where will the grooming nonsense end?
If someone gets dressed up for a night out hoping to cop off is that grooming?
Should we wear our grubby dressing gowns instead?

Advertisers surely will be convicted? We have all been groomed into buying sugary yogurt and cornflakes against our will.

Every bad decision could be blamed on grooming, and nobody will have to take responsibility any more.
It will be a never ending chain of victims.

Two points jumped out at me from this article.

Firstly, good luck getting priests to violate the sanctity of confession. That will not happen, and the people campaigning against the church know it. That reveals the real motivation. It's not a child protection issue: it's a political tactic to make the church look bad by forcing them into the false dichotomy of religious belief vs But Think Of The Children. It's just another part of the Leftist campaign to destroy institutions that represent social values, so they can substitute their own ideology. Ironic really, because Jesus was a bit of a lefty himself. Beard and sandals and everything.

Secondly, from the article

The report recommended that people in institutions who "know, suspect or should have suspected" a child was being abused should face criminal charges.

Errrr... so it will be a crime if you should have suspected something but didn't? Sometimes people are naive or absent-minded or preoccupied with other things, or perhaps just not very suspicious - and the state will punish them for it. I'm struggling to see how that can be reconciled with important principles of a liberal democratic society, not least freedom of thought and conscience.

Randall wrote:
Two points jumped out at me from this article.

Firstly, good luck getting priests to violate the sanctity of confession. That will not happen, and the people campaigning against the church know it. That reveals the real motivation. It's not a child protection issue: it's a political tactic to make the church look bad by forcing them into the false dichotomy of religious belief vs But Think Of The Children. It's just another part of the Leftist campaign to destroy institutions that represent social values, so they can substitute their own ideology. Ironic really, because Jesus was a bit of a lefty himself. Beard and sandals and everything.

Secondly, from the article

The report recommended that people in institutions who "know, suspect or should have suspected" a child was being abused should face criminal charges.

Errrr... so it will be a crime if you should have suspected something but didn't? Sometimes people are naive or absent-minded or preoccupied with other things, or perhaps just not very suspicious - and the state will punish them for it. I'm struggling to see how that can be reconciled with important principles of a liberal democratic society, not least freedom of thought and conscience.

Well...I would have liked all the know-it-alls who claimed they always knew Jimmy Savile was abusing children/women/goats to be prosecuted for allowing it to happen.
Not that I believed any of them for a second, but it was extremely irritating.