Beating in Law.
14 January 1993
WOMEN in Australia have joined forces to call for the sacking of a judge who told a jury that it was acceptable for men to use 'rough handling' on their wives to persuade them to have sexual intercourse.
The 65-year-old judge made his direction to the jury in the trial last August of a man charged with five counts of rape and one of attempted rape of his wife. The jury acquitted the man on all charges.

Mr Justice Bollen told the jury: 'There is, of course, nothing wrong with a husband, faced with his wife's initial refusal to engage in intercourse, in attempting, in an acceptable way, to persuade her to change her mind, and that may involve a measure of rougher than usual handling.

Eva Cox, of the Women's Electoral Lobby, said: 'The interesting thing is that he actually said it. I have a terrible suspicion that there is no lack of judges that also think it.'

Is Mise,
You certainly are a wealth of knowledge about catholics.

so have a go at answering the questions I raised.

Why did parents send their kids to the same schools where they knew abuse occurred?

'What about the girls', will parishioners get further inquiry into the abuse of the girls and other females?

Will there be more about the 'rape of nuns' by priests in Aus or elsewhere?

Jeez foxy,

You can't do it can you? not a word of criticism of the gross misogyny of a cleric that provides advice and guidance to hundreds if not thousands.

I am not speaking of those leaving to behead others, the forced marriages of children or the FGM that occurs in Australia. Will the slightest condemnation of a muslim strip you of your "progressive" credibility?

To explore this topic a bit more, what does 'integration' mean in the context of Australia's multi-ethnic society ?

We tend to skirt around the issue of Australian values, equality before the law, the rule of law, democracy over any other form of government, equal rights to vote, protection of the rights to free expression, to belief (provided it does NOT include some religion-sanctioned lesser rights for Australians based on gender, even IF those beliefs dictate it), freedom of movement, freedom from the fear of political persecution, equal opportunity in employment and education, etc.

Those values, based on the painfully gained principles of the Enlightenment from the sixteenth century up to today, really should be promoted and championed much more vigorously. The great majority of Anglo and non-Anglo Australians would implicitly support those values.

It's healthy to continually question, and continually re-affirm, those values: they are a package, and the diminution of any one of them diminishes all of them, and would diminish us all.

So 'integration' strongly suggests that newcomers should be welcomed into our midst, and encouraged to incorporate those values into their belief systems as thoroughly as possible. I think that most have welcomed, and will readily continue to welcome, those valuable opportunities and to make valuable contributions in their turn.

Joe

Banjo: Why did parents send their kids to the same schools where they knew abuse occurred?

Because prior to the 80's it was considered a Mortal Sin to send your kids to a State School & a venial Sin to engage in casual conversation with an OPD, Not so much an Anglian.

'What about the girls', will parishioners get further inquiry into the abuse of the girls and other females?

Our Class had a reunion a few years ago & Abuse was one of the things we talked about. Apparently the Girls had it tough off the Nuns. They got the cuts for speaking to boys, any boys, running, wrong notes on the piano or keyboard & apparently, Insolence. Nothing Sexual.

There used to be a rumour that the Monsieur was having it off with the lady behind the Church. It wasn't until after we left School we found out that it was a lad in our Class. He ran away from home as soon as we finished Grade 10 & later we heard he committed suicide. We never knew why. Family condoned?

WTF this got to do with Integration. Thanks for the Deflection Foxy. Any comment the Post I gave?

Dear Jayb,

I presume that you're referring to Nick Saffran's
anti-Muslim article in "The Federalist?"

I did read it. Mr Saffran is presenting the typical
ultra-conservative American viewpoint. We've heard
all the arguments previously many times.
I imagine that President Trump would also be a
supporter of the AEI (American Enterprise Institute)
where Nick Saffran worked as a research assistant.