Dear Philip,

That was an easy way to escape the topic.

For whatever reason you hate a certain group of people, thus you call them "fake". We could have entered prolonged arguments whether these people are indeed religious and whether they are indeed financially-greedy, but all that would only take us further from the point of this discussion:

How would you personally feel if government legislated that you must break your own most profound and sacredly-held principles?

I don't know you and I won't ask what specific principles are sacred for you, I also don't care whether those principles are based on fact or otherwise, for that's none of my business. All I want is to draw your attention to the agonising pain and helplessness that you would be feeling had the state legislated that you must abandon and break your most dear, beloved and fundamental principles, whatever they happen to be.

Nobody should be subjected to such pains.

Yuyutsu You draw too long a bow, how you can say a person hates something because they view it as fake is beyond me.

Simple question for you out of the multitude of religions which one is the real one if there is a real one?

Foxy,

The discussions between a lawyer and his client are protected, and the lawyer would face jail and disbarment if he breaks the lawyer client privilege. Not even a judge can order him to do so.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_professional_privilege_in_Australia

One pedophile confessing to another pedophile doesn't mean much. More likely a case of comparing notes. When I was a lad of about 12 at Catholic school, Friday 'confession' was a regular must do. In the box following the "Bless me Father for I have sinned..." you always fed the old bloke a little bit of the innocuous stuff, which should get you off with three Hail Mary's and a Glory Be. But the old bloke was never satisfied with that, no... he would wanted to know if you were having impure thoughts and were you engaging in impure actions, stock answer..."No Father!". When you got out, you asked your mates. "Did the old poofter want to know if you were wonking yourself?" The lads would all answer..."Yep. he always want to know that!"

Dear Philip,

If you do not hate religion, then why mention your belief that it is fake in the midst of a different discussion? Why blame all religion for a hardly-related claim by a particular denomination? why should it matter for the purpose of this discussion whether or not absolution can be achieved through confession? When the topic is government's encroachment on the Christian confession, are you aware that in the Catholic tradition, a priest can grant absolution even without confession?

To your question, there is no multitude of religions - religion is one, yet many schools attempt to teach it in different ways, offering different religious techniques. Some schools are purer and more competent than others, thus are more successful in bringing people closer to God; and while some techniques could have worked better in past ages, they could have since become obsolete due to the change of times and circumstances.

Confession, when properly done, is a wonderful and miraculous technique. Besides the religious benefits, also on a human level it can bring about genuine contrition and the cessation of crime.
But if made for the sake of financial and/or vicarious gain, then it is not properly done and then it does not work. Also when confession is solicited with the unrealistic promise of escaping the natural negative consequences of one's transgression.

But is it an imposition on those who believe in Confession and its secrecy to pass a law compelling priests to tell if a crime has been confessed?
This affects not only Catholics but some other denominations as well.

What of the fact that no law can effectively break the seal of Confession?