Which charity is it that is closing down?

If it is a church sponsored institution then the blame
rests with the organisation not the Redress scheme.
It appears again that it's a question of finance not
of doing what's morally right for the victims.

Only the perfect may have a perfect childhood.

Victimhood involves the superstition as if we live in a chaotic world, where shît just happens. We do however live in an ordered cosmos where nothing happens for no reason and anything that comes our way, good or bad, is a result of our own previous actions.

Are we similarly expected to pay back for all the warmth and love, fun and laughter that we received in our childhood?

What is the name of the charity that "is closing its doors, as it had to make large payments to the National Redress Scheme"? I have tried to find a strory it, to no avail. Nathan does a nice line in very odd, very obscure posts. He has to expect that people will wonder why he hasn't named the charity, surely? I don't see by this unnamed organisation, which seems to 'helping' every second person living on Earth, should be contributing to a rip off charity for people who might be victims of sexual abuse - or not; just who can we believe these days?

While I was searching, I did see some drack, fruitcake of a woman pronouncing that charities who don't contribute to this NRS slop chest should have their charitable status revoked.

It's marvellous just how many people mixed up in 'charities' are, themselves, not very charitable at all. They heighten the belief held by an increasing number of people who have ceased giving to charities that, 'where there is a charity, there are people with sticky fingers'.

"If it is a church sponsored institution then the blame
rests with the organisation not the Redress scheme.
It appears again that it's a question of finance not
of doing what's morally right for the victims."

The Redress Scheme was imposed on the community by the Government. So one could argue any flow on effects from the Redress Scheme are the fault of the Government.

I don't know what's morally right for the victims, but many people immediately assume money, without suggesting anything else.

Maybe if some saw the people in question, who are supported by this particular (small) charity to close and talk to the people supported directly, whose lives are improving, they may out of good thought, reconsider a need to take money for compensation, and see the good from a move away from money, and a need to rest, relax and regenerate.

Money can't buy things like that.

Nathan no way around it no matter the help the victim was hurt by one of theirs
Nothing can bring me to blame the victim in this case
We once had such a victim post here, the wounds could be seen in every word
Nothing must be put as a reason lives destroyed should not at least see some payment

Why is the name of the charity that's closing down a secret? One could be forgiven for thinking that there is no such charity, and the whole thing is bulldust.