All Aussies!!- GG issue

[Baron Samedi]

do you guys think that the governor general should of resigned as soon as these rumours started to retain some credibility to the office??? should johnnie of fired him ASAP. or do you even think he should of resigned??? your views on this disgusting matter please...

[Guest cloricus]

Baron, I can just tell you to not believe everything you see on programs like ?today tonight? and ?60 minutes?. I'm guessing that?s where you obtained this mindset that the Governor General of Australia was in fact doing anything detrimental to the office that he serves.

([i]I'd also like to point out that from now on my post will be bias because I believe that the "GG" did nothing wrong.[/i])

Lets say for example you got a high paying job that you really liked and some one came up to you and said "You rapped me!!!"; would you resign? [b][i]I think not[/i][/b]. On top of that the facts in the case where so based on speculation that any court would have thrown it out, which in the end was what happened.

His comments on Australian Story about the girl being the one to make the advances on the other priest may have been true, but are [b]not[/b] the sort of thing that you say on national television, especially since the girl in question was under the age of consent. That was a bad call on his part, but not worth losing your job over.

When he was arch-bishop of Brisbane and he let that priest continue working. That was a bad judgment call. That other priest didn't continue doing what he had been so GG got a second chance. Now I hate to say it but part of this is John Howard?s fault for not conducting a full background check. (I hate parroting Crean.)

I personally believe that Dr Hollingworth should have stayed on, though I'm glade that he "stuck it out" long enough to defend himself to the media, who as most times love a good mud slinging.
The only damage to the office is that which is perceived by the general people of Australia, who are being influenced by the media to believe that this has brought disgrace. (Which I think is a load of crap.)


The GG broke no law and followed standard practice at the time in the case of the church and covering up offences, I don't believe he dissevered any of this.

[James]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by cloricus [/i]
[B]

His comments on Australian Story about the girl being the one to make the advances on the other priest may have been true, but are [b]not[/b] the sort of thing that you say on national television, especially since the girl in question was under the age of consent. That was a bad call on his part, but not worth losing your job over.

[/B][/QUOTE]

[color=#808080]I don't think anyone can defend this at all. How can what he have said been true? Whether or not the girl made advances is utterly irrelevant -- for him to bring it up (and to suggest that [i]she[/i] was the cause of the relationship) is the most immature and damaging thing an adult of his position can possibly say.

That alone indicated to me that, at the very least, he doesn't understand the dangers involved with child sex offences in the church.

I do agree that his actions [i]during[/i] the course of his job were nothing to be fired over. And I also agree that the whole "he raped me" claim was absolutely bogus.

Having said that, I don't think he should ever have been hired. And as soon as his failure to protect children became evident, he [i]should[/i] have been sacked immediately. There is no excuse for him continuing in his job after that revelation. What he did was nothing short of supporting a paedophile. And I don't know about you, but I [i]don't[/i] want my Governor General to be a paedophile supporter in any way.

I mean, we can sit here and talk about technicalities (what he did or didn't do during his tenure), but to me that is irrelevant. It's also irrelevant to the majority of Australians. Most people wanted this guy to go because of what had been revealed about his past. I mean, we're not talking about some personal thing that he did in his private life here -- we're talking about a highly damaging act that was a massive breach of trust. It's only compounded by the fact that he was an archbishop.

Basically, I don't think he should be the Governor General, regardless of the technical issues surrounding this story. I would rather see a prominent doctor (someone akin to Victor Chan) as the G-G. There are so many people in Australia who have done more for the community (and for the world) than Dr. Hollingworth. And those are the people who've missed out, ultimately. They deserve the chance this time around (and I'm sure Prime Minister Howard is considering several of them).[/color]