[cebadams]

>> I don't know why people criticize the new norms. Of course there should be due process, but if one is convicted, why shouldn't there be zero tolerance for the abuse of children?

Because zero-tolerance is such a politically correct way to deal with abuse. Let's face it, abuse is a criminal offense and should be treated as one. Shaw makes a good point about transparency. The notion that the Bishop's felt that they had to deal with abuse cases outside of the context of law was their first mistake.

As a parent I don't want platitudes about zero-tolerance; I want to know that suspected criminal activity is promptly turned over to the criminal justice system.

[Unam Sanctam]

But nothing you have said contradicts the basic soundness of the notion that those convicted under Church law of abusing the young should receive zero tolerance. I just don't see what is "politically correct" or wrong about that notion -- it seems common sense to me.