Dawkins to attempt to arrest the Pope?

#1
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article7094310.ece

tl;dr - Dawkins and Hitchens believe they can arrest the Pope for covering up allegations of sexual abuse under the same legal principle used to arrest Augusto Pinochet, and try him at the International Criminal Court. They believe that the Pope doesn't have diplomatic immunity as the head of the Vatican state, because apparently the Vatican isn't recognized as a state by the United Nations.


The Pope has come under increased attack over the past few weeks as more has been revealed about his complicity in covering up allegations of sexual abuse and his inaction on disciplining pedophiles in the priesthood, putting the reputation of the Church ahead of the safety of children. Recent allegations include, cover ups in his own archdiocese when he was Archbishop of Munich and Freising (which he claims to have been unaware of and quite nobly blames on underlings), his failure to investigate allegations that a US priest, Lawrence Murphy, molested some 200 deaf children, and the most recent, a letter by Ratzinger written in 1985 about defrocking (i.e. firing) another child molesting priest in Arizona in which he wrote:


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8612596.stm



Personally, I think its a bit dodgy.. The pure numbers of calls to lines in regards to this cannot be right. I smell a witchunt.

I also wonder what would happen if it was any other religion than Christianity that was in this scandal.
 
#2
Note to future Popes/Cardinals/Bishops: If a priest is noncing kids and you get wind of it; Inform the relevant police authority.

A simple equation should apply: Sex Offender = Defrocked and criminal prosecution.
 
#3
Has any other religion in modern times had the amount of evidence against it? In this age of FOI and general access to information, is it a surprise that the evidence can be brought together better now than at any time in the past? I don't think so.

It is a problem than any corporate organisation, religious or otherwise needs to realise. Little chance of a hiding place for any kind of stink. These days the truth will catch up with you.

As a whole the Church's (and I accept I am being very general here) moral behaviour in this matter has been collectively reprehensible. As I have said on other threads, I still think that segments of the Church are in a state of denial which is feeding the witch hunt.

People can't believe the intransigence of some in the Church in either denying the problem or refusing to take full responsibility and that is why it is becoming what you describe as a witch hunt. People will keep digging and digging until the Church throws open its records and comes clean. It will be bloody but at least there will be something of the Church left afterwards. At the moment, some of things said suggests that the old boys club will continue to try and cover this up, hoping for it to go away. It seems to me to be hugely damaging to the Church's credibility.

What has become apparent is the Church cannot be trusted to self govern itself. That has been proved manifestly in Ireland with the multitude of stories (and now criminal charges) appearing there. The laws of any land says paedophilia is a chargeable offence. The Church must simply come clean of all its members that it is internally hiding now and whenever there is a a whiff of trouble in the future call in the authorities to investigate. Simple.

There needs to be a reckoning. And until the Church realise that, expect this story to drag on and on and on and on.....

But to the question set here, I don't think Dawkins has much chance of getting to the Pope. The Establishment (of any country) will not allow it to go that far. It should but it won't.
 
#4
My opinion...


Dawkins is being a Publicity seeking c**k, must have a book tour coming up.

The man has written a few books about his style of Atheism. As he has quite loudly make it clear he's an atheist, WTF is he dribbling on about now ?

Not content with shoving "His" opinion down my throat he's now trying to make out he's better than Pope.

He's quite publicly worshipping at the Altar of Cash.
 
#5
Quote "Squiggers"

They believe that the Pope doesn't have diplomatic immunity as the head of the Vatican state, because apparently the Vatican isn't recognized as a state by the United Nations.

Funny that these atheists are going after the leader of the catholic church, if this was some islamic iman[sp],he would be left alone and allowed to enter our country without fear or worry.
As for the UN not recognising the Vatican State; well the holy see has a diplomat there and the state flag flies outside the UN building.
 
#6
Kitmarlowe said:
My opinion...


Dawkins is being a Publicity seeking c**k, must have a book tour coming up.

The man has written a few books about his style of Atheism. As he has quite loudly make it clear he's an atheist, WTF is he dribbling on about now ?

Not content with shoving "His" opinion down my throat he's now trying to make out he's better than Pope.

He's quite publicly worshipping at the Altar of Cash.
Or perhaps doing it to draw attention to the issues so that it doesn't quietly go away as the catholic church would wish?
 
#7
I do not believe the 'Swiss Guard', The Popes Private Army, will willingly surrender the Pope to some Author.

The Author may be suprised by the 'actions of the Swiss Guard' if he tries to arrest the Pope.

They all don't wear silly uniforms!!
 
#8
DB216LOKDVR said:
I do not believe the 'Swiss Guard', The Popes Private Army, will willingly surrender the Pope to some Author.

The Author may be suprised by the 'actions of the Swiss Guard' if he tries to arrest the Pope.

They all don't wear silly uniforms!!
Do the Swiss Guard have jurisdiction or powers of arrest in London?

Or has Il Papa taken irradiation lessons from Mr Putin?
 
#9
Dawkins and all the others who are busy denouncing the Catholic Church at present would do well to remember to, " Judge not that Ye be not also Judged, for be sure your sins shall find you out."
 
#10
Manley said:
Dawkins and all the others who are busy denouncing the Catholic Church at present would do well to remember to, " Judge not that Ye be not also Judged, for be sure your sins shall find you out."
I take it that the sins of the Catholic church have found them out then? How do one's sins find one out and how can I be sure of that?

And why should Dawkins et al have any respect for an organisation that has tried to cover up some appalling crimes committed by some of its number?
 
#11
Kitmarlowe said:
My opinion...


Dawkins is being a Publicity seeking c**k, must have a book tour coming up.

The man has written a few books about his style of Atheism. As he has quite loudly make it clear he's an atheist, WTF is he dribbling on about now ?

Not content with shoving "His" opinion down my throat he's now trying to make out he's better than Pope.

He's quite publicly worshipping at the Altar of Cash.
Or, it could be that the twunts at the Times were very selective in their reporting?


From Richard Dawkins himself

Comment #478580 by Richard Dawkins on April 11, 2010 at 8:48 am
Needless to say, I did NOT say "I will arrest Pope Benedict XVI" or anything so personally grandiloquent. You have to remember that The Sunday Times is a Murdoch newspaper, and that all newspapers follow the odd custom of entrusting headlines to a sub-editor, not the author of the article itself.

What I DID say to Marc Horne when he telephoned me out of the blue, and I repeat it here, is that I am whole-heartedly behind the initiative by Geoffrey Robertson and Mark Stephens to mount a legal challenge to the Pope's proposed visit to Britain. Beyond that, I declined to comment to Marc Horme, other than to refer him to my 'Ratzinger is the Perfect Pope' article here: http://richarddawkins.net/articles/5341

Here is what really happened. Christopher Hitchens first proposed the legal challenge idea to me on March 14th. I responded enthusiastically, and suggested the name of a high profile human rights lawyer whom I know. I had lost her address, however, and set about tracking her down. Meanwhile, Christopher made the brilliant suggestion of Geoffrey Robertson. He approached him, and Mr Robertson's subsequent 'Put the Pope in the Dock' article in The Guardian shows him to be ideal:
http://richarddawkins.net/articles/5366
The case is obviously in good hands, with him and Mark Stephens. I am especially intrigued by the proposed challenge to the legality of the Vatican as a sovereign state whose head can claim diplomatic immunity.

Even if the Pope doesn't end up in the dock, and even if the Vatican doesn't cancel the visit, I am optimistic that we shall raise public consciousness to the point where the British government will find it very awkward indeed to go ahead with the Pope's visit, let alone pay for it.
 
#12
tattybadger said:
Manley said:
Dawkins and all the others who are busy denouncing the Catholic Church at present would do well to remember to, " Judge not that Ye be not also Judged, for be sure your sins shall find you out."
I take it that the sins of the Catholic church have found them out then? How do one's sins find one out and how can I be sure of that?

And why should Dawkins et al have any respect for an organisation that has tried to cover up some appalling crimes committed by some of its number?
I dont say he or anyone should, but, one needs to be whiter that white before screeching your outrage at the World. And for the Record, the Roman Church was NEVER seen as Whiter that White, read its History it puts any of the recent dictatorships et al to shame.

Lappsed RC by the way.
 
#13
Park the Catholic-Outrage-Mobile boys.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/g...ict-xvi-but-peter-tatchell-will-go-ballistic/

Manley said:
Dawkins and all the others who are busy denouncing the Catholic Church at present would do well to remember to, " Judge not that Ye be not also Judged, for be sure your sins shall find you out."
You do realise we're talking about the sexual abuse of children here and the systematic covering-up of said crimes? What you're saying is no-one can ever criticise anyone else, ever, since everyone has at least committed at least some sins. Crayoning moron.

Manley said:
I dont say he or anyone should, but, one needs to be whiter that white before screeching your outrage at the World.
Why?
 
#14
With all the press coverage of late how come no-one seems to have raised the issue of 'aiding and abetting'? Surely the knowledge that it was happening and the failure to take action to prevent further abuse was a crime in itself ?
 
#15
Definitely. Compare the situation to that of teachers in schools - not only is it illegal for a 23-year-old teacher to have a consensual kiss with a 18-year-old student, it is illegal for another teacher to know about it and keep schtum. Jobs will be lost and lives will be ruined. Now if you're a 50-year-old priest who anally rapes 10-year-olds, hey presto! You might, might, get moved to another diocese if you're unlucky.
 
#16
Manley said:
I dont say he or anyone should, but, one needs to be whiter that white before screeching your outrage at the World. And for the Record, the Roman Church was NEVER seen as Whiter that White, read its History it puts any of the recent dictatorships et al to shame.

Lappsed RC by the way.
I assume therefore, that you are have either never levelled any criticism at anyone or you are whiter than white? I doubt it either way. If the church is not whiter than white, then it should be careful about putting itself up as a bastion of morality.
 
#17
Grapevine said:
Definitely. Compare the situation to that of teachers in schools - not only is it illegal for a 23-year-old teacher to have a consensual kiss with a 18-year-old student, it is illegal for another teacher to know about it and keep schtum. Jobs will be lost and lives will be ruined. Now if you're a 50-year-old priest who anally rapes 10-year-olds, hey presto! You might, might, get moved to another diocese if you're unlucky.
And, in some cases, be allowed to die with the (perceived) dignity of being a priest.

The Catholic church would appear to be placing its own reputation at a higher priority than the prosecution of child abusers. It should be thoroughly investigated and charges referred where appropriate, regardless of the church's reputation. Those responsible should be hung out to dry and made to pay the price for failing in their duties and attempting to place the church above the law. And, if the pope is one of those who perverted the course of justice then he should be tried in the same way as any other man or woman who did the same.
 
#18
Manley said:
Dawkins and all the others who are busy denouncing the Catholic Church at present would do well to remember to, " Judge not that Ye be not also Judged, for be sure your sins shall find you out."
Don't forget this charming quote:

"you can't counter the message counter the messenger"

Atheist or not, apparently it doesn't take "absolute morality" to understand being a pedophile is beyond wrong. But then again, thou shalt not touch the children isn't in the bible so it can't be that bad.
 
#19
All verv salient points T B and well stated, but there will be a very long line of wrongdoers waiting to be tried before you get round to the Pope I think.

Oh and by the by, I know just how black my soul is thanks, so I know the Heaven dividend will not be extended in my direction, Thanks for your comments though, much appreciated, Toodles.
 
#20
Kitmarlowe said:
Not content with shoving "His" opinion down my throat he's now trying to make out he's better than Pope.
Well Dawkins isn't a former Nazi who heads an organisation that has been rocked by countless paedophilia cases and active conspiracy to cover up the rape of children, all the while claiming to be the representative of God on Earth. Eggs Benedict himself actually refused to defrock a child rapist in case it damaged their organisation. Heaven forbid (pun intended) that they put the victim before the abuser, but no.

Dawkins - slightly annoying but an eloquent, enlightened person who refuses to bow down before ancient superstitions. To be honest, it looks like Richard Dawkins actually IS better than the Pope.

But let's face it, Ratzinger is one of the most powerful men on earth and his club is absolutely mahussive. There is zero chance of anything happening to him. There are a lot of people on this planet who believe all that mumbo jumbo and wholeheartedly believe that he has the ear of God. He'll be laughing himself to sleep tonight on his huge gold bed with no thought for any of his church's victims other than how to shut them up and prevent any further stories coming out which might damage his position as the CEO of the Roman Church. Head of State my arse - they don't even have any borders.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads