MERGED Richard Dawkins planning to have Pope Benedict arrested over 'crimes against humanity'

[Yellow_Belle]

I think there’s a more substantially difficult case to be made that Benedict’s wrongdoing, if any, qualifies under the jurisdiction of the EU’s International Court.

Sigh. There is no such entity as the EU International Court.

Regardless of how courts appear to be secularised in Europe,

You have religious courts in the US???

 

[Leela]

Christopher Hitchens is one of those self-important blowhards who’s convinced he’s smarter than (and therefore morally superior to) everyone else on the planet.

I’ve never seen anyone get so worked up about other people’s beliefs. He’s made it his life’s work to point out the imperfections of faith, especially Christianity, and double-especially Catholicism, while blithely ignoring the incalculable benefit that faith, especially Christianity, and double-especially Catholicism, has brought to the world.

All this while being equally content to ignore the incalculable harm done to the world by atheist societies.

I really wonder what it is that he wants from people. Are we all supposed to bow down to him, thanking him for removing the blinders from our eyes? Create a society based on *his *idea of utopia?

In some ways, I think he’s the world’s biggest religious fanatic. Otherwise, why would he care?

Why would he care? No one needs to be a religious fanatic to be concerned about the widespread sexual abuse we have been hearing so much about.

 

[markeverett49]

Hitchens and Dawkins are no friends of the Church, but the Pope’s head of state immunity may need clarification in light of current laws. Certainly no one in the Church can argue that Pope’s should be protected in the commission of crimes—that’s not Catholic moral theology!

 

[stuart12]

There is no morality in atheism. There is no ‘ought’, but simply an ‘is’. Therefore, if they are being consistent, the Pope has done nothing wrong (even if he abused children himself, which is what the media seems to be likening his ‘crimes’ to).

They just want attention for their relentless cause of attacking the Church in order to allow their own evil behaviour.

Oremus pro pontifice…

 

[Leela]

There is no morality in atheism. There is no ‘ought’, but simply an ‘is’. Therefore, if they are being consistent, the Pope has done nothing wrong (even if he abused children himself, which is what the media seems to be likening his ‘crimes’ to).

Nonbelievers, of course, have moral views. When someone like Hitchens opposes the Catholic Church it is because he sincerely believes that it has acted immorally. You and he will probably disagree, but when you argue with him about it, you won’t be able to convince him that he doesn’t actually think that anything is right or wrong. Why would you even want to?

 

[edwest2]

Nonbelievers, of course, have moral views. When someone like Hitchens opposes the Catholic Church it is because he sincerely believes that it has acted immorally. You and he will probably disagree, but when you argue with him about it, you won’t be able to convince him that he doesn’t actually think that anything is right or wrong. Why would you even want to?

Mr. Hitchens has made it a point to obsess about other people’s beliefs. He has written a book and is mentioned in articles.

I think Mr. Hitchens has also fallen for the popular press accounts without doing much research of his own. He can be sincere and wrong at the same time.

God bless,
Ed

---

Choose Jesus.

 

[Santi2]

You have religious courts in the US???

You must mean UK. No, that was my mistake. My apologies. I meant to refer to court decisions over here which are increasingly giving effect to anti-Christian and secular thoughts etc. However, we do have Bishops and members of other faith communities in the legislature (the House of Lords) who can open up debate on legislation.

 

[cthulhubryan]

What [Richard Dawkins] 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: richarddawkins.net/articles/5341

Having read Dawkin’s referenced article, I am once again overtaken by disgust at the means some people will go to self promote. Reading Dawkin’s ideas about the Pope made me nauseous.

Dawkins should fear, and fear greatly. “Vengeance is Mine, sayeth the Lord”

 

[Leela]

Mr. Hitchens has made it a point to obsess about other people’s beliefs. He has written a book and is mentioned in articles.

Of course we should be concerned about what other people believe since to believe something is to be prepared to act in certain ways under certain circumstances.

I think Mr. Hitchens has also fallen for the popular press accounts without doing much research of his own. He can be sincere and wrong at the same time.

What has the press gotten wrong?

 

[unafraid]

Hitchens reminds me of a little boy sent into a perpetual tantrum by the failure of his ice-cream being delivered as promised, In his case, it is the abject, crushing disappointment derived from the fact that his fervent hopes for a “post-religious global Marxism” have withered on the vine. So now he desperately clings to a potential “post-religious existentialism”, knowing deep down that this pipe-dream emerges and dies with the sociological frequency and cyclical regularity of the cicada.

His rage is born from his own realization that he is truly “a rebel without a cause”…a bonafide and rational cause. Deep within, I believe that the the man must feel rather hopeless. Another’s belief to the nonbeliever seems to be what they despise and, yet, at the same time, covet more than anything else. It is like the rant,“why doesn’t daddy love me as much as he loves you!”, and the reactive stance to hate daddy because of the percieved slight. In Hitchens case, I believe, the “daddy” in question is…God.

 

[edwest2]

Of course we should be concerned about what other people believe since to believe something is to be prepared to act in certain ways under certain circumstances.

What has the press gotten wrong?

Mr. Hitchens has made it a point to go after certain ideas that bother him. The average person does not write a book or participate in public debates.

What the press has gotten wrong is the whole idea of arresting the Pope. It makes for engaging headlines, and increased sales, but is simply not possible. This according to the Vatican.

God bless,
Ed

---

Choose Jesus.

 

[PatThompson]

…do no let yourself think that arresting the Pope is ever a smart thing to do

Smart? No, certainly not!
Stupid? Perhaps.

…but it is interesting to see the reasons people have posted here…

• Would cause a riot
• Would cause Religious unrest in the UK
• Would upset Italy and/or Germany
• Would end someone’s political career
• Would embarass the Queen
• Would serve someone else’s political/atheist agenda

To be overly blunt, these are all cowardly answers. Not how my religion taught me to behave, and I’m sure not how your’s does.
Brave? History may answer that for us…

And do not let yourself think that one letter answers all questions

One letter does not answer all questions. I agree! But that’s really the problem, isn’t it? Who can possibly investigate this situation in a fair and reasonable way?

As the potential evidence increases people who don’t have a religious connection to the Pope are speaking out and saying “Enough, it is time for an impartial justice to investigate this”.

Is that really so difficult to understand?

Of course the problem is that “impartial justice” is likely impossible, but that’s not enough of a reason to turn a blind eye. I assume the rest of us were hoping the Catholic Church would provide some explanation, but the world has been left waiting, wondering, and now scheming.

 

[Neil_Anthony]

I think this thread is missing the point: There is no evidence for any judge to issue a warrant for the Pope’s arrest. The situations being debated in the press right now only involve decisions over whether to de-frock a priest, long after the civil authorities had become aware of the priest’s crimes. The church was not under any legal requirement to defrock anybody.

 

[edwest2]

And even Ed Koch has a few words to say:

catholickey.blogspot.com/2010/04/former-ny-mayor-ed-koch-says-enough.html

God bless,
Ed

---

Choose Jesus.

 

[unafraid]

For many years, it has been suspected that the State of Israel has Nuclear Weapons, and there have been repeated calls by the International Community for inspections to take place to verify these suspicions. Have there ever been U.N. inspectors allowed into Israel? No. As you say, “the world is waiting for answers”. And while we are at it, why not drag the entire Chinese government before a tribunal at the Hague? I am sure the Tibetans are, “waiting for answers”. The stones are flying in from all corners, and you can hear the glass shattering all around us. Let’s not turn,“a blind eye” to that truth…shall we?

 

[anode]

How could you arrest someone for the crime done by another individual. It was not the Pope who abused children. It’s just like saying arrest the President of that company because an employee of his cheated and robbed the company’s clients.

You don’t arrest the company president but you may ask him to step down.

BUT Ratzinger wasn’t pope during most of these scandals.

*However, *his having to deal with the fallout of the scandals during his pontificate is going to severely limit the efficacy of the remainder of his pontificate.

He has inherited a whirlwind.

 

[AfarGirl]

Why do Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens want to arrest the Pope for crimes he didn’t commit or cover up?

 

[Onyx88]

yes, dawkins is playing the opportunist here, and it is shameful. He’s allowed his “celebrity” to go to his head and is now doing whatever to remain in the news.

That being said, if public opinion continues to worsen for the church, the idea of arresting benedict xvi may gain traction with more respectable people as well as public support. If that were to happen, then as in the pinochet case, one never knows what might happen.

It would be best if the church addressed the issue forthrightly and avoided being put in a position where it had to estimate the likelihood of an arrest attempt and subsequent events.

i agree and the whole scandal should’ve been addressed in public a long time ago ~ to tell you the truth, in today’s world i’m not sure if the curch will ever recover

 

[PatThompson]

For many years, it has been suspected that the State of Israel has Nuclear Weapons,…drag the entire Chinese government before a tribunal at the Hague? I am sure the Tibetans are, “waiting for answers”. …Let’s not turn,“a blind eye” to that truth…shall we?

(Unafraid, I assume your comment was a response to mine.)

I agree with you 100%!

In this day and age we the people (so to speak) have the power, and some feel the responsibility, to shed light where powerful countries/states/organized-religion and companies once hid. I’m afraid that I won’t be able to discuss nuclear weapons in Israel, China’s human rights abuses, the old-fashioned US government bail-out of the big-three-automakers, etc… in any meaningful way, though. I agree with you that we have a long way to go, and I’m sure there are many people disappointed in the Catholic Church for not making the most of this opportunity to lead the way.

That being said, the Catholic Church has taken some steps, releasing their once internal-only guidelines for dealing with sex abuse charges against priests. We should all continue pushing the world in this direction (although forgive me if I’m surprised that the guidelines aren’t JUST the 10 commandments).