Richard Dawkins: Arrest The Pope During UK Visit

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2010 3:08 PM GMT
    "Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens, two of the world's most prominent atheist intellectuals, are seeking means to try the pope for crimes against humanity, their lawyers confirmed this weekend.

    The pair are said to be working with British lawyers to see if the pope can be arrested for his part in the alleged cover-up of widespread sexual abuse in the Catholic Church during a visit to the United Kingdom in September

    The Vatican has suggested that the pope is immune to prosecution as he is a head of state - Dawkins and Hitchens suggest that he is not immune as the Vatican is not represented at the United Nations.

    "I'm convinced we can get over the threshold of immunity," their lawyer Mark Stephens told The Guardian. "The Vatican is not recognized as a state in international law. People assume that it has existed for time immemorial but it was a construct of Mussolini, and when the Vatican first applied to become a member of the UN, the US said no. So as a sop they were given the status of permanent observers rather than full members."

    Dawkins, author of The God Delusion, has confirmed he is seeking the pope's arrest, although he later denied reports he was planning to perform the arrest personally.

    Last month Dawkins wrote a scathing article for the Washington Post in which he called the pope:

    A leering old villain in a frock, who spent decades conspiring behind closed doors for the position he now holds; a man who believes he is infallible and acts the part; a man whose preaching of scientific falsehood is responsible for the deaths of countless AIDS victims in Africa; a man whose first instinct when his priests are caught with their pants down is to cover up the scandal and damn the young victims to silence.

    Hitchens told the Sunday Times of London: "This man is not above or outside the law. The institutionalized concealment of child rape is a crime under any law and demands not private ceremonies of repentance or church-funded payoffs, but justice and punishment."

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/12/richard-dawkins-arrest-th_n_533837.html

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2010 3:20 PM GMT
    The publicity will perhaps be embarrassing for the Pope during his September visit, but I doubt he faces any real legal threat. Regardless of the Vatican's UN status, the UK does recognize the Vatican State, so diplomatic immunity will be observed.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2010 3:30 PM GMT
    I really wish we had better spokesmen than Dawkins and Hitchens, Hitchens in particular.

    That said, I think it is a grand idea.
  • Delivis

    Posts: 2332

    Apr 12, 2010 4:25 PM GMT
    MunchingZombie saidI really wish we had better spokesmen than Dawkins and Hitchens, Hitchens in particular.

    That said, I think it is a grand idea.


    I like them both in very different ways but I think you are right; they are unlikely to convince people that this is the right course of action.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2010 5:49 PM GMT
    Arrest would be too good. Hand him over to the victims and parents of victims of his organization, along with every living priest guilty of child abuse of any kind. Justice would be served.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2010 6:06 PM GMT
    The Catholic Church does not have license to operate outside the law, although it seems to think so.

    The high officials of the church who engineered this cover-up should be arrested, prosecuted and if found guilty, sent to prison. Including the Pope.

    I look forward to seeing him and the rest of that human flotsam in prison garb as soon as possible.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2010 6:26 PM GMT
    When and how do we get to grab Bush and Cheney?
  • irishkcguy

    Posts: 780

    Apr 12, 2010 7:08 PM GMT
    If nothing else, his travel should be restricted. The UK would be completely within their rights to not the the Pope into their countries.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2010 7:11 PM GMT
    Caslon14000 saidWhen and how do we get to grab Bush and Cheney?

    That'll never happen, either. There's no political will to do it in the US, and Republicans would go berserk, and instigate open rebellion among the looney right (we're almost at that point already).

    Neither will the International Court do it, because of US prestige and influence, as well as for economic reasons. Only the leaders of smaller and more marginal countries are ever charged with anything, except in time of war.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2010 7:19 PM GMT
    Richard Dawkins is my favorite religious debater. If none of you have read about this guy or seen him debate in person: Youtube "Richard Dawkins" and listen to his videos. He's a prominent Oxford professor who doesnt hold back his tounge.

    Richard Dawkins and Deepak Chopra are two of my favorite intellectuals.

    Read them!!!! haha
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2010 7:35 PM GMT
    Red_Vespa said
    Caslon14000 saidWhen and how do we get to grab Bush and Cheney?

    That'll never happen, either. There's no political will to do it in the US, and Republicans would go berserk, and instigate open rebellion among the looney right (we're almost at that point already).

    Neither will the International Court won't do it, because of US prestige and influence, as well as for economic reasons. Only the leaders of smaller and more marginal countries are ever charged with anything, except in time of war.


    Lets not forget how Ted kennedy, a member of the left wing royalty, walked free all his life either, and a young women lost her life. The Democrats are not free of sin either or damage, or wing nuts, or people who love to live the republican lifestyle, so long as they are not paying for it, or their medical bills either.

    man will be punished for his own sins and not Adams transgressions. So the pope can not be held responsible for the actions of a gay priest, who molested little boys in his care, if he had of obeyed the rules he would never of been there.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2010 7:44 PM GMT
    Since patticakes wants to try to be relevant - the object of a preposition can never be the subject of a sentence. That has as much to do with this post as patticake's hallucinogenic response. As a warning - don't take the brown acid.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2010 7:47 PM GMT
    Pattison said
    Red_Vespa said
    Caslon14000 saidWhen and how do we get to grab Bush and Cheney?

    That'll never happen, either. There's no political will to do it in the US, and Republicans would go berserk, and instigate open rebellion among the looney right (we're almost at that point already).

    Neither will the International Court won't do it, because of US prestige and influence, as well as for economic reasons. Only the leaders of smaller and more marginal countries are ever charged with anything, except in time of war.


    Lets not forget how Ted kennedy, a member of the left wing royalty, walked free all his life either, and a young women lost her life. The Democrats are not free of sin either or damage, or wing nuts, or people who love to live the republican lifestyle, so long as they are not paying for it, or their medical bills either.

    man will be punished for his own sins and not Adams transgressions. So the pope can not be held responsible for the actions of a gay priest, who molested little boys in his care, if he had of obeyed the rules he would never of been there.

    You don't know your Catholic dogma very well. Catholics DO believe in Original Sin (the sin of Adam). But even so, you are attempting to apply Canonical law to a criminal issue. The Church hierarchy could in fact be guilty of conspiracy, cover-ups, withholding evidence, making false statements, aiding and abetting, and numerous other crimes of their own that facilitated these abuses and hid them from legal prosecution.

    BTW, I noticed I made a typo in my quoted post above, when I incorrectly revising part of the text as I was composing it. A change to the original has been made.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2010 7:49 PM GMT
    If you haven't gotten it by now, patticakes is here to simply take whatever anti-gay position he can take on any issue. To try to counter his dull points with reason only increases his punchline.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2010 7:53 PM GMT
    McGay saidIf you haven't gotten it by now, patticakes is here to simply take whatever anti-gay position he can take on any issue. To try to counter his dull points with reason only increases his punchline.

    In other words:

    DontFeedtheTrollsjpg.jpg
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2010 7:53 PM GMT
    McGay saidIf you haven't gotten it by now, patticakes is here to simply take whatever anti-gay position he can take on any issue. To try to counter his dull points with reason only increases his punchline.


    And he's illiterate too. Despicable!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2010 7:56 PM GMT
    I can't recall one single instance where he didn't take an anti-gay position, even on things that have nothing to do with sexuality.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2010 8:02 PM GMT
    McGay saidI can't recall one single instance where he didn't take an anti-gay position, even on things that have nothing to do with sexuality.

    Well, he's told me here that I'm not a real gay, because I was married, that I'm really bisexual. He's the only "pure gay" here (or only one of a few, I forget which), presumably because he's never had a straight thought or deed. So I guess the rest of us are mostly gay pretenders. And being the only true gay, he gets to criticize other gays and faux-gays. Or at least I think that's how it works. icon_confused.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2010 8:08 PM GMT
    But back on topic: this scandal is clearly a thorn in the side of the RCC, and badly damaging the reputation and legacy of this Pope. The Vatican is drawing the wagons around him, but at this point I think it's doing more harm than good. At the same time, I think he's at no legal risk, nor most of the cardinals & bishops, since the statute of limitations has run out in many of these cases, the evidence hard to reconstruct. It's like in many sports: you run the clock out on your opponent.
  • Delivis

    Posts: 2332

    Apr 12, 2010 8:27 PM GMT
    rockinb saidRichard Dawkins is my favorite religious debater. If none of you have read about this guy or seen him debate in person: Youtube "Richard Dawkins" and listen to his videos. He's a prominent Oxford professor who doesnt hold back his tounge.

    Richard Dawkins and Deepak Chopra are two of my favorite intellectuals.

    Read them!!!! haha


    Deepak Chopra and the word intellectual should NEVER be in the same sentence together.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2010 8:31 PM GMT
    Caslon14000 saidWhen and how do we get to grab Bush and Cheney?


    Under the Military Commissions Act of 2006, the leaders during times of conflict have sweeping immunities regarding the trial and interrogation of prisoners, they even made it retroactive. not a part they talk about much, its shoved into the middle someplace of the 100+ page bill.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2010 8:34 PM GMT
    Pattison, you just quoted Mormon doctrine, is there a religion i've never picked up on before in there?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2010 9:03 PM GMT
    Richard Dawkins is only using the pope as a scapegoat to vent his own hatred of religion.
    He should stick with biological science.
  • Delivis

    Posts: 2332

    Apr 12, 2010 9:16 PM GMT
    NotThatOld saidRichard Dawkins is only using the pope as a scapegoat to vent his own hatred of religion.
    He should stick with biological science.


    Yeah, the pope and the church have nothing to answer for. Lets just dismiss all criticism of them.

    I dont think so.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 12, 2010 9:28 PM GMT
    Nice mind reading act you’ve got there NotThatOld
    Do you suggest it better left to someone wanting to vent their hatred of an accessory to child rape?

    You might all like to check out this story, by the way.

    http://exceptionmag.com/politics/civic-life/0001705/richard-dawkins-i-did-not-say-i-will-arrest-pope-benedict-xvi