Words cannot describe the AWESOME.

[tombfyre]

Richard Dawkins, and one of his fellow Atheist friends, plan to arrange the arrest of Pope Benedict XVI for crimes against humanity. They have all sorts of reasons, though one of them was of course assisting in the cover up of many sex scandals

Comments

[huskion]

This is absurd, and ignorant. I feel disgusted, and I know it's because of a lack of understanding in a lot of things.

This is analogous in idiocy to those people out there who are saying shit like "Poland is Russia's territory anyway" in regards to the recent political tragedy here and conspiracies arising from it.

A few facts for you.

The Pope does not condone paedophilia or sex crimes.

The Pope is not consenting to paedophilia or sex crimes.

It is not the Pope's fault that paedophiles or criminals choose to become clergymen. They aren't exactly going to tell anyone either. Anyone is welcome to the vocation regardless of who they are, were, and what they have done in life because Catholicism doesn't promote discriminating people or hating them and believes that with a positive outlook on life, the world, rights and wrongs and answers, people can be changed for good and everyone has a chance to make their life worth something.

The Pope is not trying to cover anyone's ass. He has done all within his might to help victims of various crimes against humanity as well as the wrongdoers. He is not picking sides. He would not pick sides. Don't think he will.

The Pope doesn't have any right to 'punish' any clergy or people who are paedophiles or sex criminals, both by law and by religious doctrine, so expecting him to is stupid.

A fundamental part of Roman Catholicism is about forgiving people for their wrongs and letting God make judgements, because it's not the right of any one human to condemn another for crimes from a religious standing point, regardless of their rank. Being a Catholic is all about knowing when to let go and how to not hurt people.

The Roman Catholic Church is not accountable for anything; with enough understanding of the religion and theology, it's obvious that individuals who choose to go against the practices and moral/ethical teachings of the Church are doing so of their own accord and likely due to misinterpretation and personal reasons or tendencies.

Atheists are not happy people. That's why they're Atheists. Predominantly religious nations have profound cultures, fun traditions, and know how to party, love, and prosper in whatever conditions, better than any Atheist people on earth.

Nobody is hiding behind their "Almighty" church. People who think the Roman Catholic Church is "Almighty" in any way are either fundamentalists who are digressing from the culture and ethos of the religion, or are actually part of another denomination of religious sect/offshoot that is not affiliated with the Pope.

Saying things like "Putting your foot down" against any religion is an insult to the entire upbringing, education and moral code of many many people. It's a sign of hatred and intolerance, which is evil. It's the sort of thing Nazis would do. There is nothing "awesome" about this whatsoever. It's foul and I really wouldn't have expected that of you.

I think people should put their foot down on blame culture and arrogantly believing that any one representative of a religion wishes to do or cause anyone harm or wrong.

Words cannot describe the retarded hypocrisy.

[tombfyre]

Oh come now, you don't need to start invoking godwins law just because we disagree on something.

I personally think the church, as any organization, should be held responsible for the actions of its members. Or at least, should make available the potential arrest and punishment of those whom stray from law, order, rules, etc. Rather than letting their be scandals, let these men of the cloth be dealt with properly.

As for the comment about Atheists not being happy people, or not having traditions/culture, that's BS. I'm an Atheist, and I'm quite happy thank you. I have a culture, I have traditions, I even have morals. All of these things can exist outside of religious influence, and to think otherwise is a rather narrow view. I can admit that a religion may also be a guiding part of a persons life, but it isn't a requirement for any of the above things.

In the end, I think what the above individuals are trying to do is make it clear that people don't have to tip-toe around the subject of religion anymore, and that the head of an organization is responsible for what goes on in it. Even if that just means not moving around or hiding people who did bad things.

I'd expect no less of any such body, be it government, group, company, business, or church.

[huskion]

While I can agree on the Pope having some degree of responsibility for the actions of clergy, I can definitely say that there is nothing the Pope would ever do to suggest, insinuate or otherwise allow people committing sex crimes as representatives of the religious organisation to be okay. It's daft that anyone would actually believe that either.

Say an American citizen went to China and raped a little boy, and a whole bunch of people turned around and decided to have Obama arrested for not doing enough about it. "It's a crime against humanity! He's letting it happen!" they'd yell, while also taking any chance they can to stab at America because they also hate it for their own reasons. That's what this Atheist is doing, at the same time, he is taking his personal vendettas and prejudices against religion and putting them into the mix and getting a whole team of like-minded ignorants to back him up. I'm not one for invoking Godwin's law either, but the resemblance is striking. So think about that before you start waving the flag of awesome and propagating that you support and agree with this essence of stupid in a can.

[tombfyre]

Well alright then. I suppose we can agree to disagree on the subject.

And yes, I have no doubt that the folks involved have a bias in their arguments and actions. But everyone usually does. ^^()

[glyn]

Your analogy is false (the Pope is not going to be arrested because one priest raped a little boy) and you're mischaracterising the argument for the Pope's arrest (no one is saying that Pope condones child sexual abuse).

What's at issue here is a genuinely complex and difficult question of social justice. The Pope is responsible for the church's policy for handling these cases, both because he has ultimate authority in the church today, and because he was the cardinal to review and set that policy in the 1980s. Many people have made serious accusations that the church has mishandled these cases, and that it has threatened victims with excommunication unless they remain silent. These accusation may be false, but how should justice be decided? The crucial question is to what extent should the Pope (or any religious leader, for that matter) be legally accountable for the actions of his church? I don't think that question has an easy answer, but I fervently hope that this case sparks useful debate on the subject.

Progress on this question is certainly not helped by knee-jerk accusations of religious persecution. Religious persecution is an evil that cannot be tolerated. However, being critical of the actions of religious institutions and suggesting they should be accountable for their actions is not ipso facto persecution. No one is being persecuted for their religious beliefs or for their affiliation with any religious organisation. A specific charge has been leveled against a specific person, and it needs to be investigated and judged fairly by some means that everyone can agree to.

And speaking of persecution, your blanket characterisation of atheists is hateful and ignorant. You are not in any position to level accusations of hypocrisy.