Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Dawkins & Hitchens plan to arrest Pope.

  • 11-04-2010 12:16am
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,460 ✭✭✭Orizio


    Charlatans.
    RICHARD DAWKINS, the atheist campaigner, is planning a legal ambush to have the Pope arrested during his state visit to Britain “for crimes against humanity”.

    Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens, the atheist author, have asked human rights lawyers to produce a case for charging Pope Benedict XVI over his alleged cover-up of sexual abuse in the Catholic church.

    The pair believe they can exploit the same legal principle used to arrest Augusto Pinochet, the late Chilean dictator, when he visited Britain in 1998.

    The Pope was embroiled in new controversy this weekend over a letter he signed arguing that the “good of the universal church” should be considered against the defrocking of an American priest who committed sex offences against two boys. It was dated 1985, when he was in charge of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which deals with sex abuse cases.
    Related Links

    Benedict will be in Britain between September 16 and 19, visiting London, Glasgow and Coventry, where he will beatify Cardinal John Henry Newman, the 19th-century theologian.

    Dawkins and Hitchens believe the Pope would be unable to claim diplomatic immunity from arrest because, although his tour is categorised as a state visit, he is not the head of a state recognised by the United Nations.

    Link.
    Tagged:


«134567

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 17,689 ✭✭✭✭OutlawPete


    That's not fair, he wears a dress.

    Do you know what happens men in prison that wear dresses?

    Karma.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,752 ✭✭✭pablomakaveli


    Dawkins is an attention whore.

    He's only doing this to push his own agenda rather than out of concern for victims of child abuse.


  • Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 19,242 Mod ✭✭✭✭L.Jenkins


    Dawkins is an attention whore.

    He's only doing this to push his own agenda rather than out of concern for victims of child abuse.

    But do you agree or disagree! How can he be held accountable or any priest be held accountable if accountablity doesnt begin at the top!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,039 ✭✭✭Seloth


    Oh gawd...I wish Dawkins would jsut shut up..he is deffo an attention whore with the most undirect awnsering method ever may I also add.

    He embarased Atheist as extremists do theists :D


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,752 ✭✭✭pablomakaveli


    djhunter30 wrote: »
    But do you agree or disagree! How can he be held accountable or any priest be held accountable if accountablity doesnt begin at the top!

    I agree the pope should be made to answer for any wrong doing but this publicity stunt isn't the right way to go about it.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 27,856 ✭✭✭✭Dave!


    Bout time someone had enough balls to try and hold him accountable tbh

    He's either above the law, or he isn't


  • Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 19,242 Mod ✭✭✭✭L.Jenkins


    I agree the pope should be made to answer for any wrong doing but this publicity stunt isn't the right way to go about it.

    I agree there with you! Is there anyother way though of litterally dragging the pope into a prison and making him confess to coin a phrase!


  • Moderators, Regional East Moderators Posts: 23,239 Mod ✭✭✭✭GLaDOS


    Seloth wrote: »
    He embarased Atheist as extremists do theists :D
    Hardly

    Cake, and grief counseling, will be available at the conclusion of the test



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 37,214 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    Dawkins is an attention whore.

    He's only doing this to push his own agenda rather than out of concern for victims of child abuse.
    Personally I'd have been more inclined to say that about Hitchens. "I'm staunchly atheist but mates with members of the right-wing christian former presidential administration" - woo Chris, how interesting of you...


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,290 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Dawkins is an attention whore.

    He's only doing this to push his own agenda rather than out of concern for victims of child abuse.
    + 100000 I actually like Dawkins, even if he is way too linear and narrow minded and remarkably uniformed beyond the ken of his primary focus, but robust champion of revolution he is not. Hitchens I would have more "faith" in(which would doubtless be somewhat ironic for the chap to hear). Dawkins is an intellectually cloistered lightweight. I would not look to him to hide me in his attic if the monsters came. The usual, again cloistered "protest" he adds his name to.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,290 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Agreed. But which one of those three would you back in a straight fight? Not the right on eejit and that's part of the problem.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 555 ✭✭✭baztard


    Nice to see some heat being put on the church. Benny was probably not responsibe in any way or form for the abuse, but he now represents the scum who were, so fúck him, let him take what that fúcked up institution deserves


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Dyr


    Team Atheist: World Police


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,763 ✭✭✭Sheeps


    Isn't the Pope a head of state, thus immune from this kind of thing? Dawkins is a prick and pop atheists are literally the scum of the earth.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,789 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    The pope can use magic, they stand no chance.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 161 ✭✭Dazd_N_Confusd


    And to think I used to like these guys. Well not Hitchens, he's always been a prick!

    I'm beginning to think these two are as bad as the people they mock, Pat Robertson, Ted Haggard etc.

    Well not as bad but getting closer every time they open their ****ing mouth!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,090 ✭✭✭jill_valentine


    I'm not friends with either of these dudes, but this thread is a bit rich.

    Weeks and weeks and weeks of "Something should be done about this" and "the Pope is a disgrace" and whatever - somebody actually threatens to actually do something about said disgrace, and there's whinging about that purely because it's Dawkins and Hitchens.

    Hitchens is indeed kind of a douche, but far more people hate on Dawkins than know what he's about.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 542 ✭✭✭cleremy jarkson


    Enjoy hell athiests. long live the pope


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,090 ✭✭✭jill_valentine


    I'll pass on your regards when I get there, Cleremy.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 542 ✭✭✭cleremy jarkson


    I'll pass on your regards when I get there, Cleremy.

    No need. I've had faith in our Lord and saviour Jesus Christ.

    only joking...he's a right c'unt


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,460 ✭✭✭Orizio


    I'm not friends with either of these dudes, but this thread is a bit rich.

    Weeks and weeks and weeks of "Something should be done about this" and "the Pope is a disgrace" and whatever - somebody actually threatens to actually do something about said disgrace, and there's whinging about that purely because it's Dawkins and Hitchens.

    Hitchens is indeed kind of a douche, but far more people hate on Dawkins than know what he's about.

    People are whinging because its a shameless publicity event - they aren't doing anything worthwhile.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,068 ✭✭✭Bodhisopha


    I love Hitchens, he's great fun.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 141 ✭✭lemonjelly


    Dawkins is an attention whore.
    attention whore.

    He's only doing this to push his own agenda rather than out of concern for victims of child abuse.

    Dawkins is not an attention whore at all.He speaks the truth in his books. the
    attention whores are whoring in the church which is not reality.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,487 ✭✭✭banquo


    Not really. Name three people in the Vatican apart from the pope without using google? You can't. And if you can it's not because they're attention whores.

    Dawkins doesn't love science; he hates religion and his hatred gets rewarded with attention, so he carries on with it. I'm not of the faith; if another person is then great, more power to them.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,090 ✭✭✭jill_valentine


    Orizio wrote: »
    People are whinging because its a shameless publicity event - they aren't doing anything worthwhile.

    Maybe. Publicity for what though?

    Hitchens is all bluster, it's true - but Dawkins, less so. Dawkins is of the educated opinion that the persistence of an organisation like the Catholic church is detrimental to the society around it. That's why he does stuff like this, to generate a fuss about a very real issue that in light of recent events should be taken more seriously. It is a publicity stunt, in that sense - he's trying to further a cause he's dedicated to, because as far as he's concerned it aids the greater good.

    I have no doubt that any attempt by Dawkins to bring the Pope or his church to account for their abuses will fail - but it's worth doing, nonetheless, if it makes us stop and think for a moment why that should be so.

    Why should somebody who's facilitated and sheltered that kind of institutional abuse and corruption be beyond account? Why shouldn't this organisation be treated the same as any other by the law?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,811 ✭✭✭✭billy the squid


    nothing will come of it. he is a head of state, which he will be for the rest of his days so nothing will happen. dawkins will be told to bog off by the police when he tries to serve the pope.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 858 ✭✭✭goingpostal


    nothing will come of it. he is a head of state, which he will be for the rest of his days so nothing will happen. dawkins will be told to bog off by the police when he tries to serve the pope.

    I agree one hundred percent. Nothing will actually happen the pope, but I still think it is worth doing. Alot of people are whinging and giving out that Hitchens and Dawkins are publicity-mongers, which they are in a way, but no-one has come up with any better idea for protesting against Benny and his heinous crimes. If it makes people think a bit more about why he has immunity and why his organisation is treated with such kids-gloves, then I am all for it. As a symbolic protest it is well worth doing, and if it makes travel for the pope more awkward and difficult, like it does for other crooks like Kissinger or Livni or Mugabe, then it will have achieved something.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,857 ✭✭✭professore


    It always amazes me what the main religions can get away with. If this was a private company (I exclude banks from this - they can apparently also do what they like) where this kind of abuse went on then the CEO would be serving a long jail sentence. Why is the pope any different? He personally covered up for known paedophiles and is STILL doing it. Let's be clear - these people are raping children and the pope gives his blessing. How can anyone defend him ?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,811 ✭✭✭✭billy the squid


    professore wrote: »
    It always amazes me what the main religions can get away with. If this was a private company (I exclude banks from this - they can apparently also do what they like) where this kind of abuse went on then the CEO would be serving a long jail sentence. Why is the pope any different? He personally covered up for known paedophiles and is STILL doing it. Let's be clear - these people are raping children and the pope gives his blessing. How can anyone defend him ?

    But he is not a CEO, he is a head of state which gives him immunity. and who do you have to thank for that, why filthy nazis like Benito Musolini for one.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,595 ✭✭✭bonerm


    Forget it Dawkins, you can't beat (vatican) City Hall.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 32,865 ✭✭✭✭MagicMarker


    For as long as I can remember there are threads almost on a daily basis expressing what scum the church is.

    Now there are two people trying to get something done about it, you're all just bitching about those people.

    WTF is up with that?

    Fair play to them I say, if they need a donation for legal fees then I'll gladly help out.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26 The Devil.


    Enjoy hell athiests. long live the pope

    Hell isn't so bad, it's kind of like Cork.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,146 ✭✭✭youcrazyjesus!


    Dawkins is an attention whore.

    He's only doing this to push his own agenda rather than out of concern for victims of child abuse.

    Absolute bollox. He's an honourable person. You're looking at him through the eyes of someone who is at the wrong end of his relentless logic.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,370 ✭✭✭✭Son Of A Vidic


    professore wrote: »
    It always amazes me what the main religions can get away with. If this was a private company (I exclude banks from this - they can apparently also do what they like) where this kind of abuse went on then the CEO would be serving a long jail sentence. Why is the pope any different? He personally covered up for known paedophiles and is STILL doing it. Let's be clear - these people are raping children and the pope gives his blessing. How can anyone defend him ?


    Amen to that. Where is the Grey area here for the Church? These guys presided over all of this, concealing perverted 'sickos' within their church. Moving child rapist's on to ' greener pastures'. Is that how 'men of God' should behave? I think when Jesus said: ''Suffer little children.'' - I think the paedophiles of the church took it's meaning literally.

    Regarding Dawkins, well he's another nut from the opposite spectrum I suppose. Maybe he should be arrested for suggesting we evolved from Apes. Can you imagine how insulted Apes must feel about such an association.


    * Raises a glass to the professore *


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,146 ✭✭✭youcrazyjesus!


    Seloth wrote: »
    Oh gawd...I wish Dawkins would jsut shut up..he is deffo an attention whore with the most undirect awnsering method ever may I also add.

    He embarased Atheist as extremists do theists :D

    He doesn't embarrass me.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,752 ✭✭✭pablomakaveli


    For as long as I can remember there are threads almost on a daily basis expressing what scum the church is.

    Now there are two people trying to get something done about it, you're all just bitching about those people.

    WTF is up with that?

    Fair play to them I say, if they need a donation for legal fees then I'll gladly help out.

    They're using this to push their own agenda. Taking advantage of the child abuse scandals so they can try and further their own cause is pathetic and insulting to the victims of child abuse.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,146 ✭✭✭youcrazyjesus!


    Enjoy hell athiests. long live the pope

    The Pope has devoted his life to something which has no basis whatsoever. The joke is on him. Thankfully.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 32,865 ✭✭✭✭MagicMarker


    They're using this to push their own agenda. Taking advantage of the child abuse scandals so they can try and further their own cause is pathetic and insulting to the victims of child abuse.
    Wow, your ability to know what others are thinking is remarkable. You should take that talent on the road!

    Have you ever listened to Hitchens actually talk about the sex abuse scandals? It's quite clear it stirs up a lot of emotion in him.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,146 ✭✭✭youcrazyjesus!


    They're using this to push their own agenda. Taking advantage of the child abuse scandals so they can try and further their own cause is pathetic and insulting to the victims of child abuse.

    This "pushing an agenda" thing always comes up when people come up against something they can't argue against. Everytime I open my mouth I push an agenda, when I go to the bar my agenda is to get a pint, when I go to school my agenda is to learn, when I write a letter my objective is to express my opinion publicly. It's a nonsense argument. I wish I saw less of it although it does tell me a lot about the person who uses it.

    How do you know they're not concerned about child abuse? Have you asked them? I'm sure he's very concerned and quite angry it's been facilitated by a cabal of power mad deluded fools who pass themselves off as something worthy of respect.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,752 ✭✭✭pablomakaveli


    Wow, your ability to know what others are thinking is remarkable. You should take that talent on the road!

    Have you ever listened to Hitchens actually talk about the sex abuse scandals? It's quite clear it stirs up a lot of emotion in him.

    I could say the same thing to you given you are assuming that they are being genuine.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,146 ✭✭✭youcrazyjesus!


    Regarding Dawkins, well he's another nut from the opposite spectrum I suppose.

    How exactly is Dawkins a "nut"? Have you read any of his books? Listened to him speak?

    Seems to be they see an idiot arguing with someone and assume the other party is an idiot too. It's one of the reasons Dawkins shies away from arguments with those indoctrinated into a religion, be they clerics or laity, you give their "beliefs" substance by engaging with them on the subject.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,752 ✭✭✭pablomakaveli


    This "pushing an agenda" thing always comes up when people come up against something they can't argue against. Everytime I open my mouth I push an agenda, when I go to the bar my agenda is to get a pint, when I go to school my agenda is to learn, when I write a letter my objective is to express my opinion publicly. It's a nonsense argument. I wish I saw less of it although it does tell me a lot about the person who uses it.

    How do you know they're not concerned about child abuse? Have you asked them? I'm sure he's very concerned and quite angry it's been facilitated by a cabal of power mad deluded fools who pass themselves off as something worthy of respect.


    If they were really concerned they probably would have spent time consulting groups for victims of child abuse and letting them take the initiative in the legal case so that its the victims who are seeking justice.

    Don't delude yourself it's a publicity stunt plain and simple.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,146 ✭✭✭youcrazyjesus!


    I could say the same thing to you given you are assuming that they are being genuine.

    He's listened to him, he knows their work, he knows their personality and values through their extensive published works and media work. I hate Hitchens, he's an idiot when it comes to many subjects but on this from listening to the man I have absolutely no doubt he is genuine.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,146 ✭✭✭youcrazyjesus!


    If they were really concerned they probably would have spent time consulting groups for victims of child abuse and letting them take the initiative in the legal case so that its the victims who are seeking justice.

    Don't delude yourself it's a publicity stunt plain and simple.

    Your opinions are very simple minded. Why you assign such poor and simplistic motives to their actions? On what basis do you do this?

    Please explain.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,752 ✭✭✭pablomakaveli


    Your opinions are very simple minded. Why you assign such poor and simplistic motives to their actions? On what basis do you do this?

    Please explain.

    Isn't it obvious? Why arent they letting the victims of child abuse lead this case? If they were really concerned with this they'd take a back seat in this case and let the victims lead it.

    But they're not. Dawkins has used publicity stunts before like the bus adverts and i'd be more concerned about his motives than Hitchens.

    You can't honestly deny beyond all doubt that this may be a publicity stunt.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,146 ✭✭✭youcrazyjesus!


    Isn't it obvious? Why arent they letting the victims of child abuse lead this case? If they were really concerned with this they'd take a back seat in this case and let the victims lead it.

    He's entitled to take the case if he wants. It's not up to you to tell him he should put in child abuse victims as the public face of the case. Wouldn't that be another publicity stunt? How would it aid the case?

    At this point, I suggest you're talking dribbling drooling nonsense.
    But they're not. Dawkins has used publicity stunts before like the bus adverts and i'd be more concerned about his motives than Hitchens.


    You can't honestly deny beyond all doubt that this may be a publicity stunt.

    :rolleyes: Not everything everyone you disagree with does should be described as being done for the purposes of forwarding an "agenda" or for the purposes of publicity. You could assign every action every human has ever taken one or both of those motives. Dismissing this action in this way is not good enough. Find a good reason to criticise it or stay quiet.

    I notice you've not even in passing mentioned the issue. The issue is: "Does Mr Ratzinger have a legal and moral case to answer in relation to actively facilitating pedophilia and is there a legal basis for the arrest".


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,815 ✭✭✭✭galwayrush


    I think they may have lost the element of surprise by announcing their plans.:rolleyes:
    So, either they are pure stupid ot it's a publicity stunt.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,466 ✭✭✭blinding


    Lock up Pope Rat. Damn good idea.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,146 ✭✭✭youcrazyjesus!


    galwayrush wrote: »
    I think they may have lost the element of surprise by announcing their plans.:rolleyes:
    So, either they are pure stupid ot it's a publicity stunt.

    They weren't planning on rugby tackling him inside St Pauls and dragging him outside in handcuffs. Makes no odds. It will become public once the legal action is initiated. Silly comment.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 10,272 ✭✭✭✭Max Power1


    But he is not a CEO, he is a head of state which gives him immunity. and who do you have to thank for that, why filthy nazis like Benito Musolini for one.
    but thats the point, he isnt a head of state apparently


  • Advertisement
Advertisement