Vatican foot in mouth

crunchy on 6/4/2010 at 06:20

Quote Posted by fett

so what did you expect?

Certainly not the Spanish Inquisition!

Morte on 11/4/2010 at 01:39

Proof of the Pope's (http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-US-Pope-Church-Abuse.html?_r=2) direct involvement in preventing a priest who confessed to tying up and molesting kids from being defrocked.

Because what's a bit of molestation compared to protecting the reputation of the Vatican?

Fragony on 11/4/2010 at 20:19

Inline Image:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v494/Fragony/pauskind501_gr.jpg

LeatherMan on 11/4/2010 at 21:45

Someone defaced (http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20100410/local/panda-print) a billboard in Malta announcing the arrival of the pope with (http://img.chan4chan.com/img/2009-03-14/1237033254132.jpg) this.

:laff:

LeatherMan on 11/4/2010 at 22:45

Quote Posted by BrokenArts

(http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100404/ap_on_re_eu/eu_britain_pope) This just gets better and better.

And better: (http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/europe/3571666/Author-Dawkins-seeks-Pope-arrest) Author Dawkins Seeks Pope Arrest

Scots Taffer on 12/4/2010 at 00:27

Hahaha Dawkins is such a prick.

SD on 12/4/2010 at 03:03

So you think those who facilitate and cover up crimes like child sex abuse should enjoy protection because of their status?

Stitch on 12/4/2010 at 03:06

I'm guessing what he thinks is that Dawkins is such a prick.

Nicker on 12/4/2010 at 07:20

Quote Posted by LeatherMan

And better: (http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/europe/3571666/Author-Dawkins-seeks-Pope-arrest) Author Dawkins Seeks Pope Arrest

Don't spin that too hard, LeatherMan.

Scots Taffer on 12/4/2010 at 07:22

I'm all for the covering up of paedophiles... preferably with a 6 foot layer of dirt and some sort of active decomposition agent to dispose of the evidence.

My thoughts are that after seeing Dawkins make a gibbering idiot of himself on Australian TV - the guy is capable of intelligent debate but rarely seems able to master anything more than the position of a rabid anti-religious reactionary full of hyperbole and strawmen - that this sort of involvement/reaction/tabloidism is precisely what inspires derision in my formerly-Christian (even, gasp, ex-Catholic) heart whenever people cite him as their go-to-guy as to why religion is a load of tosh.

Dawkins is a deliberate inciter of bigotry of his own fashioning - yes, it's an intolerance of intolerance of course and that's the intelligent and sage part of the debate, but he advocates a policy of bitter divisiveness and active hate-mongering towards those who (for the most part) blindly and (in terms of their personal agenda in religious faith) "harmlessly" practice their doctrine.

Plus, being a product of British society, he has a bee in his bonnet over Catholicism more than anything else on the planet and there's plenty of religious groups to get worked up about, but his persistence in attacking Catholicism always seems to make the war a little more personal than it ought to be for such a pragmatic and resolute scientist.

So yeah, I think he's a bit of a prick.

And I think if the Pope was directly responsible in the covering up and non-punishment of paedophile priests that he should be prosecuted by the fullest extent of the law.