Battle Pope

Whilst I previously thought Richard Dawkins and co. couldn't become larger morons then they already are, it seems as if they are not content until they take their public image and remaining credibility and shit all over it in a spectacular fashion.
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/21/20100411/tuk-pope-has-no-uk-arrest-immunity-6323e80.html

That's right, Dawkins and his buddy Hitchens plan on getting the Pope arrested when he visits the UK, however, it's not for the alleged "covering up" the pope sanctioned back in 1985 before he was even pope, nor is it for his alleged position of holding the "good of the universal church" over the safety and justice of the children raped by priests. No, Richard Dawkins is milking this as a PR campaign, much like he did with the Haiti disaster (where Dawkins encouraged people to donate to Haiti aid to combat religious aid groups and to promote atheist aid groups). He publicly stated on RichardDawkin.net that he didn't care if the Pope doesn't end up in the dock. No, his hope is that this will "raise public consciousness to the point where the British government will find it very awkward indeed to go ahead with the Pope's visit, let alone pay for it."
[http://richarddawkins.net/articleComments,5415,Richard-Dawkins-I-will-arrest-Pope-Benedict-XVI,Marc-Horne----TimesOnline,page2#478580]

That's right, Dicky D thinks it is more important to dirty the name of the Pope and the Catholic Church, than actually bring justice for all those children that have suffered at the hands of paedophile priests.

“Once, in the question time after a lecture in Dublin, I was asked what I thought about the widely publicized cases of sexual abuse by Catholic priests in Ireland. I replied that, as horrible as sexual abuse no doubt was, the damage was arguably less than the long-term psychological damage inflicted by bringing up the child Catholic in the first place...” - Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion, p. 317

Of course, this is the same Richard Dawkins that wrote: -
"The Roman Catholic Church has borne a heavy share of such retrospective opprobrium. For all sorts of reasons I dislike the Roman Catholic Church. But I dislike unfairness even more, and I can't help wondering whether this one institution has been unfairly demonized over the issue, especially in Ireland and America." - Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion, p. 316

So, why is Dicky D not leading the charge against paedophillic school teachers, care workers, in addition to priests? Consistency, its only a virtue, when you want it to be.

Either way, back to actual plan itself. Basically, they want to arrest the peope, becuase in 1985, before he was pope, he signed a letter delaying the punishment of one paedophile priest, because ne needed more time to consider the case and because he wrote that the good of the universal church needs to be considered over the defrocking of said priest. How this amounts to "covering up" evidence of dozens of cases is not clear, and what is not clear is, whether or not the pope can be even prosecuted in the UK for crimes not comitted in the country (I don't claim to be an expert on the law, so don't hold me to that). If the pope can be charged for the crimes of Catholic priests, then that would mean the head of the department of education could be charged for all the paedophile school teachers. Time would be much better spent in finding and rounding up all the paedophiles in the world, and then shooting them. Although, this would put too much power into the hands of government for my liking.

Lastly, one thing I read on the issue that caught my attention, was on Vox Day's blog on this very subject (he beat me to it, the jammy bastard): -
"The sexual abuse scandal in the Catholic church is the direct result of allowing homosexuals to enter the priesthood. Unless and until the Pope addresses that ludicrous decision of his predecessors, more predatory abuses will occur."

Somehow, I knew this was the fault of the gays. (That was satire by the way).

Whilst you can say a lot of things about Catholicism, and the previous pope, you can't blame Benedict XVI (at least not yet anyway, if evidence arises that indicate him as taking part in cover ups, then by all means). In fact, the length people have gone to defame this guy is just absurd. For example, a friend of mine told me that he said that "condoms caused AIDS". Of course, what the pope actually said was: -
"I would say that this problem of AIDS cannot be overcome merely with money, necessary though it is. If there is no human dimension, if Africans do not help, the problem cannot be overcome by the distribution of prophylactics: on the contrary, they increase it. The solution must have two elements: firstly, bringing out the human dimension of sexuality, that is to say a spiritual and human renewal that would bring with it a new way of behaving towards others, and secondly, true friendship offered above all to those who are suffering, a willingness to make sacrifices and to practise self-denial, to be alongside the suffering."
[http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2009/march/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20090317_africa-interview_en.html]

I'm guessing they saw the quote on some anti-Catholic or atheist site. That's how easy it is to misquote somedbody and take something they said completely out of context. That's why I am going to remain sceptical about claims that the pope was covering things up, until something a little more than BS rumours and misquotes turns up, ie hard evidence. I'm not so much defending the pope, as I am expressing my disgust at Dawkins.

Thank you for reading, that's all for now. Baiz.