Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[LeoLeonardoIII]

Well it's nice that he wanted to give his buddies a chance. I'm sure it's very nice to be under the protective wing of the Pope. But if harm was done, if children were molested, there aren't any second chances. You go through a trial, if found guilty you do your time, and figure out what life is going to be like. You don't just say "oops, I'll do better next time" and continue baptizing kids while nobody is the wiser.

It's not a matter of demonizing him. Imagine if your kid were molested by a specific guy you know, and his boss was hushing it up. Even if the boss doesn't get arrested, it should be so public that it's effectively added to what people think of when they hear about him. People should think "oh, the Pope, the guy who rides around in the bubble car and likes to protect child molesters".

It's an entirely valid expectation. I'm sure there's a different feeling involved when it's not "some priest diddling some kid in some country". 

Then again, it's also true that many popes in the Vatican's history have been such despicable, maladjusted humans that their confirmed crimes completely overshadow anything this dude could dream of getting away with.

That said, if the goal is just not funding his trip with government money (tax funds) it's pointless whether he actually did anything wrong or not. It comes down to a democratic decision as to whether the people want to allow their government to pay his fare.

As for Winston Churchill or whoever being bad, we don't like to think about it, but nice peaceful people are often not effective in wartime.

[Grakelin]

Saying the Pope should be arrested because his priests molested little boys is like saying that JFK should be arrested for letting deadly assassins live in his country.

Or, to respond directly to fenrif's post which ninja'd mine:

Saying the Pope should be arrested because his priests molested little boys is like saying that Winston Churchill should be arrested because his generals went ahead and planned the Battle of Dieppe.

The Pope, who is in his position until he dies and lives a structured lifestyle, does not need a motivation to change the Catholic hierarchy beyond his own morals and personal beliefs. He's the Pope. Not only does he not need to garner more power, there is nothing he could do with it if he had it. Popes have altered the Church before.

Robert Byrd can be found on this wikipedia link - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_byrd

The Pope did not rape any boys. Why would arresting him do anything? At the very least, he made an effort to get the priests away from the children they abused. In fact, coming clean to the authorities would not have helped at all: The Church would have still come under a media firestorm, because Catholic Priest molestation stories have been popular for several decades now. He would have still been in the exact same boat.

Also, forgiveness and repent are fundamental aspects of their religion, and thus their own core beliefs. He probably thought the priests really were conforming.

[sonerohi]

I'll admit, I didn't read the sources, but I assumed the Pope had told some authorities and had them under a closer watch than what he did. I still don't think the Pope could or would be arrested, fined maybe.

[Grakelin]

You can't fine the Pope, because he doesn't actually have any of his own money.

[Vester]

He's my Pope and all, but I still think he's an anti-progressive jerk.

You can't fine the Pope, because he doesn't actually have any of his own money.

I'm pretty sure his magnificent Pope-hat can be tracked from orbit with the naked eye.

[fenrif]

Saying the Pope should be arrested because his priests molested little boys is like saying that Winston Churchill should be arrested because his government officials molested little kids, and he moved them around so nooone could do anything about it, didnt tell anyone about it, and completely let them carry on doing it rather than embarrass his government.

Made that a little more applicable for you

[Grakelin]

His hat belongs to the Church. The Pope undertakes a vow of poverty, and the Church pays for everything.

Their status as one of the richest organizations in the world is helped along by the fact that they aren't paying salary.

[cowofdoom78963]

If you are capable of taking away that he supports these behaviors (as opposed to supporting the solidarity of his church--a position I neither hold nor respect, but the difference is there and substantial), your worldview is immature and lacks granularity.

By protecting pedophiles he is supporting them. I could give less of a shit why.

Also, forgiveness and repent are fundamental aspects of their religion, and thus their own core beliefs. He probably thought the priests really were conforming.

Yeah, but you see the thing is:
Those priests did not molest the pope.

[LeoLeonardoIII]

Also, forgiveness and repent are fundamental aspects of their religion, and thus their own core beliefs. He probably thought the priests really were conforming.

Yeah, but you see the thing is:
Those priests did not molest the pope.

Well nobody has come forward yet

Also, excellent point about the hat. Man, that is a nice hat. Why come our politicians don't wear hats or powdered wigs or anything?

...

I wonder if there is a vault in the Vatican, with these three locks and a poison-dart trap, and there is a dude whose sole job it is to guard the keys to that door with the heat of his blood, strapped to his arm in a booby-trapped Kevlar suitcase, and inside that vault is row upon row of papal hats.

Glorious. Glistening in the torchlight.

(Yeah I assume the Vatican still has torch sconces every 40 feet)

[Grakelin]

I asked somebody who is doing their Ph. D in Sociology of Religion whether or not the Pope should go to jail. She said yes.

But it was because he sentenced thousands of Latin Americans to death, and not because of pedophilia.

I guess this is where I stand as of ten minutes ago.

[sonerohi]

The Vatican has a vault, so deep underground it is actually a tower in China. Inside it is a single, platinum pope hat. From this one, they make a wax mold of it, and make a copper pope hat with that mold. Then, they use a long forgotten alchemy to make it appear like the pope hat we see. It is still metal, because the Pope needs something to stop assassins. It is also where he stores his lunch.

[ChairmanPoo]

But it was because he sentenced thousands of Latin Americans to death

... he did?

[darkflagrance]

Also certain types of cover-ups are perfectly legal.

So it would need to be evidence that these cover ups are of the illegal kind.

Nah, this counts as a crime against humanity. The same as the Israeli politician Tzipi Livni, who has been accused of perpetuating war crimes. She would've been arrested if she'd've came to the UK, but she called it off at the last minute.

Considering that after the Livni affair broke out top officials in the UK govt backtracked and promised to prevent similar incidents from happening again, I can't say that it really constitutes a precedent that can be used to justify the arrest of the Pope.

More an anomaly.

[Grakelin]

But it was because he sentenced thousands of Latin Americans to death

... he did?

This is back when he was Grand Inquisitor and decided that Liberation Theology was heretical. Then, people with certain theological views started being cleansed in places like El Salvador.

[Leafsnail]

Still, this is a serious accusation, and running at it head first without any perfectly solid evidence means that we cannot try him again due to double jepordy laws. (You can't be convicted of a crime you have been declaired innocent of.)

I believe Britain has eliminated that law.  Mainly 'coz it's stupid... if more evidence comes to light, it should be possible to go to court again.

All of this is moot, of course; nobody is going to arrest a head of state for something this minor--and despite the emotional implications of the crimes, this is very minor compared to what heads of states are actually arrested and incarcerated for.

I'll believe this when you convince a victim of abuse that his crimes are merely emotionally troubling, and actually "minor".

I am saying that Ratzinger is the one most likely to enact meaningful beneficial change in the upper echelons of the Catholic hierarchy. So, yeah, I am. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Bad men from Winston Churchill to Robert Byrd all have their uses.

I disagree, to be honest.  He hasn't shown the slightest inclination to change anything, and even bitched about being attacked by the media for covering up child abuse cases.  If the Pope is arrested (he won't be, though...) then perhaps the next guy will actually be inclined to follow the law.  I mean, if you're immune to prosecution and are a total bastard, then of course you're gonna protect your reputation above all else.