![]() |
The Church Scandal. Pope has immunity in abuse trials: Vatican Quote:
Only in america does that happen. |
Why is that disgusting? They want him to testify in a case about 200 deaf boys who were sexually abused. I don't give a fuck who you are, you should have to testify for stuff like that. For fuck sakes why does the vatican even count as a country anyways? |
You don't believe in separation between church and state? |
Obviously not the Vatican. Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
i find it disgusting that the church would try to cover up this shit. and not take responsibility. PS. its the law who decides immunity, not the vatican. |
lol. y'all seen that new south park? cartman keeps referencing it. |
It's disgusting that the pope has immunity in the first place. Of all the people, the pope should be the FIRST one to stand out & testify BECAUSE he IS the head of state, not the other way around Posted via RS Mobile |
so if the catholic church killed those children, he should still be immune ? please, the church is a big MNC with real estate holdings with no property tax and sheep that come weekly to pay money to clear their consciences. |
Quote:
|
The vatican = biggest/most powerful organized gang in the world. Posted via RS Mobile |
Quote:
Posted via RS Mobile |
so, you guys think that if some canadian foreign diplomat in tibet abused a child in 1950, prime minister harper should be held accountable? that's about as close a comparison as i can make from reading this article. |
^ read the article, your comparison would have to be that Harper helped to cover up a mayor molesting children back before he was PM, but now that he is PM they say that he can't be called to be cross examined in the trial of this mayor. |
I don't have a problem with them summoning the Pope to testify. He's essentially the CEO of a MNC, and anything his Office does, he's ultimately responsible for. |
This is what happens when you give the church so much power. When Vatican was allowed to put up walls and create its own city pretty much with its own internal laws, this shit was bound to happen. I find it utterly fucked up and disgusting that this shit is happening within the catholic church. My parents made me go to a catholic high school. It was stupid as shit. I turned out worse than a public school kid lol! |
Quote:
|
^ can I report it and then you give him points? :haha: |
as a catholic, I don't think the pope should be summoned to court, he's a religious leader, not the CEO of a MNC, the church is not a profit-maximizing firm, it has assets, but it is not looking for profit, it uses its assets for the proliferation of its religion as any religion does, only on a grander scale i think the lawyers are just looking to make a name for themselves... they know they're not gonna be able to get the pope to testify plus their argument for a cover up seems baseless and weak |
Quote:
That fact that he is unwilling to go, to me, makes it seem like he did help cover something up and the guy is guilty. You would think he would be pretty motivated to go if it could clear up one of the biggest issues surrounding his church and the guy is actually innocent. |
Quote:
the pope was in charge of dealing with these particular matters when these incidents went on and it was the pope who ignored accusations and words of concerns about this particular issue... he's directly involved with the damned case... that's like having a court case about theft from a bank... and saying the head of security involved with this case shouldn't be called as a witness and has nothing to do with it.... what??? |
is there a pedobear picture with a catholic hat? that would be funny. |
hmm i'm actually not to sure about how things work at the vatican but i'm guessing the pope didn't have the authority to excommunicate Reverend Murphy at the time? it says he was warned about it but not that he was in charge of the accusations against R. Murphy but the reason I don't think the pope should have to testify is not so much that I don't think he should be accountable if things like this are happening within the church, but its more a question of should the pope be subject to US law or should the US law have authority over religion? As the long drawn out case with the polygamists in Bounty have proven, clashing state law with religion opens up pandoras box and throws out a whack load of questions nobody has answers to... I think I'm rambling on now but back to the point, so lets say US courts say he's guilty, so do you send the pope to prison? will the public allow it? do you order the church to pay severences? the church isn't a firm so does the judicial system have the authority to order a religion to pay? blehh i know alot of people will disagree with me but I just think ordering the pope to testify will end up being a "bite more than you can chew" scenario, the church is investigating into these matters, bishops are testifying... if the pope himself was involved with such a scandal, God forbid, then it'd be a different matter, but I think these cases can be settled without the pope having to testify |
^ do you actually get what is going on? They want to call in the pope to testify about an American bishop who molested 200 boys, and the now-pope was part of covering it up due to the position the now-pope was in with the church at that time. This is not about what happens in the church or state having authority over religion (which it should, but that's another discussion), this is a child molestation case. And I'm sorry but fuck the church, they had their chance to investigate and chose to sweep it under the rug, and this is the result. One side of my family is Catholic but fuck, I would fly out there and drag his old wrinkly ass into that courtroom myself if I could. |
|
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:49 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Revscene.net cannot be held accountable for the actions of its members nor does the opinions of the members represent that of Revscene.net