Dawkins wants Pope arrested when he visits UK

[luther]

washingtonpost.com

[nicegirlsarenice]

Richard Dawkins did NOT say that. Take a look at what he actually said:

Needless to say, I did NOT say "I will arrest Pope Benedict XVI" or anything so personally grandiloquent. You have to remember that The Sunday Times is a Murdoch newspaper, and that all newspapers follow the odd custom of entrusting headlines to a sub-editor, not the author of the article itself.

What I DID say to Marc Horne when he telephoned me out of the blue, and I repeat it here, is that I am whole-heartedly behind the initiative by Geoffrey Robertson and Mark Stephens to mount a legal challenge to the Pope's proposed visit to Britain. Beyond that, I declined to comment to Marc Horne, other than to refer him to my 'Ratzinger is the Perfect Pope' article here: 'Ratzinger is the Perfect Pope' by Richard Dawkins - The Washington Post - RichardDawkins.net

Here is what really happened. Christopher Hitchens first proposed the legal challenge idea to me on March 14th. I responded enthusiastically, and suggested the name of a high profile human rights lawyer whom I know. I had lost her address, however, and set about tracking her down. Meanwhile, Christopher made the brilliant suggestion of Geoffrey Robertson. He approached him, and Mr Robertson's subsequent 'Put the Pope in the Dock' article in The Guardian shows him to be ideal:
'Put the pope in the dock' by Geoffrey Robertson - guardian.co.uk - RichardDawkins.net
The case is obviously in good hands, with him and Mark Stephens. I am especially intrigued by the proposed challenge to the legality of the Vatican as a sovereign state whose head can claim diplomatic immunity.

Even if the Pope doesn't end up in the dock, and even if the Vatican doesn't cancel the visit, I am optimistic that we shall 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.

Richard

'Richard Dawkins calls for arrest of Pope Benedict XVI' by [UPDATE 4-12] Marc Horne - TimesOnline - RichardDawkins.net

Personally I would be totally against the arresting of the pope. If the pope were to be arrested, it would be because of his current position and not to do with his actual alleged crimes.

I bet the people shouting loudest for it have no clue what he's even supposed to have done. All they're doing is taking some cherry-picked words from letters he wrote decades ago. There were indeed some bishops, cardinals etc. in the church that did appear to protect abusers, in particular moving them along from one parish to another one with few people knowing anything about it.

As head of a large corperation, the pope is entitled to the money that he's made. Right now he's being harassed and slandered by people (including Richard Dawkins, but not as much as that ridiculous headline would suggest), and he could very well have a case against those people. Dawkins has nothing on him so he can't just slander him.

[Doozer]

How is the Pope entitled to the money. Isnt he supposed to have taken a vow of poverty