http://richarddawkins.net/articles/5344

Oh and Bill Donahue is there too.

I love how Hitchens corrects her at the end.

Don't "fair and balanced" debates usually involve people debating...

Oh wait...Fox News...gotcha.

Yup.

I stopped listening to Donahue halfway through. His stupidity hurts my brain.

Hitchens comment at the end was sensationalist and unhelpful.

(March 30, 2010 at 12:17 am)fr0d0 Wrote: Hitchens comment at the end was sensationalist and unhelpful.

Sensationalist? How on earth could he possibly sensationalise that appalling mess? Why on earth should Hitchens even try to be helpful? I think his agenda is clear enough; to make the Pope and other criminals in the Church responsible for their actions.The whole catastrophe goes to the issue of the church being above the law.

The Pope and all other clergy had both a legal and moral responsibility to report those crimes to the civil authorities immediately they became aware ,yet apparently NONE did. They chose instead to protect the institution of the Church.

The news woman's poor choice of words trivialised the whole issue; it's not 'curious' (IR 'interesting' or 'unusual'),it's a tragedy of Greek proportions. Arguably the greatest moral dilemma the Church has been forced to face since WW 2. The Church is nothing if not expert at protecting its own interests.So it bloody well should ;be it's had 2000 years practice.

I think Hitchens may be mistaken about what can be done to Ratty: As the autocratic head of state of a theocracy, he's pretty much legally bullet proof. (The Vatican is a sovereign State)

Quote:and unhelpful.

Do you seriously expect Hitchens to pass the KY jelly to Herr Von Popenfuhrer, Frodo?[/i]

ewwwwwwwww come on! ewwwwwwwww

Certainly Frodo means that decorum and maturity are important in any situation, but not at the same time defending pederasty...

Or am I mistaken?

(March 30, 2010 at 8:37 am)Pippy Wrote: ewwwwwwwww come on! ewwwwwwwww

Certainly Frodo means that decorum and maturity are important in any situation, but not at the same time defending pederasty...

Or am I mistaken?

How was that not mature? The topic was how the Catholic Church hides priests that fuck little kids. It's an appalling mess, and I don't think Hitchens was out of line in any of it.

Yes, because making people face the truth that priests raped children and were protected for it is "sensationalist".

It's appalling and Hitchens is one of the few people who speaks honestly about it and doesn't pussyfoot around it or make excuses because this involves "Holy men" or the Pope.

Children. Raped. For decades. Covered up.

Everyone needs to be more outraged.

Certainly, I just felt the need to contribute that I didn't think it was fair to make it seem like Frodo was supporting Pedophilia.

Heads on sticks if you ask me. But then again, my list of potential heads is very long.