FWIW, Dawkins is the man who came off looking rather stupid in Ben Stein's film about evolution.

Funny how Dawkins' crimes are much more evil than the one's he is decrying.  

Not so. Dawkins is open about his blasphemies; Benedict is more subtle. B16 is a wolf in sheep's clothing; Dawkins is merely a wolf.

Why didn't he want to arrest Pope John Paul II? It was JPII that did nothing about the sɛҳuąƖ abuse. That's because JPII was loved by the enemies of the Church, whereas Pope Benedict XVI is a more conservative Pope (freeing the TLM, lifting excommunications of SSPX, etc...)

I really have very little objection to what Dr. Dawkins is trying to do. I would prefer if Fr. Ratzinger were tried in an ecclesiastical court rather than in a secular court, but the Vatican doesn't really believe in the notion that clerics are immune from prosecution in state courts anymore.

I say arrest Josef Ratzinger, and thank God there'll always be an England.

Matthew D. Hardin said:

I really have very little objection to what Dr. Dawkins is trying to do.

I have an objection to what Dawkins THINKS he's doing, but not what he is ACTUALLY doing.  Dawkins is actually suggesting that the U.N. prosecute a fake Pope, which is fine with me.  The problem is that, in the eyes of most of the world, Vatican II really is the Catholic Church, Ratzinger really is the Pope, and what Dawkins suggests sets a very dangerous precedent.  

I would prefer if Fr. Ratzinger were tried in an ecclesiastical court rather than in a secular court, but the Vatican doesn't really believe in the notion that clerics are immune from prosecution in state courts anymore.

Great point.  The "Church" has stooped to meet the world, and now the world is about to inevitably consume it.  Luckily, it's only really consuming a dummy, a counterfeit.

And that is because the Dawkins and the Ratzingers of this world are on the same side.  It's just that each of them has a different function when it comes to destroying the common enemy known as the Catholic Church.  One works from within, one from without...  One does everything he can to discredit the "Catholic Church" by twiddling his thumbs while sacrilege, heresy, and the grossest immorality flourish.  The other then comes in for the mop-up job, making it appear is if the "Catholic Church," with its "superstition," "impossible standards of celibacy," and "medievalism" is the enemy -- when the enemy is really non-Catholics who pose as Catholics.  

People need to see that both sides, both the VII impostors and the seculars, are really both the same, they are all non-Catholics.  Don't defend Ratzinger because he pretends -- poorly -- to be Catholic while Dawkins is an atheist.  

As if Ratzinger doesn't have a computer and is unaware what is going on?  Any of us here could clean up the Church better in two hours than Ratzinger has done in years.  Oh, I see you are on video giving a clown Mass?  Goodbye, don't darken my doorstep again.  Molested a kid?  I hope you enjoy your new home on a prison barge!  Etc.  

 :applause: :applause:

Let them devour their own, Raoul.

B16 and Richard Dawkins agree far more than they disagree. They are false opposites. I'm not about to waste my time getting upset about the prospect of an antipope getting arrested. Indeed, were Ratzinger to be arrested, it might well be the first time justice has been served in England since the 16th century.

I  believe Mr Hardin is referring to brief moment in time when Philip and Mary were the monarchs of merry old England. :detective: