The Pope is a Dirty Old Man

I haven’t had much chance to comment on recent newsworthy events, but have finally seen fit to break the silence on by far the most scandalous of news stories. To quote and paraphrase Richard Dawkins (whom I greatly admire) and Christopher Hitchens (whom I consider a rancid wind-bag), Joseph Alois Ratzinger should be arrested.

And no he does not have the immunity of a head of state, because the Vatican is not a state, it’s a creation of Mussollini that is only an “observer” at the United Nations.

The pope is a leering old villain in a frock, who spent decades conspiring behind closed doors for the position he now holds; a man who believes he is infallible and acts the part; a man whose preaching of scientific falsehood is responsible for the deaths of countless AIDS victims in Africa; a man whose first instinct when his priests are caught with their pants down is to cover up the scandal and damn the young victims to silence.

This man is not above or outside the law. The institutionalized concealment of child rape is a crime under any law and demands not private ceremonies of repentance or church-funded payoffs, but justice and punishment.

Arrest the bugger. Goddamnit, arrest them all!

21 Replies to “The Pope is a Dirty Old Man”

  1. He also happens to head one of the wealthiest and most popular institutions in the world so fat chance of his arrest in this lifetime.

    p.s. Richard Dawkins is ma bwoy too πŸ™‚

  2. As a lapsed Catholic who is trying to explore her atheist tendencies, this couldn’t have fuelled my ire any better. You know how they say a fish rots from the head, well something is definitely rotten in the state of Vatican (sorry Billie Shakespeare). You have an 80-year old (supposed) virgin who walks around in a fat girl’s dress trying to tell the rest of us how we should be leading holy lives, when his leaders are carrying out the most unholy of deeds. Somebody pass me a sick bucket, I’ll hurl in it and dump it on his head. In ordinary society, those priests would have been hauled before a court and all we would be hearing now, is keys clanking all over as they are thrown away.

    and by the way, where is Peter Tatchell when you need him. with his experience in getting beat down in his numerous attempts at citizens arrests, he can tell Richard Dawkins the pitfalls to avoid.

  3. Here’s the problem I have … this organisation (Catholic Church) is basically free from judicial oversight.

    These guys appear beholden to canon law above any statutory laws, and the leader sits in judgement on his minions.

    Choosing to protect the church first, and discarding the victims of the church, brings out the militant side of me (and any decent human being).

  4. And here’s my question: How is it that there are still individuals out there who call themselves Catholics? I want to know what Joe Catholic thinks of all this. How does he/she rationalise the obvious trend. Doesn’t the normal person question their choice of denomination at the very least?

  5. @Tara – there’s nothing normal about religious folk. Or if they insist they are, as they do, I sure as hell (yes, irony) am not.

    Religious folk are in too deep to question their nonsense.

  6. See, that there is some scary ass shit, right there. And you know another denomination I am fascinated by, Jehovah’s Witnesses (no offence to any witnesses who may read this). I just dont get them. Such a tiny history of (not so) numerous near misses, predicting the end of the world-wise, yet they be the fastest growing. And don’t get me started on their leadership and policies and rules and stuff (did anyone say equal opportunities?). They give the Catholics a run for their money at being hinky.

  7. @Tara: ‘hinky’, what a lovely word, so replete with meaning.

    religion is a good idea in theory, principles of brotherhood and love thy neighbour and all that jazz. but in the hands of mortal man and the voices in his head (think Dubya) it excuses all sorts of licentious behaviour. more so for the Catholics who can just say a few hail maries to wash away their putrid iniquities.

  8. Elle, didn’t think it appropriate to use ‘fucked up’, considering I don’t get to say a few hail marys to wash away the putrid iniquity.

  9. He’s Anti-CAPITALIST, not Anti-Catholic πŸ™‚

    To clarify, neither am I. I’m against criminal abuse of (any) power.

    And semi-institutionalised rape.

  10. btw, I was an altar boy at an archaic jesuit boys college and I did not hear about nor notice anything untoward about the fathers and brothers there – or maybe I just wasnt aware of such shit.
    That said,
    there was that terrible scandal at Silveira House (in the 90s) in which it was alleged that numerous ‘trainee’ nuns were being screwed by priests and having forced abortions. I think it came to light when one of the girls died during a botched abortion.

  11. As an ex-convent girl, I can vouch for the less than pure motives of a lot of those so called ‘religious’. I was in my ‘a’ level year with one of said nuns, and when I got to university, she was there too, but married and pregnant. all this within a year of my leaving high school. high shenanigans indeed.

    enforced celibacy does not work. I am not much of a fan of monogamy either, it’s like democracy, it looks good on paper, but the reality is totally different.

  12. Well, seeing as we’ve started kicking the dog, we might as don heavy boots.

    Firstly, I didnt know they recruited nuns THAT young (but then again, makes sense), and secondly, yes, highly, highly, scandalous.

    JB, you may (or may not) remember the Catholic Priest from the one Catholic church in Chegaz? The albino dude?
    Well, I’ll have you know he was a regular at that pub-cum-whorehouse (good pun πŸ™‚ ) opposite the cotton depots. Would park his conspicuous (because it was the only one of that colour in the whole town, yes, small town, get over it) little blue mazda 323, pull off his white collar, book a room, order booze, grab a couple hookers and go whore it up til the morning. And yes, I witnessed all this shit myself a couple times. Dont ask. Dont.

    More interesting topic – monogamy, IMO is all good until you meet someone else you really want to shag. Then it all goes pear-shaped after that.
    Im convinced monogamy is bullshit, but Im still waiting for that level of maturity to kick in which will allow me to disregard that my woman has shagged some other dude and have me get down to my shit with her. Or maybe I should be asking if a woman can be ‘mine’ to begin with …

    goodness, too much thought for a friday …

  13. Part of the problem I have with monogamy is that we now live for so long. it made more sense when our life forces were spent by age 40 or so. but now at 40 you haven’t even hit mid life crisis mode yet. you aren’t even the dirty old man in the club. and we all know that as men get older (read: they get more money), the pool of women they have access to expands significantly. why would you not want to dip your toes in those waters? all that firm, nubile flesh parading in front of you, like a ripe fruit ready for the picking.

    And even if it’s not about the carnal knowledge, people change. someone who might have interested me at 20 is not the person I expect to interest me at 30. it’s impossible to be all things to one person. so when your needs are not being met, move on. you would do it with a job, so why not with a relationship. coz that is full-time work if ever there was any. or maybe this is just the bitter voice of a spurned singleton.

  14. Eish, Mos Nav you have stories, you’ll tune me when I come down (for the Bulls game in CT).

    Monogamy … I’ve always been a believer myself. It’s a cliche, but when you do meet someone you want to commit to forever and ever and ever … you will.

  15. to quote you a few cliches ‘the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak’ and ‘the road to hell is paved with good intentions’.

  16. @JB – dude you better not be playing.

    @El – agreed on both counts. Like Chris Rock said, a man (and i suppose a woman too) is only as faithful as his options.
    I’ve seen a brotha CHANGE when he gets some change in his pocket for the first time.
    With that said I dont advocate for shagging more than one person at a time, things just get messy and nasty and I find it impossible to be intimate with more than one person at the same bells (well, usually πŸ™‚ ). But we must hook up while we wanna hit it and then when we get off each other then we move the fuck on. Problem is people feel obliged to not hit it and move on, society makes it bad too, and then we end up staying in a relationship either faithful and bored as fuck or getting a side shag.
    Thats the physical bit.

    On the second count, I think before (thumbsuck) 40, we are not settled into who we are and do not have enough wisdom to settle with someone. Up to that point we still changing and experiencing and changing some more … I think fortyish, post-mid-life crisis, is a decent time to be hooking up with someone for that good ever after stuff. And then again when Im forty I might shift that to 50 πŸ™‚

Comments are closed.