It’s on: Modern atheism “has led to the greatest forms of cruelty and violations of justice,” declares Pope
posted at 7:05 pm on November 30, 2007 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
printer-friendly
Commenter Peski sends the link and sniffs, “Maybe he only reads the New Testament.”
Actually, the Pope’s after more than just the atheists. You’ll find the encyclical here; our Protestant readers will note with interest (or not) what he has to say about individual salvation. As for the godless, his argument will be familiar as it’s been made in the comments of this blog many times.
The atheism of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries is—in its origins and aims—a type of moralism: a protest against the injustices of the world and of world history. A world marked by so much injustice, innocent suffering, and cynicism of power cannot be the work of a good God. A God with responsibility for such a world would not be a just God, much less a good God. It is for the sake of morality that this God has to be contested. Since there is no God to create justice, it seems man himself is now called to establish justice. If in the face of this world’s suffering, protest against God is understandable, the claim that humanity can and must do what no God actually does or is able to do is both presumptuous and intrinsically false. It is no accident that this idea has led to the greatest forms of cruelty and violations of justice; rather, it is grounded in the intrinsic falsity of the claim. A world which has to create its own justice is a world without hope. No one and nothing can answer for centuries of suffering. No one and nothing can guarantee that the cynicism of power—whatever beguiling ideological mask it adopts—will cease to dominate the world.
He’s referring to communism (and refers to Marx by name earlier on), of which atheism is of course a component. To read this, you’d think it was communism that was a component of atheism — that the root of the problem is godlessness, not an economic system based on state coercion and compulsory compliance. It’d be like arguing that the problem with white-power churches in the midwest isn’t their racist ideology, it’s their Christianity. The difference, perhaps, is that while you don’t need racial theory to practice Christianity effectively, you may well need atheism to practice communism effectively, to clear the way for the state to be installed in the role of God. That makes the link between the two rather more problematic, although it also politely neglects to consider atheism within the context of other economic systems. Would a libertarian atheist state lead to the “greatest forms of cruelty”? I’m skeptical. But then, I would be.
Exit quotation: “We secretly resonate with the atheists — thank God he is absent!”
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: [1] 2 3 »
Has there ever been an example of one? If there hasn’t, then maybe it’s just not a viable way of organizing a society. If one did form, I would be highly suspect of a society where the organizing princples are “everyone is on their own” and “there’s no consequences if you don’t get caught.”
pedestrian on November 30, 2007 at 7:12 PM
Allah,
I think he is arguing that atheism demands a morality in the world. Without God, that morality ends up being communalism (or communism). Therefore, atheism breeds communism…. or something like that.
bnelson44 on November 30, 2007 at 7:12 PM
That would be anarchism, wouldn’t it?
bnelson44 on November 30, 2007 at 7:13 PM
How many libertarian states of any flavor have there been?
Allahpundit on November 30, 2007 at 7:13 PM
Where does the islamic world fit into all of this? You can’t get more anti-atheist than they are.
progressoverpeace on November 30, 2007 at 7:13 PM
Communisms replacement for God was the state. Some of us are libertarians, however, and we reject worship of the almighty state just as much as we reject worship of the omniscient omnipotent omni-contradictory entity so complex it could invent life like a watchmaker yet not have to have been created by an even-more-complex watchmaker HimSelf.
shirgall on November 30, 2007 at 7:15 PM
I’ll get the popcorn, someone else get the beer!
Bad Candy on November 30, 2007 at 7:20 PM
Can we include cultists among atheist?
pat on November 30, 2007 at 7:20 PM
I forgot that the Pope addressed the islamic world by citing another pope saying that “Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached”. Kind of goes against his latest bit …
progressoverpeace on November 30, 2007 at 7:21 PM
I just wrote about this very topic in my blog. Post is titled “Good or Bad.” Click on my name to read it.
jgapinoy on November 30, 2007 at 7:22 PM
I think the early United States would qualify. Sure there were some strict blue laws, etc. but the level of taxation and regulation were extremely low by modern standards. But it was highly Christian, and the founders knew that was key.
pedestrian on November 30, 2007 at 7:25 PM
Already got both. I’m ready.
It seems to me the pope is basically saying that evil triumphs anytime people substitute something in the place of God. The question is, does he see atheism as a root cause of that substitution or not?
Slublog on November 30, 2007 at 7:25 PM
Can there be justice without the existence of morality? For a Christian believer, morality is defined by God. For an atheist, morality is defined by what he feels is right. So what happens to justice when an atheist is feeling kinda crappy at the moment?
.
GT on November 30, 2007 at 7:26 PM
Who here thinks that a debate between the Pope and Hitch would be the the Thrilla in the Basilica?
MadisonConservative on November 30, 2007 at 7:27 PM
Very cogent comment–kudos on not emotionally reacting before thinking–and IMO (from other papal documents and Catholic teaching I’ve read on the subject) is exactly what “The German shepherd” had in mind.
Not sure what’s meant here. You mean like capitalism? Atheism isn’t an official government policy (on pain of jail or worse) under any capitalistic society I’m aware of. Could be wrong.
We better buckle up here–gonna be a long thread.
What I want to know is: The other night AP promised to watch a thread for gratuitous anti-Catholicism and never showed up again. Is that going to happen again tonight? Stay tuned.
Think I’ll take a break at the gym before the Catholic slammers turn out in force.
inviolet on November 30, 2007 at 7:27 PM
That’s because they can not survive in the face of collective evil — and there is no shortage of collective evil…anywhere…at any time…in any culture…in any place…in all of recorded human history. Show me utopian Shangra-la. It doesn’t exist. Never has. Never will.
Why not you say? To quote Darth Vader, I find your lack of faith (in human nature) distubing. If you can not believe in God because of the lack of physical evidence of His existence, surely, you ought to be able to believe in unchanging universal constants that WE DO have plenty of physical evidence for — like the speed of light in the vacuum of space, or the rotteness of human nature.
CyberCipher on November 30, 2007 at 7:27 PM
This thread’s gonna be long enough to knit Allah a new winter coat.
fogw on November 30, 2007 at 7:28 PM
I haven’t eaten well today, so my thinking may not be too sharp. But I really don’t see (at least in the block quote above) even a tacit allusion to any human manifestation of and idea (eg. communism), rather he seems to focus on the idea itself. It would seem as though the crux of his argument is this statement:
Weight of Glory on November 30, 2007 at 7:28 PM
I am going to have to really read this link ti understand it all.
God bless this Pope.
CrimsonFisted on November 30, 2007 at 7:29 PM
To be honest, I don’t think Hitch has the theological background to debate the pope.
bnelson44 on November 30, 2007 at 7:31 PM
Atheists under Communism are responsible for the deaths of over 100 million people. Does this mean all atheists are bad? Absolutle not, but at the same time no civilization can function without a system that is widely adhered to and advances morality. In my opinion, even though athiests can possess personal morality, if the ideas of atheism dominate any country it will inevitibly loose it’s collective morality.
davenp35 on November 30, 2007 at 7:33 PM
As far as his statement about salvation, no surprise here. Catholic soteriology has never developed the idea of salvation being a single point in one’s life.
Weight of Glory on November 30, 2007 at 7:34 PM
That’s because they can not survive in the face of collective evil — and there is no shortage of collective evil…anywhere…at any time…in any culture…in any place…in all of recorded human history. Show me utopian Shangra-la. It doesn’t exist. Never has. Never will.
I think it is more fundamental than that. If we take the definition of Libertarian as a frame of mind that sees protection of private property as essential for liberty and seeks to minimize, as much as possible, the power of the state over individuals and their properties, we end up with a philosophy that will forever be widdling down the State. Eventually, you will have simply individuals on their property.
IMHO the reason Libertarians can’t field a viable national candidate is that when push comes to shove, they really don’t want to live with each other.
bnelson44 on November 30, 2007 at 7:37 PM
Wouldn’t matter, Benny would just use Force Lightning and roast Hitch at first sight.
Bad Candy on November 30, 2007 at 7:37 PM
Hey, let’s make this a weekly thing:
Friday Night Fight?
terryannonline on November 30, 2007 at 7:37 PM
Ouch.
peski on November 30, 2007 at 7:38 PM
Exactly
peski on November 30, 2007 at 7:39 PM
The closest might be this country’s first century.
Is this statement by the Pope to be taken literally?
I’ve read statements by agnostics not that much different.
His statement here strikes me as inconcise.
Speakup on November 30, 2007 at 7:40 PM
LOL. Okay. Go ahead and brand me an anti-Catholic bigot now because I’ve got a sense of humor.
CyberCipher on November 30, 2007 at 7:40 PM
I think what he’s saying is that when humanity attempts to force (in this case justice) anything on the rest of humanity, it will eventually fail. Communisim, or any ism for that matter, always tend to fail, because the state is pushed onto the people and they will eventually push back. Some things should just be left to happen I guess.
gator70 on November 30, 2007 at 7:41 PM
Hey, look! A thread on atheism!
Professor Blather on November 30, 2007 at 7:41 PM
The Big Hat vs. the Hairless Sack
peski on November 30, 2007 at 7:42 PM
Stop teasing us and type something. I need some Friday night chuckles.
CyberCipher on November 30, 2007 at 7:43 PM
Meanwhile, Leeland Eisenberg alleges he was molested by a Catholic Priest and whiled away the time taking hostages at a Hillary Campaign HQ today. I question the timing of the Pope’s distraction from religious abuses.
(firmly tongue-in-cheek)
shirgall on November 30, 2007 at 7:43 PM
LOL
Speakup on November 30, 2007 at 7:43 PM
LOL!
And we have a winner.
F15Mech on November 30, 2007 at 7:45 PM
Oops. Missed that. Sorry. Like I said, haven’t eaten well today.
Weight of Glory on November 30, 2007 at 7:46 PM
Well yeah cause the beer costs more than the popcorn does.
Speakup on November 30, 2007 at 7:47 PM
It wouldn’t be an AP thread without at least one reference to something anatomical and lude, donchathink’?
CyberCipher on November 30, 2007 at 7:48 PM
Hey, I’m Catholic, there’s goofing and there’s rank hatred.
Did your Collie laugh?
Bad Candy on November 30, 2007 at 7:49 PM
Shhh….
Bad Candy on November 30, 2007 at 7:50 PM
Atheism breeds communism? Sorry, that dont does not hunt.
What about being ones brothers keeper (being responsible for the welfare of others), or Jesus kicking out the money changers (capitalists).
I am agnostic, and with that, am a individualistic libertarian
A philosophy of live and let live, where we dont have a bunch of silly laws or overarching governance, and you can do your own thing, is not something you hear in church. Plenty of religious institutions are for heavy handed government, as long as it is their specific beliefs encoded into law.
Atheists and agnostics arent the ones giving you silly laws regarding personal behavior.
firepilot on November 30, 2007 at 7:52 PM
So much of the human sufferring in the name of religion over the centuries (particularly non-muslim religions) came at a time of tremendous superstition. Witches were burned, humans were sacrificed, entire tribes were persecuted, because people thought their misery - famines, plagues, ect… - were a result of the gods being angry with them, and that they needed to cleanse the societies of sin in order to appease them.
Well, in the 19th and 20th centuries, the days of superstition had ended, we were able to explain natural phenomenon that led to human sufferring, and the religious-inspired violence generally quelled.
The communists had no such excuse. Its just something to think about. Islamists have no excuse either, but the commands to kill and subjugate unbelievers are unique in that they were given for their own sake, regardless of other superstitions.
Jimmy the Dhimmi on November 30, 2007 at 7:53 PM
Look, your not going to find me defending the horror of communism in the 20th (and 21st) century, but this is just a load of Papal Bull. All he has to do is read a history of his own church, or any history for that matter, or even his own Old Testament (as I sniffed in my email to AP, to encounter enough cruelty and violations of justice keep him weeping for the rest of his life. Atheism schmatheism. People have a horrid potential to do evil, and God believers are no exception.
peski on November 30, 2007 at 7:53 PM
Please see the prior 4,302 threads on atheism. I probably said something in a couple of them.
Meanwhile, how about them Cowboys? Anyone seen the new Jessica Alba movie? Does she get nekkid?
(Warning: lame attempt at on-topic segue follows)
Speaking of Jessica Alba and the Dallas Cowboys, aren’t both absolute proof of God’s benevolent existence?
Now that I’ve cleared that up, anybody got a beer?
Professor Blather on November 30, 2007 at 7:54 PM
He’s out looking for Clinton campaign plants. Don’t tell anyone but, if he finds any, I have my suspicions that he intends to pee on them.
CyberCipher on November 30, 2007 at 7:55 PM
It just might. The reason is, as others have pointed out, that human nature has the capacity for great evil and cruelty (but personally I still believe people are inherently good). Libertarianism has no internal constraint against those cruelties so they will inevitably happen.
The main difference between communism’s cruelties and a libertarian state’s cruelties, however, would likely be that the libertarian cruelty wouldn’t be directed by the state. It would be directed by people acting in a sort of group-think arising from either selfishness or indifference to the suffering that is being caused by the dominant group over the weaker one.
Personally, doctrinal Libertarianism has always struck me as incomplete because of its capacity to support abortion in America. That is the ultimate example of the strong massacring the powerless in a libertarian-minded society. All it takes (or took) to excuse from a libertarian mindset is the dehumanization of the unborn. Any classification of people similarly dehumanized (ie Jews, blacks, gays) and be similarly slaughtered in a libertarian society.
Nessuno on November 30, 2007 at 7:56 PM
Wasn’t it Benjamin Franlin that said that beer is proof that God exists and that He loves us?
(I get my familiar quotes mixed up.)
CyberCipher on November 30, 2007 at 7:57 PM
If the Pope had a large A on his vestment and Christians represented 20 or so % of the population would the institution and the reserve bank of morality be comprised of murder and mayhem or would environmental forces produce a morality set not that much different?
Speakup on November 30, 2007 at 7:57 PM
Hey look! It’s the Pope being Catholic!
Doesn’t surprise me at all. While of course I disagree with him on salvation, I love the fact that he layed down the gauntlet on Atheism. Does seem a bit random don’t it?
I agree with the thrust of the argument. Man hungers for meaning, morality, reverence, something that is greater than itself. If you reject this God because of evil in the world then what do you replace it with? In the 20th century many Atheists replaced it with the state. And we all saw how well that turned out. This is because we simply can’t do what we attribute to God. It is beyond our capability!
I’m sorry, The Great Leap Backward or the Cultural Revolution is far worse than the Inquisition, or the Salem Witch Trials. The Gulag was worse than the Crusades! And the argument isn’t that Atheism is intristically evil, just that it has led to the greatest forms of cruelty and violations of justice.
Though this line of attack goes nowhere, because it’s not going to convince an Atheist there is a God. The Atheist says, “So what there ain’t a God and we have to make the best of it!”
Keljeck on November 30, 2007 at 7:57 PM
Oops. That’s Bejamin FranKlin.
CyberCipher on November 30, 2007 at 7:57 PM
Only if she’s your girlfriend and you own the team.
peski on November 30, 2007 at 7:57 PM
LOL, not my first beer run.
Speakup on November 30, 2007 at 7:58 PM
The magnitude of evil is what is so striking. The Inquisition killed a couple of thousand over several centuries. Hitler, Stalin, and Mao killed well over 100 million people in a few decades.
Gotta love them cowboys.
Mojave Mark on November 30, 2007 at 7:59 PM
I don’t think I was clear. In my earlier post I noted that I didn’t see where the Pope was talking about communism, rather he seemed only to be talking about and underlying idea. Had I read what AP wrote right under it, then I wouldn’t have stupidly written that. Thus, I blamed it on my poor health, as any respectable person would.
Weight of Glory on November 30, 2007 at 7:59 PM
Did you just equate the Cowboys with Hitler?!?!?!!!
I’M OUTRAGED!!!11!!!!1
Slublog on November 30, 2007 at 8:00 PM
Benjamin FranklinAhh, forget it. You know. That crusty old guy that wrote Poor Richard’s Almanack.CyberCipher on November 30, 2007 at 8:00 PM
Hey Pope Benedict, I admire you, not as much as Pope John Paul II and Pope Urban II of course, but I will tell you what I told Hitchens, whom I also admire, sometimes you should just shut up already!
I have examined all the known superstitions of the world and I do not find in our particular superstition of Christianity one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology. Millions of innocent men, women, and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, and imprisoned. What has been the effect of this coercion? To make one half the world fools and the other half hypocrites; to support roguery and error all over the earth. The clergy converted the simple teachings of Jesus into an engine for enslaving mankind to filch wealth and power to themselves. They, in fact,
constitute the real Anti-Christ.
- Thomas Jefferson
Now look what you have gone and made me do.
MB4 on November 30, 2007 at 8:02 PM
I got ya, I was just commenting on the larger point. Got a bit rushed and made a couple of typos in the process.
Time to take the Blather route and go find a beer.
peski on November 30, 2007 at 8:02 PM
Double-ouch.
peski on November 30, 2007 at 8:03 PM
My wife’s Catholic, my kids are Catholic and I send them to Catholic school, so please don’t think I’m anti-Catholic…
But I can’t be the only one who finds Pope Benedict really creepy looking.
John Paul II had that, um, teddy bear look that even an atheist could love.
Yeah, it’s a shallow observation, but I wonder if there aren’t a lot of even more shallow people out there who suddenly don’t find Catholicism as cuddly these days.
saint kansas on November 30, 2007 at 8:03 PM
Personally, this is my favorite book of Franklin writings.
Weight of Glory on November 30, 2007 at 8:04 PM
Ironically, I actually see the libertarian perspective as being the strongest argument against legal abortion.
As an increasingly libertarian leaning conservative, I begin approaching that question by assuming - in the absence of proof to the contrary - that a human fetus is an American citizen. Thus, they share (or should share) all the right I have (or should have). From a libertarian perspective, abortion should be abhorred as fundamentally opposed to libertarian ideology - unless you can demonstrate unequivocally that the fetus is not alive. Libertarianism demands that I respect the rights of others to that same liberty I see as an innate right.
I personally think any libertarian that supports abortion is betraying their own core beliefs.
But that’s just what Jessica Alba told me. She’s wicked smart.
Professor Blather on November 30, 2007 at 8:04 PM
Hmmm. Let’s see. Jessica Alba, Dallas Cowboys, beer, the Pope, atheists, plants, notorious mass murderers of totalitarian regimes, popcorn… what are we missing?
CyberCipher on November 30, 2007 at 8:04 PM
That’s because he’s a dead ringer for Emperor Palpatine.
I like calling him the Nazi Pope for fun. But it’s all in jest.
Keljeck on November 30, 2007 at 8:05 PM
Punk Ass. Go after the Atheists, run from the Islamists.
Don’t get me wrong - atheists could use a spanking, but part of the allure is the fact that it is hard to place the blame on much of the world’s atrocities on atheism (just wait).
While they are terribly rude, they are not that violent (yet). Regardless, the Catholic church and the Pope are not equiped to say much.
Agrippa2k on November 30, 2007 at 8:06 PM
Just don’t let it be this kind of beer. It will cost you due to the lack of supply.
Weight of Glory on November 30, 2007 at 8:06 PM
This reminds me, as everything does, of the Steyn/mainstream-Right diagnosis of Europe: their lack of religion means they don’t have the cultural confidence to absorb their Muslim immigration, whether in terms of enforcing their Enlightenment values of simply in terms of keeping up demographically with births. But where would they be if they were equally unreligious but somehow had no immigration? Maybe their low birthrates would cause trouble in paying for their welfare state but they’d recover one way or another. Not so with the immigration. The problem is the Muslim immigration, not the religious vacuum.
And in the far East there have been some pretty decent functioning societies that weren’t all that religious, at least not in by the God-fearing standards of the West. It would be a stretch however to call them atheist or nonreligious societies.
Alex K on November 30, 2007 at 8:07 PM
I thought it was in the Bible somewhere. No?
I’ll bet the Pope would know.
Speaking of the Pope, I love Eggs Benedict. Mmmmm.
Professor Blather on November 30, 2007 at 8:07 PM
The reformation killed a over a third of Europe, about half of England and lasted a century.
“The Church” declared the natives in the new world not human and no different than livestock, for at least five centuries the coastal areas of the African continent, all along India, South east Asia and the Pacific rim were considered open to rape, robbery and pillage in the name of the Church.
There’s no better side in the who’s more deadly debate.
Speakup on November 30, 2007 at 8:07 PM
You could say something nice about Fred Thompson. That usually gets the ball rolling.
Professor Blather on November 30, 2007 at 8:08 PM
TJ was the Jimmuh Carter of his era. Teddy Roosevelt told me that. **Sigh** Why does the professor get Jessica Alba when I’m stuck with old “speak softly and carry a big stick”?
CyberCipher on November 30, 2007 at 8:09 PM
Has there ever been a kind and just theocracy?
I can’t think of one.
Killgore Trout on November 30, 2007 at 8:10 PM
Is Hotair a state?
MB4 on November 30, 2007 at 8:10 PM
Any man that has a wife 25 years younger than himself is a man after my own heart. I salute Fred! (csdeven responds in 5..4..3..2..1)
CyberCipher on November 30, 2007 at 8:11 PM
Because I pray to the right God.
Professor Blather on November 30, 2007 at 8:11 PM
Hilaire Belloc said atheists were “our only worthy opponent.” Maybe, but it would be nice if the Pope thought about Islam a little more seriously.
Alex K on November 30, 2007 at 8:13 PM
It’s a state…of being.
Slublog on November 30, 2007 at 8:13 PM
Did Jessica mention that she likes to refer to the Pope as
Papa Ratzi.
CyberCipher on November 30, 2007 at 8:13 PM
Which God?
Huckocchio’s God?
MB4 on November 30, 2007 at 8:13 PM
Fred? Say something nice? B-b-b-but he’s Fraud Thompson!!!1!11!1 He eats babies and kills puppies!!!!!1!11
Bad Candy on November 30, 2007 at 8:14 PM
Only atheists believe in borders!
Alex K on November 30, 2007 at 8:15 PM
Does the pope have the rationalist background to debate Hithcens?
MB4 on November 30, 2007 at 8:16 PM
What’s the crime rate at the Vatican? I dunno what they are, but I’m guessing that’s considered a theocracy.
Bad Candy on November 30, 2007 at 8:17 PM
But are communists really atheists or do they just have a different form of god?
MB4 on November 30, 2007 at 8:18 PM
Good. I don’t think Jesus came upon this earth to found a cuddly religion.
bnelson44 on November 30, 2007 at 8:18 PM
wowsers. MB4 spels evry bitt ass gud ass i du.
CyberCipher on November 30, 2007 at 8:19 PM
Well, wouldn’t that thought process lead you to say that no one is truly an atheist, just someone who worships a different kind of god?
bnelson44 on November 30, 2007 at 8:19 PM
Have you seen those get-ups the Swiss guards wear?
That’s a fashion crime right there.
Professor Blather on November 30, 2007 at 8:20 PM
Where? Where? Where?
Are you sure?
Why wasn’t I told?
MB4 on November 30, 2007 at 8:20 PM
I dunno about Hithcens, but I’m guessing he’s got enough to deal with Hitchens. Again, not that it matters. Hitch can’t step to Benny’s Force Lightning. He might be drunk enough not to feel it though.
Bad Candy on November 30, 2007 at 8:20 PM
Benedict Beer, right here.
bnelson44 on November 30, 2007 at 8:21 PM
Everyone has a god. And worship is only a matter of degree. Some worship is overt and openly acknowledged. In other case, worship is covert or even unrecognized by the worshiper.
CyberCipher on November 30, 2007 at 8:22 PM
Hardly. He’s too slow to catch the energetic little b%^4%9s.
He does do a mean hillbilly impression though.
Onto actual matters of substance: The Pope strikes his target dead on again. Lets be realistic, Communism supplants God with the state. It’s the reason all the Marxists in the Democratic party refer to any religious talk as an injection, they’re merely trying to innoculate us against the new religion of the all-powerful government.
BKennedy on November 30, 2007 at 8:22 PM
Just another name for Satan, ya’ know.
CyberCipher on November 30, 2007 at 8:25 PM
Wow. That picture could be Palpatine.
If only I knew how to photoshop … some lightening shooting out of his hands would be pretty funny ….
Professor Blather on November 30, 2007 at 8:29 PM
Good one. I’m guessing they have a little bit of white collar crime (embezzlement, stealing office suplies, etc) but it’s probably pretty low. I’d be a little more concerned with sex offenders. They seem to have had their fair share of trouble in that department.
Killgore Trout on November 30, 2007 at 8:31 PM
More like the Barry Goldwater of his era.
MB4 on November 30, 2007 at 8:35 PM
My favorite photoshop is a gif of him superimposed on Palpatine in the scene from Revenge of the Sith where he’s holding off Samuel Jackson and yelling “UNLIMITED POWER!”
I laughed.
Keljeck on November 30, 2007 at 8:38 PM
I think they’ve been cracking down on that, and besides, that kind of crime happens much less amongst the clergy than the rest of the public, despite the hyperventilation from the media.
Bad Candy on November 30, 2007 at 8:39 PM
Comment pages: [1] 2 3 »