Richard Dawkins solicitor says that the Vatican is not a state

[RadiomanATL]

Richard Dawkins: I will arrest Pope Benedict XVI -Times Online

“There is every possibility of legal action against the Pope occurring,” said Stephens. “Geoffrey and I have both come to the view that the Vatican is not actually a state in international law. It is not recognised by the UN, it does not have borders that are policed and its relations are not of a full diplomatic nature.”

Put aside all religious issues, and current scandals. I'm drilling it down to a sovereignty issue.

The Vatican was there as a nation/state before the UN. You don't get to wipe it away with the stroke of a pen just 'cuz you don't like religion.

If the Vatican was there first, perhaps they can disband the UN with a stroke of a pen as well?

 

[martybegan]

The vatican has treaties with other countries. It issues ambassadors and has embassies.
Its borders are just as policed as those between EU contries.

Kind of a stretch by Mr Dawkins.

 

[Avatar4321]

Richard Dawkins isn't exactly the brightest bulb in the room.

The vatican has it's own military force. And they have no sovereignty? Bullcrap.

 

[geauxtohell]

Richard Dawkins: I will arrest Pope Benedict XVI -Times Online

“There is every possibility of legal action against the Pope occurring,” said Stephens. “Geoffrey and I have both come to the view that the Vatican is not actually a state in international law. It is not recognised by the UN, it does not have borders that are policed and its relations are not of a full diplomatic nature.”

Put aside all religious issues, and current scandals. I'm drilling it down to a sovereignty issue.

The Vatican was there as a nation/state before the UN. You don't get to wipe it away with the stroke of a pen just 'cuz you don't like religion.

If the Vatican was there first, perhaps they can disband the UN with a stroke of a pen as well?

God, Dawkins is a sanctimonious prick.

 

[Baruch Menachem]

It's army wears fancy dress, any legal violations are handled by Italy, it is entirely enclosed by the capital city of another state, its authority is just about nil. What's the point to it anyway?


I have to agree when it comes arresting, Dawkins already had it done to him. Mentally.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

According to accepted international law, Vatican City has been a sovereign state since the 6th century. Good luck, Mr. Dawkins.

 

[geauxtohell]

Here's what pisses me off about Dawkins. It's not enough for him to simply be an athiest and let other believe as they want. He seems insistent on attacking people for their faith (I say that as a person that is not particularly religious).

In that light, he's on par with the most fervent evangelicals.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Here's what pisses me off about Dawkins. It's not enough for him to simply be an athiest and let other believe as they want. He seems insistent on attacking people for their faith (I say that as a person that is not particularly religious).

In that light, he's on par with the most fervent evangelicals.

I'm somewhere between an Atheist and an Agnostic, and I agree wholeheartedly.

I think the same about Michael Moore - I agree with him on a lot of issues, but I intensely dislike him because he's an ASSHOLE.

 

[geauxtohell]

Here's what pisses me off about Dawkins. It's not enough for him to simply be an athiest and let other believe as they want. He seems insistent on attacking people for their faith (I say that as a person that is not particularly religious).

In that light, he's on par with the most fervent evangelicals.

I'm somewhere between an Atheist and an Agnostic, and I agree wholeheartedly.

I think the same about Michael Moore - I agree with him on a lot of issues, but I intensely dislike him because he's an ASSHOLE.

That's it. The guy is an asshole. I take umbrage with his attempts to take science and discredit religion. Again, other side of the same coin as ID.

If he want's to reach his own conclusions on the matter that is fine, but no scientific journal will accept a paper that "disproves God".

That's why he gets to write books about it instead.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Here's what pisses me off about Dawkins. It's not enough for him to simply be an athiest and let other believe as they want. He seems insistent on attacking people for their faith (I say that as a person that is not particularly religious).

In that light, he's on par with the most fervent evangelicals.

I'm somewhere between an Atheist and an Agnostic, and I agree wholeheartedly.

I think the same about Michael Moore - I agree with him on a lot of issues, but I intensely dislike him because he's an ASSHOLE.

That's it. The guy is an asshole. I take umbrage with his attempts to take science and discredit religion. Again, other side of the same coin as ID.

If he want's to reach his own conclusions on the matter that is fine, but no scientific journal will accept a paper that "disproves God".

That's why he gets to write books about it instead.

Exactly. And I get to not buy his books.

 

[CrimsonWhite]

It's army wears fancy dress, any legal violations are handled by Italy, it is entirely enclosed by the capital city of another state, its authority is just about nil. What's the point to it anyway?


I have to agree when it comes arresting, Dawkins already had it done to him. Mentally.

Believe it or not, but this one of the most highly trained soldiers in the world.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Richard Dawkins: I will arrest Pope Benedict XVI -Times Online

“There is every possibility of legal action against the Pope occurring,” said Stephens. “Geoffrey and I have both come to the view that the Vatican is not actually a state in international law. It is not recognised by the UN, it does not have borders that are policed and its relations are not of a full diplomatic nature.”

Put aside all religious issues, and current scandals. I'm drilling it down to a sovereignty issue.

The Vatican was there as a nation/state before the UN. You don't get to wipe it away with the stroke of a pen just 'cuz you don't like religion.

If the Vatican was there first, perhaps they can disband the UN with a stroke of a pen as well?

Let the Vatican try.

I remember the Iranian hostage situation. Sovereignty on foreign soil, is only as good as those who agree to recognize it.

That said, if they can get lawyers to write up a thing or two...

Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens, the atheist author, have asked human rights lawyers to produce a case for charging Pope Benedict XVI over his alleged cover-up of sexual abuse in the Catholic church.

The pair believe they can exploit the same legal principle used to arrest Augusto Pinochet, the late Chilean dictator, when he visited Britain in 1998

I love the personal attacks on Dawkins. Makes me admire the man more.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

The Vatican is not a nation.

Hitchens, author of God Is Not Great, said: “This man is not above or outside the law. The institutionalised 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."

Last year pro-Palestinian activists persuaded a British judge to issue an arrest warrant for Tzipi Livni, the Israeli politician, for offences allegedly committed during the 2008-09 conflict in Gaza. The warrant was withdrawn after Livni cancelled her planned trip to the UK.

“There is every possibility of legal action against the Pope occurring,” said Stephens. “Geoffrey and I have both come to the view that the Vatican is not actually a state in international law. It is not recognised by the UN, it does not have borders that are policed and its relations are not of a full diplomatic nature.”

Richard Dawkins: I will arrest Pope Benedict XVI -Times Online

I don't see it happening, but I see no credible arguments from the idiots here @ USMB. No arguments, just attacks in Dawkins.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

The vatican has treaties with other countries. It issues ambassadors and has embassies.
Its borders are just as policed as those between EU contries.

Kind of a stretch by Mr Dawkins.

Dawkins and Hitchens: Hitchens says the Vatican does not have borders that are policed.

Could you explain where you are right and Hitchens is wrong?

“There is every possibility of legal action against the Pope occurring,” said Stephens. “Geoffrey and I have both come to the view that the Vatican is not actually a state in international law. It is not recognised by the UN, it does not have borders that are policed and its relations are not of a full diplomatic nature.”

Richard Dawkins: I will arrest Pope Benedict XVI -Times Online

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Richard Dawkins isn't exactly the brightest bulb in the room.

The vatican has it's own military force. And they have no sovereignty? Bullcrap.

AS usual, the house idiot did not read the link.

Where does Dawkins or Hitchens say the Vatican has no sovereignty? You are using a red herring argument framed by the OP.

Read the link before you speak your shit.

Dawkins and Hitchens believe the Pope would be unable to claim diplomatic immunity from arrest because, although his tour is categorised as a state visit, he is not the head of a state recognised by the United Nations.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Richard Dawkins: I will arrest Pope Benedict XVI -Times Online

“There is every possibility of legal action against the Pope occurring,” said Stephens. “Geoffrey and I have both come to the view that the Vatican is not actually a state in international law. It is not recognised by the UN, it does not have borders that are policed and its relations are not of a full diplomatic nature.”

Put aside all religious issues, and current scandals. I'm drilling it down to a sovereignty issue.

The Vatican was there as a nation/state before the UN. You don't get to wipe it away with the stroke of a pen just 'cuz you don't like religion.

If the Vatican was there first, perhaps they can disband the UN with a stroke of a pen as well?

God, Dawkins is a sanctimonious prick.

another clueless prick who didn't read the link.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

According to accepted international law, Vatican City has been a sovereign state since the 6th century. Good luck, Mr. Dawkins.

This may be, but where is the evidence for that? International law?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

The Holy See is recognized by the UN.

It has permenant observer status. They have embassies in NY.

And they've been accepted as a Sovereign State since the Lateran Treaty in 1929.

Richard Dawkins doesn't get to override international law because he feels like it.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Vatican City is a city-state that came into existence in 1929 and is thus distinct from the central authority of the Roman Catholic Church, the Holy See, which existed long before 1929. Vatican City - Re.ViCa

how many conservatives or conservative/progressive christian assholes here have said things to the contrary?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

The Holy See is recognized by the UN.

It has permenant observer status. They have embassies in NY.

And they've been accepted as a Sovereign State since the Lateran Treaty in 1929.

Richard Dawkins doesn't get to override international law because he feels like it.

true but...

here is the argument...

Dawkins and Hitchens believe the Pope would be unable to claim diplomatic immunity from arrest because, although his tour is categorised as a state visit, he is not the head of a state recognised by the United Nations.