A Thought

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-02-07 10:57pm

I was just think about the idea of a figurative wall separating Church and State. Maybe this isn't the best idea.

No, not for the reasons you're thinking. If we're talking about a wall between Church and state, that would imply that while the church cannot affect the government, the government, inversely, could not enter into the affairs of the Church. Can't very well go through a wall, can you? Maybe we should revise our terminology. I'm no fan of government regulation of much of anything, but if priests won't stop fucking little boys and consistently refuse to police themselves, then obviously the government needs to step in and do something. Maybe we should get rid of the concept of the wall, and replace it with a "selectively permeable (from the side of the state, only) wall between church and state."

Maybe this is just a silly semantics nitpick. Any thoughts?

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2003-02-07 11:00pm

The government should not interfere with the church's ability to function. Preventing priests from fucking little boys in no way hinders the functionality of the RCC.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-02-07 11:03pm

HemlockGrey wrote:The government should not interfere with the church's ability to function. Preventing priests from fucking little boys in no way hinders the functionality of the RCC.

Well, in this case, the RCC could argue that the church is its own institution, kept separate from the state by law and should be allowed to deal with its own affairs. But obviously, this isn't a good idea.

ArthurDent · Post by **ArthurDent** » 2003-02-08 01:19am

I don't recall anything that says that a religion has free leave to act above the law of the land...meaning that the priests who have been abusing boys should be tried and punished to the fullest extent of the law regardless of what the Church may or may not do.

jegs2 · Post by **jegs2** » 2003-02-08 01:24am

ArthurDent wrote:I don't recall anything that says that a religion has free leave to act above the law of the land...meaning that the priests who have been abusing boys should be tried and punished to the fullest extent of the law regardless of what the Church may or may not do.

No argument here -- no religious leader (or political leader) should be exempt from the law.

Lord Pounder · Post by **Lord Pounder** » 2003-02-08 08:56am

The problem is that RC Priests DO think they are above the law. The 1st cases of Peadophile Priests were reported in my home city. How where they handled? The vatican handed out a few hundred thousand to make it go away. Priests have also been reported as being active members of the PIRA and got away with it because the moment you investigate a Priest he is on TV screaming about religous descrimination.