Keyboard warrior atheists in AH

prinz

Mike 1972 wrote: »

The President doesnt have free reign to sell off the contents of the National gallery and do a runner with the proceeds because the constitution contains enough checks and balances (Oireachtas, Supreme Court, Cabinet, Council of state) to limit the extent of her powers..

Neither does the Pope.

Mike 1972 wrote: »

The Vatican doesnt have a written constitution..

Wrong. The first written strict body of laws relating to the Vatican which can be described as a constitution was brought in in 1929 and agreed with the Italians at the time guaranteeing the Holy See independence. This has been revised since, most recently a new body coming into force in 2001 referred to as the New Fundamental Law which replaces the original Fundamental Law of 1929. This is constantly overlooked by a team of cardinals which is renewed every few years.

Of course the absense of a definitive written constitution is nothing new is it Mike? Thinking of the U.K. here for example? Tell me, does the absence of a written constitutional document such as we have in the Republic mean that UK civil servants can do as they please with state assets?

Mike 1972 wrote: »

....or separation of powers...

Not quite on the money here either. The executive branch is made up of the Pope and Pontifical Commission appointed by the Pope. (Taoiseach and Cabinet almost). Judicial matters are overseen by a series of Tribunals which deal with civil and criminal law in accoradance with Canon Law. The legislative duties are performed by a whole range of Pontifical Commissions established to look into individual issues, i.e. P.C. for Culture, P.C. for Communications, P.C for Justice and Peace etc etc which are staffed and run by the Curia of the Holy See (AKA the civil service - headed by someone the Pope appoints). Of course then there are the Congregations for various things. So yeah, not quite free reign to do whatever he wants whenever he wants.

Mike 1972 wrote: »

Once the pope is appointed he is the supreme, infallible, dictator-for-life of the whole damn place. While he might (out of necessity) have delegated many of the powers relating to the day to day administration of the Vatican and its many institutions to various subordinates whatever powers he giveth he can take away....

While the office of Pope is often described as that of an absolute monarch it's not really as black and white as that as above. It's a common misconception that the Pope can do whatever the hell he likes.

Mike 1972 wrote: »

One only has to read up on the history of the set up to see the extent to which a Pope can abuse their position. The Borgias would be the most notorious example but there are plenty of others.

King John is a great example to use when scaremongering about Queen Elizabeth II.

Mike 1972

prinz wrote: »

Not quite on the money here either. The executive branch is made up of the Pope and Pontifical Commission appointed by the Pope. (Taoiseach and Cabinet almost). Judicial matters are overseen by a series of Tribunals* which deal with civil and criminal law in accoradance with Canon Law. The legislative duties are performed by a whole range of Pontifical Commissions established to look into individual issues, i.e. P.C. for Culture, P.C. for Communications, P.C for Justice and Peace etc etc which are staffed and run by the Curia of the Holy See (AKA the civil service - headed by someone the Pope appoints). Of course then there are the Congregations* for various things. So yeah, not quite free reign to do whatever he wants whenever he wants.

* (who appoints these ?)

Every dictator, emperor or absolute monarch who has ever ruled has found it necessary to delegate some of their powers to appointed subordinates. How are things any different in the Vatican ?

prinz wrote: »

Of course the absense of a definitive written constitution is nothing new is it Mike? Thinking of the U.K. here for example? Tell me, does the absence of a written constitutional document such as we have in the Republic mean that UK civil servants can do as they please with state assets?.

If you want to discuss the merits or otherwise of the UK's "unwritten" constitution there are more appropriate threads for doing so in.

MrStuffins

http://26.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lht2zw8ysI1qaj3x8o1_500.png

Father Damo

gosuckonalemon wrote: »

If there was no religion then:

1) the holocaust would never have happenend,

2) ethnic cleansing of millions across all continents would not have happened and continue to happen

3) thousands of women and children in the DRC would not be raped every week

4) priests in the catholic church would not have been able to be in the position to sodomise young, innocent Irish children for decades

5) our the Magdalene sisters for that matter!



..

Are you being serious or just interjecting this sh1te for a laugh?

Cheers.

Father Damo

Father Damo wrote: »

Are you being serious or just interjecting this sh1te for a laugh?

Cheers.

I just logged in again for the first time in weeks.

Again, are you taking the piss or being serious with points 1-5?

Cheers. I reckon you were joking as you never responded the first time, and athiests are generally gas craic in terms of their opinions/ conspiracy theoires (and Im saying this as a census form Catholic who hasnt seen a church since the last drunken piss up christening i went to)

Daegerty

Father Damo wrote: »

I just logged in again for the first time in weeks.

Again, are you taking the piss or being serious with points 1-5?

Cheers. I reckon you were joking as you never responded the first time, and athiests are generally gas craic in terms of their opinions/ conspiracy theoires (and Im saying this as a census form Catholic who hasnt seen a church since the last drunken piss up christening i went to)

Jaysus lad thanks for digging up this thread

strobe

Daegerty wrote: »

Jaysus lad thanks for digging up this thread

It's a sign of the rapture. The zombie, atheist bashing threads are rising from the grave.