He and his sicko boss (who also recently resigned after it was discovered that the pope hid child rapists from justice so that they could continue attacking children) should both do the honorable thing: Slit their wrists.
- He was only accused. Not proven or convicted.
- He did not resign, just chose not to go to the conclaive.
Get your facts straight before you post.
Hope this helps;
It was proven he was a high ranking employee of a known terrorist group. This is not disputed.
Benedict did NOT resign for this reason. He resigned because he was ill and could not perform his duties.
Nick, I have to disagree with you on this.
Please, read and get the facts, not the media’s agitprop. They have it out for the Catholic church because of “gay marriage” and ordination of female priests, as well as a host of other issues.
I do NOT assume that the Catholic church is perfect, by no means. NO human being is perfect, that is reserved for G-d. Man errors, G-d rules.
Hope this helps;
Wrong. He resigned. Get your facts straight before you post. Hope this helps.
Please provide a cite.
I love you, Nick, but you do tend to fly off the handle when you are angry. You can’t always believe what you read on the internet, especially when the sources are not documented and provide citations.
Hope this helps;
That’s easy. I’ll cite you in your post #5 where you write:
ABC news uses the word “resigns” in the headline: http://abcnews.go.com/International/cardinal-keith-obrien-resigns-amid-sexual-misconduct-allegations/story?id=18587770
Daily Beast uses the word “resigns” in the headline: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/02/25/uk-s-top-cardinal-keith-o-brien-resigns-who-s-next.html
Wall Street Journal uses the word “resigned” in first sentence of article: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323384604578325750159547408.html
Washington Post uses the word “resigns” in headline: http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-faith/scottish-cardinal-keith-obrien-resigns-after-sex-accusations/2013/02/25/a93a4528-7f91-11e2-a671-0307392de8de_story.html
CBS News uses the word “resigns” in headline: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57571038/u.k.s-cardinal-keith-obrien-resigns-post-as-archbishop-says-hell-skip-conclave/
New York Times uses the word “resigns” in headline: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/26/world/europe/top-british-cardinal-resigns-after-accusations-of-inappropriate-acts.html?_r=0
Shall I continue with my citations Will or is that enough? I can produce about 140 additional citations if you want them.
That was tricky what Nick did there. Will said:
Then Nick answered a non-existent argument:
Will asked for proof of the first point of debate, and Nick shifted completely into posting evidence to support an argument Will wasn’t debating at all. Now he doesn’t have to provide evidence to support his initial claim that the Pope resigned because his hiding of rapist priests was exposed.
That argument being that he “resigned”
Wrong. I refer you to post #3 where Will was debating that point and says he “did not resign.” Here is what Will wrote in post #3 and chastised me about posting before I had this fact straight:
And post #8 where Will asks for a citation in response to me claiming he resigned and even quotes me claiming he resigned in my post #8
and Will replies:
I also refer you to the thread title.
Cameron, after carefully reviewing post #3 and post #8, will you agree to retract your post #17?
In post #5 Will is specifically talking about the Pope.
In post #9 you quote him from #5, but you apply it to your argument about the Cardinal.
And you still haven’t had to back up your statement about the Pope yet.