Christian, not Catholic, support the Cardinal, so nyeh nyeh nyeh.
That’s a weird coincidence, as that was exactly what the Cardinal said in his follow-up statement!
I’m sure I’ve said this before, but what the heck: nothing Saddam Hussein has done, no matter how atrocious, absolves me from my duty to be decent and humane. Clearly, this cardinal feels the same way. Good for him, say I.
Holy CHRIST that was funny!
hawthorne’s link at the start of this thread was damned good. You read about all the stuff Saddam has said and done, and your mental image of him almost does include talons and green saliva. Then he finally falls and you’re faced with some guy who wouldn’t look out of place rummaging in a dumpster downtown. It’s hard to hate someone that much when they don’t fit the years of reporting.
I mean, the Iraqi Information Minister Muhammed Saeed al-Saha has his own quasi-fanclub, and he’s accused of several atrocious crimes. His BS is so outrageous though that it’s funny. Someone who might say “That scar is from a shark bite I got scuba diving in the Titanic. I dated Sarah Gellar but I broke up with her.” is a mass murderer? Hard to fit.
Dio, is it really bullshit? I mean think about it, true justice has no concern for circumstance, justice gives no forethought to idealism or intent, its only concern is with maintaining balance. If you tip the scales in your favor, justice will, like karma, eventually make it right, by any means it must.
I’m speaking of course, of a more etherial concept of justice, not the real world practice of law, which has the element of compassion built into it, simply because it is meted out by humans, who are, generally speaking, and without the involvement of any organization, decent, compassionate, altruistic and in search of a greater good within the species and without.
Munch
Thanks for pointing out that my repeating terms used by others in this thread were not actually in the article. Since the article didn’t actually state that the Cardinal expressed compassion or cited cruelty then he must not have been feeling compassion or complaining about cruelty.
Please cram a thesaurus up your ass.
All in good fun,
Bubba
DISCLAIMER: “PLease cram a thesaurus up your ass” was not printed in any newspublication and is not associated with any news article.
Atheist, not Christian, supports the cardinal. Nyahh nyahh. 
Athiest here, too, rjung, I have to wonder what all the foamy blood and gutters are and how I can distance myself from him.
The irony is that the best thing for an egomaniac dictator would be a lifelong term in an anonymous prison. Killing is just what he’d want, he’ll be remembered as a martyr for years to come. We saw what happened when we took him alive, he went from a hero to a coward, according to the BBC report here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3328683.stm
A long, long term as another number in the prison system would be just the thing to take the last of that edge off. I can’t decide whether being locked in solitary or being thrown into the general population would be better, but death is not the answer.
Just because someof us feltsorry for the way he looked doesn’t mean we don’t want justice.
Not mutually exclusive.
Once he’s all cleaned up,the pity will go.
Well, you’re close. The Vatican of course would officially feel compassion for the victims of genocide, sexual abuse, and for condom wearers … and for raped women who need but cannot get abortions in countries they hold sway in. This did not make them speak out for the Jews, it does not make them protect children from being victimized from their preists (until the public scandal becomes overwhelming) and it does not keep them from further victimizing rape and incest victims by forcing them to bear the children of their attackers. Which to my mind greatly cheapens any expressions of compassion they make about anyone.
I feel strangely uncompelled to take the Vatican or Diogenes the Cynic seriously, and would rather write them both off as rube-ish and self-serving.
As for sympathy for Saddam… to me, that suggests drug use or lead posioning.
I don’t think it’s necessary to construe this one Cardinal’s comments as being representative of the Vatican or the RCC as a whole. It’s one person feeling compassion. He isn’t disqualified from feeling compassion because he is a Cardinal.
Since when are the Guantanamo prisoners considered POWs? I thought they were “illegal enemy combatants” or “super secret nonpersons” or something like that.
As a completely non-religious person who was raised a Catholic, I certainly understand why the Cardinal said what he did. Christ taught to us to love everyone, including our enemies. I think the Cardinal’s comments were completely in keeping with standard, mainstream Christian doctrine.
I do think, however, that he could have worded his comments better, perhaps including remarks about compassion felt for the suffering of the Iraqi people as well. But, all in all, I can’t really fault the overall message. It is fully Christian in spirit, and that’s all that really matters.
Can’t cite it (don’t know how yet) but the Vatican is coming out against this Cardinal, saying he’s not an official spokesman for the Holy See. Love your enemy? I don’t think this applied to tyrants. Where is the love shown to Pharoh? From what I’ve studied it involves “enemies” of the adultery/theft/non-life threatening ilk. And especially political opponents. Could (probably) be wrong, who isn’t in this this forum, but suspect Jesus wouldn’t offer to be a character witness at Hitler’s trial. (awaits the lightning bolt)
I think that you’re confusing the concept of law with the concept of justice. The law is blind, justice is formed to fit the occasion. US law is not always just, and (in my opinion) is becoming less just as time goes by (by removing judge’s options.)
In this way of thinking, your second paragraph mislabels law and justice. Law is blind, it looks only at specific events (Was the bread stolen? Is this the person who stole it? What is the punishment that we have for stealing bread?) This leads to all people who steal bread being equal before the law.
This is not just. It takes nothing into account about the reasons, and it does not allow our compassion and pity to become involved. (Was the bread resold by some Mafia bread stealing ring? Was it eaten by a hungry family? Was it stolen by some young idiot who was doing it on a dare?) The legal answer is it doesn’t matter, but the just answer is that it does.
That’s because justice requires compassion, law does not.
CC (IamNOTaLAWYERyet)
In any case, neither justice nor law precludes compassion. the Cardinal wasn’t saying let Saddam go, just that he felt some pity. Justice and compasion are not in conflict.
You realize you’re talking completely out of your ass, don’t you? None of what you’re saying is supported Biblically. Here is what Jesus actually said:
There is no qualification here that it’s ok to hate really bad people. The command is clearly that you should make no distinctions between the righteous and the unrighteous. I don’t know where you got this crap about “enemies” only applying to “non-life threatening” types but I assure you it has no scriptural support.
Let’s also not forget that Jesus forgave his own killers. They didn’t repent, they didn’t accept Jesus as their savior, they didn’t ask for forgiveness and they weren’t sorry. That blows your “non-lethal” loophole right out of the water.
What he said.
It’s because Saddam doesn’t look like a monster, as was said, but a broken down old man. You pity him…but in a contemptuous way.
Besides, this guy’s a freaking cardinal. Compassion is his JOB!
As for the child molesting priests, that’s a red herring and you fucking know it.