Lawyer could challenge U.S. recognition of Vatican

[sabra]

http://www.dfw.com/mld/startelegram/news/state/12406493.htm

Lawyer could challenge U.S. recognition of Vatican

Associated Press

ROME - The lawyer who is suing Pope Benedict XVI in Texas for allegedly covering up the sexual abuse of children by a seminarian said Wednesday he would challenge the U.S. diplomatic recognition of the Vatican if the pope is given immunity in the case.

The pope's lawyers have already asked President Bush to certify Benedict's immunity from liability in the civil lawsuit since he is a head of state - the Vatican city-state.

Attorney Daniel Shea, who is representing one of three boys suing the pope, told a news conference Wednesday that Bush could abstain from confirming Benedict's immunity. In that case, the judge handling the case, Judge Lee Rosenthal of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas in Houston, would decide how to proceed, he said.

But if Bush grants the immunity, Shea said he would challenge the constitutionality of the U.S. diplomatic recognition of the Holy See as a sovereign state on First Amendment grounds.

[arcane1]

1. sweet

:toast:

[mknmehappy]

7. Why is this "Sweet"?

[arcane1]

9. why wouldn't it be?

:shrug:

[CubsFan1982]

13. It's stupid on the face of it.

Anyone with even a passing familiarity with the Constitution would see that this "lawyer" is off his trolley.

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[arcane1]

43. reason #1

you don't know me, and don't know shit about me

give me one reason not to believe you are pro-child-molester

[Not Me]

2. Yeah sweet. As in a warrant for his arrest on conspiracy charges

if he ever sets foot in the US.

[YellowRubberDuckie]

19. Oh please.

like he organized a pedophilia ring. :eyes: Could we be a little more logical here?
Duckie

[ChairmanAgnostic]

29. not the ring, but certainly the cover up. REPEATEDLY. WORLD WIDE.

Just talk to any mexican catholic about his decisions and protection of a seriously serial pederast. I am sure it had nothing to do with the hundreds of millions that the creep sent to the vatican.

Or what the Rat did with the Poles who had a cardinal and a bishop seriously hitting on little kids for dates. and more.

Being LOGICAL, this man ran the cover-up globally for what can only be called a conspiracy to hide tens of thousands of cases of child abuse by priest.

[northzax]

32. doesn't matter.

in this world, at least. He is the head of a soveriegn state, he can do, basically, anything he wants. Yes, they should have released people like Cardinal Law to local prosecution, but the Vatican is under no real legal obligation to do so.

[Sandpiper]

44. Sovereign Immunity does not apply to Universal Crimes

A principle established by the Nuremburg trials.

The real legal question here is whether the Pope's alleged offenses are broad enough in scope to be considered universal crimes.

If a US court determines that they were, sovereign immunity can be pierced.



The chances of that happening though are virtually nil.

[wli]

26. more like accessory after the fact n/t

[Ian David]

3. The Gay and Lesbian Kingdom of the Coral Sea Islands has more legitimacy

Will UN Recognize 'Gay Kingdom'?
by Peter Hacker 365Gay.com Sydney, Australia Bureau

Posted: February 7, 2005 12:01 am. ET

(Sydney, Australia) Its a tiny coral island off the coast of Australia but it could become the center of a major battle at the United Nations.

Cato Island is technically part of territorial Australia. But, last year, after the Australian government passed a law banning same-sex marriage (story) a group of gay activists in a bid to embarrass the government, sailed out to Cato and planted the rainbow flag, declaring it to be sovereign territory

The group renamed the island the “Gay & Lesbian Kingdom of the Coral Sea Islands”. Dale Anderson, the group's leader declared himself emperor. But, the Australian government failed to blink.

The stunt would have gone unnoticed except for the constant needling by Emperor Dale. The island is hardly of strategic importance, and it is only about 3 miles square.

More:
http://www.365gay.com/newscon05/02/020705gayUN.htm

[Kipling]

6. The Australians banned gay marriage? Disappointed.

I thought they were good on the social issues.

[Ian David]

14. Yeah. Some guy was afraid people would start marrying Dingos.

My baby! A Dingo married me baby!

[Javaman]

4. That's pretty clever

[patcox2]

5. Completely baseless, too.

This is the kind of loon that gets republicans elected.

Nothing in the Constitution prevents the US from recognizing other countries which are theocracies. We'd have to withdraw our recognition of Israel if that were so, and Saudi Arabia, Iran, and how many others?

[TankLV]

15. Umm - we're recognizing a RELIGION.

The "vatican" is THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. Nothing more, nothing less.

We should never have "recognized" it.

If, not, then grant the same status to ALL OTHER RELIGIONS.

This is a stupid policy.

[CubsFan1982]

16. No, we're not.

Whether you like it or not, the Vatican City is a separate, sovereign nation governed by the Catholic Church, under the Lateran Treaties with Italy in 1929. It is as entitled to diplomatic recognition as Saudi Arabia, China, or Liechtenstein. The First Amendment has NO say over diplomatic recognition, and if you'd read the Constitution, you'd understand that.

[MichiganVote]

18. The soverign state of the roman catholic church began...

The only reason the Vatican was established as a Sovereign State was strictly done out of political necessity.

In 1929, Mussolini needed the support of Catholics if he was to consolidate his power base. He had to 'bribe' the church with an agreement. Italy then 'recognized' the Sovereign status of the Vatican. On September 11. 1929, Vatican City became the smallest nation in the world placed completely under the Pope's jurisdiction. The authorities agreed to NOT interfere in the Vatican's internal affairs and the church simply turned a 'blind eye' to what was going on around them as a reward in gaining their sovereignty.

So this whole thing came about, not for anything religious in nature, but to have a 'silent' ally, guaranteeing both entities to carry on with their arcane manipulations, unopposed by each other.

Most Catholics really don't realize how it all came about, much less average Americans of any religious persuasion.

[TankLV]

21. The "vatican" is and has always been THE CHURCH.

I don't care what THEY call it - it is recognizing a RELIGION.

It's all bullshit and should be ended IMMEDIATELY!

It has not logical basis for it's existence. It's proven how criminal it is by first consorting with MUSSOLINI to CREATE itself in the first place, and then by HARBORING CRIMINAL PEDOPHILES with impunity.

Do away with their tax exemptions, too.

[CubsFan1982]

23. Well, that just shows your ignorance.

I suspect this has more to do with Catholicism itself rather than the First Amendment anyway.

[Cicero]

25. How does this constitute "an establishment of religion"?

Don't see how recognizing Vatican City does that.

This case is ridiculous on its face.

Later,

[anotherdrew]

8. kiss your city-state goodbye you evil little snake of a man

Garibaldi would be proud

[Rich Hunt]

17. good

I hope they burn it to the ground, as is the fashion.

[anotherdrew]

22. no no no. the archives and everything must be preserved

should make a nice museum

[hippiepunk]

27. That's crazy and violent

You bigot.

[Catholic Sensation]

28. there are just so many words i could use to describe that statement

an open support of terrorism
bigotry
ignorance

i could come up with more, but those three work best i think

[lovuian]

10. Well I wonder if Saddam gets the same immunity as a head of state

:bounce:

[Boomer]

11. He'll get immunity

As quite a few DU posts revealed when Ratzinger was first chosen as the new pope, Ratzinger and one of the Bush brothers (can't remember which one) were both serving on the same advisory board a few years ago. The putative organization (something about Bibles) looked like a cover for serious networking among power brokers.

These shadowy ties between Ratzinger and the Bush Family come in quite handy for dealing with bothersome little incidents like this one.

[CubsFan1982]

12. This would be funny if it weren't true.

What the hell kinda lawyer thinks the First Amendment has ANYTHING to do with recognition of foreign nations? That's idiotic.

[Sgent]

20. And

what kind of lawyer plays his hand early -- by publically announcing a strategy before filing the briefing? This is a real good way to put his foot in his mouth.

[emad]

30. Detroit Free Press:

Lawyer challenges pope's immunity in Texas sex-abuse suit

August 18, 2005


BY NICOLE WINFIELD
ASSOCIATED PRESS


SNIP:

But if Bush grants the immunity, Shea said he would challenge the constitutionality of the U.S. diplomatic recognition of the Holy See as a sovereign state on First Amendment grounds. "The Holy See is a church," Shea said.

-----------------------------------------------------------------


The letter, written when Ratzinger was still prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, explains that grave crimes such as the sexual abuse of minors would be handled by his congregation and that the proceedings of church tribunals handling the cases were subject to "pontifical secret."

http://www.freep.com/news/nw/popesue18e_20050818.htm

[emad]

31. Vatican tried four times during the Reagan/Bush1 admins to force

the UN to grant it sovereign state recognition. It even pleaded for a permanent seat on the UN Security Council.

They were vetoed ever time and told nothing doing.

The pivotal point centred on as yet unpublished UK classified State Documents on the role of Pius XII and the Nazis. Also post-September 1940 bombing of Buckingham Palace and role of 'Elizabeth Bowes Lyon' (aka Queen Mother), Giovanni Pacelli (aka Pius XII), UK fascist Oswald Moseley and members of the Gelli and Freeman families.

UN Sec Council resolved in 1988 and then again in 1992 that until these papers are placed in the public domain the UN would not give the Vatican more than a cursory 'Obersever' status.

Last year eminent historian/theologian John Cornwell published his latest work "Hitler's Pope". It gives a good overview of the background that underpinned the UN's stand on the Vatican today.

[gman16]

33. Is the Vatican considered a separate state?

ROME -- The lawyer who is suing Pope Benedict XVI in Texas for allegedly covering up the sexual abuse of children by a seminarian said Wednesday he would challenge the U.S. diplomatic recognition of the Vatican if the pope is given immunity in the case.

The pope's lawyers have already asked President Bush to certify Benedict's immunity from liability in the civil lawsuit since he is a head of state - the Vatican city-state.
Cut

Gotta love the Pope asking a person like Bush for immunity from accountability.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/apeurope_story.asp?category=1103&slug=Vatican%20Pope%20Sued

[htuttle]

34. Yes

[emad]

46. NO. The UN does not recognise it as having sovereign state

status. That's why it has observer status only at all UN meetings.

Only the Italian Govt since 1948 had given the Vatican official sovreignity.

The European Union, for instance, does not acknowledge any Vatican sovreignity.

The diplomatic missions that the Vatican has in many countries are part of a 'gentlemen's agreement' only and are not leally binding.

For instance, the papal nuncio in London does ot enjoy the same diplomatic priviledges and rights as, say, the Israeli ambassador - no immunity from prosecution, no accredited evoy status, no diplomatic bag priviledges etc.

[demnan]

35. Yes it is.

[craychek]

36. Yes it is. It's the smallest county in the world

I think this is really a bunch of crap. Unless he was directly doing this at the time all this was going on, he should not be held accountable. That accountability falls onto JPII, and he's quite dead =(

I personally think this lawyer is doing this to get publicity, no lawyer in his right mind would think that he would actually be successful at this or that this would even hold up legally.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

42. but the current guy was in charge of policy w/respect to child abuse

here is the top honcho that approved the transfer of bad priests from one country to another, usually with no extradition, simply to protect his own.

Given the numbers globally of the constant, non-stop cover-ups by the church, the only way to describe this organization is terms more befitting of a RICO statute.

[MercutioATC]

37. Vatican City is a sovereign state...has been since 1929.

http://history1900s.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0108136.html

[tenshi816]

38. In a word, yes,

the Vatican is a sovereign state which came into existence with the Lateran Treaty, between the Holy See and Italy, in the late 1920s (sorry, didn't look up the exact date). The Vatican's existence as a sovereign authority is universally recognized.

Edited for typo.

[Kagemusha]

39. How do you challenge diplomatic recognition, anyway?

That's certainly more correct here than challenging the immunity itself. But like, how?!?

I'd think that'd literally take an act of Congress.

[Inland]

41. No, diplomacy is entirely a presidential power.

Diplomatic recognition means exchanging ambassadors and providing other diplomatic stuff reserved to states. Got nothing to do with Congress.

[mikelgb]

40. YES. According to the State Dept...

http://www.state.gov/s/inr/rls/4250.htm

Edit to add: The proper name is actually the Holy See and the capital is Vatican City.

[onager]

45. Hee! Love to watch the apologists tiptoe...

...around the Lateran Treaty. I notice all the Professional Catholics are very careful to write that it was a treaty "between the Vatican and Italy."

Actually, as shown in that excellent analysis upthread, it was a mutual back-scratching between the Church and the Fascist dictator Mussolini.

Four years later, the Vatican got a chance to use its spiffy new diplomatic powers.

It became the very first "government" in the world to recognize Hitler's Nazi takeover of Germany, in the 1933 Concordat between the Vatican and Germany.

Again, it was a straight political deal. The Church promised to stay out of German politics. In return, the Tithing Tax was passed--a financial windfall for the churches--and Hitler made a reciprocal promise not to interfere with the Catholic Church.

The broker of that cozy little deal was the Papal Nuncio in Germany at the time, one Mr. Pacelli...who a few years later would become Pope Pius XII.

I think the entire fiction of the Vatican as a "soverign nation" should be scrapped. It's a church and an extremely well-financed propaganda organization, nothing more.