Is it time for religious leaders to answer for their crimes?
Shouldn’t be set an International Criminal Court or they’re above the law?
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
41 Answers
I think you need to be more specific. Your painting with a very wide brush.
To be honest…most of the really wacky ones (Like the Pope that rallied for the Crusade), or the ones who persecuted and killed people who didn’t believe in their beliefs….are dead.
And besides…no one should be above the law anyhow…it doesn’t matter if you’re the pope or a shaman or a guru whatever, you’re still a person and you still need to be responsible for your actions.
@Maldadpermanente no one is above the Law, but would like more info on your question.
No one is above the law, the trouble is that so many avoid arrest. The Ayatollah in Iran won’t be arrested any time soon, and neither will Bin Laden. Both would have massive cases formed against them if their respective groups dissolved though.
Definitely, it’s about time religious leaders stopped hiding behind their titles and took responsibility for their actions. They act as if they’re above the law, and unfortunately can be treated that way sometimes, but their heads should be on the chopping block just like every other criminal. I can’t say anymore though without some details or examples.
No I’d much rather see an inquisition established to punish Walmart greeters who don’t greet. Nothing is more criminal than to have to get your own cart with them just standing there.
I’m not entirely sure it would be practical to hold the current leaders culpable for crimes commited in the past. I think it would be better to treat it like corporate crime & prosecute the institution as a whole.
I think it has more to do with the fact that some world leaders fear retaliation from these terorist groups. I don’t think its religous rights that keep them from being touched but money, connections and the real possibility that they will get to them and their families. In a perfect world such people will not exist or have such power but so long as they can fashion weapons and create terrorists they will always manage to get away.
@BoBo1946 Any religious leader. They have too much power over people and zero responsibility.
In certain times, it was religious leaders who gave aid and comfort to those persecuted by others – and it was a crime at the time, too. Religions, good or bad, generally follow their conscience, and while the best will also consider the law, many will not.
You can tell a secularist by their notion that the law is bigger than the tiny box called Religion. You can tell a Believer by their notion that the Divine is bigger than the tiny box called The Law.
If we prosecute religions for disobeying the law and committing crimes, will it be a Believer or a Secularist who decides if the crime was just?
@laureth A secularist, of course. Someone who don’t think his/her beliefs are above the others, who don’t think atheist are in error and he/she’s right. A fair trial, no more but no less.
“Religions, good or bad, generally follow their conscience…” I can’t agree with you. Religions follow a set of rules written on Sacred Books on a very specific time and place, and apply those rules overtime no matter what.
Thanks for following the discussion.
I say anyone that does and behaves in a way that I do not think is right should “answer for their crimes.”
They are religious leaders because a group of people agree/believe in what they are doing and follow them.
It really comes down to a group effort.
So do we burn down churches? It is just best to stay away and stop picking at the “scab.” Eventually drying up and falling off.
@Maldadpermanente
“Religions follow a set of rules written on Sacred Books on a very specific time and place”
Loosely, as long as those don’t contradict their intuitive idea of right and wrong, even if they mistakenly believe their right and wrong come from their religion. How many Christians do you know who think slavery is okay and women belong in the kitchen?
No, Christianity is good, god is love, Jesus is a nice guy, and let’s forget all that nasty business about putting everyone and their dog to death for tying their shoelaces on the sabbath.
And as an atheist, I think that’s good, actually. Making your own judgements using scripture as a loose guideline instead of following scripture to the letter brings you a lot closer to intellectual independence.
It’s the strict ones who are really scary.
“Jesus is a nice guy”
@Fyrius so are you. :-)
“A secularist, of course. Someone who don’t think his/her beliefs are above the others, who don’t think atheist are in error and he/she’s right.”
I think in some cases…the same case is vice versa…
If you’ve committed a crime, and there is enough evidence to convict you, then you should be prosecuted, religious leader or not. What happens is that religious groups are quite good at hiding evidence against their leaders, and that’s unfortunate, but what exactly are we supposed to do about it? I think we should clearly prosecute religious leaders like this, but should the Pope be made to pay child support for every baby born in poverty because of the Church’s policies? Is the Pope responsible for the murder of abortion providers simply for saying abortion is wrong? I still think we need a little clarity on exactly what crimes you mean. Just having too much power over people is not in and of itself a crime.
@Fyrius “No, Christianity is good, god is love, Jesus is a nice guy, and let’s forget all that nasty business about putting everyone and their dog to death for tying their shoelaces on the sabbath…”
Yes, that’s the point of my question. A religious leader can say women are sinful beings, that you can’t fly a kite, that non-believers must be put to death and he (always is a “he”) knows the power of his words and that he always will come clean whatever the consequences.
Great answer my friend.
@Snarp “Just having too much power over people is not in and of itself a crime…” You’re right, they must answer because the way they use that power.
@Maldadpermanente But who do you want to answer, and for what? The Pope? Gene Robinson? Some random imam? The Ayatollah? David Miscavige? Fred Phelps? James Dobson? Catholic priests accused of abuse? Some of these have committed crimes, and should be tried for them, but what of evidence? Do we apply a different standard to religious leaders? Are you proposing new laws that specifically apply to religious leaders? And should we also try Jenny McCarthy, whose statements discourage parents from vaccinating their children and could result in deaths? She has influence and power over some people even though she is not a religious leader.
“Some are good….not many, but a few!”
I know many good Religious leaders. The problem is if you believe they are being guided by a “higher authority.”
If you don’t. Then, as good their intentions might be, they are still misguided.
Let’s have all leaders, religious or otherwise, who have engaged in or have been connected to criminal acts or activities answer for all their crimes. George Bush can be first.
And no, none of them are above the law.
@ChazMaz understood…if they are living the word by their actions, they possibly could be doing the work of the “higher authority!” If not, they might be false prophets! Lot of TV evangelist might fall into this category. Not saying they are false prophets, just possible.
@ChazMaz you must be writing a long one!!!!! lol
“Not saying they are false prophets”
Let me tell you first hand.
There are… And, they are not going to be standing on the corner with a sign over their head.
Had a phone call… From God.
@ChazMaz loll..got’cha my friend. Got to run…have a good one!
Religious leaders don’t have power they have influence. At least in western nations, they can’t force anyone to do anything. They offer opinions people follow them or they dont . In the U.S. its not illegal to encourage people to commit crimes without specific knowledge or imminent lawless action. I don’t think that almost any current religious leaders could be found guilty by those standards. People can say what they want, but only criminals ought to be punished
“Religious leaders don’t have power they have influence.”
Influence is power. And, they have plenty of it. Power that is.
Because God gave them that power.
THAT, is a VERY powerful tool.
I disagree. I support this distinction between influence and power.
Power is controlled influence.
Religious leaders really do have power, though. They can’t order people to do X and court-martial them if they don’t obey, but they know what to tell the believing masses to get them to do X anyway, of what they will think is their own volition.
There are a lot of definitions of power, so this could easily turn into a very long philosophical debate. From Wikipedia:
“Power is a measure of an entity’s ability to control the environment around itself, including the behavior of other entities. The term authority is often used for power, perceived as legitimate by the social structure.”
“Power is the capacity to restructure actual situations. Influence is the capacity to control and modify the perceptions of others.” —I.C. Macmillan
From my first college course in international relations: “Power is the capacity of A to cause B to do something B would not otherwise do.”
From Webster’s:
”: ability to act or produce an effect (2) : ability to get extra-base hits (3) : capacity for being acted upon or undergoing an effect b : legal or official authority, capacity, or right
2 a : possession of control, authority, or influence over others”.
@Maldadpermanente re “Religions follow a set of rules written on Sacred Books on a very specific time and place, and apply those rules overtime no matter what.”
First, not all religions have holy books. Second, I believe that Religion evolved as a way to codify innate human morality. If all they follow is a book, they may be following some law that was moral at the time of writing, but is not now.
When I wrote that response up there, I was thinking of very brave Christians who hid their Jewish friends and neighbors or strangers, even, and helped get them out of Dodge before the Nazis came. (Sorry to invoke Godwin’s law here, but it seems germane.) What they did was thoroughly moral, yet against the law of the land at the time. Should these Christians (or their grandkids) be made to answer in a court of law?
@Ria777 In a recent TV forum Senator Steve Fielding said that the first time he met Kevin Rudd, Rudd pulled out a Bible and started lecturing him from it. Now as much as I think Rudd is a pretentious prick and likely did this to get Fielding on side in his own twisted way, he is an Anglican, and with Tony Abbott being a devout Catholic I doubt any inquiries of this nature will get very far in our country.
@FireMadeFlesh: ironic given that the Scientologist’s Sea Org forces women to have pregnant to get abortions.
@Ria777 Really? I honestly have no idea what Scientology is into, I just know the basics of the ‘religion’ and a few stories of ex-members etc. That is scary.
@FireMadeFlesh: when you say “is into” that implies some sort of ideological or spiritual motive. to the extent that it does, it really means that if you join the Sea Org you should put your duty to it before all else and work to “clear the planet”.
the Church does not publicize that they even have a group called the Sea Org, let alone the RPF. (they set up the RPF as a system where disgraced members work as slaves to “redeem” themselves.)
they like to play the “religious prosecution” card and, if possible, talk about their beliefs, when it has nothing really to do with beliefs.
anyway, a recent New York Times article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/07/us/07scientology.html
(in reference to your earlier posts, Catholic.org has increasing run critical articles on the CoS too.)
if this bothers you (and I assume you live in australia), contact your officials and urge them to go with Senator Xenophon and do something about it.
@Ria777 It does bother me, and yes I do live in Australia. I may contact my local member and see where it goes, but then I have no faith in our political process so I doubt anything will come of it. Still, its worth a try. Thanks!
Answer this question 
