A bit of a comedy of errors has arisen around the notion of taking the pontiff into custody. The Sunday Times did its story after briefly talking to Richard Dawkins. They announced...
Wow. Strong words. Citizen arrest? But is it true?
Dawkins refutes it. He got a call got a few questions. He was supported the idea of challenging the pope visiting the UK, and stopped there. The paper went on and filled the blanks (This used to be a good paper, right?).
But people got upset. Those New Atheist! Those Atheist Taliban? Fundamentalist Atheist! This fantasy tale!
Now, should the pope be arrested? Is there reason to believe he is involved in a crime in any place he is at or visits? If so, sure. That is how the law and law enforcement works, right? Is the pope above the law? Is a president? A general? A celebrity? As they say, he's no better than he ought to be.
And if evidence and witnesses exist to give proof against this or any person...the law should be upheld.
Is there a reason not to? He's not Judge Dredd. He ain't the law.
Forgot about this pic. THIS...IS...OXFORD!!!