Rachel Zoll, "
Court lets Vatican-sex abuse lawsuit move forward" (Breibart, June 28, 2010):
A lawsuit against the Vatican that had been dismissed as a publicity stunt moved forward Monday when the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal from the Holy See. The case represents a significant hurdle for what many believed to be a long-shot claim that the Vatican bears legal responsibility for molester priests.
The high court's decision not to stop the lawsuit means the clergy sex abuse case will go to trial in an Oregon district court.
The reader who send me the link comments:
It appears that [Benedict XVI] did not take up Obama on his "deal". Now the latter is allowing, probably funding, the attack for the RC's destruction in the US. Doubt me? Believe me, I would rather not see this mad game played out, but for Obama it is crucial. He must undermine churches so as to consolidate power to the state, and he hopes, himself. Why not start with the church that has had the most thrown at it over the last 15 years or son. Why not take down one of the elephants? Look out Baptists . . .
[Hat tip to S.K.]
I think blaming the Obama administration is a stretch in this case when you consider that the administration filed an amicus brief with the supreme court asking that the case be thrown out. The brief, submitted by the solicitor general for the Obama administration, argued that the Holy See has immunity and therefore the case should be dismissed. The high court ignored this argument.
ReplyDeletehttp://pewforum.org/Religion-News/Obama-sides-with-Vatican-in-abuse-lawsuit.aspx
"The brief, submitted by the solicitor general for the Obama administration, argued that the Holy See has immunity and therefore the case should be dismissed. The high court ignored this argument."
ReplyDeleteThe Vatican to this point has HAD diplomatic immunity--true since 1978 or thereabouts in relation to the US--signed off by Carter.
The court is no longer being asked to look at the Roman Catholics as a foreign national entity--a state. It is being asked to look at it as a centralized civic/religious organization of international scope [influence, theolgical/philosophical emphases, political power, and financial base]. There is no diplomatic immunity for these groups.
Currently, and I hope that I can rightfully credit him abundantly, Benedict XVI and those around him who have been struggling with the multiplicity of issues concerned in each case, never mind the concept of statehood, have apparently rejected the Obama offer of some three weeks ago in which he [Obama] was willing to drop all claims to cases under the 1970's provision for...--And anyone out there had better believe that there was a price.