Invite Friends

Topic: Religion

Archbishop calls on Pope to resign, says he knew of abuse. Agree?

  • Comments: 86 |
  • Votes: 35
  • Share
Picture?type=square
Discussion started by Tok Staff:
A bishop Francis appointed in 2016 and former Vatican official publicly calls on Pope to resign over alleged abuse cover-up. Would that be warranted?
Background article: ... Read more
Results in this view: Y-covering Up 62% - Convince Me 10% - N-working On It 5% - N-too Extreme 24%
Picture?type=square
  • 9
Picture?type=square
  • 13
Picture?type=square
  • 2
Picture?type=square
  • 3
Picture?type=square
Picture?type=square
  • 5
Picture?type=square
  • 4
Picture?type=square
Picture?type=square
  • 9
Picture?type=square
By John Lozinski This pope is Satan a gay and a pedophile and Satan's spawn rolled into one
Picture?type=square
  • 4
Picture?type=square
Picture?type=square
Picture?type=square
Anonymous-user
  • 3
Picture?type=square
  • 5
Picture?type=square
Picture?type=square
Picture?type=square
  • 2
Picture?type=square
  • 2
Picture?type=square
  • 3
Picture?type=square
  • 1
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman hey i thought you were catholic you sound like a protestant there
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman The fighting words doctrine, in United States constitutional law, is a limitation to freedom of speech as protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

In 1942, the U.S. Supreme Court established the doctrine by a 9–0 decision in Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire.[3] It held that "insulting or 'fighting words', those that by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace" are among the "well-defined and narrowly limited classes of speech the prevention and punishment of [which] … have never been thought to raise any constitutional problem."

Chaplinsky decision
Chaplinsky, a Jehovah's Witness, had purportedly told a New Hampshire town marshal who was attempting to prevent him from preaching that he was "a damned racketeer" and "a damned fascist" and was arrested. The court upheld the arrest and wrote in its decision that

There are certain well-defined and narrowly limited classes of speech, the prevention and punishment of which have never been thought to raise any Constitutional problem. These include the lewd and obscene, the profane, the libelous, and the insulting or "fighting" words--those which by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace. It has been well observed that such utterances are no essential part of any exposition of ideas, and are of such slight social value as a step to truth that any benefit that may be derived from them is clearly outweighed by the social interest in order and morality.

— Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, 1942[3]
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By Albert Rogers There is neither God nor Satan, but the Papacy IS the Prince of Darkness, and the Father of Lies.
Other organizations do however vie for these honours.