I see Hitchens and Dawkins are investigating whether it's possible to arrest the pope. Appallingly, some of you reading this will be more upset about Dawkins criticising religion than the fact that the Pope provably covered up child abuse. Shame on you.
Isn't it a bit beyond the pale that some people seem to think that because the pope is the head of a religious institution, he shouldn't be held to the same legal and moral accountability for his part in allowing child abuse to continue? If it were Ed Balls, Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families, who'd presided over a deliberate policy to move on paedophile teachers and insist this was a matter for his department only, not for the law, does anyone here seriously think he'd be excused in the way Ratzinger has been?