Which is more contrary to human dignity, this...
...or this:
?
Cardinal Renato Martino, the reflexively anti-war prelate who predicted a gigantic disaster if Iraq's government was replaced by force, gets a little sad about poor Saddam:
"I felt pity to see this man destroyed, (the military) looking at his teeth as if he were a cow. They could have spared us these pictures," he said."Seeing him like this, a man in his tragedy, despite all the heavy blame he bears, I had a sense of compassion for him," he said in answer to questions about Saddam's arrest.
Medical exams upon capture are perfectly legal and routine. Releasing a videotape of a prisoner is also legal, and proving that he was in custody serves a military purpose.
"It's true that we should be happy that this (arrest) has come about because it is the watershed that was necessary... we hope that this will not have worse and other serious consequences," Martino said...."But is seems to me to be illusory to hope that this will repair the dramas and the damage of the defeat for humanity that a war always brings about."Why was it "necessary" to capture Saddam if the war itself was unnecessary? And if it's the result of a "defeat for humanity," then...what...huh...not quite understanding...brain overloading....
Joseph Lieberman said that if it were up to Howard Dean, Saddam would still be in power, killing Iraqis and threatening his neighbors. The same thing can be said -- and I say this with a heavy heart -- about many bishops.
Unlike the Holy Father, the good cardinal has been content to repeat the European line about war being obsolete without any nuance or reservation, and does not even bother to root his comments in the Gospel. You know who I feel compassion for? The Iraqis who lost their loved ones because of this man. I feel pity for Saddam because of the fate that awaits him if he remains unrepentant. But compassion? I'll reserve that for the mothers whose sons were dragged off and murdered, or used as cannon fodder in useless wars.
Eric, what is the top picture? Is it a picture from the current Iraq war, or from when Saddam gassed the Kurds, or something else entireley?
It's a famous picture from Halabja, where 5,000 innocent people died -- probably more than died on either side of the Iraqi war.
http://www.kdp.pp.se/chemical.html
Gosh Eric, I have no idea how somebody like Lauryn Hill could have gotten the idea that Christ has died in the Vatican (by which she meant in the hearts of those serving at the summit of the Church).
Where is the Curia's pity for the poor souls of Halabja, gassed by Saddam? Down the same spider hole as the pity for the children of victims of pederast priests and the bishops who enabled them.
As I just blogged Saddam's treatment was more "discriminate" (to use a term beloved of the "it's an unjuuuust war" commentators) than, say, cutting off his head and checking the dental records at leisure.
I'm a tad confused about the new-found respect for 'dignity' in the Church. This means that human dignity (as in not enslaving people) is the same as not shaming them (as in Mediterranean honor-pride stuff)? This seems like a suspicious use of the term. The Church, after all, condemned duelling over hurt honor REPEATEDLY, which would tend to undercut the idea that Mediterranean honor culture is something worth defending.
But then perhaps the cardinal is speaking as a diplomat and an Italian and not as a cardinal. It's happened before.
The Cardinal might have made valid points if he had said that it is not right for us to be caught up in hatred for another human being and that on that ground we should not seek to purposely humiliate Saddam for strategic and PR gain, or for revenge, despite his horrendous crimes. As it is, he came off as more concerned about the honor of a mass-murderer than about the crimes of said murderer, saying only that Saddam "bears great responsibility".
That makes his comments inane and offensive. If he will not make an apology, he should at least issue a clarification lest he cause the Church to be rendered completely impotent when dealing with Iraq matters.
Rod, it's not ALL about you.
I tend to agree with Rod again.
The Vatican surely has effete liberal bureaucrats in its mix. Of course by and large, I'm sure it has some dedicated and true servants of Christ in the mix.
But you get a cushy job, you pow wow with the Italian and European press, you have friends in liberal European intelligentsia and voila, you get liberal pablum comments by this official on the pictures of Hussein rather than something cogently grounded in Scripture. Let's face it, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. when you're in a position of issuing edicts on this and that and having the press kiss your feet when you comport to the leftists sentiments du jour, it's a measure of "power" and prestige in this present world. One can see how easy it is for even those dedicated to holy service to succumb to such banal temptations as the accolades and approval of men, even secular, Church-eschewing intelligentsia who opposed the war in Iraq.
Mark Shea had some interesting comments on this matter.
The link didn't work for some reason. Here is a tinyurl.com address:
http://tinyurl.com/zk8z
The full address is this:
http://markshea.blogspot.com/2003_12_01_markshea_archive.html#107161682633181183
I'm cocerned about your criticism of the Cardinal's refernce to war is a defeat for humanity.
That's a word for word quote from Pope John Paul II:
"War is not always inevitable. It is always a defeat for humanity."
The Cardinal on that issue is simply following the Pope's teaching.
However, that still doesn't mean that we can't be absolutely elated at Hussein's capture.
You know Eric, I really respect how you are not afraid to take on the tough issues and tough critics, and to hold to your opinion. When it comes to the Iraq war and the issues related to it, I know of no one else in St. Blog's who is better qualified to discuss it from a valid perspective. Not only are you a devout Catholic, but you were also there on the ground in Iraq. I don't always agree with you on every issue, but I do on this one.
Saddam's treatment right now is infinitely better than that of any prisoner taken by his regime or of anyone who dissented with him, such as the Kurds. Ours is a God of justice, and I believe Saddam will face appropriate justice at the hands of fair judges. This is much more that can be said for many other of history's dictators. I do not wish the man dead for a couple of reasons. First, I don't think it would be consistent with Christ's teaching, and second, if he is killed, he will become a martyr for the fanatics in the Middle East. However, I do feel he should be locked away for the rest of his life in harsh (but humane) conditions to contemplate what he has done.
I appreciate your kind words, Chris. I'll try to live up to being a "devout Catholic," as I've never considered myself exemplary.
Joe, please see my comments in a new post. In it, I'm not lumping you in with the secular Left, rather pointing out how his words have been abused.