I does agrees wit this.
Who cares about the popes views anyway. He is not qualified to say anything non-religious.
It's manifestly obvious to even the simple-minded that 1/3 of the world's population is Christian. Fully half of them are Catholic. Your dismissal, as always, represents only your wish that religion is relegated to impotence. By your standard, your Dawkins should know nothing about religion and should only comment on science. See how that works?
Remember that the problem of Latino poverty and the pressure to invade the US is largely the result of the Church's evil prohibition of contraception. Having created vast poverty, the Pope thinks the solution is to invade the US and take jobs from Americans, including hispanic and black Americans. The Pope will eventually be forced to abandon the prohibition, admitting that he is wrong on a moral question. He will say he never invoked his "infallibility" on the question, but being forced to back down on a moral question discredits the whole theory of infallibility.
Will he also wear a hula skirt and wear coconut halves for a bra? If you get to create a straw man pope to dance to your propositional theories, why stop with mere assumed political reversals? Have him snort and oink, as your preposition is exactly that preposterous and meaningless.
And infallibility is a doctrine, flawed as it is, that applies in papal rulings and dogma, not simple opinions expressed as this was. Total red herring, likely representing one of the few actual facts you know of the papacy.
As for poverty and populations, your model assumes not overpopulation and poverty occur outside Catholic realms and that it would not occur in Latin America without the religion. That breaks down quickly when skipping over to Africa, India, Polynesia, and East Asia. Nice try. Unfortunately, another fail.
Like his hate of gay people is that what you mean. He is not the Pope Ratzinger is he will be soon gne and another stooge will be chosen. He nothing more than the PR Pope.
Your standard for hate is very low indeed. The US military hated women because they never allowed them to be equals by your logic, yet they were all married to women and certainly loved them. Discrimination is discrimination, but hate is hate. The two are not equal. The pope's dogma has not reversed the Jewish taboo of anti-homosexuality that Christianity has promulgated, but the pope has actually begun building a limited bridge to gays by how he had discussed it. The entire world credits his efforts in his own bridge building. The fact that the bridge hasn't extended to full acceptance of gays does not make him a hater of us, only a leader who hasn't accepted us fully. There is a difference.
