Friday, February 22, 2013

Obama To Challenge Pope

Sources close to the Oval Office are telling Shining City Gazette that President Obama is “quite concerned” about the Pope’s having recently relinquished his infallibility at a time when he was still in possession of his papal infallibility.

As one advisor specializing in the consolidation of supreme executive authority said, “Basically what Pope Benedict XVI, or Joe I guess you’d call him now, just told the world is that it was an infallible decision for him to give up his infallibility.

“Needless to say, the president’s not crazy about the message this sends at a time when he’s achieved for himself a sovereignty roughly equal to the Pope’s supreme apostolic authority, especially with respect to his own drone killings and the granting of special dispensations to an array of mortal sinners and his tireless covering up of all the horrible crimes committed by these sinners.

“It would have been much more to our liking had the former Pope made the more infallible decision to give up his infallibility only after already having given up his infallibility so as to leave a little room for plausibly arguing that it’s a fallible decision to give up one’s infallibility even if you’re a pope.

“President Obama, and President Bush as well for that matter, could have referred him to any number of legal minds that could have made that work.

“At the very least we would like to have seen Joe stay on as Pope at whatever percentage of full-time allowed him to retain his infallibility. Back when he was still infallible, how hard would it have been to work with the Vatican’s HR department in crafting a holy writ that said working even one percent time as Pope conferred unquestionable authority on a person?

“And this is to say nothing of the simple standby of infallibly invoking state secrets to avoid confirming or denying that his infallibility had infallibly been relinquished.”

Said Obama senior legal advisor Harold Koh, “What our work on providing the president cover for his killing of children and other innocents has shown us is that the presumption of personal infallibility gives a world leader a lot to work with legally, and politically too I might add.

“But what the hell good is the presumption of infallibility if you’re going to give it up just because you’ve presumed to presume you’ve acted fallibly?

“What we’ll soon be arguing before the world court is that given the petrine supremacy the Pope came into upon ascending to the holy cathedra, he is not legally in a position to make the clearly fallible decision to give up his infallibility.

“Of course, this means we’ll probably need to convince the Court that the Pope was acting infallibly when he chose to cover for all the child molesting that went on during and before his holy watch.

“But we’re considering this good practice in case the world ever tries retroactively to challenge the infallibility of the president’s drone killing decisions.

“Obviously the Pope’s people only raped children and the president’s are killing them, but we’re confident that the principles on which we’re building our case for the infallible legality of enhanced brotherly love will have applications in any future case we build for the legality of the enhanced tough love that goes into all the president’s efforts to make the world safer for the children who survive his efforts to make the world safer for the children of the world.”

No comments:

Post a Comment