the UK Papal visit

[Bagpuss]

it is insane! But God only knows (no pun intended) how much power the Vatican has worldwide.

 

[Uncleskinny]

Respect and tolerance?

Whoops.

P.

 

[Dave]

Respect and tolerance?

Whoops.

P.

Why do we have to guess what you are trying to say?

 

[Quiffaa]

Who would pay if another head of state came (GWBush cost us a fortune im germany)
When the Dalai Lama came and several political representatives wanted a photo opportunity I`m sure his branch of buddhists didn`t pay either.

(As an ex catholic vatican statements make my blood curl, but re the price I suppose its just the usual bad luck of taxpayers)

 

[Flax]

Why do I have to guess what you are trying to say?

There. I fixed it for you.

We all know what he meant.
And we all know you struggle with text comprehension. It's ok.

 

[Dave]

There. I fixed it for you.

We all know what he meant.
And we all know you struggle with text comprehension. It's ok.

Who's this "we" that "knows what he meant"? You did the same thing I did. I don't understand why he is afraid to express his intolerance in a complete sentence. I don't understand why other people have to answer for him.

Can you tell me what he meant? I read the article. The Pope said that Nazis were a godless society. Then he said that society should be resistant to fascism.

See, the central issue here is not AIDS in Africa.

The issue is "I'm a atheist, the Pope is coming! Make it stop!"

See, as Black Cloud's link points out, and as I tried to originally make clear, if you have a bad argument you're not going to be taken seriously. That's why I found fault with the Catholic Church's misuse of science. You remember science, it's what atheists are always harping on.

The fact is, you can't expect the Catholic Church to pass out condoms and perform free abortions on demand and you can't expect them to suck Richard Dawkins' asshole like you do. But you can stage a rational protest that actually makes sense, if you let go of your bigotry and intolerance and stop trying to make charges that sound good but simply are not true.

The Pope is being accused of the deaths of millions, but we're supposed to get up in arms about something a comment that's the sort of thing Morrissey says in between bites of toast any day of the week.

 

[Flax]

Who's this "we" that "knows what he meant"? You did the same thing I did. I don't understand why he is afraid to express his intolerance in a complete sentence. I don't understand why other people have to answer for him.

Can you tell me what he meant? I read the article. The Pope said that Nazis were a godless society. Then he said that society should be resistant to fascism.

See, the central issue here is not AIDS in Africa.

The issue is "I'm a atheist, the Pope is coming! Make it stop!"

See, as Black Cloud's link points out, and as I tried to originally make clear, if you have a bad argument you're not going to be taken seriously. That's why I found fault with the Catholic Church's misuse of science. You remember science, it's what atheists are always harping on.

The fact is, you can't expect the Catholic Church to pass out condoms and perform free abortions on demand and you can't expect them to suck Richard Dawkins' asshole like you do. But you can stage a rational protest that actually makes sense, if you let go of your bigotry and intolerance and stop trying to make charges that sound good but simply are not true.

The Pope is being accused of the deaths of millions, but we're supposed to get up in arms about something a comment that's the sort of thing Morrissey says in between bites of toast any day of the week.

That's ok. I'll help you. Comprehending text is not easy for some people.

Uncleskinny said "Respect and tolerance?", then he posted a link of an article mentioning how the Pope is doing just the opposite of respect and tolerance by attacking non-believers and comparing them to Nazis.

There is a word for that in English. You get a star if you guess what it is.

When you have difficulties comprehending text, you should trying reading it slowly, with a dictionary handy.

 

[mauve21]

I'd like to see the world rid of those dirty priests who have abused
children and been allowed to get away with it.....

 

[Dave]

That's ok. I'll help you. Comprehending text is not easy for some people.

Uncleskinny said "Respect and tolerance?", then he posted a link of an article mentioning how the Pope is doing just the opposite of respect and tolerance by attacking non-believers and comparing them to Nazis.

There is a word for that in English. You get a star if you guess what it is.

When you have difficulties comprehending text, you should trying reading it slowly, with a dictionary handy.

Is it the same word that applies to people that will pretend that a man is responsible for untold deaths of poor Africans when in fact they are intolerant of his religion?

As I stated before there are legitimate reasons to question the right of the Pope to come to the UK. These do not include the fact that while the Catholic Church is actually doing something in Africa, they are doing so according to their beliefs.

You'd like to pretend that the Pope said that atheists are Nazis. It's another good tabloid headline, but unfortunately the truth is a little more complicated.

Still, read the article linked to by Black Cloud about how atheism is becoming less about a scientific viewpoint and more about attacking organized religion, in particular Catholicism.

I don't live in the UK. The Pope is not a huge issue to me. My interest in this was the best way to argue for stopping the Pope from entering the UK, simply as a topic of discussion. That is why I considered the evidence and offered what I thought was a much better tactic. It's the child abuse. It's the fake science.

If you want to read someone who agrees with you, but can write in sentences and paragraphs, look at MILVA's posts. For that matter, I agreed with you, but not in the way you wanted. Why the child abuse cover-up is not a good reason, I do not know.

I felt I posted too much in this thread anyway, and didn't want to address everyone, but the reason the taxpayers are paying for the visit is not because the Pope is a religious leader but because he is a head of state, and that's how it works.

 

[Dave]

Well, he's spoken on the issue a few times, and it didn't sound as if he was allowing contraception (neither in general, nor in Africa in particular), and that wasn't a personal message to his wife, but to the "Catholics" - the group he's leading. In that sense, his responsibility is rather obvious.

And when the pope says that the Catholic church is against the use of condoms, it means that medical groups run by Catholics in Africa are in theory not allowed to hand out condoms. Or to promote condom use and raise awareness for contraceptive techniques. This doesn't dispense non-catholics from stepping in (and they do), but you can't underestimate the impact Catholic organisations have in Africa (schools, medical centers, evangelists...). A lot of their HIV/AIDS programmes talk about love, abstinence and faithfulness - no problem with that, but it's a bit inconclusive, isn't it?

Right, condoms are not 100% safe for contraception and STDs. Why? Because they can slip off or break, or people don't use them correctly. Not because condoms decide they (dis)like your face and want to see you having children, or an STD...

As far as the protests go.. you're right, it's a lot about negativity, and little about positivity. I know people who are upset by all this, yet the minute you ask them to donate money for MsF in Africa, they refuse... I'd be glad if every protester donates 10 pounds to a non-catholic aid organisation.

I think the thing we keep coming back to is responsibility. I don't see that the same way as you do, but I understand what you are saying. Was George Bush responsible for Abu Ghraib? the policies of his administration made it possible, but individual soldiers were put on trial for their actions.

You mention the Pope's wife. I did a google image search for fun and got this.


Anyway, you're right, he's not talking to his wife, he's talking to his followers. I'm thinking that they choose to follow him. I guess the amount of programming and its effects would be debatable.

Here's what is clear. If you want the people in Africa to have access to birth control, as you stated, you have to give to other organizations. You say that people seem kind of apathetic towards this and I suspect this is true. I've seen a lot of anti-religious rhetoric in this forum, for example, but I don't recall any talk about how to save Africa from AIDS. To be fair, NoGodsNoMasters86 did talk about Darfur to some extent when he wasn't calling for the annihilation of religion.

Love, abstinence, faithfulness; not a bad start I guess, but no they won't work for everyone. That's why, on the subject of saving Africa, which you obviously care about and have thought about, we can not look to the Catholic Church.

When they do so much there, they do it within the confines of their beliefs, and this is their right. It's not a reason to block a head of state from entering the UK.

It's a very messy complicated issue that doesn't boil down to an easy headline or bumpersticker, and that was my point. I think there may be valid reasons to consider barring the Pope from the UK, but the sad thing is that the right reasons are not being emphasized, and the actual attempt to stop him is largely the result of religious intolerance. The clearer this becomes the more closely the Pope will be able to portray his detractors, ironically, as Nazis.


Pope Benedict in his Hitler Youth uniform.


and waving to the crowd. I think he's waving, anyway...

But wait, he says that his service in the Hitler Youth was involuntary. So are we blaming him for it? I'll wait to see. It would be difficult to find him responsible for failing to resist the Nazis when he was a child, and yet find that Catholics are unable to make up their own minds.

 

[Marilou]

Well said Amy. The BBC saturation of his low-li-ness visit is almost as distressing as the sight of the Reverend (yeah,right) Ian Paisley singing Protestant war hymns on the BBC News. Can't we be rid of these people? The kind people have a wonderful dream......

What is this irrational anger? Firstly the BBC is not saturated - if you want saturation look at property programmes on 365 days a year, not some programming over the course of four days. Secondly, this visit is very important to the Catholic population, why do you begrudge them the opportunity to share in events that (in contrast to most things on telly) actually have proper significance in their lives. The BBC has a duty to broadcast things like this. If you don't like it don't watch it. The BBC isn't catering to you personally.

On a different note I am fed up of everyone complaining about how much this is costing the taxpayer, like they've never realised that taxes fund things we don't like. Your taxes go towards war in Iraq, trident, the Olympic games, enquiries into all sorts (e.g. I think the recently published Billy Wright enquiry was around £30 million), the Queen, countless stupid policies etc etc. Yet somehow it's the Pope's visit that is the worst expenditure ever? This is the nature of paying tax - things you don't like will get money. I think we must also remember that the Pope has come at the INVITATION OF THE QUEEN. So it's the fault of our leaders that this cost is being incurred, yet everyone seems to ignore this and just say 'the Pope is stealing money!' or something.

I understand why people have problems at the Pope's visit, yet most focus on the most feeble objections that ultimately undermine any moral argument they might have.

 

[JoanOfArc]

I am sorry, I don't understand how we can ban someone like Geert Wilders from entering the country due to the anti-hatred laws (which I fully agree with), and because he's 'anti-Islam', yet allow the Pope with open arms? You might say that you cannot compare the two, but I certainly think that you can as the Pope preaches intolerance on other levels.

???sorry,correct me if im wrong but England is a Protestant country only because of king's Henry choice of lover.If he had chosen another lover England would still be a Catholic country.And as for tolerance-what about killings and persecutions of the Catholics in England?Has anyone apologised to the Pope for that?Where are the official apologies?Pope has apologised for the abuse cases.Where are the apologies for killing and persecuting Catholics in England?

 

[JoanOfArc]

the Pope preaches intolerance on other levels.

Really?So quote me the encyclical.

 

[JoanOfArc]

Pope Benedict in his Hitler Youth uniform.

Oh no not again this cheap trick with Hitler Youth.Yes of course being a child he could forsee the future and the world war and mass killings,which even world leaders couldnt have predicted and thought that Hitler is just harmless guy even after the annexation of Austria and part of Czech.Yeah right

 

[Kewpie]

???sorry,correct me if im wrong but England is a Protestant country only because of king's Henry choice of lover.If he had chosen another lover England would still be a Catholic country.And as for tolerance-what about killings and persecutions of the Catholics in England?Has anyone apologised to the Pope for that?Where are the official apologies?Pope has apologised for the abuse cases.Where are the apologies for killing and persecuting Catholics in England?

Wrong.

Church of England is a part of Catholic church.

Henry VIII wanted to divoce his first wife Catherine of Aragon in order to re-marry to Anne Boleyn, broke up with Vatican and created Church of England.

 

[Jackie London]

Wrong.

Church of England is a part of Catholic church.

Henry VIII wanted to divoce his first wife Catherine of Aragon in order to re-marry to Anne Boleyn, broke up with Vatican and created Church of England.

How do you mean that it's a part of the catholic church?

 

[Kewpie]

How do you mean that it's a part of the catholic church?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_england

 

[JoanOfArc]

Wrong.

Church of England is a part of Catholic church.

Henry VIII wanted to divoce his first wife Catherine of Aragon in order to re-marry to Anne Boleyn, broke up with Vatican and created Church of England.

my question was rethorical.Im afraid you didnt understand my post.King Henry wanted to marry his lover,Act of Supremacy etc.etc.

 

[Jackie London]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_england

I don't really get what you mean. The liturgy and faith naturally have a lot in common with the catholic liturgy and faith but the church of England is, as an organisation today, not a part of the catholic church at all. Allready during the time of Henry VIII the church split with the catolic church.

The Church of England is the officially established Christian church[2] in England, the Mother Church of the worldwide Anglican Communion and the oldest among the communion's thirty-eight independent national and regional churches. (from wikipedia)

 

[Marilou]

Wrong.

Church of England is a part of Catholic church.

Henry VIII wanted to divoce his first wife Catherine of Aragon in order to re-marry to Anne Boleyn, broke up with Vatican and created Church of England.

The Church of England is not part of the Catholic church. As you said, Henry VIII "broke up with the Vatican". They are entirely different institutions with significant theological and liturgical differences. Also whilst it is true that Henry VIII's marital capers were the catalyst for religious reform in the UK it is wrong to reduce it to merely the actions of one man: it was the result of a European wide movement. People often try to undermine the CofE by saying it was only created because Henry wanted a wife but that's not true.