Pope visit controversy

[JennaFletcher]

So what do people all think about the Pope's visit to the UK in September?

His visit alone could cost up to £20 million in tax payers money!

He is also parading around the city of Edinburgh doing that thing that the Pope does (parading around like a enlightened being) with Keith O'Brien and other godly friends.

I'll lash out my opinions throughout this thread but I am interested to see what fellow Hibs.netters think about this.

Any devout Catholics out there? Any free-thinking Atheists? :greengrin

[Pretty Boy]

So what do people all think about the Pope's visit to the UK in September?

His visit alone could cost up to £20 million in tax payers money!

He is also parading around the city of Edinburgh doing that thing that the Pope does (parading around like a enlightened being) with Keith O'Brien and other godly friends.

I'll lash out my opinions throughout this thread but I am interested to see what fellow Hibs.netters think about this.

Any devout Catholics out there? Any free-thinking Atheists? :greengrin

I was raised a Catholic but haven't been near a church in about 5 years.

Personally see the whole visit as a bit of a waste of money. On top of that given the Catholic churches views on issues such as homosexuality, abortion, contraception and the mishandling of the child abuse scandals i am a bit uncomfortable about the whole celebration quite frankly.

The only point i take issue with is i read someone describe the visit as an 'inflammatory' gesture towards Protestants. Any more inflammatory than the annual Orange marches which stroll through the centre of Edinburgh and Glasgow?

The visits going ahead, i have little time for the Catholic Church as a whole or the Pope as a person and i'll be ignoring the whole thing.

[Woody1985]

I've no interest in him when he's here, I just hope it doesn't inconvenience me whenever he is here. The contentious issue for most is the tax payer funded visit.

It has been said that we always pay for Heads of State upon their visit and therefore the pope's visit is no difference. I would agree with this sentiment normally. However, other heads of state don't go parading around the streets and waving to their followers. So is he here in a personal capacity i.e. a religious leader or as a head of state to meet with our heads to discuss world politics etc.

I suspect that the vatican state was set up purely for religious reasons (I have read it before but can't recall why it was set up. Probably because I have little interest) and therefore the Head of State arguement becomes a little hollow.

When is he due to arrive? Will he still be alive?!

[JennaFletcher]

I was raised a Catholic but haven't been near a church in about 5 years.

Personally see the whole visit as a bit of a waste of money. On top of that given the Catholic churches views on issues such as homosexuality, abortion, contraception and the mishandling of the child abuse scandals i am a bit uncomfortable about the whole celebration quite frankly.

The only point i take issue with is i read someone describe the visit as an 'inflammatory' gesture towards Protestants. Any more inflammatory than the annual Orange marches which stroll through the centre of Edinburgh and Glasgow?

The visits going ahead, i have little time for the Catholic Church as a whole or the Pope as a person and i'll be ignoring the whole thing.

Agree wholeheartedly. Except I probably won't be ignoring him, I'll join a protest against the Pope & the catholic church. I know that people say rising to the bait just gives the Pope more attention and the feeling he is actually important - but the things he says I find to be really offensive and I can't stomach the thought of that Bigot parading around Edinburgh on an all expenses trip as paid for by the public.

Also Alex Salmond and Jim Murphy have both been in the press quoting how good an occasion will be... how is it that when someone in a position of power doesn't act upon child abuse allegations can get away with it but if it was a criminal who covered up for child abuse then they'd be hounded by the public/media/politicians...

[JennaFletcher]

I've no interest in him when he's here, I just hope it doesn't inconvenience me whenever he is here. The contentious issue for most is the tax payer funded visit.

It has been said that we always pay for Heads of State upon their visit and therefore the pope's visit is no difference. I would agree with this sentiment normally. However, other heads of state don't go parading around the streets and waving to their followers. So is he here in a personal capacity i.e. a religious leader or as a head of state to meet with our heads to discuss world politics etc.

I suspect that the vatican state was set up purely for religious reasons (I have read it before but can't recall why it was set up. Probably because I have little interest) and therefore the Head of State arguement becomes a little hollow.

When is he due to arrive? Will he still be alive?!

The Pope doesn't discuss world politics but preaches hate and intolerance. This is why he shouldn't be welcomed.

Due to arrive in September, think the date for Edinburgh is the 16th or 17th.

[Twa Cairpets]

So what do people all think about the Pope's visit to the UK in September?

His visit alone could cost up to £20 million in tax payers money!

He is also parading around the city of Edinburgh doing that thing that the Pope does (parading around like a enlightened being) with Keith O'Brien and other godly friends.

I'll lash out my opinions throughout this thread but I am interested to see what fellow Hibs.netters think about this.

Any devout Catholics out there? Any free-thinking Atheists? :greengrin

Arguing to stop him coming on the grounds of cost or moral turpitude is neither fair nor just. The cost argument is petty - lots of things that lots of people disagree with costs lots of money, and to single out this particular variety of religion would be difficult to justify. I cant see the same complaint if it was the Dahli Lama (in my mind an equally deluded soul with another - apparently different - hotline to God). Equally, while the child abuse scandal of the Catholic church and the institutional cover-up is beyond appalling, to ban the visit of the church leader would be to (in some peoples eyes) immediately group all priests as actual or potential paedophiles whcih would be equally wrong.

While I have no time for religion on a personal level, and will argue against it till the cows come home, it does play a significant part in the lives of many.

What I hope the visit does do is create some genuine discussion and debate about the issues that exist within the church. I find their stances on areas such contraception, homosexuality and abortion disgraceful, and the squirming that they have undergone to somwhow justfiy the child abuse scandal is almost as disgusting as the abuse itself.

The visit of the Pope will bring these issues, I hope, to the fore. While there will of course be polarised, entrenched positions on all sides, if there can be some reasoned debate that people will listen to and consider, then there is an opportunity for people to change their views and maybe challenge the blind acceptance of dogma.

[Woody1985]

The Pope doesn't discuss world politics but preaches hate and intolerance. This is why he shouldn't be welcomed.

Due to arrive in September, think the date for Edinburgh is the 16th or 17th.

I know but my point isn't really what he does or doesn't do. If he's being invited as a head of state he should be doing head of statey things (tongue in cheek!) given that's the reason given for our expense and not parading around in some giant lego looking incubated mobile. It all looks a bit creepy!

[JennaFletcher]

Arguing to stop him coming on the grounds of cost or moral turpitude is neither fair nor just. The cost argument is petty - lots of things that lots of people disagree with costs lots of money, and to single out this particular variety of religion would be difficult to justify. I cant see the same complaint if it was the Dahli Lama (in my mind an equally deluded soul with another - apparently different - hotline to God). Equally, while the child abuse scandal of the Catholic church and the institutional cover-up is beyond appalling, to ban the visit of the church leader would be to (in some peoples eyes) immediately group all priests as actual or potential paedophiles whcih would be equally wrong.

While I have no time for religion on a personal level, and will argue against it till the cows come home, it does play a significant part in the lives of many.

What I hope the visit does do is create some genuine discussion and debate about the issues that exist within the church. I find their stances on areas such contraception, homosexuality and abortion disgraceful, and the squirming that they have undergone to somwhow justfiy the child abuse scandal is almost as disgusting as the abuse itself.

The visit of the Pope will bring these issues, I hope, to the fore. While there will of course be polarised, entrenched positions on all sides, if there can be some reasoned debate that people will listen to and consider, then there is an opportunity for people to change their views and maybe challenge the blind acceptance of dogma.

I think it's perfectly reasonable to argue that the cost of the Pope visit is ridiculous, bearing in mind everything that he stands for, everything he preaches and the sordid things that he chooses to cover up.

You have stated many reasons why the Pope is disgraceful, so why is it unfair to dispute his visit on cost & moral grounds? It is hardly petty to bring up the cost thing.

[JennaFletcher]

I know but my point isn't really what he does or doesn't do. If he's being invited as a head of state he should be doing head of statey things (tongue in cheek!) given that's the reason given for our expense and not parading around in some giant lego looking incubated mobile. It all looks a bit creepy!

Yup well the fact is that the Pope is more than creepy. Would you like to be stuck in a room with the Pope?!

[Woody1985]

Yup well the fact is that the Pope is more than creepy. Would you like to be stuck in a room with the Pope?!

I wouldn't want to be stuck in a room with any pish stained auld man. :tee hee:

Was he not a nazi at one point? :devil:

[Andy74]

The Pope doesn't discuss world politics but preaches hate and intolerance. This is why he shouldn't be welcomed.

Due to arrive in September, think the date for Edinburgh is the 16th or 17th.

Hate and intolerance? Go on then, expand. You are having a good go at looking fairly intolerant about something here yourself.

The problem I have with criticsim of the Catholic Church, and I'm not one who beleives in it, is that people tend to pick bits out of it in isolation that they don't agree with and use it as a negative message.

Take contraception. The Catholic Church actually preaches that sex is something fro within mariage only and as part of developing a family, not as a recreation. Naturally them, contraception and abortion are things they will take issue with.

Why should the church be blamed when its followers choose to ignore the no sex bit but do follow the no contraception bit?

I think the opposition to this show the prejudices that still exist in the Uk and have little to dow with whay has become the politicisation of certain parts of its teachings. these are being used as an excuse to have a go at something people are intolerant of.

That's about it.

[Pretty Boy]

I wouldn't want to be stuck in a room with any pish stained auld man. :tee hee:

Was he not a nazi at one point? :devil:

Member of the Hitler Youth. As was every German at the time so not really a fair stick to beat him with(even though i know you were taking the piss). Apparently he wasn't an enthusiastic member.

[CropleyWasGod]

Member of the Hitler Youth. As was every German at the time so not really a fair stick to beat him with(even though i know you were taking the piss). Apparently he wasn't an enthusiastic member.

He was only following (Holy) orders....:wink:

[Pretty Boy]

Hate and intolerance? Go on then, expand. You are having a good go at looking fairly intolerant about something here yourself.

The problem I have with criticsim of the Catholic Church, and I'm not one who beleives in it, is that people tend to pick bits out of it in isolation that they don't agree with and use it as a negative message.

Take contraception. The Catholic Church actually preaches that sex is something fro within mariage only and as part of developing a family, not as a recreation. Naturally them, contraception and abortion are things they will take issue with.

Why should the church be blamed when its followers choose to ignore the no sex bit but do follow the no contraception bit?

I think the opposition to this show the prejudices that still exist in the Uk and have little to dow with whay has become the politicisation of certain parts of its teachings. these are being used as an excuse to have a go at something people are intolerant of.

That's about it.

I think the problem a lot of people have with the contraception issue is related to the AIDS epidemic in Africa. People are going to have sex outside wedlock thses days, it happens. The Catholic Church opposes this and contraception, fair enough. If people wish to be Catholics then perhaps they should listen to the full message and abstain from sex but unfortunately they don't, the Church in turn has actively opposed any kind of safe sex education unless the message is abstension pure and simple. I'm not saying that they should endorse condoms but perhaps turning a blind eye until the situation is stabilised wouldn't be a bad thing? I rememeber a huge ammount of controversy surrounding a Bishop in Africa who was preaching that it was better to die than to live as a sinner by using condoms. I'll try to find the link but i think with comments like that it's easy to see why there is a certain distaste from some regarding the Churches teachings.

[--------]

Member of the Hitler Youth. As was every German at the time so not really a fair stick to beat him with(even though i know you were taking the piss). Apparently he wasn't an enthusiastic member.




That's what they ALL said - after the war....

Apparently Eichmann thought he was actually running holiday camps, and Goering thought the Luftwaffe was an early version of EasyJet.

:greengrin

[JennaFletcher]

Hate and intolerance? Go on then, expand. You are having a good go at looking fairly intolerant about something here yourself.

The problem I have with criticsim of the Catholic Church, and I'm not one who beleives in it, is that people tend to pick bits out of it in isolation that they don't agree with and use it as a negative message.

Take contraception. The Catholic Church actually preaches that sex is something fro within mariage only and as part of developing a family, not as a recreation. Naturally them, contraception and abortion are things they will take issue with.

Why should the church be blamed when its followers choose to ignore the no sex bit but do follow the no contraception bit?

I think the opposition to this show the prejudices that still exist in the Uk and have little to dow with whay has become the politicisation of certain parts of its teachings. these are being used as an excuse to have a go at something people are intolerant of.

That's about it.

Expanding on the hate/intolerance bit - have you not been reading any of the crap that the Pope has been coming out with lately? What exactly is it that I am being intolerant of?

The entire stuff the Pope comes out with is a negative message in my eyes and the eyes of many others.

There's a song about the Pope by a comedian called Tim Minchin which is excellent. These are some of the lyrics (minus the swearing content) which I think will help you understand my position on this since you're clearly not getting it so far:

You see I don't give a toss about
What any other person
Believes about Jesus
And his mother

I've no problem with the spiritual beliefs
Of all these people
While those beliefs don't impact
On the happiness of others

But if you build your Church on claims
Of moral authority
And with threats of Hell impose it
On others in society

Then you
Can expect some wrath

(doesn't sound as good as the bits where swearing is meant or where I've had to change words!)

[Twa Cairpets]

I think it's perfectly reasonable to argue that the cost of the Pope visit is ridiculous, bearing in mind everything that he stands for, everything he preaches and the sordid things that he chooses to cover up.

You have stated many reasons why the Pope is disgraceful, so why is it unfair to dispute his visit on cost & moral grounds? It is hardly petty to bring up the cost thing.

Because my belief on moral grounds is that there is nothing wrong with homosexuality, that contolled legal abortion is a right a woman should have and that denying contaception (either within or outwith marriage) is reprehensible and demeaning, it doesnt mean that other people dont have equally strong opinions on the other side of the fence. The fact they claim scriptural authority for it is a different argument, but is it is, ultimately, a matter of personal morality, not an absolute right or wrong.

If you were to deny entry to every leader - political, spiritual or business on the grounds of the strength of opposition or cost then there would be precious few visits of anyone to anywhere.

If you disagree with the Pope's stance - and I do, at a very fundamental level - peceful protest and reasoned debate is a much better way of getting your point across rather than slamming the door. To do that would be to set a very, very dangerous precedent.

The caveat to this is active spreading of hate - that oxygen should be denied. I disagree with you that that is what the catholic church or the Pope seek to do.

[JennaFletcher]

Because my belief on moral grounds is that there is nothing wrong with homosexuality, that contolled legal abortion is a right a woman should have and that denying contaception (either within or outwith marriage) is reprehensible and demeaning, it doesnt mean that other people dont have equally strong opinions on the other side of the fence. The fact they claim scriptural authority for it is a different argument, but is it is, ultimately, a matter of personal morality, not an absolute right or wrong.

If you were to deny entry to every leader - political, spiritual or business on the grounds of the strength of opposition or cost then there would be precious few visits of anyone to anywhere.

If you disagree with the Pope's stance - and I do, at a very fundamental level - peceful protest and reasoned debate is a much better way of getting your point across rather than slamming the door. To do that would be to set a very, very dangerous precedent.

The caveat to this is active spreading of hate - that oxygen should be denied. I disagree with you that that is what the catholic church or the Pope seek to do.

Whilst people have beliefs on homosexuality and abortions, the problem is not that people have strong opinions either way but when they air these opinions when they are a person in power. Comparing homosexuality to be as devastating as destruction in the rain forrest is just ridiculous etc etc What about teenage Catholics who don't think they can follow their faith and be gay too? Has anyone notified the Pope of the alarming rate of teenage suicides relating to gays?

I think it's far more dangerous to voice such distressing comments than to slam the door on them.

I've never said it would be anything but a peaceful protest and reasonable debate!

[PeeJay]

Member of the Hitler Youth. As was every German at the time so not really a fair stick to beat him with(even though i know you were taking the piss). Apparently he wasn't an enthusiastic member.

I think on closer reflection you may find this to be not true :cool2:

[JennaFletcher]

http://wegoats.com/files/pope_looks_like_palpatine_02.jpg.jpeg

Just a little picture to spice things up a bit. :greengrin

[Pretty Boy]

I think on closer reflection you may find this to be not true :cool2:

Ok i'll rephrase after December 1936 there was a legal obligation for all Aryan children to become members of the Hitler Youth.

The Jugenddienstpflicht laws of 1939 made membership nigh on impossible even for opponents of the regime.

[Twa Cairpets]

Whilst people have beliefs on homosexuality and abortions, the problem is not that people have strong opinions either way but when they air these opinions when they are a person in power. Comparing homosexuality to be as devastating as destruction in the rain forrest is just ridiculous etc etc What about teenage Catholics who don't think they can follow their faith and be gay too? Has anyone notified the Pope of the alarming rate of teenage suicides relating to gays?

I think it's far more dangerous to voice such distressing comments than to slam the door on them.

I've never said it would be anything but a peaceful protest and reasonable debate!

If we were talking about a small cult, then fine. The reality of the situation surely is that Catholicism is the single largest faction of the biggest religion on Earth, and "slamming the door" in the UK would do nothing but make us look isolationist and bigoted, not principled.

It is impossible to overturn 2000 years of conditioned belief in one fell swoop. The best argument against faith and the unpalatable doctrines that faith presents is rationalism and humanism, and in the long term this will, I hope, reduce the importance of religion.

Every time the Pope (or any other religious leader) preaches what you and I would consider to be stupid, illogical and wrong, there is an opportunity to expose that preaching for what it is. What better way to beat someone than to have them daily, publicly and repeatedly hoist by their own petard in the full glare of the press and public?

[--------]

http://wegoats.com/files/pope_looks_like_palpatine_02.jpg.jpeg

Just a little picture to spice things up a bit. :greengrin



OK - I can see that one of these photos is the revoltingly vile Evil Emperor of the Death Star.




But who's the guy in the top pic?

[PeeJay]

Ok i'll rephrase after December 1936 there was a legal obligation for all Aryan children to become members of the Hitler Youth.

The Jugenddienstpflicht laws of 1939 made membership nigh on impossible even for opponents of the regime.

Theoretically perhaps -
There are enough studies etc., proving that refusal to take part was rife throughout the Reich, particularly away from the cities and amongst females, lower classes, and naturally certain religions. I took exception to ALL Germans.

The rat that is Ratzinger probably fitted in very well though!

[twiceinathens]

Given that any religion is based on faith in the non provable existence of a deity I hold no torch for any religious group. However if any such organisation operates within the parameters of the law then they are obviously entitled to live by their own morality. If the pope visits his flock here then this surely not unreasonable.
However there is no reason why any of the cost of a visit by the leader of this particular religious group should be made from the public purse.

[--------]

Theoretically perhaps -
There are enough studies etc., proving that refusal to take part was rife throughout the Reich, particularly away from the cities and amongst females, lower classes, and naturally certain religions. I took exception to ALL Germans.

The rat that is Ratzinger probably fitted in very well though!



:agree: There's plenty of evidence that refusal buy into the whole "Party" thing was common in Germany. There's also plenty of evidence for outright refusal to participate in war crimes - even when directly ordered to do so - was not only possible but quite common.

If Ratty was serving in an armoured regiment on the Eastern Front, he would certainly know what was going on in terms of the killing of prisoners, of certain categories of civilians, and of Jews and other racial and ethnic minorities. I don't suggest he could have stopped what was happening - he couldn't have. But he knew, and it's more than just a possibility that his regiment, his friends, maybe he himself, took part.

The words of Traudl Junge, Hitler's secretary, speaking at the beginning and end of the movie "Downfall":

"I've got the feeling that I should be angry with this child, this young and oblivious girl. Or that I'm not allowed to forgive her for not seeing the nature of that monster. That she didn't realise what she was doing. And mostly because I've gone so obliviously. Because I wasn't a fanatic Nazi. I could have said in Berlin, "No, I'm not doing that. I don't want to go the Führer's headquarters." But I didn't do that. I was too curious. I didn't realise that fate would lead me somewhere I didn't want to be. But still, I find it hard to forgive myself...."

".... All these horrors I've heard of during the Nurnberg process, these six million Jews, other thinking people or people of another race, who perished. That shocked me deeply. But I hadn't made the connection with my past. I assured myself with the thought of not being personally guilty. And that I didn't know anything about the enormous scale of it. But one day I walked by a memorial plate of Sophie Scholl in the Franz-Joseph-Strasse. I saw that she was about my age and she was executed in the same year I came to Hitler. And at that moment I actually realised that a young age isn't an excuse. And that it might have been possible to get to know things...."

Sophie Scholl and her brothers and friends in the White Rose DID say no. They wanted the world to know that not all Germans agreed with Hitler and the Nazis.

[Pretty Boy]

Theoretically perhaps -
There are enough studies etc., proving that refusal to take part was rife throughout the Reich, particularly away from the cities and amongst females, lower classes, and naturally certain religions. I took exception to ALL Germans.

The rat that is Ratzinger probably fitted in very well though!

Reading back my answer was a bit silly. I was only trying to make a quick point that for many Hitler Youth membership was not a choice and did not represent strong support for the Nazi regime from the individual. No offence meant.

I read a report last year that made a case for up to 20-25% of children avoiding membership, which considering they were againt a totalittarian regime is mighty impressive. Obviously because of the whole murky issue of underage conscription during the war it's hard to obtain a true figure.

[JennaFletcher]

If we were talking about a small cult, then fine. The reality of the situation surely is that Catholicism is the single largest faction of the biggest religion on Earth, and "slamming the door" in the UK would do nothing but make us look isolationist and bigoted, not principled.

It is impossible to overturn 2000 years of conditioned belief in one fell swoop. The best argument against faith and the unpalatable doctrines that faith presents is rationalism and humanism, and in the long term this will, I hope, reduce the importance of religion.

Every time the Pope (or any other religious leader) preaches what you and I would consider to be stupid, illogical and wrong, there is an opportunity to expose that preaching for what it is. What better way to beat someone than to have them daily, publicly and repeatedly hoist by their own petard in the full glare of the press and public?

Does this trip have to be funded by the taxpayers though? Why doesn't the catholic church pay for it?
I agree with the rest of what you say though!

[PeeJay]

:agree: There's plenty of evidence that refusal buy into the whole "Party" thing was common in Germany. There's also plenty of evidence for outright refusal to participate in war crimes - even when directly ordered to do so - was not only possible but quite common.

If Ratty was serving in an armoured regiment on the Eastern Front, he would certainly know what was going on in terms of the killing of prisoners, of certain categories of civilians, and of Jews and other racial and ethnic minorities. I don't suggest he could have stopped what was happening - he couldn't have. But he knew, and it's more than just a possibility that his regiment, his friends, maybe he himself, took part.

The words of Traudl Junge, Hitler's secretary, speaking at the beginning and end of the movie "Downfall":

"I've got the feeling that I should be angry with this child, this young and oblivious girl. Or that I'm not allowed to forgive her for not seeing the nature of that monster. That she didn't realise what she was doing. And mostly because I've gone so obliviously. Because I wasn't a fanatic Nazi. I could have said in Berlin, "No, I'm not doing that. I don't want to go the Führer's headquarters." But I didn't do that. I was too curious. I didn't realise that fate would lead me somewhere I didn't want to be. But still, I find it hard to forgive myself...."

".... All these horrors I've heard of during the Nurnberg process, these six million Jews, other thinking people or people of another race, who perished. That shocked me deeply. But I hadn't made the connection with my past. I assured myself with the thought of not being personally guilty. And that I didn't know anything about the enormous scale of it. But one day I walked by a memorial plate of Sophie Scholl in the Franz-Joseph-Strasse. I saw that she was about my age and she was executed in the same year I came to Hitler. And at that moment I actually realised that a young age isn't an excuse. And that it might have been possible to get to know things...."

Sophie Scholl and her brothers and friends in the White Rose DID say no. They wanted the world to know that not all Germans agreed with Hitler and the Nazis.

Good post Doddie!

[PeeJay]

Reading back my answer was a bit silly. I was only trying to make a quick point that for many Hitler Youth membership was not a choice and did not represent strong support for the Nazi regime from the individual. No offence meant.

I read a report last year that made a case for up to 20-25% of children avoiding membership, which considering they were againt a totalittarian regime is mighty impressive. Obviously because of the whole murky issue of underage conscription during the war it's hard to obtain a true figure.

Fair point - no offence taken!

[--------]

Good post Doddie!

Ta. The whole controversy about Christians (of whatever denomination) and others collaborating with the Nazis during WW2 gets people's backs up, and I suppose it's really only a side-issue here - I mean, as long as he doesn't actually decide to drive his Panzer down Princes' Street.... :rolleyes: Sorry - I know I shouldn't be flippant about this, and I apologise if I've offended anyone.

Seriously, I don't think that this visit is a good idea, and I see no justification whatsoever for any public money being spent on it. The whole bill should be sent to the Catholic Church, to whoever's actually organising the thing. My congregation isn't publicly-funded - we get only the same tax allowances that any other registered charity receives, not a penny more.

As far as the Caldera itself goes, I can see this damaging relationships between our folks and the Catholic congregation - the hotheads and bampots on both sides of the Great Divide will start yelling at one another, and the sensible folks (on both sides) will be drowned out. It's happened that way before, and it'll be the same this time.

[sambajustice]

Agree wholeheartedly. Except I probably won't be ignoring him, I'll join a protest against the Pope & the catholic church. I know that people say rising to the bait just gives the Pope more attention and the feeling he is actually important - but the things he says I find to be really offensive and I can't stomach the thought of that Bigot parading around Edinburgh on an all expenses trip as paid for by the public.

Also Alex Salmond and Jim Murphy have both been in the press quoting how good an occasion will be... how is it that when someone in a position of power doesn't act upon child abuse allegations can get away with it but if it was a criminal who covered up for child abuse then they'd be hounded by the public/media/politicians...

You've obviously been itching to have a pop at this whole thing for ages!!!

You're in the wrong place, why dont you go to Google, type in "Follow, Follow" and there you will find a whole host of like minded people!

Your rants are a disgrace. I'm only at your 2nd post! God knows what i'm going to find underneath!

[--------]

You've obviously been itching to have a pop at this whole thing for ages!!!

You're in the wrong place, why dont you go to Google, type in "Follow, Follow" and there you will find a whole host of like minded people!

Your rants are a disgrace. I'm only at your 2nd post! God knows what i'm going to find underneath!


Seems to me that jenna's objecting to this visit on the grounds of what the Pope has said on a number of serious moral issues. On some of them, I would agree with her.

If he has a right to pronounce on certain issues, then others have a right to demonstrate against his position on those issues - provided they do so within the legal boundaries.

Can't see how you can equate that with the FTP1690 attitude of the cream of FF.

[Woody1985]

You've obviously been itching to have a pop at this whole thing for ages!!!

You're in the wrong place, why dont you go to Google, type in "Follow, Follow" and there you will find a whole host of like minded people!

Your rants are a disgrace. I'm only at your 2nd post! God knows what i'm going to find underneath!

How is it obvious that she's been waiting for ages to have a go at this? Why wouldn't she have just posted it previously? :confused:

And why is it the wrong place? I thought the original post on other people's thoughts on the visit were reasonable. I suspect that Jenna has some strong points and feelings on why she has no interest in the pope going by previous discussions we've had. Are Hibs fans not allowed to oppose the pope? Perhaps you belong on some Celtic forum or another ( I don't know which is the follow, follow eqivalent).

I think that Jenna could go into more detail on her objections and articulate her points and feelings a lot better on this thread, she does on others.

[Twa Cairpets]

Does this trip have to be funded by the taxpayers though? Why doesn't the catholic church pay for it?
I agree with the rest of what you say though!

I dont like the idea of a single penny of mine being diverted to anything involving religion, but I think there has to be a bit of appreciation of "realpolitik" here. He is a de facto world leader. Ignore the "Head-of-State" politically expedient get out clause, he is the spiritual leader of around 1.1 billion people. Like it or not (and I don't), the bottom line is that he is, sadly, of global importance, and therefore needs (again, sadly) to be treated accordingly.

[bighairyfaeleith]

I don't believe in religion myself as I think it just causes problems, I also have a real problem believing that some god made me and pulls all the strings. But then I never did like being told what to do:greengrin

In regards to the pope, as long as he doesn't drive down eatser rd at 2.45 and cause a delay to the cabbage playing I couldnae gie a flying one what he does.

TBH I just feel a bit sorry for the people that blindly follow him, I won't get remotely upset by his visit however!

[JennaFletcher]

You've obviously been itching to have a pop at this whole thing for ages!!!

You're in the wrong place, why dont you go to Google, type in "Follow, Follow" and there you will find a whole host of like minded people!

Your rants are a disgrace. I'm only at your 2nd post! God knows what i'm going to find underneath!

Samba, what's wrong with fancying some idle chit chat on a Hibs forum on a dull Monday afternoon? This is "The Holy Ground" after all.

My rants are stemmed from a complete disagreement which I have with this Pope (not the other one, he was quiet!) and the morality which the Catholic church tries to preach. Personally, I think it's all ridiculous.

The main things I disagree with what the Pope states about homosexuality, contraception, abortion... I don't like any of it, which is why I dispute this visit which is funded directly through people like me and you. £20 million is a lot of money for a bigot in a hat to come have a wee jaunt around the UK and utter some more nonsense.

What have you contributed to this discussion? If my rants are such a disgrace, why don't you try and counter them instead of taking a disliking to me because I say what I think? :agree:

Also - Why would I go on a Rangers forum simply because I disagree with the Pope's sentiments? I'm not protestant or catholic and firmly believe any religious element should be eliminated from football altogether.

[JennaFletcher]

How is it obvious that she's been waiting for ages to have a go at this? Why wouldn't she have just posted it previously? :confused:

And why is it the wrong place? I thought the original post on other people's thoughts on the visit were reasonable. I suspect that Jenna has some strong points and feelings on why she has no interest in the pope going by previous discussions we've had. Are Hibs fans not allowed to oppose the pope? Perhaps you belong on some Celtic forum or another ( I don't know which is the follow, follow eqivalent).

I think that Jenna could go into more detail on her objections and articulate her points and feelings a lot better on this thread, she does on others.

Like I said on the other post, this was just for some idle chit chat. I could comprise a detailed, analytical piece on "The Pope & Morality" but I was certain that many people have been updated on the news from the Vatican themselves.

I'm a 20 year old female atheist Hibs fan who believes in equal rights, gay rights &
not the Pope. Shoot me :greengrin

[CropleyWasGod]

Like I said on the other post, this was just for some idle chit chat. I could comprise a detailed, analytical piece on "The Pope & Morality" but I was certain that many people have been updated on the news from the Vatican themselves.

I'm a 20 year old female atheist Hibs fan who believes in equal rights, gay rights &
not the Pope. Shoot me :greengrin

I am not sure which one shows the most idealism......

Actually, I do :rolleyes:

[JennaFletcher]

I don't believe in religion myself as I think it just causes problems, I also have a real problem believing that some god made me and pulls all the strings. But then I never did like being told what to do:greengrin

In regards to the pope, as long as he doesn't drive down eatser rd at 2.45 and cause a delay to the cabbage playing I couldnae gie a flying one what he does.

TBH I just feel a bit sorry for the people that blindly follow him, I won't get remotely upset by his visit however!

The Pope's shield would not protect him from hundreds of Hibs fans eager to get to the match :greengrin

[JennaFletcher]

I am not sure which one shows the most idealism......

Actually, I do :rolleyes:

Well someone's gotta do it right!

[speedy_gonzales]

I'm a 20 year old female atheist Hibs fan who believes in equal rights, gay rights &
not the Pope. Shoot me :greengrin
Careful, this to me suggests you think equal rights & gay rights are mutually exclusive?!?
Right, where did I leave that big spoon:greengrin

[Beefster]

I think it's perfectly reasonable to argue that the cost of the Pope visit is ridiculous, bearing in mind everything that he stands for, everything he preaches and the sordid things that he chooses to cover up.

You have stated many reasons why the Pope is disgraceful, so why is it unfair to dispute his visit on cost & moral grounds? It is hardly petty to bring up the cost thing.

Everything he stands for? Do you have any idea of the good that the Catholic Church does?

As a Catholic, I disagree with the Pope on a shedload of things and think that the Church seriously needs to modernise its views. However, you sound as much of a bigot as anyone in the Catholic Church that I've heard.

[Pretty Boy]

£20 a pop to see the old boy in Bellahouston Park apparently.

[Killiehibbie]

I think the whole religion industry is just another con trick to make money or wage war but lots of people believe in it all good luck to them. £20,000,000 is peanuts compared to the amount of money that is wasted on other things, a small price to pay to keep the pope safe and the believers happy. It'll be very easy to avoid being too upset by his visit just switch off if you don't like what he says.

[hibsdaft]

Arguing to stop him coming on the grounds of cost or moral turpitude is neither fair nor just. The cost argument is petty - lots of things that lots of people disagree with costs lots of money, and to single out this particular variety of religion would be difficult to justify. I cant see the same complaint if it was the Dahli Lama (in my mind an equally deluded soul with another - apparently different - hotline to God). Equally, while the child abuse scandal of the Catholic church and the institutional cover-up is beyond appalling, to ban the visit of the church leader would be to (in some peoples eyes) immediately group all priests as actual or potential paedophiles whcih would be equally wrong.

While I have no time for religion on a personal level, and will argue against it till the cows come home, it does play a significant part in the lives of many.

What I hope the visit does do is create some genuine discussion and debate about the issues that exist within the church. I find their stances on areas such contraception, homosexuality and abortion disgraceful, and the squirming that they have undergone to somwhow justfiy the child abuse scandal is almost as disgusting as the abuse itself.

The visit of the Pope will bring these issues, I hope, to the fore. While there will of course be polarised, entrenched positions on all sides, if there can be some reasoned debate that people will listen to and consider, then there is an opportunity for people to change their views and maybe challenge the blind acceptance of dogma.

good, reasoned post.

[Phil D. Rolls]

You've obviously been itching to have a pop at this whole thing for ages!!!

You're in the wrong place, why dont you go to Google, type in "Follow, Follow" and there you will find a whole host of like minded people!

Your rants are a disgrace. I'm only at your 2nd post! God knows what i'm going to find underneath!

What a mature and objective post. I'd write more but my Sash is in the washing machine. :bitchy:

[Phil D. Rolls]

Everything he stands for? Do you have any idea of the good that the Catholic Church does?

As a Catholic, I disagree with the Pope on a shedload of things and think that the Church seriously needs to modernise its views. However, you sound as much of a bigot as anyone in the Catholic Church that I've heard.

Well there's the viaducts......

[ArabHibee]

Samba, what's wrong with fancying some idle chit chat on a Hibs forum on a dull Monday afternoon? This is "The Holy Ground" after all.

My rants are stemmed from a complete disagreement which I have with this Pope (not the other one, he was quiet!) and the morality which the Catholic church tries to preach. Personally, I think it's all ridiculous.

The main things I disagree with what the Pope states about homosexuality, contraception, abortion... I don't like any of it, which is why I dispute this visit which is funded directly through people like me and you. £20 million is a lot of money for a bigot in a hat to come have a wee jaunt around the UK and utter some more nonsense.

What have you contributed to this discussion? If my rants are such a disgrace, why don't you try and counter them instead of taking a disliking to me because I say what I think? :agree:

Also - Why would I go on a Rangers forum simply because I disagree with the Pope's sentiments? I'm not protestant or catholic and firmly believe any religious element should be eliminated from football altogether.

Umm, aren't you a student?

[Phil D. Rolls]

I think the whole religion industry is just another con trick to make money or wage war but lots of people believe in it all good luck to them. £20,000,000 is peanuts compared to the amount of money that is wasted on other things, a small price to pay to keep the pope safe and the believers happy. It'll be very easy to avoid being too upset by his visit just switch off if you don't like what he says.

NUMBER CRUNCHING
£20m - the cost of the Pope's visit to Scotland (is this right?)
£5m - the amount pledged to improve support to carers in Scotland over 5 years (works out at £1.50 pa for every carer).

Great value that Papal visit.

[Phil D. Rolls]

£20 a pop to see the old boy in Bellahouston Park apparently.

Compared to £80 to see Paul McCartney at Hampden that's a bargain, even before you get the chance to wipe the slate clean for all your unholy thoughts over the past 20 years.

I say we should go for it!

[Bishop Hibee]

Dear, dear. I hardly know where to start but here goes.


So what do people all think about the Pope's visit to the UK in September?

His visit alone could cost up to £20 million in tax payers money!

He is also parading around the city of Edinburgh doing that thing that the Pope does (parading around like a enlightened being) with Keith O'Brien and other godly friends.

I'll lash out my opinions throughout this thread but I am interested to see what fellow Hibs.netters think about this.

Any devout Catholics out there? Any free-thinking Atheists? :greengrin

As someone who attends Mass every Sunday which probably makes me "devout" in the OPs eyes then I'm quite looking forward to it. I'll actually be part of the parade but don't worry Doddie, I'm not in the John Knox outfit. http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/news/Side-by-side--the.6438915.jp


The Pope doesn't discuss world politics but preaches hate and intolerance. This is why he shouldn't be welcomed.

Due to arrive in September, think the date for Edinburgh is the 16th or 17th.

I think you'll find he teaches love and peace if you looked into it more closely. You may not like Catholic Church teaching on personal sexual morality but it's a very small part of what Christian faith is about


Yup well the fact is that the Pope is more than creepy. Would you like to be stuck in a room with the Pope?!

Given that he is one of the most influential theologians of the 20th and 21st Centuries, yes.


Does this trip have to be funded by the taxpayers though? Why doesn't the catholic church pay for it?


It's a state visit as head of the Vatican. Until there is a change in policy making all leaders on state visits pay for the visit themselves then there should be no exception for the Pope.


I dont like the idea of a single penny of mine being diverted to anything involving religion, but I think there has to be a bit of appreciation of "realpolitik" here. He is a de facto world leader. Ignore the "Head-of-State" politically expedient get out clause, he is the spiritual leader of around 1.1 billion people. Like it or not (and I don't), the bottom line is that he is, sadly, of global importance, and therefore needs (again, sadly) to be treated accordingly.

While we don't agree on matters of belief, at least your posts are decent and not ignorant and/or ranting.

I'm worried all the schoolchildren on the parade will be subject to barracking despite many of them being from Protestant, Hindu, Muslim, agnostic and atheist families as well as Catholic ones.

Any thoughts?

[New Corrie]

NUMBER CRUNCHING
£20m - the cost of the Pope's visit to Scotland (is this right?)
£5m - the amount pledged to improve support to carers in Scotland over 5 years (works out at £1.50 pa for every carer).

Great value that Papal visit.


Just to add to your number crunching.....$500 Million US dollars paid out to the victims of child abuse, and that's them just dipping their toes in the water, but apparantly they do lots of nice things:confused:

[New Corrie]

Dear, dear. I hardly know where to start but here goes.



As someone who attends Mass every Sunday which probably makes me "devout" in the OPs eyes then I'm quite looking forward to it. I'll actually be part of the parade but don't worry Doddie, I'm not in the John Knox outfit. http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/news/Side-by-side--the.6438915.jp



I think you'll find he teaches love and peace if you looked into it more closely. You may not like Catholic Church teaching on personal sexual morality but it's a very small part of what Christian faith is about



Given that he is one of the most influential theologians of the 20th and 21st Centuries, yes.



It's a state visit as head of the Vatican. Until there is a change in policy making all leaders on state visits pay for the visit themselves then there should be no exception for the Pope.



While we don't agree on matters of belief, at least your posts are decent and not ignorant and/or ranting.

I'm worried all the schoolchildren on the parade will be subject to barracking despite many of them being from Protestant, Hindu, Muslim, agnostic and atheist families as well as Catholic ones.Any thoughts?


I think that you will find that is the least of their worries, are you not "worried" about children being in the company of people who cover up Paedophilia? funny how you evaded the "wanton child molestation issues" in your sanctimonious post.

[Flynn]

Does anyone know of any peaceful protests organised for his visit. I want to show my disgust at the Catholic church in the form of lots of law-abiding booing and a witty banner.

The man must be shown that Scotland will not tolerate a Pope who tries to cover up sexual abuse perpetrated by his underlings. This is main, but not only reason I wish to protest his visit.

[Twa Cairpets]

I think you'll find he teaches love and peace if you looked into it more closely. You may not like Catholic Church teaching on personal sexual morality but it's a very small part of what Christian faith is about

I don't know if I agree with this. Of course within the bigger picture of christianity are several principles that are an undeniable good, such as charity and selflessness (although i hasten to add that these are not traits exclusive to christians). However the teachings on personal sexual behaviour of catholicism in particular are significant and have massive impact on the life and welfare on both individuals and society. Strict adherence to no contraception within wedlock essentially relegates women to the role of brood mare. Promoting what is effectively a policy of unrestricted population growth in a world of rapidly reducing resources is to store up problems of poverty and want for future generations.

The current Pope is from my understanding a conservative catholic, and is dedicated to taking a hard-line stance on these matters. However, his and his church's reaction to the child-abuse scandals alone has been disgraceful, and I hope he comes under the level of scrutiny he deserves on this. It is all directly related to the obsession that the church does at least seem to have with what individuals do sexually, and highlihgts the hypocrisy of much of its teaching.


While we don't agree on matters of belief, at least your posts are decent and not ignorant and/or ranting.
Thank you

[--------]

It's a state visit as head of the Vatican. Until there is a change in policy making all leaders on state visits pay for the visit themselves then there should be no exception for the Pope.

I'm worried all the schoolchildren on the parade will be subject to barracking despite many of them being from Protestant, Hindu, Muslim, agnostic and atheist families as well as Catholic ones.

Any thoughts?




If he's here as head of state as opposed to religious leader, where's the problem in people demonstrating against him and his views? Why should he have a softer ride because of his religious pretensions?

And I'm worried about the schoolchildren - why are they being involved in a political rally in support of a foreign head of state?

And has he been screened through the police computer for previous sexual offences like everyone else who comes in contact with children?

[may 16th 1998]

Does anyone know of any peaceful protests organised for his visit. I want to show my disgust at the Catholic church in the form of lots of law-abiding booing and a witty banner.

The man must be shown that Scotland will not tolerate a Pope who tries to cover up sexual abuse perpetrated by his underlings. This is main, but not only reason I wish to protest his visit.

There's a group called 'Protest The Pope' that's coordinating the protests, their website is http://www.protest-the-pope.org.uk/

The section entitled 'The March' gives details of a mass rally in London and also outlines the key reasons why we should condemn his visit.

[Bishop Hibee]

I think that you will find that is the least of their worries, are you not "worried" about children being in the company of people who cover up Paedophilia? funny how you evaded the "wanton child molestation issues" in your sanctimonious post.

I don't think my post is trying to make out that I or my views are morally superior to anyone else on this board. You don't know what I do or don't believe.

The Roman Catholic church, as has been well documented, child abuse by a significant minority of religious, sexual or otherwise in a scandalous fashion. For an organisation whose leaders are supposed to stand up for the poor and oppressed, there is no excuse for the actions of the abusers and the subsequent cover up.

I can only say that all church going Catholics that I know and any clergy I've met are disgusted by this. The Catholic Church in Scotland has for a good few years now had rigorous checks on anyone working with children and young people and is extending/has extended this to those working with vulnerable adults.


I don't know if I agree with this. Of course within the bigger picture of christianity are several principles that are an undeniable good, such as charity and selflessness (although i hasten to add that these are not traits exclusive to christians). However the teachings on personal sexual behaviour of catholicism in particular are significant and have massive impact on the life and welfare on both individuals and society. Strict adherence to no contraception within wedlock essentially relegates women to the role of brood mare. Promoting what is effectively a policy of unrestricted population growth in a world of rapidly reducing resources is to store up problems of poverty and want for future generations.

The current Pope is from my understanding a conservative catholic, and is dedicated to taking a hard-line stance on these matters. However, his and his church's reaction to the child-abuse scandals alone has been disgraceful, and I hope he comes under the level of scrutiny he deserves on this. It is all directly related to the obsession that the church does at least seem to have with what individuals do sexually, and highlihgts the hypocrisy of much of its teaching.

Thank you

The "obsession" the church supposedly has is due to the fact that it puts it's head above the parapet and flies in the face of current majority opinion on issues like sex before marriage. This makes it reportable and is the main issue that people know about the Catholic Church The reality is that every catholic church in Edinburgh on a Sunday has individuals of all colours, ages, economic circumstances, political beliefs and social circumstances (single parents, gays etc.) I know of one lesbian couple who attend Mass in a parish and have an adopted kid. While the church teaches this lifestyle is wrong, the individuals are not condemned but are part of the community of sinners that make up every Catholic parish in the world.


If he's here as head of state as opposed to religious leader, where's the problem in people demonstrating against him and his views? Why should he have a softer ride because of his religious pretensions?

And I'm worried about the schoolchildren - why are they being involved in a political rally in support of a foreign head of state?

And has he been screened through the police computer for previous sexual offences like everyone else who comes in contact with children?

I never said I had a problem Doddie. As the Pope is in Edinburgh on the feast of St Ninian, staff and children from every school in Scotland named after St Ninian have been invited to be part of the parade. Given the vehement opposition to this visit on this board, snapshot of opinion though it is, is it worth it? Also, how is it a political rally :confused:


There's a group called 'Protest The Pope' that's coordinating the protests, their website is http://www.protest-the-pope.org.uk/

The section entitled 'The March' gives details of a mass rally in London and also outlines the key reasons why we should condemn his visit.

Nice to see a Jambo on site :yawn:

[Hibbyradge]

I'll certainly be popping along to see him, if he's in Edinburgh when I am.

Sorry if that disappoints anyone.

[may 16th 1998]

I don't think my post is trying to make out that I or my views are morally superior to anyone else on this board. You don't know what I do or don't believe.

The Roman Catholic church, as has been well documented, child abuse by a significant minority of religious, sexual or otherwise in a scandalous fashion. For an organisation whose leaders are supposed to stand up for the poor and oppressed, there is no excuse for the actions of the abusers and the subsequent cover up.

I can only say that all church going Catholics that I know and any clergy I've met are disgusted by this. The Catholic Church in Scotland has for a good few years now had rigorous checks on anyone working with children and young people and is extending/has extended this to those working with vulnerable adults.



The "obsession" the church supposedly has is due to the fact that it puts it's head above the parapet and flies in the face of current majority opinion on issues like sex before marriage. This makes it reportable and is the main issue that people know about the Catholic Church The reality is that every catholic church in Edinburgh on a Sunday has individuals of all colours, ages, economic circumstances, political beliefs and social circumstances (single parents, gays etc.) I know of one lesbian couple who attend Mass in a parish and have an adopted kid. While the church teaches this lifestyle is wrong, the individuals are not condemned but are part of the community of sinners that make up every Catholic parish in the world.



I never said I had a problem Doddie. As the Pope is in Edinburgh on the feast of St Ninian, staff and children from every school in Scotland named after St Ninian have been invited to be part of the parade. Given the vehement opposition to this visit on this board, snapshot of opinion though it is, is it worth it? Also, how is it a political rally :confused:



Nice to see a Jambo on site :yawn:

Well, from 'Protest The Pope' here's some of the reasons why it's a political rally:-

As a Head of State, Joseph Ratzinger will be allowed to address the Parliament.
In his role as a religious leader, it is highly likely that the Pope will abuse this occasion to promote his harsh intolerant views, criticising our democratically agreed legislation, as with his attack to British Equality Laws when this visit was announced.
With its wealth, its diplomatic service, its influence on political parties, its willingness to exploit its treaties and privileges, the Vatican seems determined to consolidate its position in the corridors of power of the European Union.
The EU is getting more important by the day. It’s no longer just about markets and trade and tariffs. Its significance is increasing in many other areas: HUMAN RIGHTS, MEDICAL RESEARCH, FAMILY LAW, EDUCATION.
With privileged access to the very top levels of the EU, the Vatican is able to influence legislation at the early stages, before any proposal reaches public consultation. Education Policies will be affected with directives that entrench subsidies for Catholic Schools and Universities. When the EU begins to influence Research Policy, the Vatican will use its influence for funding to be cut off for genetic research. And when it comes to Family Law, the Vatican will promote its pernicious policies on gays and on abortion. Not to mention the ban on condoms for family planning and AIDS protection, especially as the Vatican urges the cutting of funding by Western governments to Developing Countries when “abstinence” programmes aren’t prioritised over condom education and distribution, so causing 1.5 million deaths a year, with 12 million orphans.

The Vatican is not a Country as the other European Countries. It’s an artificial State created by the fascist dictator Mussolini on the 11th of February 1929 and that consolidated its power with a Concordat with Hitler, subsequently signing Concordats with many other Countries and adversely affecting the lives of millions of people wherever the influence of the Vatican is strong enough to push their sectarian agenda, which is not even shared by lay catholics or other christian denominations.

We protest against honouring the Head of the Vatican with a State Visit and therefore we will march towards the British Parliament in support to our Democracy, rejecting strongly the undemocratic interference of the Vatican.

[tony higgins]

So what do people all think about the Pope's visit to the UK in September?

His visit alone could cost up to £20 million in tax payers money!

He is also parading around the city of Edinburgh doing that thing that the Pope does (parading around like a enlightened being) with Keith O'Brien and other godly friends.

I'll lash out my opinions throughout this thread but I am interested to see what fellow Hibs.netters think about this.

Any devout Catholics out there? Any free-thinking Atheists? :greengrin

Take it your not going then.

:greengrin

[Pretty Boy]

Umm, aren't you a student?

Students pay tax. Absolute myth thats been accepted as fact to suggest otherwise.

Yes, they get tax breaks on earnings during term time as it's seen as a way to fund their studies. This is only true to a certain ammount(the number escapes me right now) before NI and PAYE tax is deducted. Also all monies earned outwith term time is taxed same as anyone else.

It's also generally considered that those with a degree will go into higher paid employment in the future so will in turn pay more tax on future earnings.

[CropleyWasGod]

Students pay tax. Absolute myth thats been accepted as fact to suggest otherwise.

Yes, they get tax breaks on earnings during term time as it's seen as a way to fund their studies. This is only true to a certain ammount(the number escapes me right now) before NI and PAYE tax is deducted. Also all monies earned outwith term time is taxed same as anyone else.

It's also generally considered that those with a degree will go into higher paid employment in the future so will in turn pay more tax on future earnings.

Not so. Students are treated the same way as any other employee when it comes to tax. If a student earns enough during term time, they will pay tax.

Practicalities, of course, are that students will be less likely to be working enough to pay tax during term-time. The principle, though, remains.

[Twa Cairpets]

Well, from 'Protest The Pope' here's some of the reasons why it's a political rally:-

As a Head of State, Joseph Ratzinger will be allowed to address the Parliament.
In his role as a religious leader, it is highly likely that the Pope will abuse this occasion to promote his harsh intolerant views, criticising our democratically agreed legislation, as with his attack to British Equality Laws when this visit was announced.
With its wealth, its diplomatic service, its influence on political parties, its willingness to exploit its treaties and privileges, the Vatican seems determined to consolidate its position in the corridors of power of the European Union.
The EU is getting more important by the day. It’s no longer just about markets and trade and tariffs. Its significance is increasing in many other areas: HUMAN RIGHTS, MEDICAL RESEARCH, FAMILY LAW, EDUCATION.
With privileged access to the very top levels of the EU, the Vatican is able to influence legislation at the early stages, before any proposal reaches public consultation. Education Policies will be affected with directives that entrench subsidies for Catholic Schools and Universities. When the EU begins to influence Research Policy, the Vatican will use its influence for funding to be cut off for genetic research. And when it comes to Family Law, the Vatican will promote its pernicious policies on gays and on abortion. Not to mention the ban on condoms for family planning and AIDS protection, especially as the Vatican urges the cutting of funding by Western governments to Developing Countries when “abstinence” programmes aren’t prioritised over condom education and distribution, so causing 1.5 million deaths a year, with 12 million orphans.

The Vatican is not a Country as the other European Countries. It’s an artificial State created by the fascist dictator Mussolini on the 11th of February 1929 and that consolidated its power with a Concordat with Hitler, subsequently signing Concordats with many other Countries and adversely affecting the lives of millions of people wherever the influence of the Vatican is strong enough to push their sectarian agenda, which is not even shared by lay catholics or other christian denominations.

We protest against honouring the Head of the Vatican with a State Visit and therefore we will march towards the British Parliament in support to our Democracy, rejecting strongly the undemocratic interference of the Vatican.

Its a bit "ranty", isn't it?

It reads as if there is some secret, shady agenda being followed by the Vatican (which, incidentally, from what I can see is not a member of the EU). One thing that is abundantly clear is the Catholic churches view on the areas raised - its not as if there is some cloak-and-dagger undercover agenda.

The protest planned on the "head-of-state" ticket is really just self-justification trying to make the protest against a relgious organisation somewhat more paltable. As it happens, I broadly agree with the concerns the protest group has, but I would be much happier if they were honest in their opposition.

Of course the Catholic church will oppose the things laid out - thats what they believe in. But if the protestors think they are protesting against the head of the Vatican City State and not the Catholic church they are being, at the very least, intellectualy dishonest.

[Twa Cairpets]

The "obsession" the church supposedly has is due to the fact that it puts it's head above the parapet and flies in the face of current majority opinion on issues like sex before marriage. This makes it reportable and is the main issue that people know about the Catholic Church The reality is that every catholic church in Edinburgh on a Sunday has individuals of all colours, ages, economic circumstances, political beliefs and social circumstances (single parents, gays etc.) I know of one lesbian couple who attend Mass in a parish and have an adopted kid. While the church teaches this lifestyle is wrong, the individuals are not condemned but are part of the community of sinners that make up every Catholic parish in the world.

I actually have a degree of respect for the honsty with which catholicism is unequivocal in its pronouncements - its not wishy-washy, and has a robustness and consistency about its views which is missing from many other christian denominations. (I dont for a minute agree with great swathes of the dogma, but there is little by way of hidden agenda.).

Incidentally, I very specifcally referred to the policy of sexual conduct within wedlock as being one worthy of opprobrium, not the stance on sex outside marriage.

[IWasThere2016]

I cannot understand anyone wanting to be ruled by some old and out of touch chap in Rome nor some old out of touch wifey in Buckingham Palace.

And, I certainly wouldn't want to go out my way to see/meet them personally.

If there is a God, I am sure he will not mind if you don't feed the Church of Rome or England but worship in your own way.

[Pretty Boy]

Not so. Students are treated the same way as any other employee when it comes to tax. If a student earns enough during term time, they will pay tax.

Practicalities, of course, are that students will be less likely to be working enough to pay tax during term-time. The principle, though, remains.

My mistake.

The point still stands though that this constant tax dodger stick that is used to beat students is without foundation.

[Woody1985]

Dear, dear. I hardly know where to start but here goes.

As someone who attends Mass every Sunday which probably makes me "devout" in the OPs eyes then I'm quite looking forward to it. I'll actually be part of the parade but don't worry Doddie, I'm not in the John Knox outfit. http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/news/Side-by-side--the.6438915.jp

I think you'll find he teaches love and peace if you looked into it more closely. You may not like Catholic Church teaching on personal sexual morality but it's a very small part of what Christian faith is about

Given that he is one of the most influential theologians of the 20th and 21st Centuries, yes.

It's a state visit as head of the Vatican. Until there is a change in policy making all leaders on state visits pay for the visit themselves then there should be no exception for the Pope.

While we don't agree on matters of belief, at least your posts are decent and not ignorant and/or ranting.

I'm worried all the schoolchildren on the parade will be subject to barracking despite many of them being from Protestant, Hindu, Muslim, agnostic and atheist families as well as Catholic ones.

Any thoughts?

That's all fine and well but as far as I'm aware he isn't coming here to discuss things with our heads of state on state relations, world politics etc etc. Therefore, he's coming to preach personal beliefs and not in an official state capacity in my eyes.

[sambajustice]

The owner of our Football Club is a devout Catholic.

Cant wait to now see all the replies slating Sir Tom!

[Betty Boop]

That's all fine and well but as far as I'm aware he isn't coming here to discuss things with our heads of state on state relations, world politics etc etc. Therefore, he's coming to preach personal beliefs and not in an official state capacity in my eyes.

I would imagine he will be discussing world affairs, when he speaks at the Parliament in London.

[Twa Cairpets]

The owner of our Football Club is a devout Catholic.

Cant wait to now see all the replies slating Sir Tom!

Where has anyone on this thread come out with anything slating individual catholics or their beliefs on a personal basis (The Pope excepted)?

Your post is trivialising your own view, and trying to create an argument where non exists.

[Bishop Hibee]

That's all fine and well but as far as I'm aware he isn't coming here to discuss things with our heads of state on state relations, world politics etc etc. Therefore, he's coming to preach personal beliefs and not in an official state capacity in my eyes.


I would imagine he will be discussing world affairs, when he speaks at the Parliament in London.

Correct Betty. The Catholic Church is a key player in tackling poverty around the world. Given that the current UK government has pledged to increase foreign aid to 0.7% of GNI by 2013, I would say that is the main thing being discussed.

The approach to organised religion by government under the Conservatives may be different too if Eric Pickles, Communities Secretary is to be believed.

[PeeJay]

Correct Betty. The Catholic Church is a key player in tackling poverty around the world. Given that the current UK government has pledged to increase foreign aid to 0.7% of GNI by 2013, I would say that is the main thing being discussed.

The approach to organised religion by government under the Conservatives may be different too if Eric Pickles, Communities Secretary is to be believed.

Interesting - do you have any facts or a link to back this up?

[Twa Cairpets]

Correct Betty. The Catholic Church is a key player in tackling poverty around the world. Given that the current UK government has pledged to increase foreign aid to 0.7% of GNI by 2013, I would say that is the main thing being discussed.

The approach to organised religion by government under the Conservatives may be different too if Eric Pickles, Communities Secretary is to be believed.

Eris Pickles. Now there's a man who gives me the heebie-geebies, and not just because he looks like a VIZ character.

[--------]

I never said I had a problem Doddie. As the Pope is in Edinburgh on the feast of St Ninian, staff and children from every school in Scotland named after St Ninian have been invited to be part of the parade. Given the vehement opposition to this visit on this board, snapshot of opinion though it is, is it worth it? Also, how is it a political rally :confused:



If he's here as head of state, paid for by the tax-payer, it's political. It's the Vatican State gatting a commendation form Westminster and Holyrood - "These guys are good guys, they're our friends..."

However, if he's holding a religious meeting in Bellahouston Park at £20 a pop (now why didn't I think of that?)? :confused:

BTW - he may be an influential theologian in his own denomination, but he's absolutely nothing to write home about where I come from. :rolleyes:

[Flynn]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEhtOhwL8xk&feature=PlayList&p=11BC53034B071121&playnext=1&index=24 (part 1 of 2)

Stephen Fry explains far more eloquently than I could why the Catholic church is not (to put it mildly) a force for good in the world.

Agree with every single word. Well worth checking out if you haven't seen it. Thou shalt not question Stephen Fry.

[Woody1985]

I would imagine he will be discussing world affairs, when he speaks at the Parliament in London.


Correct Betty. The Catholic Church is a key player in tackling poverty around the world. Given that the current UK government has pledged to increase foreign aid to 0.7% of GNI by 2013, I would say that is the main thing being discussed.

The approach to organised religion by government under the Conservatives may be different too if Eric Pickles, Communities Secretary is to be believed.

That's fine then if he's coming to discuss those things. As head of state he should only be supported with costs directly relating to that visit, not prancing around other part of the country to see his followers. I would apply that to any heads of state. If you want to go on a jolly to coincide with a state visit then I have no objections but do it at your own expense.

As for the person who wrote the Tom Farmer 'point', don't be so ridiculous. I'm sure STF is aware that people with different views and values support Hibs.

And as for those that say 'it's only 20 million, we've spent more on other crap', it does not mean that we should continue in that manner. That's how local councils etc have contributed to the lack of funding all around the country.

[richard_pitts]

There is a difference between Catholics and the leadership of the Catholic Church. Having been condemned by the latter (and indeed others) for my campaigning on gay rights. It is fair to say I am not a fan of its leadership. This is before we mention its issues surrounding child abuse and contraception in Africa...

[--------]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEhtOhwL8xk&feature=PlayList&p=11BC53034B071121&playnext=1&index=24 (part 1 of 2)

Stephen Fry explains far more eloquently than I could why the Catholic church is not (to put it mildly) a force for good in the world.

Agree with every single word. Well worth checking out if you haven't seen it. Thou shalt not question Stephen Fry.


I don't agree with every single word of that, but I do agree that there's a huge amount there that EVERY church organisation and hierachy should take on board.

John Calvin wrote of "ecclesia reformata et semper reformanda" - a church reformed, yet always in need of reformation - which in a nutshell means that Christians should question everything that churches and clergy do in their name, and act to put things right.

I'd much rather sit at the dinner-table of an evening with SF than with Ratzinger or Widdecombe.


BTW - supposing a Mormon was elected USPrez some day - would we expect HIM to come on a state visit and then head off to some country park to hold a religious festival?

[Bishop Hibee]

Interesting - do you have any facts or a link to back this up?

This link is a reasonable start http://ukinholysee.fco.gov.uk/content/en/article/douglas-alexander


Eris Pickles. Now there's a man who gives me the heebie-geebies, and not just because he looks like a VIZ character.

Classic fat Tory ..... but if he walks the walk then religion will have a bigger say over the course of the coalition government.


If he's here as head of state, paid for by the tax-payer, it's political. It's the Vatican State gatting a commendation form Westminster and Holyrood - "These guys are good guys, they're our friends..."

However, if he's holding a religious meeting in Bellahouston Park at £20 a pop (now why didn't I think of that?)? :confused:

BTW - he may be an influential theologian in his own denomination, but he's absolutely nothing to write home about where I come from. :rolleyes:

I meant party political but I'd agree that as a Head of State then it's political.

You can't complain about the cost of the visit and then complain about RC's being asked to donate money towards it :cool2:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEhtOhwL8xk&feature=PlayList&p=11BC53034B071121&playnext=1&index=24 (part 1 of 2)

Stephen Fry explains far more eloquently than I could why the Catholic church is not (to put it mildly) a force for good in the world.

Agree with every single word. Well worth checking out if you haven't seen it. Thou shalt not question Stephen Fry.

I don't worship at the altar of an Oscar Wilde wannabe.

[Twa Cairpets]

I don't worship at the altar of an Oscar Wilde wannabe.

That is a really daft statement Bish. Avoid the ad hominems, and listen to what he actually says - they are powerful points, very eloquently put.

[Flynn]

I don't worship at the altar of an Oscar Wilde wannabe.

No-one asked you to :-)

[Betty Boop]

That's fine then if he's coming to discuss those things. As head of state he should only be supported with costs directly relating to that visit, not prancing around other part of the country to see his followers. I would apply that to any heads of state. If you want to go on a jolly to coincide with a state visit then I have no objections but do it at your own expense.

As for the person who wrote the Tom Farmer 'point', don't be so ridiculous. I'm sure STF is aware that people with different views and values support Hibs.

And as for those that say 'it's only 20 million, we've spent more on other crap', it does not mean that we should continue in that manner. That's how local councils etc have contributed to the lack of funding all around the country.

From what I have read, the Catholic Church in the UK has raised 7 million through personal donations and fund raising events, to contribute towards the pastoral part of his visit( the mass in Belahouston Park etc). The State will pay for the policing and security aspects, as would happen with any other State visit. I reckon as tax-payers there are many things that we object to our taxes being spent on, but thats what happens in society. I should add that it makes no odds to me whether he comes or not, but my wee Aunty is well excited. :greengrin

[Twa Cairpets]

Classic fat Tory ..... but if he walks the walk then religion will have a bigger say over the course of the coalition government.

Hence the heebie-geebies.

[--------]

You can't complain about the cost of the visit and then complain about RC's being asked to donate money towards it :cool2:

I don't worship at the altar of an Oscar Wilde wannabe.




I can complain about it if the state visit is being used top defray some of the costs of the religious festival.

Regardless of SF's private life (which I assume is what you're referring to) the arguments he advances are cogent and to the point. I've often wondered myself how an institution dominated by celibates can pontificate so dogmatically to others on how they should organise their relationships.... :rolleyes:

[Killiehibbie]

And as for those that say 'it's only 20 million, we've spent more on other crap', it does not mean that we should continue in that manner. That's how local councils etc have contributed to the lack of funding all around the country.

How much will all these people spend during the popes visit? Even rangers are making money out of it by charging them for parking add up all the transport, food & drink, accommodation, etc and I bet it adds up to plenty.

[Woody1985]

From what I have read, the Catholic Church in the UK has raised 7 million through personal donations and fund raising events, to contribute towards the pastoral part of his visit( the mass in Belahouston Park etc). The State will pay for the policing and security aspects, as would happen with any other State visit. I reckon as tax-payers there are many things that we object to our taxes being spent on, but thats what happens in society. I should add that it makes no odds to me whether he comes or not, but my wee Aunty is well excited. :greengrin

Yes, but what is that 7 million being spent on?

He's holding an event, which he's charging for, and then expecting/receiving all the policing for free because he's a Head of State. His status as Head of State is not relevant to that event and therefore the money raised should be used to pay for the event. Maybe they're saving up for their next compo claim. :duck:

I agree that there are lots of things that I don't agree with my money being spent on and when those issues are raised on a thread like this then I'll state what I feel at that time. :greengrin

[Dashing Bob S]

Yes, but what is that 7 million being spent on?

He's holding an event, which he's charging for, and then expecting/receiving all the policing for free because he's a Head of State. His status as Head of State is not relevant to that event and therefore the money raised should be used to pay for the event. Maybe they're saving up for their next compo claim. :duck:

I agree that there are lots of things that I don't agree with my money being spent on and when those issues are raised on a thread like this then I'll state what I feel at that time. :greengrin

We can do without the paedophille apologist and his evil, exploitative organisation in our country, but we also do without Buckingham Palace and the parasites who infest it.

[Beefster]

BTW - supposing a Mormon was elected USPrez some day - would we expect HIM to come on a state visit and then head off to some country park to hold a religious festival?

Nope. I wouldn't expect a Catholic US President to do it either.

The leader of a worldwide religion might though.

[Woody1985]

Nope. I wouldn't expect a Catholic US President to do it either.

The leader of a worldwide religion might though.

But when 'they' leave to go and do something that is a personal choice i.e. not in a head of state capacity then surely you wouldn't expect to pay for them.

If I go away to conference with my work (which I've never done) then I wouldn't expect those providing to the conference to pay for my expenses whilst I went away and did something of my choosing before or after the event. Yes, pay my board and food costs but if I want to go sightseeing or bang 10$ hookers they're not going to foot the bill are they? And suggesting to the conference provider that it's only an extra 20$ in hooker fees and it's a drop in the ocean to their overall company expenses isn't quite going to cut the mustard.

(disclaimer, I've never banged a 10$ hooker. :greengrin)

[Brizo]

As a green grape who attends the big gigs Christmas , Easter and the odd few inbetween im totally nonplussed by the Popes forthcoming visit. In fact I know very few Catholics (apart from my ma and her buddies) who are looking forward to it. There was a real atmosphere of expectation and excitement preceeding JP2s visit. There seems to be a lack of any real enthusiasm to see the current "manager". Secularisation , church scandals plus Bennys lack of charisma and arch conservatism are all major factors imo. It will be interesting to see what crowds the Pope attracts during the forthcoming visit. I would guess they will be substantially lower than the last Papal visit.

I wasnt going to bother to go watch him but if it gets on the thruppenies of the professional atheists , angry students and good old fashioned bigots I think ill probably attend :greengrin

[ArabHibee]

Students pay tax. Absolute myth thats been accepted as fact to suggest otherwise.

Yes, they get tax breaks on earnings during term time as it's seen as a way to fund their studies. This is only true to a certain ammount(the number escapes me right now) before NI and PAYE tax is deducted. Also all monies earned outwith term time is taxed same as anyone else.

It's also generally considered that those with a degree will go into higher paid employment in the future so will in turn pay more tax on future earnings.

I wasn't asking you, I was asking Jenna. You're assuming that she has a job where she pays tax. For all you know Mummy and Daddy might be funding her through University, so you're making assumptions.

And as I think has been previously said, students don't get tax breaks during term time. It will depend on how much they earn through the financial year. If they have not earned over their basic allowance for a particular tax year and have paid tax, then they will receive a refund.

[CropleyWasGod]

I wasn't asking you, I was asking Jenna. You're assuming that she has a job where she pays tax. For all you know Mummy and Daddy might be funding her through University, so you're making assumptions.

.

Whether she has a job or not, she will be paying VAT, and therefore contributing to the economy.

[ArabHibee]

Whether she has a job or not, she will be paying VAT, and therefore contributing to the economy.

Fair point, never thought of that.

[marinello59]

Is the Pope a Catholic.:confused:

[ballengeich]

Is the Pope a Catholic.:confused:

Should the question be relevant to someone who is a head of state?

[Beefster]

Should the question be relevant to someone who is a head of state?

If that state's constitution dictates that the head of a specific religion is automatically the head of state then I'd imagine so.

[bighairyfaeleith]

As a green grape who attends the big gigs Christmas , Easter and the odd few inbetween im totally nonplussed by the Popes forthcoming visit. In fact I know very few Catholics (apart from my ma and her buddies) who are looking forward to it. There was a real atmosphere of expectation and excitement preceeding JP2s visit. There seems to be a lack of any real enthusiasm to see the current "manager". Secularisation , church scandals plus Bennys lack of charisma and arch conservatism are all major factors imo. It will be interesting to see what crowds the Pope attracts during the forthcoming visit. I would guess they will be substantially lower than the last Papal visit.

I wasnt going to bother to go watch him but if it gets on the thruppenies of the professional atheists , angry students and good old fashioned bigots I think ill probably attend :greengrin

:greengrin

I'm going to attend as well, just so I can shout

"Your not the messiah, your just a very naughty boy!"

[Woody1985]

There's a piece in the EEN about the pope visit today.

His trip will take him from Holyrood, up and along Princes St and up to Morningside. The original route of the Royal Mile was scrapped due to limited exit routes.

I had to laugh when the organisers said that they're worried that they can't fill approximately 16,000 standing places for the journey. They want the streets to be filled 5 or 6 deep and that's the real reason they're allowing around 20 pupils from each school out to watch the visit. A man with over a billion followers struggling to pull a crowd of 16,000!

[Twa Cairpets]

There's a piece in the EEN about the pope visit today.

His trip will take him from Holyrood, up and along Princes St and up to Morningside. The original route of the Royal Mile was scrapped due to limited exit routes.

I had to laugh when the organisers said that they're worried that they can't fill approximately 16,000 standing places for the journey. They want the streets to be filled 5 or 6 deep and that's the real reason they're allowing around 20 pupils from each school out to watch the visit. A man with over a billion followers struggling to pull a crowd of 16,000!

Is the pope a jambo, one wonders, with these kinds of figures?

But in fairness, there isnt a billion in Scotland Woody. It would be great if the visit is a huge flop - anything that decreases the perceived importance of organised religion is a good thing from my viewpoint.

[Woody1985]

Is the pope a jambo, one wonders, with these kinds of figures?

But in fairness, there isnt a billion in Scotland Woody. It would be great if the visit is a huge flop - anything that decreases the perceived importance of organised religion is a good thing from my viewpoint.

:tee hee:

I know re the numbers, I just like putting a negative slant on things. :greengrin

But seriously, why the hell do we as a city/nation feel compelled to make sure that we 'don't look bad' because people aren't keen to turn out to see the pope?

TBH, I'm a little entrigued and if I'm in town at that time I might look to catch a glimpse of this global figure. Sort of in the same way I was when going past the Balmoral when the MTV awards were on after work. I thought 'Yes, if I see Madonna or whoever it might be a little cool but look at all those middleaged saddos hanging around the entrance like flies round ****'.

[marinello59]

I had to laugh when the organisers said that they're worried that they can't fill approximately 16,000 standing places for the journey. They want the streets to be filled 5 or 6 deep and that's the real reason they're allowing around 20 pupils from each school out to watch the visit. A man with over a billion followers struggling to pull a crowd of 16,000!

The last Pope to visit had a Popemobile though. Much more Rock and roll. This guy needs a gimmick too.:agree:

[Killiehibbie]

The last Pope to visit had a Popemobile though. Much more Rock and roll. This guy needs a gimmick too.:agree:
I'm sure Jocky Scott would lend him it.

[Brizo]

There's a piece in the EEN about the pope visit today.

His trip will take him from Holyrood, up and along Princes St and up to Morningside. The original route of the Royal Mile was scrapped due to limited exit routes.

I had to laugh when the organisers said that they're worried that they can't fill approximately 16,000 standing places for the journey. They want the streets to be filled 5 or 6 deep and that's the real reason they're allowing around 20 pupils from each school out to watch the visit. A man with over a billion followers struggling to pull a crowd of 16,000!

Us papes cant win :greengrin If we turn out en masse :wink: were brainwashed sheep. If we vote with our feet and give this unpopular Popes visit a bodyswerve were part time supporters. I think numbers will be down hugely from the JP2 visit for a variety of reasons but I still think he'll get a bigger turnout than any other world political or spiritual leader would.

Im also reliably informed hes going to swing by the Inch after doing the city centre tourist thing :thumbsup:

[Woody1985]

The last Pope to visit had a Popemobile though. Much more Rock and roll. This guy needs a gimmick too.:agree:

Is he not bringing the pope mobile? Stuff that, I'll no even have a wee cheeky look if he's not got that with him!

[shamo9]

It always strikes me as odd how quick people are to worship and idealise normal and fallible people like they're somehow better than everyone else. A sort of willing subordination that you see everyday now with 'celebrities'.

Having a faith, of sorts, is essentially about having a relationship with what you believe is your creator, saviour etc. That's all well and good, and this 'relationship' can act as positive reinforcement for some people, helping them overcome difficulties - like a guardian angel is supporting them, of a kind.

Why people then need to go out of their way to listen and follow a decrepit old fallible man -- who's spent the majority of his life trying to convince everyone around him that his crap don't stink as bad as the guy next to him. Why people sit there, put him in his own little castle and gush meekly as he clumsily tries to put words in the mouth of your 'God', well, I can't get my head around it.

[Woody1985]

It always strikes me as odd how quick people are to worship and idealise normal and fallible people like they're somehow better than everyone else. A sort of willing subordination that you see everyday now with 'celebrities'.

Having a faith, of sorts, is essentially about having a relationship with what you believe is your creator, saviour etc. That's all well and good, and this 'relationship' can act as positive reinforcement for some people, helping them overcome difficulties - like a guardian angel is supporting them, of a kind.

Why people then need to go out of their way to listen and follow a decrepit old fallible man -- who's spent the majority of his life trying to convince everyone around him that his crap don't stink as bad as the guy next to him. Why people sit there, put him in his own little castle and gush meekly as he clumsily tries to put words in the mouth of your 'God', well, I can't get my head around it.

I think it's because people need a human focal point to put their belief into and need someone there for guidance, simply because they can't actually do it with the real thing (which I don't believe exists). :duck:

What's with the little strange smoky thing when one dies and the next one is appointed? And why do they show it live on TV. It's probably some guy on his break having a puff of a cigar. :greengrin

[Phil D. Rolls]

I wasnt going to bother to go watch him but if it gets on the thruppenies of the professional atheists , angry students and good old fashioned bigots I think ill probably attend :greengrin

I think you have issues - maybe it would be an idea to talk to someone. :greengrin

[tony higgins]

Think i might go even though i,m not a catholic.

[JennaFletcher]

I wasn't asking you, I was asking Jenna. You're assuming that she has a job where she pays tax. For all you know Mummy and Daddy might be funding her through University, so you're making assumptions.

And as I think has been previously said, students don't get tax breaks during term time. It will depend on how much they earn through the financial year. If they have not earned over their basic allowance for a particular tax year and have paid tax, then they will receive a refund.

I have a summer job and obviously there is VAT which I think someone has already mentioned.

[JennaFletcher]

It always strikes me as odd how quick people are to worship and idealise normal and fallible people like they're somehow better than everyone else. A sort of willing subordination that you see everyday now with 'celebrities'.

Having a faith, of sorts, is essentially about having a relationship with what you believe is your creator, saviour etc. That's all well and good, and this 'relationship' can act as positive reinforcement for some people, helping them overcome difficulties - like a guardian angel is supporting them, of a kind.

Why people then need to go out of their way to listen and follow a decrepit old fallible man -- who's spent the majority of his life trying to convince everyone around him that his crap don't stink as bad as the guy next to him. Why people sit there, put him in his own little castle and gush meekly as he clumsily tries to put words in the mouth of your 'God', well, I can't get my head around it.

Yes I agree entirely with this.

[--------]

Nope. I wouldn't expect a Catholic US President to do it either.

The leader of a worldwide religion might though.


So is it a State visit, or a recruitment drive? :cool2:

[Woody1985]

So is it a State visit, or a recruitment drive? :cool2:

This is what I've been trying to clarify from the start. Can't have it both ways! Well actually, it looks like you can, providing it's the UK taxpayer funding it. Damn, you can have pretty much anything you want.

[Betty Boop]

This is what I've been trying to clarify from the start. Can't have it both ways! Well actually, it looks like you can, providing it's the UK taxpayer funding it. Damn, you can have pretty much anything you want.

Yip, we are even paying for the children of diplomats and military officers to go to private schools.
:grr: :greengrin

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/jul/28/taxpayer-diplomats-children-private-schools?showallcomments=true#co

[LancashireHibby]

A man with over a billion followers struggling to pull a crowd of 16,000!

Is he a Yam? :thumbsup:

[bighairyfaeleith]

Is he a Yam? :thumbsup:

why has he been at the kids as well:grr:

[Beefster]

So is it a State visit, or a recruitment drive? :cool2:

It's a State visit with the Pope holding some masses.

I've had Scientologists approach me on Princes Street and ask me to join - that's a recruitment drive.

[Sir David Gray]

I personally don't have a problem with the fact that the Pope is coming to the UK, it's the fact that it's THIS Pope that I have an objection. Although I'm not a Roman Catholic, I share similar views to them on a number of moral issues.

The whole child abuse scandal within the Roman Catholic Church has been shameful and I just don't think we should be paying for his visit to the country.

[Woody1985]

Now the church want the council/TIE to remove the tram from Princes St so people can see him. :faf:

Tell them to **** right off. They're expecting 10,000 people. I'm sure 10,000 people can fit into Princes St without the 10/20/30 metre tram blocking their view.

If they want the tram moved then they can cough up the cash to have it moved and placed back.

[DH1875]

Ok forget about all that. Kids came in from school the day and said they need £1 each. I said to them what for thinking they'd say a non uniform day or something and they said it was so the school could buy the pope a present. I mean wtf, if it's no costing a bloody nougth now there robbing the kids.

[thekaratekid]

I saw a council document today detailing the road closures.

It ran to 19 pages!!!

[heretoday]

Let's face it. It's showbiz! People love to see a famous face and think of all the money that will roll in what with sales of ice creams, flags and tacky illuminated images of the Madonna.

[LancashireHibby]

Let's face it. It's showbiz! People love to see a famous face and think of all the money that will roll in what with sales of ice creams, flags and tacky illuminated images of the Madonna.

Didn't realise she had a gig at the same time?

[--------]

Let's face it. It's showbiz! People love to see a famous face and think of all the money that will roll in what with sales of ice creams, flags and tacky illuminated images of the Madonna.


Craggy Island Novelties, Co. Ltd. do a very nice range, I believe.

[Bishop Hibee]

Now the church want the council/TIE to remove the tram from Princes St so people can see him. :faf:

Tell them to **** right off. They're expecting 10,000 people. I'm sure 10,000 people can fit into Princes St without the 10/20/30 metre tram blocking their view.

If they want the tram moved then they can cough up the cash to have it moved and placed back.

You're more gullible than a Hearts beLIEver if you think this isn't a made up story by the Evening News to get the Pope and trams on the front page together. Would suit Viz.


Ok forget about all that. Kids came in from school the day and said they need £1 each. I said to them what for thinking they'd say a non uniform day or something and they said it was so the school could buy the pope a present. I mean wtf, if it's no costing a bloody nougth now there robbing the kids.

Don't pay it then.


I saw a council document today detailing the road closures.

It ran to 19 pages!!!

And?


Let's face it. It's showbiz! People love to see a famous face and think of all the money that will roll in what with sales of ice creams, flags and tacky illuminated images of the Madonna.

No it isn't.


Craggy Island Novelties, Co. Ltd. do a very nice range, I believe.

Oh dear Doddie. I'd expect better from you than cheap sniping.

Check this out for a reasoned atheist view.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/aug/22/pope-visit-catholic-prejudice

[JennaFletcher]

Forgot how much banter could be had on this forum.

Anyone else had a look at proposed road closures for the old man in the white hat to parade around and wave?

Who wants to bring the eggs?! :wink:

[Woody1985]

You're more gullible than a Hearts beLIEver if you think this isn't a made up story by the Evening News to get the Pope and trams on the front page together. Would suit Viz.


So the EEN made up a quote from a member of the Church that they thought it would be a given that it would be moved. And, ermm, it's now being moved.

What purpose would getting the pope and the tram on the same page serve? Everyone is now pissed off that the tram will be moved at an expense because of the popes journey. Hardly a positive PR spin given that people are already pissed off at the cost of the project.

Some people are just paranoid...

Perhaps they just made up the story that £22,000 has been spent on doing up roads that the pope will travel along, despite there being little wrong with it. And from memory, it happens to be a councillors street.

[Woody1985]

Forgot how much banter could be had on this forum.

Anyone else had a look at proposed road closures for the old man in the white hat to parade around and wave?

Who wants to bring the eggs?! :wink:

I've seen them, 19 pages.

What would have been better is if they'd sorted all of the road closures by reopen time in the document so people could plan journeys better. It looks like a lot of places will be closed until 15:00 or 16:30.

[Ants]

Whats wrong with flying him into Edinburgh airport, have a mass in the vast open area around the airport , fly him out and then the rest of the city can enjoy just another day.

If anyone was wanting a bet 5 or 6 years ago, I would have staked that the trams would be up and running within Edinburgh before another pope arrived...

[Bishop Hibee]

So the EEN made up a quote from a member of the Church that they thought it would be a given that it would be moved. And, ermm, it's now being moved.

What purpose would getting the pope and the tram on the same page serve? Everyone is now pissed off that the tram will be moved at an expense because of the popes journey. Hardly a positive PR spin given that people are already pissed off at the cost of the project.

Some people are just paranoid...

Perhaps they just made up the story that £22,000 has been spent on doing up roads that the pope will travel along, despite there being little wrong with it. And from memory, it happens to be a councillors street.

The headline said the catholic church was DEMANDING TIE move the tram. Later it said the church reps EXPECTED it to be moved. Will it be moved? Who cares! The News will have got its publicity and the papal visit and the trams will have been bashed by "outraged from Morningside". Total non-story.

"Little" wrong with the roads? £22K doesn't get you much in the road repairs business. Ask any commuter who uses the route the pope will travel along and I guarantee they could find £22K worth of repairs. Have you seen the state of Edinburgh's roads?

Was he/she an atheist, catholic or protestant councillor :grr: :rolleyes:

[Woody1985]

They expected it to be moved because they thought it should be and therefore wanted it moved.

22k on one stretch of road that wasn't in need of repair as much as other areas. That's the whole reason people are pissed off so I'm not quite sure what your point is. Lol

[Brizo]

The headline said the catholic church was DEMANDING TIE move the tram. Later it said the church reps EXPECTED it to be moved. Will it be moved? Who cares! The News will have got its publicity and the papal visit and the trams will have been bashed by "outraged from Morningside". Total non-story.

"Little" wrong with the roads? £22K doesn't get you much in the road repairs business. Ask any commuter who uses the route the pope will travel along and I guarantee they could find £22K worth of repairs. Have you seen the state of Edinburgh's roads?

Was he/she an atheist, catholic or protestant councillor :grr: :rolleyes:

:agree: As the Papal visit nears we will see the atheist propaganda machine kick into overdrive ably supported by the Scottish tabloid media including the EEN. They will no doubt be further supported by the dotnet atheist propagandists :wink:

Whats dissapointing in this ecumenical age is that our resident minister seems only too willing to join there ranks to have a series of wee digs. Maybe the C of S have more in common with atheists than they have with other faiths :confused: Maybe they should merge .... if they havent already :greengrin

With regard to cost I can understand peoples objections for paying for a gig they dont want to see .... but as a taxpayer theres plenty things I object to paying for ... the 2.9 billion per year it costs the various agencies to clear up the aftermath of our binge drinking culture and the 20 billion its gonna cost to replace Trident. Maybe there have been but I cant remember any similar size threads on those costs. Or a similar size thread on the costs of the Pakistan Prime minister visiting the UK while his country went through the disaster ?

Of course BH we'll just be accused of paranoia .... which seems to be the stock answer to anyone who takes an opposite view from the atheist viewpoint.

[Phil D. Rolls]

The headline said the catholic church was DEMANDING TIE move the tram. Later it said the church reps EXPECTED it to be moved. Will it be moved? Who cares! The News will have got its publicity and the papal visit and the trams will have been bashed by "outraged from Morningside". Total non-story.

"Little" wrong with the roads? £22K doesn't get you much in the road repairs business. Ask any commuter who uses the route the pope will travel along and I guarantee they could find £22K worth of repairs. Have you seen the state of Edinburgh's roads?

Was he/she an atheist, catholic or protestant councillor :grr: :rolleyes:

Ach well, if it's only a matter of £22k then every Catholic in Edinburgh just needs to chip in a £1. Simples.

[Twa Cairpets]

:agree: As the Papal visit nears we will see the atheist propaganda machine kick into overdrive ably supported by the Scottish tabloid media including the EEN. They will no doubt be further supported by the dotnet atheist propagandists :wink:

Whats dissapointing in this ecumenical age is that our resident minister seems only too willing to join there ranks to have a series of wee digs. Maybe the C of S have more in common with atheists than they have with other faiths :confused: Maybe they should merge .... if they havent already :greengrin

With regard to cost I can understand peoples objections for paying for a gig they dont want to see .... but as a taxpayer theres plenty things I object to paying for ... the 2.9 billion per year it costs the various agencies to clear up the aftermath of our binge drinking culture and the 20 billion its gonna cost to replace Trident. Maybe there have been but I cant remember any similar size threads on those costs. Or a similar size thread on the costs of the Pakistan Prime minister visiting the UK while his country went through the disaster ?

Of course BH we'll just be accused of paranoia .... which seems to be the stock answer to anyone who takes an opposite view from the atheist viewpoint.

Haud on a minute. Atheist propaganda machine? What on earth are you talking about? Could you possibly direct me to where this may exist, because of course atheism is a movement that demands thousands of pounds from its subscribers, and requires them to dogmatically and unquestioningly follow all of its preaching. Oops sorry getting that mixed up with religion there for a minute.

I wouldn't have accused you of paranoia before this post, but I sure as hell would now. (And for the record, if you look back through this thread, here's at least one atheist who (albeit grudgingly) accepts that the Pope should come and have the cost met by the authorities).

[Dashing Bob S]

Heard from a mate in the know that he could be here on a permanent basis soon - in the colours of Celtic. Done deal apparently.

[HibsMax]

Are there any plans afoot to dump him in a wheelie bin?

[heretoday]

The Catholic church has had such bad publicity in the last couple of years the Pope will have to do a bit more than just the usual gracious hand-kissing and knee-bending.

I suggest a sensational show of Brazilian keepie-uppie on the airport tarmac when he arrives, follow that with a press conference in which he has the hacks in fits with some ironic gags and top that with a U2-style stadium band performance calling for world peace etc.

Obama could join him for the big number. There's another guy whose agent is losing sleep.

[Brizo]

Haud on a minute. Atheist propaganda machine? What on earth are you talking about? Could you possibly direct me to where this may exist, because of course atheism is a movement that demands thousands of pounds from its subscribers, and requires them to dogmatically and unquestioningly follow all of its preaching. Oops sorry getting that mixed up with religion there for a minute.

I wouldn't have accused you of paranoia before this post, but I sure as hell would now. (And for the record, if you look back through this thread, here's at least one atheist who (albeit grudgingly) accepts that the Pope should come and have the cost met by the authorities).

As I expected anyone who comes on and gives an alternate view to the prevailing dotnet atheist majority is told they are paranoid. Altho your use of the word "hell" from someone with such strong atheist convictions did bring a smile to my face :wink:

We live in a UK society where the pro atheist viewpoint has become the dominant one in the media. Its seen in the written media all the way through from the muesli munching left wing Guardian readership to the Scottish tabloid press. Its seen on TV where anyone of religious faith is either portrayed as not the full shilling ie Dot Cotton or a comedy figure ie the recent series "Rev". Of course its not a machine in the structured way of a political machine but it is equally invidious and as it has become the acceptable consensus view in society it becomes very difficult to argue against. You only need to see the reaction if anyone admits to being of a religious faith in discussions in the workplace , in the pub , on websites.

And you only have to look at this particular site to see that while the common perception is that its the religious who push their views on others , it is in fact the Dawkins botherers who post continually and push the atheist agenda with evangelical zeal.

The atheist agenda is of course winning in the western world , much of the hard work done by the Catholic church itself in self destruct mode with the appointment of an uncharismatic, unpopular , arch conservative Pope and of course the church scandals. Chances are in thirty years time there wont be enough practising Catholics in the UK to warrant a visit from a Pope.

[Woody1985]

:agree: As the Papal visit nears we will see the atheist propaganda machine kick into overdrive ably supported by the Scottish tabloid media including the EEN. They will no doubt be further supported by the dotnet atheist propagandists :wink:

Whats dissapointing in this ecumenical age is that our resident minister seems only too willing to join there ranks to have a series of wee digs. Maybe the C of S have more in common with atheists than they have with other faiths :confused: Maybe they should merge .... if they havent already :greengrin

With regard to cost I can understand peoples objections for paying for a gig they dont want to see .... but as a taxpayer theres plenty things I object to paying for ... the 2.9 billion per year it costs the various agencies to clear up the aftermath of our binge drinking culture and the 20 billion its gonna cost to replace Trident. Maybe there have been but I cant remember any similar size threads on those costs. Or a similar size thread on the costs of the Pakistan Prime minister visiting the UK while his country went through the disaster ?

Of course BH we'll just be accused of paranoia .... which seems to be the stock answer to anyone who takes an opposite view from the atheist viewpoint.

Me too. However, this is different because he is coming to our country as 'Head of State' yet is preaching to his followers on a personal level yet we are still meeting the cost. If he came and security arrangements were made as part of his official visit then there would be no issue. It's the fact that he's using it for his own preachings that is the issue.

As for:

the 2.9 billion per year it costs the various agencies to clear up the aftermath of our binge drinking culture

How much does the alcohol industry generate for the economy as a whole? What is the net profit/deficit when factoring in all the jobs that it creates?

20 billion its gonna cost to replace Trident

Like it or not, our nuclear deterrent is one of our only bargaining chips on the world stage that allows us to live in relative peace.

Or a similar size thread on the costs of the Pakistan Prime minister visiting the UK while his country went through the disaster

He was here on an official visit and therefore there is no issue with the cost. It is irrelevant to this thread what is happening in his own country. Perhaps you could have a thread on his visit and if he should have been here at all but as I say, you're comparing apples and pears here.

[Woody1985]

As I expected anyone who comes on and gives an alternate view to the prevailing dotnet atheist majority is told they are paranoid. Altho your use of the word "hell" from someone with such strong atheist convictions did bring a smile to my face :wink:

We live in a UK society where the pro atheist viewpoint has become the dominant one in the media. Its seen in the written media all the way through from the muesli munching left wing Guardian readership to the Scottish tabloid press. Its seen on TV where anyone of religious faith is either portrayed as not the full shilling ie Dot Cotton or a comedy figure ie the recent series "Rev". Of course its not a machine in the structured way of a political machine but it is equally invidious and as it has become the acceptable consensus view in society it becomes very difficult to argue against. You only need to see the reaction if anyone admits to being of a religious faith in discussions in the workplace , in the pub , on websites.

And you only have to look at this particular site to see that while the common perception is that its the religious who push their views on others , it is in fact the Dawkins botherers who post continually and push the atheist agenda with evangelical zeal.

The atheist agenda is of course winning in the western world , much of the hard work done by the Catholic church itself in self destruct mode with the appointment of an uncharismatic, unpopular , arch conservative Pope and of course the church scandals. FWIW ive no problem with people having anti religious views but find the Papal visit "costings" argument disingenuous in the extreme. And I appreciate 2C thats not been part of your argument.

Paranoia or what. Dot Cotton conspiracy. :faf:

Atheist agenda is winning in the western world? From something I read recently, only about 7% of Americans do not believe in God or ADMIT to not believing because of the negative affect it can have on their lives.

Dawkins deals with facts based on human knowledge and proven science. There's probably hundreds of religions, even if one is right then the rest are fools. Religious believers continually ignore scientific facts because of their 'faith' and when most are challenged on these they revert to some inane reasoning as to why their God is true and the right one.

And I don't think there is an overwhelming majority of non believers on here, perhaps this thread but many have said in the past that they can't be bothered getting into their personal beliefs on here.

[Twa Cairpets]

As I expected anyone who comes on and gives an alternate view to the prevailing dotnet atheist majority is told they are paranoid. Altho your use of the word "hell" from someone with such strong atheist convictions did bring a smile to my face :wink:

We live in a UK society where the pro atheist viewpoint has become the dominant one in the media. Its seen in the written media all the way through from the muesli munching left wing Guardian readership to the Scottish tabloid press. Its seen on TV where anyone of religious faith is either portrayed as not the full shilling ie Dot Cotton or a comedy figure ie the recent series "Rev". Of course its not a machine in the structured way of a political machine but it is equally invidious and as it has become the acceptable consensus view in society it becomes very difficult to argue against. You only need to see the reaction if anyone admits to being of a religious faith in discussions in the workplace , in the pub , on websites.

I just do not believe this to be the case. The lack of an overtly religious agenda does not mean the default stance is one of pro-atheism. I wish there was much, much more media coverage of science, or rational thought, of skepticism in general than there is. The "atheist agenda" as you put it is not a unified view, with any defined "leadership". Dawkins would be the first to say "don't take my word for it, look into it for yourself".


And you only have to look at this particular site to see that while the common perception is that its the religious who push their views on others , it is in fact the Dawkins botherers who post continually and push the atheist agenda with evangelical zeal.

The atheist agenda is of course winning in the western world , much of the hard work done by the Catholic church itself in self destruct mode with the appointment of an uncharismatic, unpopular , arch conservative Pope and of course the church scandals. Chances are in thirty years time there wont be enough practising Catholics in the UK to warrant a visit from a Pope.

I truly hope rationality and atheism does become the dominant way of thinking everywhere, and I would be delighted if in thirty years time enough Catholics have sat down, stripped away the dogma and come to a realisation that their belief system is flawed, contradictory and unsustainable without reverting to a mediaeval understanding of science to render the visit of a pontiff pointless. But at the moment he is, de facto, a global leader with a very significant following in Scotland, and as such - if we have any pretensions to Statehood - he should be afforded the courtesy of the country hosting him. This isn't to say I agree with vast swathes of what he stands for and represents, because I don't, but that is a moot point entirely.

[Brizo]

[QUOTE=Woody1985;2560808]Me too. However, this is different because he is coming to our country as 'Head of State' yet is preaching to his followers on a personal level yet we are still meeting the cost. If he came and security arrangements were made as part of his official visit then there would be no issue. It's the fact that he's using it for his own preachings that is the issue.

As for:

the 2.9 billion per year it costs the various agencies to clear up the aftermath of our binge drinking culture

How much does the alcohol industry generate for the economy as a whole? What is the net profit/deficit when factoring in all the jobs that it creates?

The same argument could be made for the tobacco industry in terms of profit / jobs it creates for the economy ... I personally dont want to pick up the tab :wink: as a taxpayer for the resultant NHS costs or the NHS / policing / social services costs arising from our binge drinking culture. And id gladly forego any gains from the sale of irresponsibly priced and irresponsibly marketed drink if it made society safer.

20 billion its gonna cost to replace Trident

Like it or not, our nuclear deterrent is one of our only bargaining chips on the world stage that allows us to live in relative peace.

We will agree to disagree on that , which without wishing to sound offensive I find a somewhat simplistic and out of date analysis. Probably best left for another debate

Or a similar size thread on the costs of the Pakistan Prime minister visiting the UK while his country went through the disaster

He was here on an official visit and therefore there is no issue with the cost. It is irrelevant to this thread what is happening in his own country. Perhaps you could have a thread on his visit and if he should have been here at all but as I say, you're comparing apples and pears here.[/QUOTE

I think its very worth comparing. The reaction to the Pakistan PM visiting at a time of major disaster in his own country has produced nowhere near the level of hostility that the visit of the Pope , another head of state , is producing ... certainly not on this mb.

As taxpayers in a democracy billions are spent on areas that many of us will object to and many of us will not personally benefit from. If the cost of the Popes visit is 20 million and thats only from what ive read on here then in reality that is a very small amount in the mountain of outlay that UK taxpayer money is spent on. You can argue that it would be better spent elsewhere , I would argue that the billions I have quoted would be better spent elsewhere.

[QUOTE=Woody1985;2560829]Paranoia or what. Dot Cotton conspiracy. :faf:

Aaah the old paranoia slur :yawn:

Atheist agenda is winning in the western world? From something I read recently, only about 7% of Americans do not believe in God or ADMIT to not believing because of the negative affect it can have on their lives.

[B]I dont doubt your stats but tbh am suprised. The bible belt yes but big city USA ?

Dawkins deals with facts based on human knowledge and proven science. There's probably hundreds of religions, even if one is right then the rest are fools. Religious believers continually ignore scientific facts because of their 'faith' and when most are challenged on these they revert to some inane reasoning as to why their God is true and the right one.

And thats why these debates are ultimately futile as faith is intangible and cant be proven by scientific experiment which is the only criteria Dawkinistas will accept. Time for me to bale for I fear we'll just end up going round in circles. Feel free to have the last word .... which you no doubt will :greengrin

[Leicester Fan]

I'm not religious, certainly not catholic and if the Pope comes around my area (don't know) I won't be going to see him.

All I've got to say to all the anti religious bigots on here is "haven't you got anything important to worry about?".

[Twa Cairpets]

Atheist agenda is winning in the western world? From something I read recently, only about 7% of Americans do not believe in God or ADMIT to not believing because of the negative affect it can have on their lives.

[B]I dont doubt your stats but tbh am suprised. The bible belt yes but big city USA ?
So Bible belt believers count less? Thats an odd stance. Here's a link to the demographics of atheism. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_atheism) This article suggests 9% of people in the USA have no religion, but only 1.6% - to my mind a staggeringly low figure - describe themselves as explicitly atheist or agnostic.


Dawkins deals with facts based on human knowledge and proven science. There's probably hundreds of religions, even if one is right then the rest are fools. Religious believers continually ignore scientific facts because of their 'faith' and when most are challenged on these they revert to some inane reasoning as to why their God is true and the right one.

And thats why these debates are ultimately futile as faith is intangible and cant be proven by scientific experiment which is the only criteria Dawkinistas will accept. Time for me to bale for I fear we'll just end up going round in circles. Feel free to have the last word .... which you no doubt will :greengrin

I hope you dont bale from the thread, because how else can those of faith seek to put there point over if not by entering into debate? I dont think it is a circular argument at all. In the context of this thread, the validiy of religious movements as a coherent body is critical. (I do not believe the Head of State argument has any validity at all - it is solely a way around a difficult question for politicians).

I accept that many tens of thousands in Scotland have religion, in this case Catholicism, at the centre of ther lives. They define their actions and morals by their religious belief, and the Pope is at the head of this organisation, the largest single faith group on the planet. It is surely therefore indisputable that the Pope is a World leader, as is the Dahli Lama, for example.

Your very defensive posts, with disparaging "Dawkinista" jibes, does your position no favours at all. Would it not be better to defend what your beliefs regarding the Pope's visit and your faith by defining them in terms of the positives you believe it provides rather than by almost exclusively in terms of why atheists are bad?

[majorhibs]

Agree wholeheartedly. Except I probably won't be ignoring him, I'll join a protest against the Pope & the catholic church. I know that people say rising to the bait just gives the Pope more attention and the feeling he is actually important - but the things he says I find to be really offensive and I can't stomach the thought of that Bigot parading around Edinburgh on an all expenses trip as paid for by the public.

Also Alex Salmond and Jim Murphy have both been in the press quoting how good an occasion will be... how is it that when someone in a position of power doesn't act upon child abuse allegations can get away with it but if it was a criminal who covered up for child abuse then they'd be hounded by the public/media/politicians...

Typical narrow minded protestant **** feared o catholics views- this is 2010- just ignore it if ye dinnae like it

[Twa Cairpets]

Typical narrow minded protestant **** feared o catholics views- this is 2010- just ignore it if ye dinnae like it

I'm sure Jenna will answer for herself, but seriously: "feared o catholics views"?

So you're not allowed to object to something without being afraid of it, presumably in some sort of quasi-religious "burn the witch" style? There is not a single word of Jennas post that suggest fear. Not one. Outrage, disgust and offense, yes. Fear, no.

If you take your argument to its logical conclusion, then we should just accept, for example, racists, fascists, fundamentalists of all persuasions becuase - hey - it's 2010. Because he is a religious leader does not automatically entitle him to respect.

[Woody1985]

Me too. However, this is different because he is coming to our country as 'Head of State' yet is preaching to his followers on a personal level yet we are still meeting the cost. If he came and security arrangements were made as part of his official visit then there would be no issue. It's the fact that he's using it for his own preachings that is the issue.

As for:

the 2.9 billion per year it costs the various agencies to clear up the aftermath of our binge drinking culture

How much does the alcohol industry generate for the economy as a whole? What is the net profit/deficit when factoring in all the jobs that it creates?

1. The same argument could be made for the tobacco industry in terms of profit / jobs it creates for the economy ... I personally dont want to pick up the tab :wink: as a taxpayer for the resultant NHS costs or the NHS / policing / social services costs arising from our binge drinking culture. And id gladly forego any gains from the sale of irresponsibly priced and irresponsibly marketed drink if it made society safer.

20 billion its gonna cost to replace Trident

Like it or not, our nuclear deterrent is one of our only bargaining chips on the world stage that allows us to live in relative peace.

2. We will agree to disagree on that , which without wishing to sound offensive I find a somewhat simplistic and out of date analysis. Probably best left for another debate

Or a similar size thread on the costs of the Pakistan Prime minister visiting the UK while his country went through the disaster

He was here on an official visit and therefore there is no issue with the cost. It is irrelevant to this thread what is happening in his own country. Perhaps you could have a thread on his visit and if he should have been here at all but as I say, you're comparing apples and pears here.

3. I think its very worth comparing. The reaction to the Pakistan PM visiting at a time of major disaster in his own country has produced nowhere near the level of hostility that the visit of the Pope , another head of state , is producing ... certainly not on this mb.

As taxpayers in a democracy billions are spent on areas that many of us will object to and many of us will not personally benefit from. If the cost of the Popes visit is 20 million and thats only from what ive read on here then in reality that is a very small amount in the mountain of outlay that UK taxpayer money is spent on. You can argue that it would be better spent elsewhere , I would argue that the billions I have quoted would be better spent elsewhere.
.


Paranoia or what. Dot Cotton conspiracy. :faf:

4. Aaah the old paranoia slur :yawn:

Atheist agenda is winning in the western world? From something I read recently, only about 7% of Americans do not believe in God or ADMIT to not believing because of the negative affect it can have on their lives.

5. I dont doubt your stats but tbh am suprised. The bible belt yes but big city USA ?

Dawkins deals with facts based on human knowledge and proven science. There's probably hundreds of religions, even if one is right then the rest are fools. Religious believers continually ignore scientific facts because of their 'faith' and when most are challenged on these they revert to some inane reasoning as to why their God is true and the right one.

6.And thats why these debates are ultimately futile as faith is intangible and cant be proven by scientific experiment which is the only criteria Dawkinistas will accept. Time for me to bale for I fear we'll just end up going round in circles. Feel free to have the last word .... which you no doubt will :greengrin



The quotes have gone a bit crazy so I've numbered the points.

1. You've not provided any evidence that you're 'picking up the tab'. There's a 2.9 billion pound cost but that's not necessarily the net deficit. I accept your arguement that there are resources tied up that could be used elsewhere that are used on smokers etc. On the flip side, you could argue that a lot less people would need to be employed if there weren't as many social problems (not saying that's a good or bad thing but something to consider).

2. Fair enough.

3. I don't. You can compare peoples reactions to the disaster and this but they're not directly comparable because the original post was related to the cost associated with his travel.

I've not read through this again but from memory most of the 'hostility' was aimed at the cost because of the conflicting interests of the visit and not the actual pope. Yes, one of two have objected based on the popes beliefs (and for Jenna to be called a bigot because the popes belief contradicts directly with her life is a joke).

There are lots of places that money could be better spent but the attitudes of it's only 20/40/100/500/1,000 million has helped contribute to the financial mess that the country is in.

Out of interest, does anyone know the normal costs associated with state visitsfrom other high profile states?

4. You brought up paranoia so that's why I stuck that in there. :greengrin

5. TC has posted up a link on the details. I can't say for sure if it would affect peoples lives in big cities as much but when religious belief is a part of the US constitution and a major part of the presidential elections I'd guess that it plays a big part right across the US.

6. I think we will end up round in circles so it's probably best to leave this aspect of the debate. :greengrin

[Twa Cairpets]

5. TC has posted up a link on the details. I can't say for sure if it would affect peoples lives in big cities as much but when religious belief is a part of the US constitution and a major part of the presidential elections I'd guess that it plays a big part right across the US.


Small point and a bit on the hijacky-side, but the US constitution is actually quite big on the separation of state and religion. There is a massive requirement for public schools (in the american sense of public schools) to be secular. It's one of the reasons why so many US kids are homeschooled (1.5million is the best estimate I can find). Of those homeschooled, 83% of parents said it was to "provide religious or moral instruction" (http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oii/nonpublic/statistics.html)

It's fair to say it has a huge impact on life and politics, but it isn't constitutional (although the Republicans and the Tea Party are doing their best...).

[Brizo]

Your very defensive posts, with disparaging "Dawkinista" jibes, does your position no favours at all. Would it not be better to defend what your beliefs regarding the Pope's visit and your faith by defining them in terms of the positives you believe it provides rather than by almost exclusively in terms of why atheists are bad?

Just popped back in to clear up the specific highlighted bit. Dont have the time or inclination tbh to go into this subject or my personal beliefs any further.

I know that you and Woody dont use phrases like " God botherers" in your posts but it and others are regularly used by other people in threads such as this to disparage and belittle people of religious faith. My use of "Dawkins botherers" and "Dawkinistas" was just to illustrate that point in reverse :devil:. I wasnt aiming those phrases at you but if atheists who use that language also felt disparaged , then maybe ive made my point :dunno: And if thats defensive ... mea culpa :wink:

[Hibrandenburg]

So the big guy with the long beard who lives in the sky is sending his little helper here to drum up support for his Sunday singing sessions.

Might give that one a miss.

[(((Fergus)))]

So the big guy with the long beard who lives in the sky is sending his little helper here to drum up support for his Sunday singing sessions.

Might give that one a miss.

Aw, they'll be sooo disappointed :devil:

[Hibrandenburg]

Aw, they'll be sooo disappointed :devil:

Can't be too careful with that mob. They don't like us heretics and have been known to stone to death, burn at the stake or make us suffer the comfy chair.

[Phil D. Rolls]

Can't be too careful with that mob. They don't like us heretics and have been known to stone to death, burn at the stake or make us suffer the comfy chair.

I certainly wouldn't expect that.

[Phil D. Rolls]

The Catholic church has had such bad publicity in the last couple of years the Pope will have to do a bit more than just the usual gracious hand-kissing and knee-bending.

I suggest a sensational show of Brazilian keepie-uppie on the airport tarmac when he arrives, follow that with a press conference in which he has the hacks in fits with some ironic gags and top that with a U2-style stadium band performance calling for world peace etc.

Obama could join him for the big number. There's another guy whose agent is losing sleep.

Something along the lines of:

"How did you find America"
- Turn left at Greenland

"What do you call that hairstyle"
- Arthur

"Are you a mod or a rocker"
- both, I'm a mocker

"At this moment in time, I'm bigger than Jesus"


I'm not religious, certainly not catholic and if the Pope comes around my area (don't know) I won't be going to see him.

All I've got to say to all the anti religious bigots on here is "haven't you got anything important to worry about?".

If he comes anywhere near my girls, I swear I'll do time, I blooming well will!!!!

[Green_one]

I have a summer job and obviously there is VAT which I think someone has already mentioned.

Wow, so basically your NET contribution of tax to what you recieve from state taxes is almost certainly in the negative and therefore you are in the happy position of not actually contributing the 50 pence or so you talk about.

Sort of both undermines your personal arguement and at the same time making it not applicable to yourself. Should I now try to calculate what you are costing me?

Thanks for being so altruistic that you are worried about my 50 pence but it now sounds I am probably ponying up £1 to cover your non contribution too. Bummer.

[khib70]

Wow, so basically your NET contribution of tax to what you recieve from state taxes is almost certainly in the negative and therefore you are in the happy position of not actually contributing the 50 pence or so you talk about.

Sort of both undermines your personal arguement and at the same time making it not applicable to yourself. Should I now try to calculate what you are costing me?

Thanks for being so altruistic that you are worried about my 50 pence but it now sounds I am probably ponying up £1 to cover your non contribution too. Bummer.
Naughty, naughty Jenna, furthering her education to become a more useful contributor to society, and having the audacity to work as well. People should have to produce their audited tax records for the last ten years before they are allowed to have an opinion on how public money is spent.

:rolleyes:

[ArabHibee]

Naughty, naughty Jenna, furthering her education to become a more useful contributor to society, and having the audacity to work as well. People should have to produce their audited tax records for the last ten years before they are allowed to have an opinion on how public money is spent.

:rolleyes:

There's a sweeping generalisation if ever I heard one. :rolleyes:

[heretoday]

Catholics I know are embarrassed and annoyed at the way things are going. They are dreading the Pope's visit.

There is some talk of breaking away and forming a Scottish Catholics group.

[Phil D. Rolls]

Catholics I know are embarrassed and annoyed at the way things are going. They are dreading the Pope's visit.

There is some talk of breaking away and forming a Scottish Catholics group.

I think it's been done before has it not?

There was this bloke called Martin Luther, and then this bloke called John Calvin, and this guy called John Knox kind of liked what they said.

Apparently what swung it was something to do with moving a sedan chair on the High Street so that the public could get a better view of Mary Stuart's visit.

[hibbill2002]

The Popes in Glasgow ...


and asks "Anyone who wants to be prayed over, please come forward to the front by the altar."

With that, wee Jamie got in line, and when it was his turn, the Pope asked, "My son, what do you want me to pray about for you?"

Wee Jamie replied, "Your Holiness, I need you to pray for help with my hearing."

The Pope put both hands over Jamie's ears, and then prayed and prayed and prayed. He prayed a great prayer for Jamie, and the whole congregation joined in with great enthusiasm.

After a few minutes, the Pope removed his hands, stood back and asked, "Jamie, how is your hearing now?"



Wee Jamie answered, "Ah don't know. It's not 'til next week....."

[heretoday]

I think it's been done before has it not?

There was this bloke called Martin Luther, and then this bloke called John Calvin, and this guy called John Knox kind of liked what they said.

Apparently what swung it was something to do with moving a sedan chair on the High Street so that the public could get a better view of Mary Stuart's visit.

Tee hee! I was thinking that too. :greengrin I said they'll just have to wait for Ratz to pop his clogs and get a younger, more PC type. Tony Blair would be perfect. Or Cherie?

[Phil D. Rolls]

Tee hee! I was thinking that too. :greengrin I said they'll just have to wait for Ratz to pop his clogs and get a younger, more PC type. Tony Blair would be perfect. Or Cherie?

I'm not sure the Vatican waits for Popes to pop their clogs. They tend to put these things on a fast track if they don't like the guy.

I think Daniel O'Donnell would be perfect for the job. The gigs a wee bit below the Blairs.

[JennaFletcher]

Wow, so basically your NET contribution of tax to what you recieve from state taxes is almost certainly in the negative and therefore you are in the happy position of not actually contributing the 50 pence or so you talk about.

Sort of both undermines your personal arguement and at the same time making it not applicable to yourself. Should I now try to calculate what you are costing me?

Thanks for being so altruistic that you are worried about my 50 pence but it now sounds I am probably ponying up £1 to cover your non contribution too. Bummer.

Whatever. The reasons I am against the Pope visit is primarily and most importantly because of the Vatican ideology - the tax payer thing was something I found very interesting so I put that in. Apologies if I used 'we' once or twice when talking about 'the taxpayer' and thus sending you into a mathematical frenzy.

[JennaFletcher]

Naughty, naughty Jenna, furthering her education to become a more useful contributor to society, and having the audacity to work as well. People should have to produce their audited tax records for the last ten years before they are allowed to have an opinion on how public money is spent.

:rolleyes:

Oh, forgive me patronising khib, for actually having an opinion and trying to generate some healthy discussion on a DISCUSSION board. Just because I'm a student doesn't mean I lack sense or reason (though I'm sure people who disagree with me would argue to the contrary!)

[Pretty Boy]

Oh, forgive me patronising khib, for actually having an opinion and trying to generate some healthy discussion on a DISCUSSION board. Just because I'm a student doesn't mean I lack sense or reason (though I'm sure people who disagree with me would argue to the contrary!)

I think if you read back you will see Khib is on your side so to speak.:wink:

[JennaFletcher]

I think if you read back you will see Khib is on your side so to speak.:wink:

Well even if he is on my side, he was still cheeky so incurred my wrath :greengrin

[--------]

I'm not sure the Vatican waits for Popes to pop their clogs. They tend to put these things on a fast track if they don't like the guy.

I think Daniel O'Donnell would be perfect for the job. The gigs a wee bit below the Blairs.



Yup. It's a tradition that goes back to the Renaissance - the Borgias and the Medicis tended to get a wee bit tired of waiting for their turn, so they devised ways of facilitating the handover of power, IIRC.

Conspiracy theorists and Francis Ford Coppola would have it that this practice extended into the 20th century - John Paul Mk 1 was apparently grossly dysfunctional, so they scrapped him and replaced him with JP Mk 2 who was so satisfactory they kept him going way past his optimum sell-by date.

I heard that Ratzi's going in for a re-fit soon - they've decided they need to do something about those eyes.

He's scaring the children.... :devil:

[lapsedhibee]

Oh, forgive me patronising khib, for actually having an opinion and trying to generate some healthy discussion on a DISCUSSION board. Just because I'm a student doesn't mean I lack sense or reason (though I'm sure people who disagree with me would argue to the contrary!)

Aye but what about your sense of irony, and being able to distinguish friend from foe and that? Is there a remedial course available? :dunno: :wink:

[majorhibs]

Typical insecure nonsense thats been goin on in this country by the 70 odd percent majority towards the 20 odd percent minority for the last 400 or so years. What is it really that you lot are so scared of? Not exactly as if a first visit for 28 years is a takeover bid or anything, is it?

[CropleyWasGod]

Typical insecure nonsense thats been goin on in this country by the 70 odd percent majority towards the 20 odd percent minority for the last 400 or so years. What is it really that you lot are so scared of? Not exactly as if a first visit for 28 years is a takeover bid or anything, is it?

Us lot? :confused:

[Phil D. Rolls]

Typical insecure nonsense thats been goin on in this country by the 70 odd percent majority towards the 20 odd percent minority for the last 400 or so years. What is it really that you lot are so scared of? Not exactly as if a first visit for 28 years is a takeover bid or anything, is it?

Hi MH, nice to see you back. :thumbsup: Sorry, I'm going to have to disagree with you on this one though.

I'm scared of having to pay for it. Otherwise I couldn't give a monkeys about this conjurer and his entourage.

[Brizo]

Yup. It's a tradition that goes back to the Renaissance - the Borgias and the Medicis tended to get a wee bit tired of waiting for their turn, so they devised ways of facilitating the handover of power, IIRC.

Conspiracy theorists and Francis Ford Coppola would have it that this practice extended into the 20th century - John Paul Mk 1 was apparently grossly dysfunctional, so they scrapped him and replaced him with JP Mk 2 who was so satisfactory they kept him going way past his optimum sell-by date.

I heard that Ratzi's going in for a re-fit soon - they've decided they need to do something about those eyes.

He's scaring the children.... :devil:

Thankfully your boss John Christie seems to have a far more ecumenical view of the Papal visit.

[Barney McGrew]

And as if there wasn't enough money being shelled out on policing, Paisley is sicking his oar in

http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/news/Ian-Paisley-coming-to-Capital.6529661.jp

What a tit.

[Hibbyradge]

I'm pleased that one of the world's most famous and influential men is to visit, and as a result, publicise, our little country.

Yes, the government will have to shell out a few pence on each of our behalf's to facilitate his safety, but in my view, it's worth it.

Would there be the same outcry if, say, Barack Obama was to visit Scotland? :dunno:

[Phil D. Rolls]

I'm pleased that one of the world's most famous and influential men is to visit, and as a result, publicise, our little country.

Yes, the government will have to shell out a few pence on each of our behalf's to facilitate his safety, but in my view, it's worth it.

Would there be the same outcry if, say, Barack Obama was to visit Scotland? :dunno:

A democratically elected leader who runs the world's largest economy, as opposed to abloke that is the leader of a religious sect? :hmmm: it's a toughie.

Either that or we are just bigots who have been brought up in the tradition of John Knox. :dunno:

[Hibbyradge]

A democratically elected leader who runs the world's largest economy, as opposed to abloke that is the leader of a religious sect? :hmmm: it's a toughie.



Q. So is it the method by which he was appointed that you object to, or his job?

A: Both.

I have similar thoughts about most American Presidents, but I'd still see the benefit to our country if he was to visit. Which, unlike the Pope, he won't.

Oh dear, I knew I shouldn't have got involved in this utterly polarised, and pointless, debate.

The Pope will be here on Thursday. Our country will be the focus of the world's media for a few hours, then he will return to Italy.

We can then give a huge sigh of relief and shift our attention to our everyday objects of hate, like the English, Irish Catholics, Orangemen, homosexuals etc.

By the way, Barack Obama received 349 electoral votes which represented fewer than 65 million votes out of a population of 310 million.

In doing so, he spent $700m dollars compared to McCain's $84m. (The Grauniad reports him having spent over $1000m.)

Democracy, we love it.

[Phil D. Rolls]

Q. So is it the method by which he was appointed that you object to, or his job?

A: Both.



Yes that's it in a nutshell. I can't stand the organisation he represents, and I pity those who commit their lives to it.

I wouldn't for one minute object to them having an assembly or anything else to welcome this representative of their faith. I do object to the assumption that a) everyone else should be happy about it, regardless of their faith; and b) that anyone who objects to it is doing so because they are bigoted.

However, the show will go on, and he will continue to hold his dangerous views on abortion, contraception; sex outside marriage; and the rights of women. I understand that wee business about abusing alter boys is all in the past now.

Any debate where the answer is "yes" or "no" is going to be polarised. My understanding was we were discussing whether we wanted to pay the money to have him over.

[Borders Hibby]

Typical insecure nonsense thats been goin on in this country by the 70 odd percent majority towards the 20 odd percent minority for the last 400 or so years. What is it really that you lot are so scared of? Not exactly as if a first visit for 28 years is a takeover bid or anything, is it?

No chance of a takeover, think that particular organisation needs to concentrate on not imploding all by itself. Has the catholic church ever been so unpopular, or its members so disillusioned. Paying for the visit should surely be done to the church itself, its no poor!

[khib70]

Well even if he is on my side, he was still cheeky so incurred my wrath :greengrin
I used to think students did irony really well, too:boo hoo:::greengrin I was actually having a go at the guy who was having a go at you in the tired old Paul Calf "bloody students" sort of way.

[Beefster]

A democratically elected leader who runs the world's largest economy, as opposed to abloke that is the leader of a religious sect? :hmmm: it's a toughie.

Either that or we are just bigots who have been brought up in the tradition of John Knox. :dunno:

The Pope is elected by Cardinals, most of whom lead and represent a diocese.

PS Catholicism isn't a sect.

[speedy_gonzales]

PS Catholicism isn't a sect.
,,well I dunno, catholicism could be a sect of christianity.

According to one internet source, sociologists use the word sect to refer to a religious group with a high degree of tension with the surrounding society!
In the 'english' use of sect, we often confuse it with cult, in countries where catholic is the majority, 'sect' can mean non-catholic groups.

It's all relative!?!

[hibsbollah]

PS Catholicism isn't a sect.

Catholicism is a sect. As is Protestantism and Greek and Russian orthodoxy.
Sorry to be pedantic.

Thanks to tomorrows papery japery I am unable to pick up my hire care from city centre Edinburgh, despite having paid for it and booked it 2 weeks ago. Its RC gone mad :grr::grr::grr:

[Beefster]

Catholicism is a sect. As is Protestantism and Greek and Russian orthodoxy.
Sorry to be pedantic.

I suppose it depends on what definition you use. Most folk wouldn't use it in the context that you are.

[Brizo]

Catholicism is a sect. As is Protestantism and Greek and Russian orthodoxy.
Sorry to be pedantic.

Thanks to tomorrows papery japery I am unable to pick up my hire care from city centre Edinburgh, despite having paid for it and booked it 2 weeks ago. Its RC gone mad :grr::grr::grr:

:greengrin :top marks

[Gatecrasher]

is anyone else bracing themselves for a busy commute into edinburgh tomorrow :rolleyes:

[Woody1985]

is anyone else bracing themselves for a busy commute into edinburgh tomorrow :rolleyes:

To be fair, it looks pretty much the same as the tram diversions coming from the east side of Princes St to the west end.

What time is he going along Princes St?

[Gatecrasher]

To be fair, it looks pretty much the same as the tram diversions coming from the east side of Princes St to the west end.

What time is he going along Princes St?

those dont really account for the roads being shut when the convoy is heading into town from the airport etc, my fear is they have made such a big deal about the road closures that more people will be heading into Edinburgh around the time i drive in (around 06:15) rather than the normal 0700 - 0830 ish

dont know what time he is going along princes street though

[Ed De Gramo]

Hopefully the popemobile gets a puncture and he has to get airlifted to Glasgow...tomorrow is gonna be a commute from hell for a lot of people

[Woody1985]

I was going to bus it but I think I might just cycle now just in case.

[Phil D. Rolls]

The Pope is elected by Cardinals, most of whom lead and represent a diocese.

PS Catholicism isn't a sect.

Eh, who elects them then? I don't recall being asked.


Catholicism is a sect. As is Protestantism and Greek and Russian orthodoxy.
Sorry to be pedantic.

Thanks to tomorrows papery japery I am unable to pick up my hire care from city centre Edinburgh, despite having paid for it and booked it 2 weeks ago. Its RC gone mad :grr::grr::grr:

Hire care - I've never heard it called that before. Still, I suppose it's cheaper than buying flowers, taking her out for a meal and calling her nice things. :duck:

I'll get my cat.

[The_Todd]

I notice a bunch of Weegie Orangemen are coming through to "protest", along with Ian Paisley.

I'm not religious in any way shape or form, but it depresses me how stuck in the 17th century we are.

[lyonhibs]

Anyone watching the news?? Some nutbar senior Cardinal has come out and said that the UK is "like a 3rd world country" gripped by "an aggressive atheism".

You couldn't make it up.

[Hibbie_Cameron]

Tomorrow is going to be a complete and utter nightmare going to work. As it stands ill probably be getting off the bus at haymarket and walking/running the rest of the way. Cant be bothered lookin up maps etc to see what bus goes where so good old fashioned excerise will takeover

[The Harp Awakes]

Anyone watching the news?? Some nutbar senior Cardinal has come out and said that the UK is "like a 3rd world country" gripped by "an aggressive atheism".

You couldn't make it up.

"like a 3rd world country" gripped by "an aggressive atheism"

Sounds not far off the mark to me. Anything goes in the UK nowadays - no rules, no morals. Things are getting out of control. It won't be long before we can pick and choose the sex of a kid, colour of eyes, etc. If that's what folk want then, fair enough. Not for me though.

The negativity in the media on the Pope's visit is pretty much representative of an overwelmingly non-Catholic majority in the UK. I heard statistics today that the income generation for Edinburgh from the Pope's visit will be 23 times the expense. Somehow though, the media reports focus on the cost of the visit as do many posters on this thread.

The media are famous for setting their own agenda as they are doing over the visit. Bigots will no doubt jump on the bandwagon, Ian Paisley to name but one.

Very sad that there are so many vitriolic comments on this board in relation to the Pope's visit to Scotland, which is only the 2nd in ~1500 years.

[The Harp Awakes]

So what do people all think about the Pope's visit to the UK in September?

His visit alone could cost up to £20 million in tax payers money!

He is also parading around the city of Edinburgh doing that thing that the Pope does (parading around like a enlightened being) with Keith O'Brien and other godly friends.

I'll lash out my opinions throughout this thread but I am interested to see what fellow Hibs.netters think about this.

Any devout Catholics out there? Any free-thinking Atheists? :greengrin

For me it is another fantastic opportunity to sell our beautiful city to the World in front of a TV audience of over 1 billion. Sorry for looking at the bigger picture.

Income generation to Edinburgh from the visit is estimated at 23 times the cost so sounds good to me. Let's have a Pope's visit once a year:wink:

[The_Todd]

"like a 3rd world country" gripped by "an aggressive atheism"

Sounds not far off the mark to me. Anything goes in the UK nowaday - no rules, no morals.

I'm very uncomfortable with the idea you have to be religious to have morals. I like to think of myself as an alright kinda guy. But I'm an agnostic so I must be morally bankrupt.

But, let's stay with your theory that back in the day where everyone believed with no questions asked and the world was a much better place. Those blacks knew where they belonged in those days. Women, know your limits - stay at home, produce babies and make my dinner! Not to mention some of the wonderful things that went on at the Church's behest. The inquisitions, the witch-hunts. All in the name of morality.

Oh yes. The good old days.

[The Harp Awakes]

I'm very uncomfortable with the idea you have to be religious to have morals. I like to think of myself as an alright kinda guy. But I'm an agnostic so I must be morally bankrupt.

But, let's stay with your theory that back in the day where everyone believed with no questions asked and the world was a much better place. Those blacks knew where they belonged in those days. Women, know your limits - stay at home, produce babies and make my dinner! Not to mention some of the wonderful things that went on at the Church's behest. The inquisitions, the witch-hunts. All in the name of morality.

Oh yes. The good old days.

I'm also uncomfortable with the idea that you have to be religious to have morals. The problem is that if there are no rules society breaks down.

[Ed De Gramo]

still see no point in this visit....pointless visit

[The_Todd]

I'm also uncomfortable with the idea that you have to be religious to have morals. The problem is that if there are no rules society breaks down.

The law if the land is enough rules for me. But you have to give humans some credit. I don't refrain from murder and robbery because of rules, I refrain from robbery and murder because I'm pretty sure I know right from wrong. And not because an ancient book tells me so.

[The Harp Awakes]

The law if the land is enough rules for me. But you have to give humans some credit. I don't refrain from murder and robbery because of rules, I refrain from robbery and murder because I'm pretty sure I know right from wrong. And not because an ancient book tells me so.

Well if you have the confidence in our learned politicians to set the rules then your expectations are high as they don't have good track record.

[lapsedhibee]

I'm not religious in any way shape or form, but it depresses me how stuck in the 17th century we are.
:confused: I'm not.

[Twa Cairpets]

Well if you have the confidence in our learned politicians to set the rules then your expectations are high as they don't have good track record.

So you're suggesting the rules for moral codes come from the Vatican? Or are you just have a generalised non-focussed rant on the iniquities of it all and how society is going to hell in a handbasket?

[Dashing Bob S]

So you're suggesting the rules for moral codes come from the Vatican? Or are you just have a generalised non-focussed rant on the iniquities of it all and how society is going to hell in a handbasket?

That's a good one to try to sell to the victims of child sexual abuse or people in Africa rotting away with AIDS.

If society is going to hell in a handbasket, it's in no small part down to the sterling efforts of the Vatican.

[Phil D. Rolls]

still see no point in this visit....pointless visit

Don't you mean a pontiff visit? :dunno:

[Woody1985]

"like a 3rd world country" gripped by "an aggressive atheism"

Sounds not far off the mark to me. Anything goes in the UK nowadays - no rules, no morals. Things are getting out of control. It won't be long before we can pick and choose the sex of a kid, colour of eyes, etc. If that's what folk want then, fair enough. Not for me though.

The negativity in the media on the Pope's visit is pretty much representative of an overwelmingly non-Catholic majority in the UK. I heard statistics today that the income generation for Edinburgh from the Pope's visit will be 23 times the expense. Somehow though, the media reports focus on the cost of the visit as do many posters on this thread.

The media are famous for setting their own agenda as they are doing over the visit. Bigots will no doubt jump on the bandwagon, Ian Paisley to name but one.

Very sad that there are so many vitriolic comments on this board in relation to the Pope's visit to Scotland, which is only the 2nd in ~1500 years.

How is this income broken down?

Is the money fed back into the Edinburgh economy?

As I understand it is our local services that will be used and put out. However, the money generated from visitors may go into local businesses etc but that goes to central government in the form fo VAT.

There may be longer term benefits but those are unquantifyable (sp) because they're speculation.

The reported cost is 15-20 million for the visit as a whole. How is that broken down? Is that 23 times the cost to Edinburgh which will likely be a much lesser figure than the 20 million. If it's 23x20million then damn, invite him every week. If it's 20x2 million then it's not such a big deal.


For me it is another fantastic opportunity to sell our beautiful city to the World in front of a TV audience of over 1 billion. Sorry for looking at the bigger picture.

Income generation to Edinburgh from the visit is estimated at 23 times the cost so sounds good to me. Let's have a Pope's visit once a year:wink:

Where did you get this 1 billion figure? The same press articles that you've blasted over their agendas? I read the 1 billion in the Sun.

So one in 6 people on the planet are going to be glued to their TV's today? I'd say that's quite unlikely but could be wrong. I suspect the figure has been sensationalised.

I'm away to another work building in the next few mins. I think the pope is meant to be coming along the west approach road at 10:30 so I'm going to give him a wave.

[khib70]

Tomorrow is going to be a complete and utter nightmare going to work. As it stands ill probably be getting off the bus at haymarket and walking/running the rest of the way. Cant be bothered lookin up maps etc to see what bus goes where so good old fashioned excerise will takeover
Getting off at Haymarket eh? The Pope will approve of that, all right :greengrin

[Makaveli]

TBH I'm a bit raging they cancelled Santa's visit due to it going £100k over budget last year but managed to find the money for this guy.

[RyeSloan]

A few thoughts.

Whether you belive in the teachings of the Catholic Church or not I struggle to understand how people cannot accept that the visit of a Pope to the UK is a significant event. Not just for the UK's significant amount of Catholics but as you can see by the substantial crowds for the Nation as a whole.

People of course have the right to disagree with his visit but the utterances of the like of Paisley smack of great intolerance and are certianly not very Christian! The previous Popes visit did a substantial amount of good with regards the relationship between the Church of Scotland and the Catholic Church and it seems quite odd that other branches of christianity find they are required to protest at the fact that the Pope has the audacity simply to visit another country.

Cost wise I also think it's a bit cheap to complain. As has been stated the Pope is the leader of a global power and represents billions of Catholics around the globe...to treat his visit as anything other than a state visit would seem to be tight in the extreme.

I think a few people and movements have tried to stoke the 'controversy' for their own ends but really in the end come across as slightly myopic.

I have little time for religion per se but have found the whole 'controversy' thing a bit embarrasing and I think it really does show that there is still a deep rooted streak of sectarianism in the nations psyche.

[Woody1985]

I seen the pope, it was quite intriguing to be honest. I had to walk from one end of Princes St to the other this morning around 10:40 and there was a bit of a build up then. On the way back around 12:10 the place was mobbed. There was pipers and drummers which sounded really good! The conductor was on top of one of the Princes St buildings which was quite funny. At a guess there were probably 1-200 of them.

On the way along I did see 6/7 bigot chavs who were 'gonnae knock **** oot the next **** they see wi a Celtic or Hibs top oan' and talking about setting fire to people's flags. They looked like they were going to kick off at some point.

Hopefully they never started on an individual but I suspect they wouldn't have the balls to fight a bunch of guys.

[Phil D. Rolls]

I have little time for religion per se but have found the whole 'controversy' thing a bit embarrasing and I think it really does show that there is still a deep rooted streak of sectarianism in the nations psyche.

I agree with most of your post, except the last bit. I think if people think this is down to a sectarian streak in the Scottish psyche they might be missing a much more important point.

It's almost like any criticism of the Catholic church has to be based on the fact that we are all extremist Protestants. I would have thought if that streak did exist, it would surely have shown itself much more the last time we had a papal visit.

I think there might be mileage in the fact that society's views to homosexuality, contraception and child abuse have changed quite significantly since 1982. So in the interim, the church has found itself out of kilter with what most people believe.

I think the purpose of this visit is to address these differences, and to tell people to change how they think. I'm not sure if His Holiness is talking only to RCs or to everyone, but the message is clear - "change or be damned".

The church has a right to preach to people, but what seems to be lost sometimes is that people have a right to tell "The Holy Father" to take a hike.

[Twa Cairpets]

I agree with most of your post, except the last bit. I think if people think this is down to a sectarian streak in the Scottish psyche they might be missing a much more important point.

It's almost like any criticism of the Catholic church has to be based on the fact that we are all extremist Protestants. I would have thought if that streak did exist, it would surely have shown itself much more the last time we had a papal visit.

I think there might be mileage in the fact that society's views to homosexuality, contraception and child abuse have changed quite significantly since 1982. So in the interim, the church has found itself out of kilter with what most people believe.

I think the purpose of this visit is to address these differences, and to tell people to change how they think. I'm not sure if His Holiness is talking only to RCs or to everyone, but the message is clear - "change or be damned".

The church has a right to preach to people, but what seems to be lost sometimes is that people have a right to tell "The Holy Father" to take a hike.

Yup - in his first speech of the tour he's already had a pop at secualrism, which is directly against what I view as a positive world view. If he can have a go at my "beliefs", it's fair game for me to respond in defense of my position without it being called bigotry or sectarianism

[Phil D. Rolls]

TBH I'm a bit raging they cancelled Santa's visit due to it going £100k over budget last year but managed to find the money for this guy.

Makes a change from Muslims getting the blame. Mind you, give it a couple of months.....

[MyJo]

Makes a change from Muslims getting the blame. Mind you, give it a couple of months.....

If Christmas is cancelled because of them muslims i swear i'll do time! :grr:

[RyeSloan]

Yup - in his first speech of the tour he's already had a pop at secualrism, which is directly against what I view as a positive world view. If he can have a go at my "beliefs", it's fair game for me to respond in defense of my position without it being called bigotry or sectarianism

I have no problems with people 'responding in defense of [their] position" and at no point did I say all comments against the visit were sectarian...I'm pretty non plussed by it myself and know that as a Pope he is far from popular even with his own flock.

However I do believe that some of the reaction and controversy has gone beyond simple discussion of the rights and wrongs of the church's teachings/actions to simply encompass the fact that he is a Catholic or more correctly 'non protestant'...Paisley refered to the last Pope as the Anti-Christ, don't see him directly quoted as referring to Ratz as that but the message of intolerance from quite a few is clear enough.

Finally I hear that the Pope's plane has the call signal Shepherd One....quite comical I thought!

[shamo9]

I have no problems with people 'responding in defense of [their] position" and at no point did I say all comments against the visit were sectarian...I'm pretty non plussed by it myself and know that as a Pope he is far from popular even with his own flock.

However I do believe that some of the reaction and controversy has gone beyond simple discussion of the rights and wrongs of the church's teachings/actions to simply encompass the fact that he is a Catholic or more correctly 'non protestant'...Paisley refered to the last Pope as the Anti-Christ, don't see him directly quoted as referring to Ratz as that but the message of intolerance from quite a few is clear enough.

Finally I hear that the Pope's plane has the call signal Shepherd One....quite comical I thought!

Erm, I think you're forgetting someone:I'm waiti Atheists

[Twa Cairpets]

I have no problems with people 'responding in defense of [their] position" and at no point did I say all comments against the visit were sectarian...I'm pretty non plussed by it myself and know that as a Pope he is far from popular even with his own flock.

However I do believe that some of the reaction and controversy has gone beyond simple discussion of the rights and wrongs of the church's teachings/actions to simply encompass the fact that he is a Catholic or more correctly 'non protestant'...Paisley refered to the last Pope as the Anti-Christ, don't see him directly quoted as referring to Ratz as that but the message of intolerance from quite a few is clear enough.

Finally I hear that the Pope's plane has the call signal Shepherd One....quite comical I thought!

Fair enough.

But - on this board at least - there is a tendency to have had a go at him for what he and his organisation stand for. I havent seen too much "he's a pape therefore he is bad". That's stupidity manifested as bigoted sectarianism. As an aside, I've offered wondered if you were to ask your average hun-on-the-street what is their objection to Catholicism what type of answer you'd get? I'm guessing its more likely to be "cuz he's a fenian bastirt ken, FTP" rather than "I disagree with the concept of his teachings being ex cathedra as a fundamental tenet of Catholicism, and that by my faith alone will I attain entry to heaven".

[Phil D. Rolls]

If Christmas is cancelled because of them muslims i swear i'll do time! :grr:

:faf:

[JennaFletcher]

has the Pope left yet? :greengrin

[JennaFletcher]

"like a 3rd world country" gripped by "an aggressive atheism"

Sounds not far off the mark to me. Anything goes in the UK nowadays - no rules, no morals. Things are getting out of control. It won't be long before we can pick and choose the sex of a kid, colour of eyes, etc. If that's what folk want then, fair enough. Not for me though.

The negativity in the media on the Pope's visit is pretty much representative of an overwelmingly non-Catholic majority in the UK. I heard statistics today that the income generation for Edinburgh from the Pope's visit will be 23 times the expense. Somehow though, the media reports focus on the cost of the visit as do many posters on this thread.

The media are famous for setting their own agenda as they are doing over the visit. Bigots will no doubt jump on the bandwagon, Ian Paisley to name but one.

Very sad that there are so many vitriolic comments on this board in relation to the Pope's visit to Scotland, which is only the 2nd in ~1500 years.

You mean Bigots like the Pope himself?

Many of the comments aren't vitriolic without good reason -

Reasons why the Pope is disliked:
1- his opposition to condoms is dangerous
2- his lies persecute LGBT people
3- he is soft on holocaust deniers
4- he promotes segregated schools
5- his policies make women 2nd class citizens
6- he protects paedophile preists & covers up child abuse.

I think it's safe to say it is the Pope who is aggressive and a danger to society, not Atheism.

[ancienthibby]

You mean Bigots like the Pope himself?

Many of the comments aren't vitriolic without good reason -

Reasons why the Pope is disliked:
1- his opposition to condoms is dangerous
2- his lies persecute LGBT people
3- he is soft on holocaust deniers
4- he promotes segregated schools
5- his policies make women 2nd class citizens
6- he protects paedophile preists & covers up child abuse.

I think it's safe to say it is the Pope who is aggressive and a danger to society, not Atheism.

Think you are wrong there Jenna, on that conclusion, but not necessarily on all the points you make!!

Let's be clear - I post as a Christian believer but not a Catholic and I believe there is a world of difference between the two!

For some people, here's a wee question : Can you be both a Christian and a Catholic?? (I doubt it!!)

I watched the whole of the Mass at Bellahouston yesterday and the Pope's first speech at Lambert this afternoon, and I have no doubt that the Pope's first objective is to draw all peoples to the Lord Jesus! (Just how he gets there can be debated, but I have no doubt he is sincere in his vision).

This sad world that we live in has been overrun with political correctness and the adoration of self-interest.

Despite the failings of all religious leaders, my prayer is that that there may be a fundamental reformation to the Holy Scriptures that remain unchanged, despite all the efforts of minister, popes, priests et all to assert otherwise!!

[lyonhibs]

"like a 3rd world country" gripped by "an aggressive atheism"

Sounds not far off the mark to me. Anything goes in the UK nowadays - no rules, no morals. Things are getting out of control. It won't be long before we can pick and choose the sex of a kid, colour of eyes, etc. If that's what folk want then, fair enough. Not for me though.

The negativity in the media on the Pope's visit is pretty much representative of an overwelmingly non-Catholic majority in the UK. I heard statistics today that the income generation for Edinburgh from the Pope's visit will be 23 times the expense. Somehow though, the media reports focus on the cost of the visit as do many posters on this thread.

The media are famous for setting their own agenda as they are doing over the visit. Bigots will no doubt jump on the bandwagon, Ian Paisley to name but one.

Very sad that there are so many vitriolic comments on this board in relation to the Pope's visit to Scotland, which is only the 2nd in ~1500 years.

I'm sorry, but this line - that more people that some idiotic German cardinal - have spouted about Britain being in any way comparable to a 3rd World Country really, really gets on my chebs and frankly renders those who spout it little more than total ignormasus IMO.

Britain has a health system that - despite its many faults - remains the envy of many (ask my American friend who literally presented her credit card at an A+E in London after being inadvertently glassed and could not believe that she was told no payment was necessary), we have a free (if not a bit **** at times) press, a welfare state, a good education system, a good public transport network, road and rail system (laugh all you like, but on a global scale, they are).

Britain hasn't been anything like a 3rd World country for centuries, if indeed ever, and to say otherwise denigrates the efforts, inventions and advances in all manner of fields that have got us to where we are today. Try going to a REAL 3rd World country and coming out with that pish (not directed solely at you T.H.A, just in general)

A friend of the family was the main surgeon at Bulawo General Hospital, and some of the stories he can tell about having to carry out his job with no equipment, no facilities and no money in Mugabe-run Zimbabwe would make you want to walk to your nearest NHS facility and kiss every wall, doctor and nurse in there.

And what's this rubbish about "anything goes, there are no morals anymore"?? Aye, maybe if you base your world view on "The Sun Says" or "The Mail opines" (or whatever Richard Littlejohn et al's column of hate is called).

It doesn't make good headlines to print "Actually, today, the overwhemingly vast majority of Britans will go about their daily business and cause nobody any hassle, heck, they might even achieve something or help another person"

And your subsequent point about being able to choose the colour of your baby's eyes etc - First of all, I severly doubt that such a service would ever see the light of day on the NHS, and anyway, don't you realise that the technology required to provide such a service is, if anything, TOO First world, not Third World in any way whatsoever.

FWIW, I agree with you that in the -entirely hypothetical - scenario of being able to personalise every aspect of your baby would be wrong, but the fact that we (may soon??) have the technology and expertise to do such a thing does not make Britain a "Third World country"

I personally couldn't care less about Pope John Paul II trip to the UK. My taxes go on several things I disagree with more than funding his trip. But when his mate Cardinal Gout-y says that Britain is like a 3rd World country (whether he means that on an economic, religious or social level) it makes him out to be a havering, delusional bawbag, as is anyone who agrees with him - IMO.

Rant over - slightly off topic, but there we go :greengrin

[The Harp Awakes]

I'm sorry, but this line - that more people that some idiotic German cardinal - have spouted about Britain being in any way comparable to a 3rd World Country really, really gets on my chebs and frankly renders those who spout it little more than total ignormasus IMO.

Britain has a health system that - despite its many faults - remains the envy of many (ask my American friend who literally presented her credit card at an A+E in London after being inadvertently glassed and could not believe that she was told no payment was necessary), we have a free (if not a bit **** at times) press, a welfare state, a good education system, a good public transport network, road and rail system (laugh all you like, but on a global scale, they are).

Britain hasn't been anything like a 3rd World country for centuries, if indeed ever, and to say otherwise denigrates the efforts, inventions and advances in all manner of fields that have got us to where we are today. Try going to a REAL 3rd World country and coming out with that pish (not directed solely at you T.H.A, just in general)

A friend of the family was the main surgeon at Bulawo General Hospital, and some of the stories he can tell about having to carry out his job with no equipment, no facilities and no money in Mugabe-run Zimbabwe would make you want to walk to your nearest NHS facility and kiss every wall, doctor and nurse in there.

And what's this rubbish about "anything goes, there are no morals anymore"?? Aye, maybe if you base your world view on "The Sun Says" or "The Mail opines" (or whatever Richard Littlejohn et al's column of hate is called).

It doesn't make good headlines to print "Actually, today, the overwhemingly vast majority of Britans will go about their daily business and cause nobody any hassle, heck, they might even achieve something or help another person"

And your subsequent point about being able to choose the colour of your baby's eyes etc - First of all, I severly doubt that such a service would ever see the light of day on the NHS, and anyway, don't you realise that the technology required to provide such a service is, if anything, TOO First world, not Third World in any way whatsoever.

FWIW, I agree with you that in the -entirely hypothetical - scenario of being able to personalise every aspect of your baby would be wrong, but the fact that we (may soon??) have the technology and expertise to do such a thing does not make Britain a "Third World country"

I personally couldn't care less about Pope John Paul II trip to the UK. My taxes go on several things I disagree with more than funding his trip. But when his mate Cardinal Gout-y says that Britain is like a 3rd World country (whether he means that on an economic, religious or social level) it makes him out to be a havering, delusional bawbag, as is anyone who agrees with him - IMO.

Rant over - slightly off topic, but there we go :greengrin

Ok, I agree that the 3rd world country bit was way off the mark, provided you ignore the drug and alcohol problems we have and the life expectancy in parts of Scotland being akin to 3rd World countries. On the morals and the agressive atheism side though, I think the Cardinal is spot on.

My wife works with kids with behavioural problems in a secondary school in Midlothian, not in a downtrodden area I might add. You wouldn't believe the homelife some of these kids experience and not surprisingly the kids create havoc in the classroom.

Only today, the guy in who assaulted and raped a schoolgirl in Livingston, traumatising her and devastating her life, got 5 years and 4 months in jail. The guy will likely be back on our streets in 3 years. Morals?

Before turning to the athiesm part, I should mention that my Dad is an atheist and my Mum is a devout Catholic, and I have first hand experience of the contrasting viepoints. When I was a kid my Dad used to get well p1ssed off with our local priest coming round the door to try and convert him and I reckon my Dad was spot on to be annoyed. Nowadays though the boot is on the other foot and the pushy priests have been replaced by a form of atheism that is intollerant to anyone who is religious. Just look at some of the vitriolic posts on this board about the papal visit. I think this is the form of atheism which the Pope is citing as being dangerous.

The biggest thing for me yesterday about the Pope's visit was that it showed Scotland was big enough to welcome the leader of a faith which is a minority in our country. Another thing the visit did was sell Edinburgh to 1 billion people. Who could fail to be impressed with the scenes of Princes Street and the Castle.

[speedy_gonzales]

Ok, I agree that the 3rd world country bit was way off the mark, provided you ignore the drug and alcohol problems we have and the life expectancy in parts of Scotland being akin to 3rd World countries.
Depends what you class as 3rd world? I don't think the worst of scotland compares to the worst of a (considered) 3rd world country. Health, we're not good but better than 3rd world. Life expectancy, we're not the lowest in europe so not 3rd world. And that includes the drink & drugs, do we think it doesn't exist over 'there'?



Only today, the guy in who assaulted and raped a schoolgirl in Livingston, traumatising her and devastating her life, got 5 years and 4 months in jail. The guy will likely be back on our streets in 3 years. Morals?

I don't know what 'morals' you question, he commited a crime, was caught then sentenced as per our legal system based on christian ideals. Maybe we should adopt some form of shariah law that had a more permanent punishment or should we adopt a more agnostic rehabilitation program?


Just look at some of the vitriolic posts on this board about the papal visit. I think this is the form of atheism which the Pope is citing as being dangerous.

Perhaps I'm being blinkered, or just plain pedantic, but the majority of posts have been anti-pope, not anti-catholic, there is a subtle difference. Secondly, unless the vatican has been rewritting papal messages again, the pope was warning of secularism being more of a danger than atheism.



Another thing the visit did was sell Edinburgh to 1 billion people. Who could fail to be impressed with the scenes of Princes Street and the Castle.

Although I can't deny Edinburgh looked good on camera, especially the aeriel shots, I struggle to believe that 1 billion tuned in. I base that on total global population, the number of TV sets, the local time differences, the working day, et al! What are the chances 1 in 7 of the worlds population, were off work, had a tv, were awake and had the inclination to tune in? Nah, not for me either!

[vein]

For some people, here's a wee question : Can you be both a Christian and a Catholic?? (I doubt it!!)


As a non Catholic and ex Free Church (as a nipper) I say yes you can.

But I'm interested as to why you doubt it?

[Hibbyradge]

Although I can't deny Edinburgh looked good on camera, especially the aeriel shots, I struggle to believe that 1 billion tuned in. I base that on total global population, the number of TV sets, the local time differences, the working day, et al! What are the chances 1 in 7 of the worlds population, were off work, had a tv, were awake and had the inclination to tune in? Nah, not for me either!

What a strange thing to take issue with. :confused:

It's perfectly feasible that 14% of the world's population will have seen TV pictures of the Pope's visit to Edinburgh. For those who begrudge the visit any success, that means 86% didn't.

In this modern world, news can be repeated hours after the event has happened. Sometimes I go to bed of an evening and find out what happened in other countries while I was sleeping, after I wake up and turn the TV/Radio on!

It's truly remarkable. Try it sometime! :wink:

Just out of interest, what figure would suit you better?

[IWasThere2016]

As a non-Catholic I watched the news as a point of interest/history etc. and the visit clearly brought more pleasure/happiness than otherwise IMHO.

Personally, I do find it strange that so many are devoted to a wee man with small-minded views .. But hey ho!

IMHO, most if not all churches are really just interested in your money..

[speedy_gonzales]

What a strange thing to take issue with. :confused:

It's perfectly feasible that 14% of the world's population will have seen TV pictures of the Pope's visit to Edinburgh. For those who begrudge the visit any success, that means 86% didn't.



I didn't think it was that strange Mr Radge?
I can understand how there would be a large percentage of domestic viewers, given it was held in the UK, but if pushed I'd maybe say only 50% 'watched' it. Repeats ad nauseum on a 24hr news channel that's playing in the background of a pub doesn't count(IMHO). I seen it myself on the news but that wasn't my choice, that was the editors choice and I would have seen it regardless where it was, not just because it was Edinburgh.
But globally, globally I can't see there being the vested interest we think there was. China, India & Africa. Large populations that 'generally' wouldn't have much concern to tune in to the Popes UK visit.
As for what figure I think it was? I'm not just gonna have a punt at that as there's loads of factors to take into consideration, but, until some official global TV statitician comes out with the real numbers I'll just sit here and remain sceptical. Every time something big is televised there's a reported billion viewers! Was there not a case recently when something happened and they reported more people than there is on earth watched it?
In the words of Chuck D & Flavor Flav, 'Don't believe the hype'(until proven otherwise:greengrin).

[JennaFletcher]

Think you are wrong there Jenna, on that conclusion, but not necessarily on all the points you make!!

Let's be clear - I post as a Christian believer but not a Catholic and I believe there is a world of difference between the two!

For some people, here's a wee question : Can you be both a Christian and a Catholic?? (I doubt it!!)

I watched the whole of the Mass at Bellahouston yesterday and the Pope's first speech at Lambert this afternoon, and I have no doubt that the Pope's first objective is to draw all peoples to the Lord Jesus! (Just how he gets there can be debated, but I have no doubt he is sincere in his vision).

This sad world that we live in has been overrun with political correctness and the adoration of self-interest.

Despite the failings of all religious leaders, my prayer is that that there may be a fundamental reformation to the Holy Scriptures that remain unchanged, despite all the efforts of minister, popes, priests et all to assert otherwise!!

What is wrong with political correctness? The 'correctness' bit implies that it's correct to be like that! :agree:

I'm sorry about my ignorance because I don't understand this prayer malarky.

[Woody1985]

Apologies in advance but I found this picture looking at Failblog and thought of these threads. :faf:

http://failblog.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/bc1473d5-a20d-46e8-9ef1-ca6f7efee2c4.jpg

[Phil D. Rolls]

What is wrong with political correctness? The 'correctness' bit implies that it's correct to be like that! :agree:

I'm sorry about my ignorance because I don't understand this prayer malarky.

I think people object to the "political" aspect of it. Meaning that it is done for no other reason than to score points with a particular interest group.

What disturbs me is that anything that asks people to behave in a certain way is now being labelled as PC. Particularly if it involves asking people to change the way they act or think.

It seems to me that the insult PC is about as misplaced these days as some of the original politically correct decisions, such as using words like Herstory as opposed to History.

[Betty Boop]

Did anybody watch 'The Hidden World of the Vatican, last night'? Very interesting to see what goes on behind the scenes, in the world's smallest state. The art work of Michaelangelo's frescoes, in the Sistine Chapel were absolutely awesome. Amazing it took him 14 years to complete, a sight to behold indeed. :top marks

[ancienthibby]

What is wrong with political correctness? The 'correctness' bit implies that it's correct to be like that! :agree:

I'm sorry about my ignorance because I don't understand this prayer malarky.

As Filled Rolls has pointed out, it's not 'correctness' that's the issue, but the rogue adjective 'political'. This suggest that 'correctness' is something which blows with the wind and does not provide stability to such things as morals, ethics.

It suggest a flavour of the moment approach to the setting of political objectives and has, become, in recent years more changeable than ever.:devil:

As for the 'malarky' bit, here's a starter for you:

http://www.prayerguide.org.uk/lordsprayer.htm :agree:

[Phil D. Rolls]

As Filled Rolls has pointed out, it's not 'correctness' that's the issue, but the rogue adjective 'political'. This suggest that 'correctness' is something which blows with the wind and does not provide stability to such things as morals, ethics.

It suggest a flavour of the moment approach to the setting of political objectives and has, become, in recent years more changeable than ever.:devil:

As for the 'malarky' bit, here's a starter for you:

http://www.prayerguide.org.uk/lordsprayer.htm :agree:

Yes, that's what I was trying to say.:agree:

[ancienthibby]

As a non Catholic and ex Free Church (as a nipper) I say yes you can.

But I'm interested as to why you doubt it?

Expanding on what I said, both the Free Church and the Church of Scotland (and I believe most Evangelical churches) rightly proclaim that the only way to God is through faith in the Lord Jesus. Nothing else, no good works, etc are required. Anyone who comes to faith in the Lord will know the Holy Spirit working from within, as the prayer says, 'bending and breaking, moulding and making' so that the person becomes a new person.

No other agency, no other player is required.

The Catholic Church, on the other hand, has a much more open theology which says you need faith in the Lord, plus, plus, plus. I remember a bumper sticker in the States saying 'If you can't find Jesus, call the Virgin Mary'! Sorry, but that's completely un-Scriptural!

In watching the Papal Mass at Bellahouston, I was also struck by the degree of pomp and circumstance - all the robes, vestments, incense, etc. If you read the NT you will find none of that, instead you'll find the Lord Jesus deals in the sparsest of accompaniements, just a band of faithful disciples who carry only the clothes they stand in, a belt and a staff.

Faith alone in the Lord Jesus. That's it. Alone. Nothing else!

[tony higgins]

Expanding on what I said, both the Free Church and the Church of Scotland (and I believe most Evangelical churches) rightly proclaim that the only way to God is through faith in the Lord Jesus. Nothing else, no good works, etc are required. Anyone who comes to faith in the Lord will know the Holy Spirit working from within, as the prayer says, 'bending and breaking, moulding and making' so that the person becomes a new person.

No other agency, no other player is required.

The Catholic Church, on the other hand, has a much more open theology which says you need faith in the Lord, plus, plus, plus. I remember a bumper sticker in the States saying 'If you can't find Jesus, call the Virgin Mary'! Sorry, but that's completely un-Scriptural!

In watching the Papal Mass at Bellahouston, I was also struck by the degree of pomp and circumstance - all the robes, vestments, incense, etc. If you read the NT you will find none of that, instead you'll find the Lord Jesus deals in the sparsest of accompaniements, just a band of faithful disciples who carry only the clothes they stand in, a belt and a staff.

Faith alone in the Lord Jesus. That's it. Alone. Nothing else!

As someone taught by Jesuits, good man.
Don,t be letting these idolaters away with nothing.
Next thing you know they,ll be trying to start up football teams.

[ancienthibby]

As someone taught by Jesuits, good man.
Don,t be letting these idolaters away with nothing.
Next thing you know they,ll be trying to start up football teams.
:greengrin