Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
14 September 2010
23:1070754ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
14 September 2010
23:1270757You have not said anything about the sweets yet.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
14 September 2010
23:1570760VIC
I wasn't going to mention the sweets, but now that you have gone public,,,,,,,,,,,
Was it your maker (cod) that told you to buy cheap sweets
offer me one then proceed to eat all of my Thorntons expensive chocolates
lol
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
14 September 2010
23:1870763As I said I am not a very nice person and always looking out for the best for myself.
15 September 2010
00:2970766Howard, type "catholic sex abuse" into Google, count the 1.7m results that come up, and then explain to me why my original posting is "unsubstantiated". Oh and let's not forget to add to the sordid list the fact that the Catholic establishment is noted for endless cover-ups and sheltering its own in-house criminals, fundamentally sexist, homophobic, intolerant, responsible for helping the spread of AIDS in third world countries because of their anti-contraceptive policy, racist... and they even have their own in-house holocaust denier.
This stuff is all over the web, it's all a matter of public record, it's in the news, it's bloody everywhere. And trust me, far worse material is out there than what I did, and they ain't getting sued by nobody.
One more thing, please don't twist my words. At no point have I abused Catholics. If anything I actually feel a bit sorry for Catholics at the moment, none of this is their fault and I'm sure many of them are just as disgusted with all this as I am. I am attacking the Catholic church, as in the establishment, directly.
This very evening on the Channel 4 news, a Catholic priest was interviewed in which he was challenged about the pedophile question. He said that it isn't the sort of thing you ask a new priest, but the reporter suggested that maybe it should be. His reply was that the first, most important priority for any new priest was to establish his loyalty to Christ. In other words, the religious dogma is far more important that child welfare.
And I am livid that my very hard earned tax money is funding a visit by the Pope. Surely I have a right to a refund on this one? This, to me, is the absolute polar opposite of good value.
Guest 695- Registered: 30 Mar 2010
- Posts: 426
15 September 2010
00:3170767I've always said I wouldn't comment on religious or political threads. However, I did see Rick's original post and will pick up on what some seem to be missing here in my opinion.
Why are we paying for the Head of the Catholic church (or any other) to make a visit to this country? The Vatican has an abundance of money and so could easily pay for this visit themselves.
Howard, I'm sure they're far less worried about what's said on this or any other forum and I don't think your put-down helped without actually quoting what the original post contained. It could, however, attract more attention to the thread.
Rick - love your well-placed typos
15 September 2010
01:4470768I have to agree 100% with Rick on this one, although for me religion has too many unanswered questions to believe in any of it.
I did used to enjoy Father Ted though!
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
15 September 2010
07:4270777Us Catholics get a fair bit of kicking these days, across all the media, we are almost used to it. But some of it with regard to the Pope's visit has been a bit of a shock. Clearly the horrific paedophile situation has inflicted cataclysmic harm to the church and massive PR rebuilding across all nations is needed. Hence the idea of this Papal visit.
I think its probably normal isnt it, to pick up the tab when a head of state or a head of church visits, because they will have been invited in the first place. You dont invite someone to dinner and then charge them for it...so personally am not too worried about the cost but am worried about the furore, because if the furore continues the goodwill idea of the visit will be lost.
Yes indeed the criticism has been fierce so it makes one wonder if the timing of this visit is good. Even Prime Minister Cameron, mindful of the high level of criticism which will have reached the very steps of the Vatican, issued a statement yesterday saying the Pope was "very welcome". Clearly trying to calm the situation.
When the last Pope came ( in 1982 I think it was), it was hugely successful. He pottered around in his PopeMobile and was mobbed everywhere. He was of course a very popular Pope, charismatic and likeable, and it was prior to the paedophile scandals being known.
This current Pope is not quite the same, however perhaps he never had a chance as this horrific scandal of paedophilia exploded all over his papalcy.
I myself am not a practising Catholic these days but its in the roots, and once in there its never out. So I am hoping that this visit will in the end be a success and spread some goodwill and peace.
Guest 695- Registered: 30 Mar 2010
- Posts: 426
15 September 2010
08:1370781Paul, thanks for putting your point across so well.
I understand what you're saying about picking up the tab - but if this is PR then the company (ie Vatican) should pick up the bill in my opinion.
Guest 703- Registered: 30 Jul 2010
- Posts: 2,096
15 September 2010
08:5870786I saw Rick's original post and given the known facts I thought it was quite reasonable.
Regarding the cost of the visit, one of the TV news programs yesterday pointed out that the visit of the previous pope was purely pastoral, whereas this one is both pastoral and as Head of State, so there ought to be some split between who pays but I don't know enough of the facts to comment any further on that.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
15 September 2010
09:0570790It was not what Mr Jones said so much but the way he said it with the photo to that was not right on open forum.
Guest 645- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,463
15 September 2010
09:0670791The Catholic Church has pledged £7m towards the cost.
As a matter of comparison Mgr Summersgill estimated the last visit by a pope, in 1982, cost between £15m and £16m.
According to the Bank of England's inflation calculator, an event costing £16m in 1982 would cost about £42m today
So all in all not to bad a deal.
We pay for the Yanks to visit but don't always agree with their foreign or domestic policies. Similar to Amin,the Ruskies, Mugabe et al.
Marek
I think therefore I am (not a Tory supporter)
15 September 2010
09:2270793So, do I detect a catholic pogrom against Rick's views on this subject?
For my part I don't want the pope here in any guise, religious or political. He presides over a corrupt society doing little to root out and punish those who enjoy attacking little children. Until that record changes he should stay well away.
If I had my way, I'd gather together all the Paedos I could muster, put them in one place, and invite Herr Pope to go wash away their sins, if he could. Once he'd finished I would set fire the place. Good riddance to the lot of them.
This thread isn't about the existence of God but as some have raised it, let me remind folks that Yahweh, the other name for our God, was a god of war and one to be feared. So maybe some of those bad things we do, "in his image" are to be expected and so we shouldn't be so surprised.
Turning to the Catholic Church and in furtherance of Colins post, this is the church that advocated the burning at the stake of heretics. You know, folks who had a brain and challenged and thought differently (Wycliffe etc.). This is the church that failed to denounce Nazism. This is the church where one can often find a 'club' to go and rat-arsed after service. This is the church that condemns those who seek protection from unwanted pregnancies. This is the church which is the richest on the planet, yet presides over some of the poorest people in western civilisation. The list is almost endless.
None of these failings are the failings of God, they are the failings of man in God's name.
Guest 645- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,463
15 September 2010
09:5570808Sid
I am not keen on the way the Israeli's treat the Palestinians nor the French and their treatment and deportation of the Roma etc but we have Sarkozy (who recently organised a helicopter at state cost for Cameron to visit his dying father) over here for a bit of entente cordial etc so don't let your religious views cloud the issue. Maybe Cameron and other world and church leaders will be able to persuade the Pope to deal with the current problems of the Catholic church more firmly. Simply banning him or failing to recognise him as a state leader helps no-one including the victims of the abuse.
Marek
I think therefore I am (not a Tory supporter)
15 September 2010
10:0770813Good morning Marek, I trust you feel a bit better today?
My view regarding religious heads visiting my country is the same whatever the religion. My country is protestant Church of England, plus a couple of derivatives. I have no interest in the top Mussie, Buddhist, Catholic, Mormon etc., visiting. They have no busniess in my country and I don't want them here.
I don't want allegiance to my country dissipated via religious pressure, and it clearly is in the case of mussies and catholics whose allegiance is to Allah and Rome. An old fashioned view maybe, but on I subscribe to.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
15 September 2010
10:1770816Definitely an old-fashioned view, Sid, but you are entitled to hold it. Equally then the Saudis and Iranians must be justified in banning Christian churches and imprisoning without trial those who practise any religion other than Islam on their soil? Did you know that missionary activity (technically, under Sharia law) still attracts the death penalty in Saudi Arabia to this day?
PG.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
15 September 2010
10:2670817This will always be a hot potatoe as they say.
And SID you hold the opinion that the church of England is whiter than white when in fact they are no better as individuals.
MAREK
I share your view on this, Ia have issues with all religions, but many bridges need to be built and hopefully this can be one of them.
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
15 September 2010
11:5570836You all are now going over my head with this one,all I know is God is there for all of us and at some point we will all need him you might not say so on the forum because that is beween you and him,but i tell the public how I am feeling and have always been the same about talking about our God.
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,895
15 September 2010
12:0070839I believe a lot of the hostility to this visit is purely because of the man himself, he does seem anywhere near as not popular as his predecessor.
I have no time for any religion, most wars and conflict seem to be relion based. I think Sid's post is a good example of how wars can get started.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
15 September 2010
12:0470840Peter, I am aware of what goes on in Saudi, likely to be there myself in the next few months if I get the contract I am after. However, I will be a visitor in their country and expect to abide by THEIR laws, not mine.
Keith, where did I say the CofE what whiter than white? Don't invent things people don't say please.
Vic, you are the only one going on about God. Not one posting, even Rick's, has denied the existence of a god. This thread is about religious sects and their behaviour etc.
