milquetoast1 Posted April 25, 2010 Share Posted April 25, 2010 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/7628752/Ministers-apologise-for-insult-to-Pope.html I wonder what this guy's IQ is ? Presumably quite hight to be working at that level in the Foreign Office but it doesn't seem to prevent his being stupid Here's a list of the 20 proposals listed by the joker at the foreign office: - Launch of 'Benedict' condoms - Review of Vatican attitude on condom use - Bless a civil partnership - Reversal of policy on women bishops/ordain woman - Open an abortion ward - Speech on equality - Statemen on views over adoption (change of stance) - Training course for all bishops on child abuse allegations - Harder line on child abuse—announce sacking of dodgy bishops - Vatican sponsorship for network of AIDS clinics - Meet young unemployed people - Apologize for… … - Canonise/pseudo canonise a group - Announce whistle blowing system for child abuse cases - Go to job centre - Debate on abortion - All catholic schools should be free entry to all - Speech on democracy - Vatican and C of E funded committee on dialogue - Launch helpline for abused children Although all of these are clearly meant to be offensive and a joke, most of them actually seem very reasonable to any sensible person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donkey Posted April 25, 2010 Share Posted April 25, 2010 So some junior at the FO refused to treat the visit of the Noncemaster General with the gravitas which it doesn't deserve. Big deal! Its merely a reflection of the widely held feeling that he isn't welcome here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berberis Posted April 25, 2010 Share Posted April 25, 2010 So some junior at the FO refused to treat the visit of the Noncemaster General with the gravitas which it doesn't deserve. Big deal! Its merely a reflection of the widely held feeling that he isn't welcome here. In actual fact, the Catholic Church (back in 2007) had supposed the Anglican Church in attendance meaning Catholicism was now (then) the largest religion in the UK. This may have changed over the last few years, but I cannot find any up-to-date figures. Ref: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1573452/Britain-has-become-a-Catholic-country.html Britain is in essence a catholic country with 72% of the population that identifies itself as Christian with those of no religion only numbering 15% back in 2001. Ref: http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=293 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donkey Posted April 25, 2010 Share Posted April 25, 2010 In actual fact, the Catholic Church (back in 2007) had supposed the Anglican Church in attendance meaning Catholicism was now (then) the largest religion in the UK. This may have changed over the last few years, but I cannot find any up-to-date figures. Ref: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1573452/Britain-has-become-a-Catholic-country.html Britain is in essence a catholic country with 72% of the population that identifies itself as Christian. Those statistics are nonsense. most people in this country are Atheists or Agnostics. Of those that are christian, catholics make up the minority. Besides. I come from generations of catholics and was educated in catholic schools, so I feel more qualified than most people to say I don't want him here, and although he entitled to come, he certainly doesn't deserve a respectful official reception, and he certainly isn't entitled to the same type of reception which democratically elected foreign leaders get. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berberis Posted April 25, 2010 Share Posted April 25, 2010 Those statistics are nonsense. most people in this country are Atheists or Agnostics. Of those that are christian, catholics make up the minority. Besides. I come from generations of catholics and was educated in catholic schools, so I feel more qualified than most people to say I don't want him here, and although he entitled to come, he certainly doesn't deserve a respectful official reception, and he certainly isn't entitled to the same type of reception which democratically elected foreign leaders get. The stats are from the national census so are not nonsense, just because they disagree with your point of view, that doesn’t make them wrong. 72% of people described themselves as Christian. You have to acknowledge that fact. It’s just not the case. I’m atheist (Humanist) but I know for sure we are not in a majority. In all respects, the pope is democratically elected and the head of a nation be it a small one, but just because you disagree doesn’t mean everyone else should lose out. You’re saying the minority should come before the majority aren’t you because you are a member of that minority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greybeard Posted April 25, 2010 Author Share Posted April 25, 2010 The Telegraph broke the story, the other media followed. Did you see this? The Indie ran a number of adverts that pointed out Rupert Murdoch owns 40% of the print media and has gambled everything on a tory election win so that the Conservative party and Murdoch can have a lovely cosy, mutually lucrative relationship. The Telegraph broke the story because the memo was leaked directly to them, just as they were the paper to publish the details of MPs expenses, because the details were leaked to them, and eventually the rest of the MSM latched onto the story. Murdoch has nothing to do with the Telegraph, so why bring him into it ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donkey Posted April 25, 2010 Share Posted April 25, 2010 The stats are from the national census so are not nonsense, just because they disagree with your point of view, that doesn’t make them wrong. 72% of people described themselves as Christian. You have to acknowledge that fact. . No I don't. it's not a fact. as is pointed out in this link, although 72% identified themselves as 'christian' more than half said they did not believe in God. http://www.vexen.co.uk/UK/religion.html So how is that? Obviously, they were talking about how they would identify themselves culturally. As with all statistics, it is easy to back up your own opinions by highlighting the ones which suit you, without context, and failing to mention the others. Lies lies and damned statistics. In all respects, the pope is democratically elected and the head of a nation be it a small one, The Pope is only elected by cardinals who gain their positions through appointment only, and choose the papal candidates from exclusively among themselves. That is not democracy. . but just because you disagree doesn’t mean everyone else should lose out. . Lose out on having a man who is implicated in the cover up of widespread child sex abuse being given the red carpet treatment? Speak for yourself, but I think you are deluding yourself that you are speaking on behalf of 'everyone else.' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vague_Boy Posted April 25, 2010 Share Posted April 25, 2010 A source told the BBC News website Unattributed sources, don'tcha just love 'em? They can say pretty much anything and get away with it. Just who are these convenient "sources"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chem1st Posted April 25, 2010 Share Posted April 25, 2010 If you break the noses of the people who came up with the list, does the pope give you a bloody big gold sovereign to wear? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloomdido Posted April 25, 2010 Share Posted April 25, 2010 Looks like the poap may cancel his visit now. Nothing to do with the risk that he might be arrested? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.