Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

... to Protest the Pope?

508 replies

stubbornhubby · 08/09/2010 09:03

A friend of mine told me at the weekend that this will make me an extremist...anyway we had a long thread about this in July and a few people said they'd be keen, like me, to wave a banner as he parades around the country.

There's a big march in London on Sat 18th, Hyde park Corner @ 1.30pm
details here
www.protest-the-pope.org.uk/

Also, if you live in SW London, a Small demo in Strawberry Hill on Fri 17th @9am. (NB official visti website says you will not be able to see the pope arrriving/departing SMUC - I think he must be using helicopter. Or apparating Smile)

OP posts:
Tinnitus · 17/09/2010 12:29

Treats

Nice try but that sort of obfuscation is out of date. Mr. Ratzinger has changed the rules.

If you feel you are a "beacon on a hill" then you must accept that we will wish to counter your stance or you could very well come down and douse you torch.

I am talking about your defence against reason.

Every debate with believers end with a demand for me to respect their faith.

You can't defend faith, that is an oxymoron.

I knew before your last post that you would struggle with logic.

hobnobsaremyfavourite · 17/09/2010 12:30

Tinitus I say this with respect but you really don't sound very well.

TheCoalitionNeedsYou · 17/09/2010 12:32

Tinnitus - I've been quite happily arguing with people about this for a while now. I don't think the Pope's statement makes any difference to what I can or can't do. I don't respect faith. I respect people. This hasn't changed.

PaulineCampbellJones · 17/09/2010 12:33

Still not answering my rooting out and deprogramming question.....

Tinnitus · 17/09/2010 12:33

TheCoalitionNeedsYou

I'm sorry you feel that way, I'm not sure what you feel is to be gained by taking the softly softly approach that has lead us to this state of affairs. If I am going to be painted as an aggressive Atheist, then I am going to debate with what I see as aggressive delusion.

TheCoalitionNeedsYou · 17/09/2010 12:34

Anyway, lets not get wholly derailed - Treats - 12:09?

curryfreak · 17/09/2010 12:34

Crumpet,- hardly matters. He was asked here and it is a state visit.

cory · 17/09/2010 12:35

For anyone who has read a little church history, this idea that you cannot criticise the current pope without making an all out attack on the Catholic faith seems very odd. Yes, the infallibility doctrine has (sadly) been invented since, but that only applies to pronouncements on matters of faith made ex cathedra. There is absolutely nothing in the Catholic faith that says that dislike or criticism of an individual Pope is an attack on the faith. And as far as I am aware, the use or non use of condoms (or the doings of nuns in Catholic foundling homes) is not a matter of doctrine. Hence the Pope, even to Catholics, does not have to be infallible on these subjects. And anyone is perfectly free to think him a ratbag without feeling the need to leave the Catholic church. As I believe lots of Catholics do.

Treats · 17/09/2010 12:36

TCNY

There are a lot of Catholics who ignore the teachings of the church on contraception - me included - they accept the logic of the argument, but make pragmatic choices for the sake of themselves and the people they love.

I can't follow your train of thought in the third paragraph. To be clear about what I was saying - I think that women are at greater risk of contracting HIV from men who perpetuate sexual violence against them, than from their religious beliefs preventing them from using a condom.

basically, I'm frustrated that everyone wants to focus on the condom issue when they could address the wider issue (to my mind anyway) of the inequality in sexual relations between men and women.

Personally I doubt that the Pope suddenly backtracking and saying that condoms are a good idea would make any difference at all to HIV in Africa - although I accept your point about the stance being used to force laws through and contributing to social pressure.

Tinnitus · 17/09/2010 12:37

PaulineCampbellJones

Sorry, I didn't spot that one. I mean that in debates, it is fair now to challenge Catholics and pursue the discussion regardless of their sentimentality about their faith. I don't have to go easy on followers of a church that want to challenge my beliefs.

curryfreak · 17/09/2010 12:39

I dont care that tinnitus doesn't respect catholics or the catholic faith. It will make no difference at all to the way i live my life. She's ovviously got an agenda of her own and has real issues. Anyone with that amount of hate in their heart must do.

Tinnitus · 17/09/2010 12:40

TCNY

Of course I respect people. not sure where I said anything different.

Tinnitus · 17/09/2010 12:42

curyfreak

You might be on to something there. Now that the privilege of faith is gone, you'll need a way to end a debate you can't win. sanctimony might be your last hope.

hobnobsaremyfavourite · 17/09/2010 12:46

I'm beginining to wonder if Tinitus is one and the same as that Breton poster who spouted bile about learning disabilities similar posting style and both seem quite angry.

TheCoalitionNeedsYou · 17/09/2010 12:47

The third paragraph was just saying that very literal reading of your case was probably true, but trivially so. I didn't really think that is what you meant.

The problem with the wider issue, important though it is, is that is it SO much harder to address.

Increased condom use would save lives immediately. The best answer is to do both.

Would the Pope changing his stance on condom use make a difference to HIV in Africa? Probably. It's not a magic bullet clearly, US opposition is mainly protestant for a start.

I will ask the people I know who work in International Health what research/concensus there is.

TheCoalitionNeedsYou · 17/09/2010 12:48

Tinnitus - Just that saying "yah boo you're all a bunch of cunts" doesn't do much to change peoples minds or encourage them to engage with using reason to explore ideas.

Treats · 17/09/2010 12:48

Tell me what I obfuscated and I'll clarify.

The 'beacon on a hill' phrase means that by demonstrating my Catholic faith through the way I live my life would attract other people to the faith. It's not a stance. It doesn't demand anything of you. If you don't want to do that, then live your life differently. There's no call for you to come and 'counter' me.

Not being flippant - I realise it's a typo - but what does 'douse you torch' mean? Are you saying that you regard my choices as a challenge and you therefore have a right to try and force me to change them?

I didn't realise you were talking about a defence against reason - presumably you're saying that you've argued things from a scientific point of view with people of faith before and they've ended by saying that their faith trumps everything and they don't have to be convinced by your rational arguments if they don't want to be? Maybe your arguments weren't as convincing to others as they are to you?

Tinnitus · 17/09/2010 12:51

hobnobsaremyfave

I get the impression that if I looked up post I would get quite angry at your association. I have never posted here on any subject related to special need, nor under any other name.

It is sad you have resorted to this kind of tactic.

Tinnitus · 17/09/2010 12:54

TheCoalitionNeedsYou

Please feel free to find where I said that or any thing of the sort. This is clearly not a debate on the merits of reason Vs faith but the state visit and its effects, I believe I have stuck to that.

crumpet · 17/09/2010 12:56

Curryfreak, was more a point of interest in that it was not a personal invitation from the Queen, or from the Catholic community. The government invited the Pope, so the taxpayers pay. People should complain to the government if they object to the costs.

hobnobsaremyfavourite · 17/09/2010 12:57

Tinitus don't make assumptions I am actually more on your "side" than you will ever know but I find your tone deeply unpleasant and an insult to those of us who try and put our views across in a measured and rational tone. I also find after what you have said to others on this thread that you pull the "poor little me " attitude with my post quite frankly pathetic.

Treats · 17/09/2010 12:58

TCNY - the more delicate issue that gets drowned out in the shrillness of "The Pope opposes condom use - murderer!!" is whether increased condom use would be more effective than decreased sexual activity in preventing the spread of HIV.

I profoundly believe if there were a greater amount of sexual equality in the developing world, if women had the capacity to make choices about who they sleep with and when, that a reduction in sexual activity would be the result, and that this would be more effective in bringing down rates of HIV. And this view is more a product of being a feminist than being a Catholic, but - unexpectedly - it happens to chime with what the church teaches.

I would be interested to hear what the research has to say on this.

curryfreak · 17/09/2010 13:02

Fair enough crunpet. I couldnt actually make the link work
Yes if people people strongly about the cost then they should of course complain to the government.

Tinnitus · 17/09/2010 13:02

Treats

Is your leader states that you are to hold yourselves up as models to us all that you must accept the case of those who strongly disprove of your morality. you can distance yourself from him, or you can take the flack.

In previous debates I have always run into the argument that faith trumps reason because it is enough just to believe, and I must respect that. Now Mr. Ratzinger has put you all in the position where you must take Me on and I have no faith, so you have to come up with something new or concede the argument. Bear in mind this was his idea.

It wasn't a typo, it was a metaphor.

TheCoalitionNeedsYou · 17/09/2010 13:04

Tinnitus - "Now we can say without counter that Catholics are deluded and sad and most be rooted out and deprogrammed, the insidious lies they tell to children to perpetuate their position can now be roundly exposed without the cry that"we must respect their faith."

  1. I don't think we can say it without counter. I think they could counter it with "Don't be so rude"
  2. "You must respect my faith" is a position (and I think a false one) unaffected by what the Pope says or doesn't say.
  3. Saying " You only think that because your Mummy/Daddy/Priest told you" isn't the best way to get a response from people. Asking WHY they believe things and what the consequences of that belief is (IME) more fruitful.

And I'm someone who has no problem with the 'believing in God is the same as believing in Fairies' argument. Even though this argument has never actually got me anywhere...