In not wanting The Pope to visit uk at the taxpayers expense?

[Alouiseg]

Apparently The visit wil cost 12m pounds. That's 12 million pounds to be pinched from other budgets. For a man who has been responsible for covering up crimes against children.

My MP will receive an email today and I will make my abhorrence very clear.

whomovedmychocolate I think it's pretty apparent that the only consistency is that ordinary people are being austere but politician/heads of state/obscure royals? Not so much!!

Spacehopper5 - A lot more could be done to bring these people to justice, no arguments from me. But the statement that "Child abuse is entrenched in the Catholic church" is a bit misleading. There are plenty of safeguarding mechanisms in place now and have been for the best part of a decade to keep children safe and plenty of priests who have spoken out against child abuse in the church's past.

poppymouse "I don't think we'd be hosting visit and rolling out the red carpet from a "proper" head of state if that state was complicit in protecting child abusers. " - In an ideal world you'd be right, of course. But as others have pointed out George W. Bush got to come and visit and have his visit bankrolled by tax payers and when you think of the number of innocent people who have died in Afghanistan and Iraq under his leadership as president and commander in chief of the US Army, I think it's fair to say that the Pope is no worse than some of the heads of state whose visits we've all had to fund.

Tattyhead - "Most of this country is complicit in crimes against children - most crimes against children are committed by their parents". Good point

i think there's going to be SERIOUS protests in Glasgow, i really don't want to be part of the whole thing. I wish it wasn't happening, i live in a traditionally 'Catholic' area and i don't want to be a target for violence because of this.

Telling uneducated people in Africa that condoms spread HIV is tantamount to murder. If you agree with this man you agree with genocide.

Why are so many people so ignorant???

He's a Head of State and the spiritual leader for one of the largest practising Christian groups within the UK.

Who on earth suggested just Catholics should pay for this?? What next - suggesting just Jews pay up next time the Israeli PM visits?

Pathetic.

spiritual leader my arse. As long as you're not black, gay or a woman, maybe.

We shouldn't be spending any money on things like this when we don't have enough for schools and hospitals.

If your family is suddenly short of money to buy the kids clothes you don't invite people over for a party at your expense.

"The head of Catholics in England and Wales, The Most Rev Vincent Nichols, said that the four-day tour in September will be a "very significant moment" for the country particularly in straitened economic times."

Yeah, It will waste more of what little money we have left.

If it were up to me I'd tell the queen we can't afford to support all the hangers-on and I'd tell heads of state that while they are welcome to meet for discussions we can't afford expensive parades and banquets.

Of course there are going to be serious protests in Glasgow -- huge Orange community there. Any excuse for having a go at Catholics, in the marching season or thereabouts.

Black? Are there no black Catholics? Does the Catholic Church refuse baptism to black people? Have you ever cracked open a book?

Here's an example, one among many, of the Ku Klux Klan's antipathy toward Catholics in the US. Apparently Catholics there ranked with black people and Jews as equally worthy of the contempt of the Klan.

Black and female Catholic here!

well, obviously not agreeing with Catholicism makes someone a klan member. What is your point?

There are loads of black Catholics, i'm just not convinced the Pope's happy about it since he's trying to murder Africans.

I don't agree with the Orange crowd either, but thanks for that gem of wisdom.

See? You can't talk about this subjects because whatever you say, Catholics think you're accusing them of being paedophiles. It's the most amazing defensive tactic, actually, because you then have to stop what you're saying to reassure them that you're not saying that - and before you know it the conversation is right off the rails.

I do not think all catholics are paedophiles. I do not think all catholics knew all about the paedophilia that was going on from beginning.

However, I do think any Catholic now who is not up in arms and protesting about the way the Church hierarchy behaved and is behaving is colluding with paedophiles.

What are you smoking, JennyPiccolo?

He is not really a proper head of state
The Holy See (which is what he is head of, actually, not the Vatican ) is not a bona fide state. For instance it is not a member of the UN.
On the Saturday of the tour he is going to lecture us all about family values (code anti gay, anti IVF, anti contraception ) no visiting head of state would be so rude

There's not even a semblance of debate here, if you need to resort to being personal you've lost the argument already.

Thank you Rockbird and Unfit mum!
Noted.

George W. Bush was very inclined to lecture (incoherently), iirc.

The Holy See is recognised as sovereign for the purposes of international law. It is not a member of the UN, but has observer status. Membership of the UN is not a prerequisite for statehood.

Let's start a list Spacehopper5

Copy and paste to continue it, obviously don't know the correct terminology but these were a start.

Failing to report a crime
Failing to protect a child from harm
Failing to protect a community from an abusive priest.

Condemning millions of innocent men, women and children to death from AIDS by using propaganda to discourage the use of condoms.

Being head of an organisation that threatened to excommunicate women having an abortion but was happy to minister to actual murderers - as long as they were Catholic murders (in Ireland, probably other countries too).

Threatening the doctors who wished to carry out an abortion on a child victim of incest in Latin America (old MN thread, would have to dig it out).

'Catholic murderers' obviously!

Gosh - does anyone on here form there opinions from anything other then the popular media? For example, based on the [hushed tones] 'facts'? But lets not let the facts get in the way of all the big talk and language of outrage shall we. Carry on with your list - I can sense your vitriol and spleen.

Twas the only blardy thing Henry VIII got right

Roobie, perhaps you'd care to give us any facts you have that show the church is not guilty of institutionalised child abuse and a cover up of that abuse spanning decades, across every continent and with tens of thousands of victims?

I seem to remember the Pope is supposed to lead a religion based on the teachings of someone who said 'suffer the little children to come unto me'...

Is the church still actively hampering the police investigations? Doesn't helping with the getaway make you an "accessory after the fact"

Oh, Henry VIII merely thought he was more Catholic than the Pope! That's why it still says 'Defender of the Faith' on our coins - a title given to Henry by the then Pope before all that business with Anne B. He wasn't actually terribly keen on protestantism, merely wanted a Catholic church that did his bidding!