Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

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

558 replies

Alouiseg · 06/07/2010 07:40

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.

OP posts:
JennyPiccolo · 06/07/2010 23:09

only if you're a prole.

Roobie · 06/07/2010 23:18

I wasn't just talking about the sex abuse scandal but no, I think I'll leave you ladies to your hate-filled foaming at the mouth. I'm not mentally geared up for a catholic apologetics session at the moment.

edam · 06/07/2010 23:23

right, so objecting to widespread child abuse and the cover-up of child abuse is 'hate-filled foaming at the mouth' now then, is it? If so, I'm quite happy to be on the 'hate-filled' side. Better that than colluding in child abuse.

ivykaty44 · 06/07/2010 23:26

I would far rather be foaming at the mouth than connected with an organisation that covers up it's wrong doings whilst people suffer

Roobie · 06/07/2010 23:28

Thank you, your perspective is duly noted.

Original poster
Alouiseg · 06/07/2010 23:41

Yup, put me down for some hate filled foaming too.

OP posts:
onagar · 06/07/2010 23:42

Last time this subject came up we had some Catholics saying "well of course the pope ordered it kept it from the police. That was so he could investigate it himself" as though that made any legal or moral sense.

Presumably a different lot of Catholics to the ones claiming he didn't keep information about abuse from the police.

Can we put both lots in a room together so they can get their stories straight.

LittleMissSnowShine · 06/07/2010 23:47

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

Having spent 14 years in Catholic school and living in a mixed part of Belfast I have my own ambivalent feelings about the pope, the church etc etc but this seems like a pretty blanket statement. Catholc Church follows Natural Law doctrine as formulated by Thomas Aquinas and its essentially deontologist in moral outlook, ie. acts matter as much as, if not more than, consequences.

There's plenty of room to point the finger and call the church hypocritical over child abuse or the fact that things like organ donation and blood transfusions seem to be a bit of a shady area under natural law but they're not forbidden while IVF/condoms are.But the Catholic church's position on condoms is pretty clear - sex must always be open to the possibility of procreation. Using condoms/the pill/coil etc all preclude this so they're hardly going to be recommending using them!

Saying the pope wants to murder Africans and anyone who agrees with him (ie. is a practicing Catholic) is guilty of genocide seems akin to sheer religious intolerance to me tho.

And, as previously stated, while £12m is hardly an insubstantial amount of money, esp during a recession, it is a drop in the ocean of what the government spends on other ludicrous things so it's hardly worth getting this worked up about this one specific instance of too much public money being spent on something. Are people equally offended that we pay a TV licence that goes towards putting on TV programs like Songs of Praise?

onagar · 06/07/2010 23:55

I object to the other ludicrous things things too. When I post about those other things someone always says "but there are other ludicrous things so it's not worth objecting to this one" just as you have.

mathanxiety · 07/07/2010 04:11
tortoiseonthehalfshell · 07/07/2010 04:38

Seeker, I'm really impressed with your posts here. I note that none of the Catholics are engaging with them directly.

Maybe if you just stopped calling them all paedophiles?

mathanxiety · 07/07/2010 05:40

"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."
Oh Huzzah, I'm not a paedophile after all -- thank you Seeker, I was worried there for a while (for about 5 pages of this thread muckflinging.)

"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."
Awwwww, you had to go and spoil it.

It's hard to engage with hot air.

SoupDragon · 07/07/2010 06:28

"while £12m is hardly an insubstantial amount of money, esp during a recession, it is a drop in the ocean of what the government spends on other ludicrous things"

What nonsense. Paying £12m plus security costs so that a religious leader can visit is a ridiculous waste of money. He's not a proper head of state, he's a religious leader. The invitation should be withdrawn for financial reasons alone. Put the money back into the pot for something meaningful like education or health. if you want to see your religious leader, buy a ticket to Rome.

nomorebooze · 07/07/2010 07:07

Yanbu! i did a thread not so long ago about our country wasting money. this really piddles me off. we should not be footing this bill, or other ludicrous things. arggggggggggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhh. so so annoying!

daftpunk · 07/07/2010 07:21

Yabu;

How many times has Nelson Mandela visited this country on state visits? how much has that cost?........there's even a statue of him in parliament square fgs.... costs £££££

Mandela has a dodgy past.. I object paying for him.

The pope is the head of the catholic church....he is more important than Nelson Mandela.

nomorebooze · 07/07/2010 07:23

D P : Pope or any similar person, this is still a sad waste of our money.

daftpunk · 07/07/2010 07:33

I agree. It all costs money...but we can't pick and choose who we pay for, if we could most people wouldn't contribute a penny to 99% of state visits.

The pope has just as much right to visit this country (on tax payers money) as anyone else.

AlCrowley · 07/07/2010 07:54

Has it been 3 months already?

I suppose it's a given that you'd choose Nelson Mandela daftpunk, he fought against racism didn't he.

The pope is not more important that Nelson Mandela, they are both just human beings with dodgy pasts.

SoupDragon · 07/07/2010 07:57

"The pope has just as much right to visit this country (on tax payers money) as anyone else"

Yes, he has as much right as any other religious leader. ie none.

SoupDragon · 07/07/2010 07:59

As i said, if people want to see the pope they can pay to go to Rome. I assume they wouldn't expect the tax payer to foot the bill for them to fly over there so why should we pay to fly him over here?

sarah293 · 07/07/2010 08:05

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

sarah293 · 07/07/2010 08:11

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

daftpunk · 07/07/2010 08:14

Are you suggesting we have "means tested" state visits?

sarah293 · 07/07/2010 08:30

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

GrimmaTheNome · 07/07/2010 08:31

if we could most people wouldn't contribute a penny to 99% of state visits.

hey, a statement by DP most of us probably agree with at the moment!!!

However....

Mandela has a dodgy past.. I object paying for him.

The pope is the head of the catholic church....he is more important than Nelson Mandela.

Nice to see you're still on form Daftpunk.
Nuff said.