The Pope is coming to UK to campaign against equality: Does this make him a respectable leader of faith or a bigot?

[Strix]

What do you think?

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8492597.stm

Thought the pope was St Peter's rep, not god's?

i dont believe in idolatry,as individuals we have self determination and volition. A responsibility to self and others .

reality testing demonstrates there is no god.this notion of being judged by unseen other at an unspecified time is baffling

Or is it that the Popes PR department are a lot more savvy these days and are just as good at a soundbite as Alistair Campbell. Shows the faithful they still have their finger on the pulsew? Or am i a cynic? I really should lie down.

ilovemydog - yes but St. Peter was God's (Jesus') representative - the head of the church which Jesus formed.

Grimma - likewise the church would not encourage such teachers to promote cohabitation.

Scottishmummy, belief in god is a whole other topic! I agree that we have a responsibility to self and to others... I find it useful to have the church as my guide (2000 years of teaching from people far wiser than I'll ever be), but that is just the choice i have made.

'not encourage' is rather different to trying to meddle with another nation's equality legislation specifically to allow discrimination against homosexuals.

I gather that part of the reason for the Pope's visit is related to the beatification of Cardinal Newman. I wonder what he would have made of the Pope's stance. Although I don't doubt the cardinal was staunchly celibate, I think he'd have had rather more wisdom and compassion on this subject.

Grimma - Cardinal newman is the MAIN reason for his visit. What a shame the newspapers can't focus on that rather than all this other stuff...

you mean its a shame,they dont sycophantically gush?

are you suggesting the media should gloss over glaring illiberalities

you can catch the HPV virus from kissing too, as both HPV1 and HPV2 can be found on the lips. Roll on vaccinations!

• and the Pope has to be right, if you are a Catholic - Doctrine of Papal infallibility anyone? Th catholic church takes its right not only by apostolic succession, but also direct from the almighty via the bible...

no time for this pope - as Cardinal ratzinger it was his little piece of work on the pill that meant it was banned (or whatever word you wish to use - anathematised?) though sadly it is only the third world that seems to have listened....

No Scottishmummy, it would just be nice if they had something nice to say about the catholic church once every 10 years or so!

Has the pope said he wants the right to refuse employment to couples who are co-habiting and the other 1000s of possible sins? if not then I don't see how anyone can pretend that it's not bigotry just aimed at gay people.

freddo. I agree. it WOULD be good if they had something nice to say about the catholic church once every 10 years or so!

plaudits should only be given were deserved.if "nothing nice" said perhaps that is as you suggest because something good only happens once in 10years

To answer the OP is he a respectable religious leader or a bigot, the answer is both.

Most respectable religious leaders are bigots of one kind or another.

I don't see the 2 as mutually exclusive.

'respectable' as in they can have tea with the Queen.

But worthy of respect? I'm with Dawkins on this one - respect needs to be earned, it doesn't come free with the silly hat.

I think the score for and aginst is roughly 3 people for the pope and god knows how many, I lost count, against(On this particular matter, would not want to upset anybody)

Hi Freddo, I'm baaack! (Was answering the call of the child.)

Okay so catching up I see that the sex debate was a little bit fruitless. But I have to say Freddo you are all over the shop.

Still, I am really happy to move on to Cardinal Newman, because after all this visit is as you say all about him.

So what about his friend and companion Ambrose St John? They were certainly very close, and loved each other dearly. It is a touching story, and I for one am glad that when the opened his grave there was nothing there, so his clearly expressed final wish to be buried in the same grave as his dearest friend was not violated by relic-hunters.

I wonder if Benedict sees the irony there?

jpII made me think about church hierarchy and particularly the role of the pope - with the condom - africa thing.

i decided i didn't like church hierarchy at that point.

Pope benny is quite simply a twat.

Rhubarb has said everything i could ever wish to on the subject.

i hope he comes here - then for the first time i can make a placard and protest.

happy birthday Rhubarb mate x

He isnt campaigning against equality (though I have no reason to believe that he agrees with it), he is campaigning against this bill, which is a frightful piece of ill-judged legislation, with all sorts of consequences.

"unintended consequences" I mean of course!

am going to bed as am tired and ill

Ok Freddo, may I ask that the first thing you do, as one catholic to another, is to read this piece on the Bible and homosexuality you will see that the Bible is no stranger to homosexuality.

In fact the Bible does not really say anything about it at all. It says a lot about adultery and murder and theft and all the other sins, but nothing much about homosexuality, which makes you think that it really wasn't seen as anything to get their knickers in a twist over.

Secondly. Jesus repeated over and over that it was not for us to judge but to accept. We should accept all people as they are whether we agree with them or not, it is for God to judge not us.

Thirdly, there are bigger sins than homosexuality, something the church seems to forget. Jesus fully condemned those who took away the innocence of children. I don't think, personally, that he gave a shit about peoples sexuality. Only the church gave a shit about that. In fact Jesus was quite happy to treat women as equals too.

It was the church who decided that women could not be equal, not Jesus. It was the church who decided that they should be celibate, Jesus only said they should if they could. It was the church who decided they didn't like homosexuals, Jesus never said anything about it.

The church made a lot of their own rules to keep their people right where they wanted them. Like a dictatorship. It frightens me that there are people still out there who accept all the church's teachings without questioning where it came from and why. Your biggest guide should be the Bible. If the church teaches you rules that are not in the Bible then you should and you must question that.

Jesus also taught us to beware of those who use religion for their own causes, he warned of people using his name to commit sin and spread bigotry. That is what is happening now and I am dismayed that there are intelligent people on Mumsnet who cannot see that and still defend the hierachy of the catholic church.

I have my faith, but I do not have that faith in the church. I will proudly stand as a catholic, but not as a catholic of the church as it is today. And I will be the first with the placard, naked, chained to summat. Possibly. Depending on how cold it is!

Rhubarb.

i wont be naked

In fact the Bible does not really say anything about it at all. It says a lot about adultery and murder and theft and all the other sins, but nothing much about homosexuality,

Have a look at Leviticus

Rhubarb, your eloquence and generousness of spirit humbles me.

I rise, to give you a standing ovation. Brava

Notice you are still avoiding the issue about the other prohibitions in Leviticus, Redbin. If you consider that verse so important - more important than the teachings of Jesus - surely you have to take ALL of Leviticus equally seriously. Ditch the leather shoes, for a start.