Don't discuss religion or politics. Don't act with children or animals.

[caddyman]

Other than for any humour that can be squeezed out of the trip, I don’t give a fig that the Pope is in the UK. I am not a Catholic, so he’s not important to me in any way, shape or form. As a head of state he’s as important or as unimportant as any other president, prime minister or monarch and entitled to the same respect and pomp as we would extend them or expect to be extended to ours. As a head of a religious group, too, he should get the same respect as the leader of any other religious group (though where you draw the line between religions and sects, I don’t know).

Either way you cut it, he’s here and a lot of people are happy to see him, so that’s a good thing. I think he’s old, irrelevant, out-dated and out of touch, but others don’t and this island is big enough and the people on it are big enough (by and large) to accommodate all shades of opinion. So welcome, then, Pope Benedict XVI. I hope you have a good visit and that you don’t find us too third-world for your tastes.

What I do object to though, is the insinuation that lack of belief is a bad and aggressive thing – though my opinion in this matter is undermined by the strange antics of people like Dawkins, who I would otherwise admire. I lean more towards his atheism than I do the Pope’s religion. But in the same way that I object to being told that atheism is a bad thing by the religious lobby, and get completely irate when they muddle secularism and atheism. America seems to be doing that as do many other places. Religion is a personal matter and should not be pandered to in any way, shape or form, by the State. The individual should be free to believe any old crap he or she likes provided it doesn’t impinge on anyone else’s life or beliefs or interfere with the pursuance of the individual’s duties. If they want to be evangelical about their faith, fine: do it on their own time. That’s what secularism is: keeping religion out of the state. That’s the way it has to be if you are to be inclusive of all beliefs.

I oppose being preached at by anyone, regardless of their agenda. I don’t want the Pope, the Archbishop of Canterbury, any Imams, Buddhist Enlightened Ones, Rabbis, Shamen or Voodoo Witch Doctors trying to convert me (or anyone else unless they ask to be converted). Similarly, I don’t want people like Dawkins, Hitchens or (would you believe) Stephen Fry telling people that religion is evil and that they should abandon it.

I may agree with one side or the other on the existence or otherwise of God or Gods, plural or single. I do dispute the teaching of religion as science (intelligent design, my arse), but at the same time, it doesn’t hurt my quality of life or peace of mind if some hick deludes him or herself either in favour of, or against some particular mental stance in the privacy of their own home, provided that they don’t try to push that enthusiasm on to me. I’ll even give them the benefit of the doubt if they try to convert me once, provided they desist when I tell them to.

It’s whatever rocks your boat, Guys. Just don’t expect it to rock mine, or everyone else’s.

So, at the end of the rant it comes to this: if you are pro-religion, or anti-religion, fine. Just shut up and do whatever it is that keeps you going through the day. Invite me to join in, if you like, but don’t pester if I say no.

And don’t go around telling people they’re idiots, insane or criminals if they don’t like your views. Just accept their idiocy as you expect them to accept yours.

In the meantime I have decided that I would like the Pope better if he wore a propeller on that little white beanie of his.

Comments

[changeling72.livejournal.com]

Well said.

[ginasketch.livejournal.com]

I'm peeved that we have to pay for it though.

[caddyman.livejournal.com]

We would pay for any head of state in the same way they pay for ours when they nip over there for a visit.

[ginasketch.livejournal.com]

I pretty much agree with this guy.

It's not exactly as if he's here to dicuss foreign policy or anything of major importance.

If he makes catholic happy, good on them. But we just can't afford it right now. And FWIW I've had the same reaction to much of the art and design advertising the Olympics.

Edited for bad code. whoopsie.

[caddyman.livejournal.com]

I'm always buggering up the code, too! ;-D

[ginasketch.livejournal.com]

I miss quotation marks mostly!

BTW, have invited you and furtle to an event on facebook at the museum.

[littleonionz.livejournal.com]

Would we pay as much for a visit from the head of state from Luxembourg? Also tis only a state because Mussolini made it thus. Am not trying to be combatative; just sayin:)

[pauln.livejournal.com]

Oh, now that's fightin' talk! :)

The Vatican, as the remnant part of the Papal States, is a country far older than the Republic of Italy or its predecessor the Kingdom of Italy. Mussolini merely recognised it as a state from the perspective of the kingdom.

Points about Luxembourg agreed with. I'd add Andorra and Lichtenstein.

[littleonionz.livejournal.com]

I wasn't singling out poor old Luxembourg, it was just the first small place that came to mind :)

I don't think ancient history validates modern world claims, you could justify all kinds of crazy doing that, just look at the middle east.

[pax-draconis.livejournal.com]

I cannot help but think that this view, enlightened though it is, is a lot easier to hold when your lifestyle and person aren't being targeted as morally evil.

That can get under your skin a bit after a while.

And - and again, I'm not trying to be combative here - it's helpful to remember that the state visit is for a head of state. We need to keep the man's role as head of a postage-stamp Latveria entirely separate from his role as head of the Catholic church. Because he most assuredly won't make that distinction.

[ginasketch.livejournal.com]

Yup.

Also, Icon LOVE.

[mezzogiornouno.livejournal.com]

..er, but HMQ surely acts in the same dual role.

[caddyman.livejournal.com]

Brenda is rather more diplomatic and less prone to proselytizing.

She may be head of the Church of England, but Canterbury calls the shots, like the PM dioes in government.

Besides, belief in God is not really a prerequisite of the Church of England.

[mezzogiornouno.livejournal.com]

It's worth pointing out, I think, particularly in the face of Dawkin's statement that the Pope's scientific pronouncements are responsible for the deaths of countless AIDS victims in Africa (and here Mr D, usually noted for his intellectual rigour, is being somewhate vague in his use of the word "countless"), that it isn't a (in practice) prerequisite of Catholicism that every tenet of the church's teaching is rigorously adhered to - here I'm thinking of those great many Catholics whose consciences were never troubled by using birth control, or those whose attitudes to sex were not those mirrored by Monty Python's Meaning of Life sketch.

[mezzogiornouno.livejournal.com]

Oh hang on, that's just me

[caddyman.livejournal.com]

That is a fair point.

I think there is room for legitimate protest against such views. I'm not clear in my own mind how that all squares with what I said and generally belive above.

I think I may have to bang my head on the table a bit mre to sort out the contradiction in my bonce. (you wouldn't belive the typo I just corrected *shame*)

[w00hoo.livejournal.com]

I held to pretty much the same idea as you did which I think counts as 'if they want to play with their imaginary friend, fine, just don't talk to me about it.' For whichever imaginary friend might be their flavour.

I pretty much changed that after 9/11 when I realised that ignoring it didn't actually stop it happening in the same playground I was standing in. The realisation came when Dubbya was on TV announcing that God would help America avenge their dead (or some such).

At that point I changed my views to 'them that believe in their imaginary friends aren't safe to have about wielding power'.

Naturally as a lazy git I've not done that much about it, but I do support atheist causes now and then which I didn't before. After all the people who matter in this are well above my pay grade to do anything about.

[fractalgeek.livejournal.com]

To get to see him, you have to be a "pilgrim" vouched for by a leader who belongs to a recognised church.


Anyone for a campaign to start saying "I am (eg) a secularist atheist"...?

[mezzogiornouno.livejournal.com]

Or you can stand on the Mall on Sunday as he goes "driveabout", then pop over to Hyde Park for the open prayer meeting.

Hyder PArk

[fractalgeek.livejournal.com]

er...

"Pilgrim Passes

To gain access to the event site you will need a Pilgrim Pass. This will be distributed by your Pilgrim Leader on departure from your Pilgrim Point."

http://www.thepapalvisit.org.uk/2010-Visit/Visit-event-Information/Attending-Events/How-can-I-see-the-Pope-in-the-UK/Guide-to-Hyde-Park/Vigil-Information

And don't forget your passport or equivalent photographic ID for the security checks.

Re: Hyder PArk

[mezzogiornouno.livejournal.com]

Blimey, just like a Buck House garden party! Point about Hyde Park withdrawn.

Re: Hyder PArk

[fractalgeek.livejournal.com]

Apparently it's a major reason behind the low ticket sales - it's being run as a big commercial event, but many of the potential audience thought it was open.

[keith-london.livejournal.com]

"What I do object to though, is the insinuation that lack of belief is a bad and aggressive thing" - absolutely agree! Sadly, I fear that increasingly a secular society cannot be taken as a given. We appear to have to battle against some hardline religious voices which say "why should we have secularism imposed on us"? I hope I won't be around any time in the future whereby we felt we had to impose secularism.

[failing-angel.livejournal.com]

Very well put sir.

I also think I'm with you about the beanie

[ladkyis.livejournal.com]

UM, as a person baptised in the Catholic church, confirmed in the church in Wales and with Irish catholic and Jewish ancestry I agree totally with what Mr Caddyman has said. I have long thought that the "beanie" deserved a propellor - and does anyone else think it a good thing that the head of the Catholic Church still wears his yamulka like a good boy when he goes about his life?