[karezza]

Some 77% of Britons think taxpayers should not help pay for Pope Benedict XVI's visit to Scotland and England, a survey suggests.

An online poll of 2,005 adults issued by think tank Theos also found 79% had "no personal interest" in his visit.

[icecakes]

Originally Posted by karezza

Some 77% of Britons think taxpayers should not help pay for Pope Benedict XVI's visit to Scotland and England, a survey suggests.

An online poll of 2,005 adults issued by think tank Theos also found 79% had "no personal interest" in his visit.

I heard the bbc are sending 400 people to cover the popes visit,now we know where the tv licence money goes

[LaLaLand]

I don't want to pay for him to come here. They should take the money out of the religious community, or expect him to visit for free.

Even better, don't let him come. There's a reason for that huge square in the Vatican City, for people to go and SEE THE POPE.

At the end of the day, it's my choice not to be religious so it should be my choice to pay or not.

[MTVN]

He's the head of state for the Vatican, they all have their trips funded

[Shaun]

Bigoted, corrupt douchebag in charge of a dated, stupid cult, with a penchant for condemning everyone to AIDS and rehabilitating paedophiles and Holocaust deniers.

Absolute disgrace of a man and of a religion.

[Chels]

My mate's got to go listen to him speak xD

[Stacey.]

Is there only one pope? I know this has been asked loads of times etc but I still don't actually know or can't remember what the answer was.

Also what do pope's do?

[setanta]

The chap is living in the dark ages and so is the Vatican. Cannot believe that it's still going ahead and I doubt very much if it'll be all plain sailing for him over there.

[MTVN]

Originally Posted by Stacey.x

Is there only one pope? I know this has been asked loads of times etc but I still don't actually know or can't remember what the answer was.

Also what do pope's do?

Yes, and then when he dies all the Cardinals at the Vatican elect a new one.

He basically has to define moral and religious issues to Roman Catholics as well as appointing Bishops, naming Saints, representing the Church abroad, provide the Catholic Church's views on current affairs etc.

The last Pope - John Paul II - was more popular than the current one

[InOne]

Originally Posted by Stacey.x

Is there only one pope? I know this has been asked loads of times etc but I still don't actually know or can't remember what the answer was.

Also what do pope's do?

He rides in a Pope Moblie and waves at people.

[Stacey.]

Originally Posted by MTVN

Yes, and then when he dies all the Cardinals at the Vatican elect a new one.

He basically has to define moral and religious issues to Roman Catholics as well as appointing Bishops, naming Saints, representing the Church abroad, provide the Catholic Church's views on current affairs etc.

The last Pope - John Paul II - was more popular than the current one

Originally Posted by InOne

He rides in a Pope Moblie and waves at people.

LOL he sorta sounds funny.

And thanks I get it now.

[Lee.]

Originally Posted by karezza

Some 77% of Britons think taxpayers should not help pay for Pope Benedict XVI's visit to Scotland and England, a survey suggests.

An online poll of 2,005 adults issued by think tank Theos also found 79% had "no personal interest" in his visit.

That's me.

[BB_Eye]

He is meant to be a guest of honour like a lot of heads of state from different countries who visit. What I can't fathom is what this Pope has done to be 'honoured'.

[ElProximo]

If you had zero interest in Roman Catholicism you should, at least, be excited about the big economic boost it will bring. Good for business if nothing else.

Having said that, he is the head of a state and gets the usual accommodations, security, etc.
In fact, many a celebrity gets this kind of consideration including ones i don't give a damn about.
Many a politician gets all these considerations.
IF Richard Dawkins becomes head of state or brings millions to an event then he will get these considerations.

[MTVN]

Originally Posted by ElProximo

If you had zero interest in Roman Catholicism you should, at least, be excited about the big economic boost it will bring. Good for business if nothing else.

Having said that, he is the head of a state and gets the usual accommodations, security, etc.
In fact, many a celebrity gets this kind of consideration including ones i don't give a damn about.
Many a politician gets all these considerations.
IF Richard Dawkins becomes head of state or brings millions to an event then he will get these considerations.

Yep, he's just entitled to the same benefits that any head of state gets

[BBfan46]

How about we send Kerry Katona to Vatican City for a week and they can fund that?

[ElProximo]

Originally Posted by BBfan46

How about we send Kerry Katona to Vatican City for a week and they can fund that?

The Vatican funds millions of visitors, guests, celebrities, heads of states and even non-religious UK citizens every year.

So I guess we are all even.

[BB_Eye]

Originally Posted by ElProximo

If you had zero interest in Roman Catholicism you should, at least, be excited about the big economic boost it will bring. Good for business if nothing else.

Having said that, he is the head of a state and gets the usual accommodations, security, etc.
In fact, many a celebrity gets this kind of consideration including ones i don't give a damn about.
Many a politician gets all these considerations.
IF Richard Dawkins becomes head of state or brings millions to an event then he will get these considerations.

I just think we could be more discriminating when it comes to receiving our 'guests of honour'. Nobody is forcing the government to play nice when a head of state comes to visit. There was understandable controversy when Augusto Pinochet and Robert Mugabe were treated as guests by Thatcher and Blair respectively. Both should have been placed under arrest for human rights violations.

[setanta]

Originally Posted by ElProximo

If you had zero interest in Roman Catholicism you should, at least, be excited about the big economic boost it will bring. Good for business if nothing else.

Having said that, he is the head of a state and gets the usual accommodations, security, etc.
In fact, many a celebrity gets this kind of consideration including ones i don't give a damn about.
Many a politician gets all these considerations.
IF Richard Dawkins becomes head of state or brings millions to an event then he will get these considerations.

Nah, not with you on this one. It's costing 20million or so, plus people are being asked to "contribute" by handing over 25 quid or so to attend some of the open air masses.

And then the controversy that's going on within the Catholic Church and the Popes declarations on many issues will cause justifiably harsh protestations from some groups. It's just an accident waiting to happen.

[ElProximo]

Originally Posted by setanta

Nah, not with you on this one. It's costing 20million or so, plus people are being asked to "contribute" by handing over 25 quid or so to attend some of the open air masses.

And then the controversy that's going on within the Catholic Church and the Popes declarations on many issues will cause justifiably harsh protestations from some groups. It's just an accident waiting to happen.

People who go and pay to attend the events are on their own so that is neither her nor there,
but,
20 million is not a lot for a massive thing like this. It's no more or less than you would get if Obama was doing a similar route and events.
Just wrap your head around what the Olympics will cost never mind the pope.

There isn't a controversy going on in the Catholic Church but a huge number of Brits are Catholics.
Sure, not all Brits are Catholics but there is some national systems to avoid controversies.
Plenty of us could not give a flying *** about (for example) hosting a World Cup or parading the team around,
but,
its a 'national event' sort of thing for a significant number of Brits who worship this type of thing - so its all done together.

Again - you can go to the Vatican and see mass amounts of non-Catholic Brits being hosted there.
Catholic and non-Catholic happy to have the security, lights turned on, etc etc.

[BB_Eye]

Originally Posted by ElProximo

People who go and pay to attend the events are on their own so that is neither her nor there,
but,
20 million is not a lot for a massive thing like this. It's no more or less than you would get if Obama was doing a similar route and events.
Just wrap your head around what the Olympics will cost never mind the pope.

There isn't a controversy going on in the Catholic Church but a huge number of Brits are Catholics.
Sure, not all Brits are Catholics but there is some national systems to avoid controversies.
Plenty of us could not give a flying *** about (for example) hosting a World Cup or parading the team around,
but,
its a 'national event' sort of thing for a significant number of Brits who worship this type of thing - so its all done together.

There really isn't that many Catholics in the UK. They are a minority within a minority (churchgoers). Certainly less than there are muslims

Again - you can go to the Vatican and see mass amounts of non-Catholic Brits being hosted there.
Catholic and non-Catholic happy to have the security, lights turned on, etc etc.

Most of them are not interested in the Pope. It's more about the spectacle.

[ElProximo]

Originally Posted by BB_Eye

There really isn't that many Catholics in the UK. They are a minority within a minority (churchgoers). Certainly less than there are muslims

Yes, I am aware of this situation. It's not always easy to identify just exactly how many people are 'nominal' or how many attend church regularly.

Just to mention something about that - 'regular church attendance' is some kind of highly regarded 'measure' and way of identification given far too much reverence in the UK.

But anyways
I'm not Catholic but accept that a lot of people are and when a Pope arrives there will be some kind of state 'funding' going on. I'm not even sure if 'funding' is the right word.
It is as much 'self interest' or just 'best interest'.
You don't really say you are 'funding the Olympics' (well technically there is some truth to that),
but,
You host the Olympics and 'invest in it' and spend money for your own self interests.
You pay a lot of security.
You don't really say "OH.. so we have to fund the Olympics".

Most of them are not interested in the Pope. It's more about the spectacle.

Yes, it is the same for the Pope visiting the UK. Spectacle or not it requires a lot of security, special events planning etc etc.

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by Jonnii

I don't want to pay for him to come here. They should take the money out of the religious community, or expect him to visit for free.

Even better, don't let him come. There's a reason for that huge square in the Vatican City, for people to go and SEE THE POPE.

At the end of the day, it's my choice not to be religious so it should be my choice to pay or not.

It would be nice if things were 'our choice' of what we pay for. I don't like the fact that its costing so much money and personally I dont feel inspired by the pope in any way but I don't think his visit should be singled out as being a waste of money. I dont agree with our soldiers losing their lives everyday, but that does'nt seem to be my choice. I don't agree with that sh*te Tony Blair being showered with prestigious awards in America, when he is nothing more than a power hungry murderer but thats not my choice, I don't think I should help to pay back the debt this country is in, but thats not my choice. Lots of things cost us the taxpayer lots of money and we may be very strongly opposed to them - nothing we can do about it. I'm forgetting about the fact that its the pope and just thinking about it that if any 'VIP' choses to visit us at a time when we are seen in such a negative way by a lot of the rest of the world then we should be making the most of it and just accept it as a positive

[setanta]

Originally Posted by ElProximo

People who go and pay to attend the events are on their own so that is neither her nor there,
but,
20 million is not a lot for a massive thing like this. It's no more or less than you would get if Obama was doing a similar route and events.
Just wrap your head around what the Olympics will cost never mind the pope.

There isn't a controversy going on in the Catholic Church but a huge number of Brits are Catholics.
Sure, not all Brits are Catholics but there is some national systems to avoid controversies.
Plenty of us could not give a flying *** about (for example) hosting a World Cup or parading the team around,
but,
its a 'national event' sort of thing for a significant number of Brits who worship this type of thing - so its all done together.

Again - you can go to the Vatican and see mass amounts of non-Catholic Brits being hosted there.
Catholic and non-Catholic happy to have the security, lights turned on, etc etc.

Isn't alot of controversy? What? Do I have to mention some of the Pope's declarations that fly in the face of many people's beliefs, and not just that of Catholic people who are actually turning away from the church in their droves?

And the contributions are for the church, not for the British economy.

I can't believe you're saying it wont be a controversial visit and could lead to massive protests.

[Tom]

If it was Pope John Paul 2 I doubt there would be this uproar, its just because Benedict is a nasty old man.

In real terms, £10m isn't much of tax payers money considering the government get billions in tax each year. it just becomes a big issue when the Daily Mail get hold of the figure. Its like buying a bag of Space Raiders with a £50 note