Turn on thread page Beta

Why should the British Public pay £20million+ for the Pope to come visit? watch

    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    We should send the SAS to loot the Vatican while he's not there. There's got to be a load of valuable **** in there.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Yes but the taxpayer's money goes on an awful lot of things that are of no interest/benefit to the taxpayer. Such is life.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    :laugh:


    signed

    2nd name :coma:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nick_000)
    :laugh:

    His Pope mobile can be a Fiat 500 :yes:
    has hat wouldnt fit in a fiat
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Daveinnorfolk)
    It's nice to have a bloke who stands up for sensibility - and this is from an Anglican (albeit one with strong Catholic sympathies)
    Yeah telling a load of Africans with AIDS to stop using condoms is really ******* sensible.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    Where the hell is £20 million going?
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by taheki)
    Yeah telling a load of Africans with AIDS to stop using condoms is really ******* sensible.
    Do intelligent people still come away with this?

    Look, this is very simple and easy to understand:

    -The Church has 2 teachings about sex- it should be within marriage and it should be unprotected.
    -If a person breaks 1 of those teachings, why should we believe they suddenly become all devout and refuse to break the 2nd of those teachings?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    SO we can assassinate him idiot. SSHHHHHHHHHH Now you've made me blow my cover
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Celtic_Anthony)
    Do intelligent people still come away with this?

    Look, this is very simple and easy to understand:

    -The Church has 2 teachings about sex- it should be within marriage and it should be unprotected.
    -If a person breaks 1 of those teachings, why should we believe they suddenly become all devout and refuse to break the 2nd of those teachings?

    errmm i think the point passed you by.

    It's not about devout ness it's about the fact that the rules especially the protection one has no logic behind it especially as half of africa is aids riddled and this merely helps to propogate the spread of aids.
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    Why are you all singing it, like online petitions even do anything. 1 letter in the post is going to have more of a chance of changing things than thousands signing an online petetion, and anyways the pope visting will bring people into the UK, his visit will likely inject more than 20 million pounds into the UK economy, you people are jokes.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Libtolu)
    errmm i think the point passed you by.

    It's not about devout ness it's about the fact that the rules especially the protection one has no logic behind it especially as half of africa is aids riddled and this merely helps to propogate the spread of aids.
    It didn't pass me by, idiot.. The point is that Catholic teaching would prevent aids if adhered to and, further, that there is no reason to believe people do not use condoms because of Church teachings, seeing as they show no sign of adhering to the rest of the Church's teachings on sex.

    Is that clear?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Earl Nuce)
    Where the hell is £20 million going?
    It isn't. It's a nonsense figure popped up by some thick atheist tosser with an agenda.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Celtic_Anthony)
    Do intelligent people still come away with this?

    Look, this is very simple and easy to understand:

    -The Church has 2 teachings about sex- it should be within marriage and it should be unprotected.
    -If a person breaks 1 of those teachings, why should we believe they suddenly become all devout and refuse to break the 2nd of those teachings?
    Is it right to use some baseless 'teachings' from a non-factual book to tell people they shouldn't use protection, despite the fact that AIDS is endangering entire populations in Africa?

    Catholic teaching wouldn't prevent the spread if it was adhered to - people with AIDS can still marry. AIDS is passed from a mother to her children, so someone could grow up as a devout Christian, following every one of these stupid little rules and still pass the disease to his/her spouse and children.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nick_000)
    How democratic of you.
    What, by exercising my democratic right to freedome of speech? Or are you opposed to that?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nick_000)
    We all know how rich the Catholic Church is. This seems like an outlandish waste of taxpayer funds. Especially considering the cutbacks in public services.

    If you're against it, sign here:

    http://www.secularism.org.uk/petition-the-pm.html
    I have the same problem with cheryl cole. sorry its irrelevant to the thread. but yeh the pope £20 million what the gonna do send him here in a gold plate aeroplane or what?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    He should come over with a return ticket with EasyJet.

    Signed..
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by taheki)
    Yeah telling a load of Africans with AIDS to stop using condoms is really ******* sensible.
    Ummm, it is actually. HH told them to practise abstinence. A U.S. study looked at 662 black children aged 11 to 15, divided into four groups.

    Each was given a different type of education - eight hour-long abstinence-only classes, lessons on safe sex, classes using both approaches or lessons on general health with no sex element.
    Two years later, 33.5 per cent of abstinence-only students admitted having had sex, against 49 per cent of each of the other three groups.

    So the Pope was right. Case closed.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by adamrules247)
    Ummm, it is actually. HH told them to practise abstinence. A U.S. study looked at 662 black children aged 11 to 15, divided into four groups.

    Each was given a different type of education - eight hour-long abstinence-only classes, lessons on safe sex, classes using both approaches or lessons on general health with no sex element.
    Two years later, 33.5 per cent of abstinence-only students admitted having had sex, against 49 per cent of each of the other three groups.

    So the Pope was right. Case closed.
    So because of one study an entire continent should practice abstinence? Don't be silly. As well as that, those 33.5% would be extremely susceptible to AIDS without condoms, don't you think? :rolleyes:

    People should look to Uganda. A mixture of abstinence advice, condom proliferation and health clinics massively reduced their AIDs rate. Without the condoms not much would have changed.

    The Pope is wrong, as usual. Case closed.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by adamrules247)
    Ummm, it is actually. HH told them to practise abstinence. A U.S. study looked at 662 black children aged 11 to 15, divided into four groups.

    Each was given a different type of education - eight hour-long abstinence-only classes, lessons on safe sex, classes using both approaches or lessons on general health with no sex element.
    Two years later, 33.5 per cent of abstinence-only students admitted having had sex, against 49 per cent of each of the other three groups.

    So the Pope was right. Case closed.
    The problem is, he's telling people to use abstinence instead of protection, so if (as is completely natural and right), someone does want to have sex, they're less likely to use condoms. Why can't he tell them to abstain, but use condoms if at some point they feel they can't? Because he believes it's wrong to use protection.. which is completely senseless.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Celtic_Anthony)
    It didn't pass me by, idiot.. The point is that Catholic teaching would prevent aids if adhered to and, further, that there is no reason to believe people do not use condoms because of Church teachings, seeing as they show no sign of adhering to the rest of the Church's teachings on sex.

    Is that clear?
    How would the churches teaching prevent aids?

    There are children being born with aids even if they only have sex in wedlock with their husband who has also only had sex in wedlock to his wife they would still be spreading aids around and giving birth to babies with aids.

    So no the churches teachings are ******** but what can you expect from the church.:rolleyes:
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: February 11, 2010
Poll
How are you feeling in the run-up to Results Day 2018?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.