Anti-Catholicism

having been to a catholic school, I have found that there is a lot of anti-catholicism coming from the catholics, me included. For me, it is because of having been forced into religion, forced to go to church etc, etc that drove me away from it and made me hate it. I don't agree with organised religions. I wonder if this is the case for other (ex-)catholics

In the present day, I have not detected any such general sentiment. Perhaps in the past, but certainly not now.

You'd really contest that there is strong sentiment against the EU (such as not embracing the Euro) and about just how much influence the US is having on our political decisions?

In my experience they tended to keep themselves to themselves. It's usually the Protestant strands, in my opinion, which merit that title.

Of course, the Jews aren't all that abrasive either, but they're discriminated against.

No, I wouldn't contest that. I would contest that there is a strong sentiment for "we do not acknowledge any higher (mortal) authority over ourselves than our country."

Really?

That's not the feeling I get from most people I talk to, most are quite disgusted (perhaps a little strong but you get the idea) of how much we bend to other countries laws and rules - especially in regards to the EU.
And most (albeit a smaller amount) really do not like that we are so close to America.

In my experience, the protestant churches are more liberal when you think about issues such as homosexuality, contraception, abortions etc.
or at least much less vocal/active

The very anti-Catholic slurs people know of back this up. Papist, Romanism

I was not referring to nations, but rather to ideologies and the people or countries who support them. The problem with Catholicism was that if the Pope's orders contravened those of the government then the Catholic would follow the Pope. In the same way, if someone's "ideological leaders" are attacked, or the UK's laws or government come into serious conflict with that person's beliefs then I think many would defend their ideological beliefs rather than the commands of the government. I don't know what your ideological background is, but if the government launched a serious attack on my beliefs - for example it tried to kill prominent secular humanists, or it attacked a secular country solely because of its secularism, or I was conscripted to fight in a war for the government based on beliefs that went against my humanism, then I would refuse, and communicate with the secular humanist community to bring about a suitable punishment for the government.

Perhaps you hold some ideological beliefs that would, ultimately, have your loyalty rather than the government's?

There are fewer "flashpoints" now than in the past, but if one arose, what would you do?

They wouldn't be ideologically obliged to - except perhaps in the very rare occasions that the Pope was acting ex cathedra - and I can think of several occasions where numerous Catholics have gone very much against the Pope without lessening their attachment to the faith.

But that's not what we are talking about in this thread, and introducing extreme circumstances are obviously going to be different to the norm. We are talking about does Britain anti-catholic on the whole. I contested that it wasn't so much about being anti-catholic as much as placing yourself at a higher authority than the country, making you aloof from everyone else.

Besides, what you are describing is exactly what I am talking about. You and your beliefs would be in the minority, hence the majority which is basically labelled as "Britain" in this thread would resent you for that.

I don't think my beliefs would be in the minority, hence my thought that placing yourself "at a higher authority than the country" is a strange reason for being anti-Catholic when many other people hold beliefs that would place them in similar positions.

Times have changed since WWII.

If they weren't in the minority then the government wouldn't be acting on the countries behalf - hence why rebellions occur.

Aye? You really need to find some proof to back up your claims. I see no evidence that suggest people are in favour of handing power from themselves, and the government to outside sources. In fact the ONLY evidence I see is large resentment in such actions.

It is a simple proposition. The government only has someone's loyalty when the citizen's views correspond to those of the government. If the government changes its views then the citizen does not change their views, and so a conflict arises. If one is put in a position where the views come into serious conflict then the citizen would have loyalty to their views (and from whatever authority they come) rather than those of the government.

This is why the belief that some "has loyalty to their country" is, in most cases, nonsense. If the country's direction is greatly different from one's beliefs then the country becomes one's enemy. If British became synonymous with racist, belligerent, and genocidal, then I would feel nothing but animosity towards Britain, and would consider treason and treachery to be fair and justified. You could say that I believe I have an obligation to those who lead with reason and rationality, if they come into serious conflict with a government that is acting unreasonably.

So, Catholics recognize a higher authority than the country, but then so does almost everyone else; we all have a moral authority that transcends what the country commands us to do. (Or, at least, I would hope we do.)