You know what? I thought we'd got past this five years ago.

[davywavy]

I don't know if you noticed, but the UK has recently had a visit from a figure who is, to say the least, quite controverial. Some people consider him to be an ethical and moral authority, but the vast majority look at pretty much everything he's said in the last half-decade with a sinking feeling of dismay at a smug, self-righteous poseur getting the oxygen of publicity.

That's right, I hear Michael Moore was in London for a few days.

But you know what I'm playing at here - the old bait and switch of expectation around the Pope visiting the UK and the somewhat predictable resultant online furure. I actually find it quite depresssing the number of people who I know and consider friends who've gone from being normally intelligent and reasonable folks to, well, not being that over the whole thing. We've even had the old 'pope was a member of the Hitler Youth' line dragged out ad infinitum again, and I swear that the next time someone spouts that old line of crap at me I'm going to go ape bonkers and punch their teeth out through their bottom.
The thing I hate about accusations of and comparisons with Hitler and the Nazis is that it is just incresidibly intellectually lazy shorthand; I'd've hoped that Rik Mayall in the Young ones thirty years ago had shown that up as the vacuous line of argument which it is. What it is basically saying is "I disagree with you but lack the will or ability to formulate an argument, so I'm just going to call you the worst thing I can think of." It's just tiresome. Stop it. I’m very disappointed in everyone who has done so. I thought you were more intelligent than that. All of you.

What's even more tooth-grindingly embarrassing was the open letter from the usual suspects like Richard Dawkins and Stephen Fry in which they "reject the masquerading of the Holy See as a State", pretty much because they don't like orthodox catholicism's views on condoms and homosexuality. Now, I didn't know that one could get away with unilaterally ceasing to recognise states which have things like UN ambassadors and a standing army just because one doesn't like their policies, but if you can then I don't recognise Zimbabwe because Robert Mugabe is a bit of a meanie and, um, hang on... Sweden - yes, Sweden - because, oh, I don't know. Because it's full of pinkoes.
There. That's just as good an argument as any.

There's plenty to disagree with Catholicism about and this sort of posturing does the opposing argument no good whatsoever. Indeed, I'd say that having Richard Dawkins in your corner in any argument about metaphysics makes you look a bit of a twat to the vast majority of 'plague on both your houses' people who just want to get on with their lives.

What's worse is that, reading LJ and FB, a great many people seem to feel that they are in some way morally superior to the Pope. Now with my record, for me to claim moral superiority over pretty much anyone is comedy and I think that’s true of most of the people I know as well. I know what a lot of you have done, you see.
To those who disagree with the Popes moral stance, my suggestion is this: if you feel your personal philosophy can bring greater spiritual peace, succour, and comfort to the poor and dispossessed of the world, then get out there and act, and I don't mean posting it to FB for a bunch of similarly minded people to agree with you like so many nodding dogs.
Who knows? If your philosophy is indeed superior, in two thousand years they may well be electing your spiritiual successor.

Anyway, rant over. It's back to jokes on Monday and I've got some good ones lined up for next week including - maybe - my first ever full musical.

Comments

[janewilliams20.livejournal.com]

Actually, what I mainly object to about this visit is the huge quantity of taxpayers' money (yes, MY money) being wasted on it. So he's the head of a cult, and some people want to wave flags at him. So? Let them (and him) pay for it, then. And don't even THINK about closing the roads to people who're trying to do something productive, like get to work (or the shops, or the pub) just because this irrelevance wants to play at posing.

[davedevil.livejournal.com]

Good God----

--- I ACTUALLY agree with you ----

I feel quite faint...

[rssefuirosu.livejournal.com]

The previous pope - a much, much better pope incidentally - did not have the state funding his visit in 82. Given the state of the Vatican's finances compared to ours, and the incredible waning of support for the catholic church, this being a state visit cannot be justified. And, in my own way, yes I am going out and providing philosophical succour.

So I shall continue to find the Tim Minchin song hilarious, and repost it as I please.

[twicedead.livejournal.com]

Yeah, but so is the Queen and other countries pay for her to visit them...

[twicedead.livejournal.com]

Jedi Church: Is it OK for Jedis to have same sex marriages?

[raggedhalo.livejournal.com]

Correcting Ben Goldacre on Twitter yesterday on the Hitler Youth thing was really quite disappointing. It was compulsory to join!

[zenmeisterin.livejournal.com]

Well to be honest I've ignored the whole thing. I don't like it and the transport disruption is going to make going to the theatre with my mother tonight a nightmare, but he's not really any more or less hypocritical and full of crap than any other Leader the state spends lavish amounts on bringing over and entertaining. If anything, the comments he's made are a source of amusement.

Do Not Want, but then why should I demand that what I want should take precedent?

[crocodilewings.livejournal.com]

If you'll just indulge my pedantry for a bit, I'd like to propose a more refined sequence of events.

The Pope, in his speech, likened secularism to Nazism, and lots of people online went "well he'd know, what with being in the Hitler Youth and all". Now, I don't think either positions are particularly scintilating, but I'd be lying if I said I didn't think the latter one had a tiny bit of a point hiding somewhere in it.

When Nobby McAOLchops (East Kent) is encouraged to liken someone to the Nazis by the Have Your Say team, he's doing it because he's an uneducated moron who's been given a largely anonymous platform. The most influential decision he's ever going to have to make in life probably involves something like distribution of confectionary packaging in the East Anglia region. To a certain extent, Nobby can say what he likes about Nazis, and it will get as much interest and attention as his opinions on water polo, cunnilingus or ninjas. Namely none.

The Pope has neither that luxury or excuse. He's a well-educated man. He was alive and present in Germany over the course of the Second World War. There's also that annoying and confounding issue of over a billion people (allegedly) believing that everything he says is the word of God. When he likens something to Nazism, he means business.

In that light, it's actually pretty reasonable to criticise his invocation of Godwin's Law a bit more harshly than Nobby's. Several orders of magnitude, maybe.

[janewilliams20.livejournal.com]

She's the head (well, for display puropses) of what's still quite an important country, not just a cult. I don't know of anyone who pays for her to show because she's the head of the Church of England?

[crocodilewings.livejournal.com]

Can you just go through all public expenditure and let us know what is and isn't pointless crap, please?

Or, so we don't have to bother you, can you just tell us this objective measure of what constitutes "pointless crap" which you seem to be using?

[karohemd.livejournal.com]

That even Goldacre mentioned it really set me off. I actually sent him an email (with parts of what I just posted today) and he replied not really apologising but at least conceding my point. He tried to argue that it wasn't his main point in the article but I think an off-handed remark makes it even worse.

[danfossydan.livejournal.com]

I not that suprisingly largely agree with your post.

I do feel that the pope is wonderfully larger than life. I think its astounding that figures such as him have this public persona that travel from City to city. I'm quite amazed by how many public engagments are being cramed into such a short space of time by this particualar "old timer".

Other such greats, are quite a short list. I think QE is possibly equally astounding. US presidents just don't have the same level of being head of such a massive orginiastion for their whole life, and being such a part of history. (they come close mind, but then also have more direct accountability and power than the Queen or Pope).

I think its strange, because these are very unique people in positions that I actually don't envy, but I think that do provide a very important focus for humanity. I think the focus that this visit brings with it on to a wide range of very important issues is valuable.

Sure I'm a bit annoyed about the uncertainty of travel disrurpution at the weekend for me personally, but I'm damn glad that there is a Pope (and a Queen) and wish them and their successors lots of luck.

[crocodilewings.livejournal.com]

Actually, I'd like to apologise for my first comment. Sarcasm might not be the lowest form of wit, but it's a poor dialect of reasoning. I am genuinely sorry.

Your original comment is in the form of a consistency argument, but I don't think it's really pointing at an inconsistency. It would be valid if it addressed a single identifiable demographic of people who on the one hand didn't want the bill for the Pope's visit to be footed by the taxpayer, but on the other actively supported other public spending they themselves believed to be similarly useless. I don't believe that demographic exists.

[danfossydan.livejournal.com]

So do visits by forign national leaders benifit the people who pay the taxation?

Does it have to benifit all of them or most of them? Or just some of them?
Does that benifit have to be direct?

Sounds anything but easy to me.

[danfossydan.livejournal.com]

Public service members pay tax, I think there are 6 million of the about 40 million tax payers who are directly paid from that taxation. (which is then taxed) So around 15% directly benifit what ever you do...?

The education, welfare and health budget, being spent on non-tax payers (children and unemployed) has massive social coheision advantages, fights plague and invests in my future (as a current tax payer).

I suppose old people are a direct waste of money...

[crocodilewings.livejournal.com]

Not quite what I mean. The argument that people either want useless public spending or they don't implies there is a group which actively wants spending they themselves believe to be useless, provided it's the kind of useless they like.

Although now I've phrased it like that, those groups totally exist. Never mind.

[medusa-nw.livejournal.com]

I don't go around brushing incidences of child abuse by my minions under the carpet, don't go around saying being gay is a sin, don't go around saying women aren't fit to be my minions and don't go around telling people that they shouldn't be using condoms, when using condoms is the best way, other than abstinence (and don't even get me started on that one!), to stop you from getting AIDS. So I have no hesitation at all saying that I'm morally superior to the pope. If that disappoints you, so be it.

Also, the membership of the Hitler Youth would not have been brought up by anyone had he not decided to liken being an atheist to being a Nazi. It's a flippant comparison by those who aren't the supposed moral guiding light to a couple of billion people that I'm quite happy to go along with.

[crocodilewings.livejournal.com]

I got that too. Of course I'm morally superior to the Pope. That doesn't necessarily make me arrogant, it just means I have a really low opinion of him and his religion.

[annwfyn.livejournal.com]

I suspect that the Roman Catholic church probably has more direct impact on far far more lives than the UK does. We have how many citizens? And there are how many devout Roman Catholics around the world?

I mean, you may not agree with the pope, but calling him 'the head of a cult' is a big like calling Barack Obama 'some foreign politician'. It's a tad disingeneous.

Plus, as previously stated, he's the head of a foreign state (Vatican City), and we've paid for a lot of them to come and visit.

[annwfyn.livejournal.com]

*nods nods nods*

And it ties into a general British thing for throwing WW2 at the German people whenever we want to feel smug.

Yes, there was an unpleasant regieme in Germany, many many years ago. That doesn't mean that no German who was born before 1945 has no right to express a moral view ever.

[janewilliams20.livejournal.com]

As that nice Mr Fry pointed out, he's head of a "state" by a historical technicality, not in any meaningful sense.

And yes, he is just the head of a cult. Not a politician. A big cult, yes, but it's still only a cult, not anything useful or meaningful.

[crocodilewings.livejournal.com]

On the other hand, what's the gross domestic export of the Vatican?

[davywavy.livejournal.com]

See? Hope for you yet.

[annwfyn.livejournal.com]

Do we evaluate the economy of every head of state who wants to visit us? Is there a cut off point? How about square mileage?

What constitutes a 'real state', which is, I presume, what you're getting at?

I tend to think if Vatican City is recognised as a state, then it's a state.

I also think that regardless of that, the Pope is a major figure who's views and opinions have a very direct impact on the lives of billions of people and an awful lot of British citizens. And that's why we're paying a lot of money for him to visit. Because he is important, whether one may personally approve of him or not.

[crocodilewings.livejournal.com]

It was more a response to your assertion that Catholicism had more direct impact on more lives than the UK does. By some measures it absolutely does, but it definitely depends on the measure. I wasn't actually looking at it from the perspective of hosting foreign heads of state based on trade value, but now we've accidentally stumbled onto it, you've brought up an interesting point.

The fact is we do evaluate the economy of every foreign head of state who comes to visit us, and how important they are (i.e. how valuable they are to us) determines how much of a fanfare they get, and how much we spend on them. In that light, the amount of effort put into the Pope's visit is kind of jarring. After all, we don't trade with the Vatican; they give us all the religion we want for free, and evidently we don't want all that much. We're not courting them for political reasons. We don't need them to swing a vote with the UN. There's no middle-eastern country we require their asistance in invading. It is literally a case of the Pope nipping over for a chat and a cup of tea.

I for one don't begrudge him this, but he doesn't really belong in the same category as foreign dignitaries visiting for important matters of state.