Cardinal O'Brien - Disgrace

[BigC]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/scotland/article3603020.ece

 

It's one thing religious leaders telling people how to live their lives... But it's another when they start distorting the truth.

 

The cardinal says that the experiments on stem cells could lead to hybrid human/animal babies and experiments of Frankenstein proportions.

 

That is a lie, pure and simple. The only place that could happen is in the imagination of an ill informed ignorant idiot who is trying to push his warped agenda onto others.

 

Saying that we shouldn't carry out medical experiments to find a cure for degenerative diseases because it could lead to hybrid human monsters is comparable to saying that we shoudn't harness electricity because we might get electrocuted, or we shouldn't dissect dead bodies because the human body is sacred (even although it will help train lots of new surgeons), or we shouldn't give people condoms because they might practice safe sex (oops, they've beaten me to that one already).

 

I noticed that the cardinal had a pacemaker fitted shortly after making these statements.

 

Who's the Frankenstein now eh?

 

It's a good job there weren't idiots like you around all those years ago when pacemakers were first developed, saying that putting electronic devices into people was "immoral" because it could lead to a whole new breed of super human/andriod hybrids.

 

If there had been then you might not still be around to spout the nonsense that seems to flow so freely from your holy gob.

 

(Can you tell that I'm a bit annoyed about this).

[Acey]

Well said.

 

Take a look at this Daily Mail (I know, I know) column. I've rarely read a bigger load of poorly-argued bumf (my emphasis in bold).

 

With all the difficulties facing the Prime Minister, you'd think that he would be making every possible effort to avoid any further elephant traps. But no - having unaccountably constructed one for himself, he has not only fallen in but is refusing to haul himself out.

 

For reasons which so far have eluded everyone else, he is refusing to allow Labour MPs a free vote on the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill and is instead imposing a three-line whip.

 

This has placed Roman Catholic Labour MPs in particular in serious difficulty, because the Bill contains a number of provisions - of which the most repugnant is the proposal to allow the creation of animal/human hybrid embryos - which diametrically conflict with their religious principles. As a result, three Cabinet ministers and nine other members of the Government are reportedly considering their position.

 

Now the row has dramatically escalated, with some exceptionally strong statements by church leaders expressing their horror at the Bill in their Easter sermons.

 

First, the Scottish Catholic leader Cardinal Keith O'Brien compared the hybrid proposal to the creation of Frankenstein's monster.

 

Then other churchmen piled in, including Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, who called for a free vote on the Bill, and the Anglican Bishop of Durham, who called upon all faiths to object to these "1984-style" proposals from "a militantly atheist and secularist lobby".

 

As the pressure on Gordon Brown has mounted, so too has the scope for political mischief. Yesterday, the arch-Blairite Stephen Byers gave another hefty turn of the ratchet when he warned that the public would "look on in disbelief" if MPs were not given a free vote on such a sensitive measure.

 

With the row suddenly thus turning into a direct challenge to Mr Brown's authority and judgement, it now stands to inflict upon him a level of damage going far beyond this immediate controversy. This is truly a most baffling state of affairs.

 

For the issues in this Bill have previously always been treated as matters of conscience on which MPs have accordingly been given a free vote.

 

So why on this occasion did Mr Brown decide instead to deny a free vote and force this crisis of conscience among Labour MPs? Why, when there are so many things - such as the gathering economic crisis or the meltdown in public services - which require urgent government attention, has Mr Brown allowed himself to become enmeshed in a wholly unnecessary fight over science and religion?

 

Moreover, even now he's in a hole he's still digging. Yesterday, the Government suggested that MPs could abstain on parts of the Bill - but only if its passage through Parliament wasn't threatened. Such MPs would therefore be allowed to uphold their religious principles only if doing so was totally useless. What an insult.

 

The Health Secretary Alan Johnson says MPs won't be forced to act against their conscience or their faith. Big deal! What about allowing them to vote with their conscience?

 

For parts of this Bill, such as the proposal to allow scientists to combine animal eggs with human nuclei and create hybrid embryos from which stem cells can be grown for research, are simply unconscionable,

 

Scientists claim that the protesters are irresponsibly scaremongering, since the proposed hybrids would not be grown into "monsters" but would be used only as primitive cells for research.

 

In their arrogance, such scientists fail to understand the nature of the objection. It is the idea of creating such a hybrid embryo at all that is so abhorrent.

 

Experimenting on human embryos is bad enough; it destroys an individual life in order to serve the interests of others and thus degrades and brutalises us all.

 

But creating an animal/human embryo breaks an even deeper taboo. It negates the acknowledgement of what it is to be human and, by obliterating the difference between animals and humans, destroys the concept of human uniqueness.

In the House of Lords' debates on this Bill, it became crystal clear that the Government is indeed doing nothing less than redefining a human being. In a remarkably revealing admission, the health minister Lord Darzi said that, after some thought, the Government had decided that the hybrids in question were "at the human end of the spectrum".

 

Just think about that for a moment and you can see how grotesque this all is. It appears that an animal/human hybrid embryo can be said to be more human or less depending on the proportion of animal material in the mix, like a Delia Smith recipe.

 

But you can't be a little bit human. This is the way humanity is dehumanised. Indeed, since this Bill would allow the creation of embryos that are half animal, half human, they would have no claim to be more human than animal.

 

Alan Johnson cynically suggests the Bill will bring about cures for such terrible afflictions as motor neurone disease, multiple sclerosis or Parkinson's. Yes, of course, everyone would like to bring such suffering to an end. But there isn't a shred of evidence that this will be the case.

 

The destruction of hundreds of thousands of human British embryos for research has not led to any such major breakthroughs - for which there is more hope from taking stem cells from adult tissue.

 

What's more, only last summer the former Chief Medical Officer, Sir Liam Donaldson, told a committee on this Bill that there was "no clear scientific argument" in favour of creating such hybrids and it would be "a step too far" for the public.

 

So why did Gordon Brown decide to take that step too far?

 

Part of the answer must lie in the intense pressure from scientists who, in the Godlike belief that they can eradicate disease and misery from the world, constantly push to be in the forefront of medical research regardless of any adverse consequences for society.

 

They find all-too-willing allies among government officials who are mesmerised by the prospect of this country leading the world in anything, and also among politicians who will cheerfully tear up any moral or ethical code going in order to satisfy public demand.

 

Indeed, the Bill contains many other deeply troubling proposals. It removes fatherhood from the family script altogether for some children conceived through IVF.

 

It allows the creation of "saviour siblings", whose sole purpose in being brought into the world will be to provide parts of their organs or tissues to help another member of their family. It permits fertility clinics to create "designer babies" by selecting for destruction those embryos which are marred by serious disease.

In short, it should be renamed the Dehumanising, Brutalisation and Freakology Bill.

 

It was based on a report by the cross-party Science and Technology Committee, which was itself profoundly split. The dissidents on the committee said the majority report was "unbalanced, light on ethics, goes too far in the direction of deregulation and is too dismissive of public opinion and much of the evidence".

 

That's about the sum of it. This Bill should never have been brought to Parliament in its present form. Now that it has, there must be a free vote on it.

 

After all, if these proposals aren't a matter of conscience for Mr Brown, what is? Or does he see absolutely everything in terms of crude political power? If this Bill is rammed through, where does that leave that famous moral compass of his? In pieces.

 

The above made me laugh, until I remembered that it was published in a newspaper read by thousands. I especially enjoyed the "we're not animals" part. What the **** are we then - plants? Stupid bint.

 

I lament that fact that this bill didn't sail through years ago.

[felix]

In the 21st century religion should really have no place -or offer no opinion - in matters of science.

 

Historically religion has only ever provided answers, or blind truths (via whichever prophet or diety you happen to believe in). To disbelieve these truths was sometimes punishable by death .

 

Science is always asking questions, religion only ever provides answers based on belief.

 

As soon as Cardinal O'Brien can stand up and explain stem cell research in scientific terms, and explain why people with parkinsons, motor neuron disease etc etc. should not be helped, he can feck right off imho.

[Stuart Lyon]

Frankly I think we should pity those foolish enough to take heed of religious figureheads.

[Coco]

This might be an interesting factor in the Labour party losing even more support in the West of Scotland.

[Walter Payton]

This might be an interesting factor in the Labour party losing even more support in the West of Scotland.

 

Because the West of Scotland already sets the standard in genetic experimentation and mutation?

[Le Chat]

Some of these trumpets really are stuck in the dark ages.

[Boris]

What irks me about this is that you have what is essentially a lobbyist controlling, or trying to control, elected representatives at the very heart of government. It is an affront to democracy.

 

Surely the MP's in question have a responsibility to their constituents first, party second and any cult third.

 

You could argue about the first two responsibilities as they are elected on a party ticket therefore perhaps the party comes first as they have de facto party acceptance of their constituents in the first place.

 

When I joined my union on the application form it asked if I was a freemason. I am not, however if it is asking this should it also ask if I am a member of an organised religion for if I were to hold office then surely membership of an organised religion could sway how I vote on matters as much as being a member of the Freemasons could?

 

The Church of course with its long history of forward thing. Gallileo got his apology...eventually...500 years later.

 

Just because it is Christianity doesn't make theocracy any more palatable for me. Jesuit thought-police anyone?

[The Old Tolbooth]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/scotland/article3603020.ece

 

It's one thing religious leaders telling people how to live their lives... But it's another when they start distorting the truth.

 

The cardinal says that the experiments on stem cells could lead to hybrid human/animal babies and experiments of Frankenstein proportions.

 

That is a lie, pure and simple. The only place that could happen is in the imagination of an ill informed ignorant idiot who is trying to push his warped agenda onto others.

 

Saying that we shouldn't carry out medical experiments to find a cure for degenerative diseases because it could lead to hybrid human monsters is comparable to saying that we shoudn't harness electricity because we might get electrocuted, or we shouldn't dissect dead bodies because the human body is sacred (even although it will help train lots of new surgeons), or we shouldn't give people condoms because they might practice safe sex (oops, they've beaten me to that one already).

 

I noticed that the cardinal had a pacemaker fitted shortly after making these statements.

 

Who's the Frankenstein now eh?

 

It's a good job there weren't idiots like you around all those years ago when pacemakers were first developed, saying that putting electronic devices into people was "immoral" because it could lead to a whole new breed of super human/andriod hybrids.

 

If there had been then you might not still be around to spout the nonsense that seems to flow so freely from your holy gob.

 

(Can you tell that I'm a bit annoyed about this).

 

 

Superb post mate, these tossers really do think they are a law unto themselves, they need to take a closer look at home before firing bullets at anyone else.

[K1874M]

The guys a disgrace... he's bullied politicians using faith as an excuse. I know a few catholics who are disgusted by him also. The man deserves to go to hell if their is such a place.

[Boaby Ewing]

Look, if we don't develop humans with wings and claws and ****, then the Chinese will.

 

And then we'll all be living under a godless, piranha headed dictatorship in no time.

 

Didn't think about that, eh, captain Christian?

[Toggie88]

At the end of the day, it's his job. He had to speak out on this. I've met the Cardinal on a couple of occasions (and just as I was reading this thread been told that I'll be meeting him again today) and he's a nice guy whose doing his job - regardless of my opinions on the matter, I completely understand the reason behind him this.

 

It's a touche subject, and one that will ultimately come down to one's moral views on the subject. The SNP have granted it's members a free vote on the subject, so no members feel the party are forcing them to vote against their beliefs.

[Boaby Ewing]

 

Shanghai Zoo. Do believe the hype.

[I P Knightley]

At the end of the day, it's his job. He had to speak out on this. I've met the Cardinal on a couple of occasions (and just as I was reading this thread been told that I'll be meeting him again today) and he's a nice guy whose doing his job - regardless of my opinions on the matter, I completely understand the reason behind him this.

 

It's a touche subject, and one that will ultimately come down to one's moral views on the subject. The SNP have granted it's members a free vote on the subject, so no members feel the party are forcing them to vote against their beliefs.

 

But they weren't elected by their consituencies on the basis of their individual beliefs, they were elected on the basis of party policies (allegedly).

 

Therefore, their duty is to their constituents, not their personal beliefs.

 

Elsewhere, I believe that the issue of KPO'B having a pacemaker yet speaking out against 'Frankenstein' medical research is quite an interesting dilemma. Ask him when you see him, would you? If it seems a bit awkward, you could always ask him to hear your confession and discuss the matter there...

 

Personally, I'm against the research. Not on religious grounds - simply that I feel we've made enough medical advances and, yes, people still die with horrible illnesses, many too young but, heck, we are put on this planet only for a short amount of time and we have to accept that. (This is today's view. Tomorrow, I may change my mind.)

[K1874M]

At the end of the day, it's his job. He had to speak out on this. I've met the Cardinal on a couple of occasions (and just as I was reading this thread been told that I'll be meeting him again today) and he's a nice guy whose doing his job - regardless of my opinions on the matter, I completely understand the reason behind him this.

 

It's a touche subject, and one that will ultimately come down to one's moral views on the subject. The SNP have granted it's members a free vote on the subject, so no members feel the party are forcing them to vote against their beliefs.

 

Toggie have a word mate... if you think bullying mp's using their faith is fair then you are blinded by your faith.

[doctor jambo]

IN the Gp press today that GP's will need to state what treatments they disagree with- abortion etc and publish it in their practice leaflets

failure to do so may affect registration (aka the sack)

Should MP's do similar and publish thier beliefs in thier election pamphlets so that we know if their morals are going to affect their duty?

[jambo walesy]

Have you ever heard Cardinal O'Brien speak!

OMG he bores you to tears.

[Toggie88]

Toggie have a word mate... if you think bullying mp's using their faith is fair then you are blinded by your faith.

 

I would hardly say bullying.

 

If MPs, or members of the public for that matter feel they are being bullied by their faith, then I would have to question why they are a member of that church and what their faith is.

[Toggie88]

But they weren't elected by their consituencies on the basis of their individual beliefs, they were elected on the basis of party policies (allegedly).

 

Therefore, their duty is to their constituents, not their personal beliefs.

 

Elsewhere, I believe that the issue of KPO'B having a pacemaker yet speaking out against 'Frankenstein' medical research is quite an interesting dilemma. Ask him when you see him, would you? If it seems a bit awkward, you could always ask him to hear your confession and discuss the matter there...

 

Personally, I'm against the research. Not on religious grounds - simply that I feel we've made enough medical advances and, yes, people still die with horrible illnesses, many too young but, heck, we are put on this planet only for a short amount of time and we have to accept that. (This is today's view. Tomorrow, I may change my mind.)

 

Yes they were. If it was simply a party political system the ballot papers would simply read:

Labour [ ]

Conservative [ ]

SNP [ ]

etc...

 

When a MP is elected, they have been elected as an individual. It does come down to their party ultimately however as this is the way in which politics has evolved nationally.

 

I think this is similiar to abortion. It will come down to personal opinion...not party position.

[doctor jambo]

I would hardly say bullying.

 

If MPs, or members of the public for that matter feel they are being bullied by their faith, then I would have to question why they are a member of that church and what their faith is.

 

Or if as an MP you feel that the government you work for and are and are a part of are doing something so abhorent, why you continue to suckle at the fat teat of the paying public and not do the moral thing and resign

 

And the very idea of a moral MP just made me chuckle

[doctor jambo]

Yes they were. If it was simply a party political system the ballot papers would simply read:

Labour [ ]

Conservative [ ]

SNP [ ]

etc...

 

 

No- they weren't

I have never seen a politician put thier personal beliefs (and I dont mean the I want better education, more socila equality guff)

on thier election leaflets

 

for example:

"Hi I'm Mr SNP from Glasgow, I am a Catholic who hates roast beef, single mums and junkies. I think being gay is wrong, but like hardcore porn and think we should legalise it. Macaroons are nice , but tea cakes are better. I blieve in better education, more schools and all that guff. I use my expenses to go shopping and eat in nice restaurants"

[K1874M]

I would hardly say bullying.

 

If MPs, or members of the public for that matter feel they are being bullied by their faith, then I would have to question why they are a member of that church and what their faith is.

 

Its bullying.. he has said in the past that politicians who voted against their faith wouldnt be welcome... their faith has nothing to do with their constituents.

 

Its disgusting, the day its made illegal for religious leaders to sway parliamentary decisions will be a very big step in the direction of complete democracy.

 

If the party was a religious party then so be it yes the religious leaders have every right to sway their chosen parlimentary figure heads.

[Toggie88]

No- they weren't

I have never seen a politician put thier personal beliefs (and I dont mean the I want better education, more socila equality guff)

on thier election leaflets

 

for example:

"Hi I'm Mr SNP from Glasgow, I am a Catholic who hates roast beef, single mums and junkies. I think being gay is wrong, but like hardcore porn and think we should legalise it. Macaroons are nice , but tea cakes are better. I blieve in better education, more schools and all that guff. I use my expenses to go shopping and eat in nice restaurants"

 

 

Well maybe that is a change that is needed. Or if you feel strongly enough about this subject, I would recommend you contact all candidates in your area to discuss the issues you are most concerned about i.e hardcore porn and Macaroons.

[Toggie88]

Its bullying.. he has said in the past that politicians who voted against their faith wouldnt be welcome... their faith has nothing to do with their constituents.

 

Its disgusting, the day its made illegal for religious leaders to sway parliamentary decisions will be a very big step in the direction of complete democracy.

 

If the party was a religious party then so be it yes the religious leaders have every right to sway their chosen parlimentary figure heads.

 

So what about freedom of speech? Chuck that out the window? It's ultimately up to the MP what they do. Do they let their faith get in the way? or do they do what they believe what is it the best interest of their constituents?

[K1874M]

So what about freedom of speech? Chuck that out the window? It's ultimately up to the MP what they do. Do they let their faith get in the way? or do they do what they believe what is it the best interest of their constituents?

 

I'm all for Freedom of speech, Obrian hasnt given his MP the freedom tho has he....

 

I'm all for freedom to practice religion but that should not encroach in any one else's life. You think different. Thats a shame as it shows your faith in a bad light, one that uses bullying to govern and protect.

[monkfish1979]

I'm all for Freedom of speech, Obrian hasnt given his MP the freedom tho has he....

 

I'm all for freedom to practice religion but that should not encroach in any one else's life. You think different. Thats a shame as it shows your faith in a bad light, one that uses bullying to govern and protect.

 

They all do, to some extent, and our native faith seems to favour guilt tripping and dressed up moral browbeating to achieve any agenda that might be on their plate at the time.

 

Religious types, for the most part (IMO) thrive on kneejerk reactions to things that they know nothing about, and are very quick to condemn things before they've been properly researched. Good thing not many people pay attention to them these days....

 

Fuds, IMO.

[Boris]

So what about freedom of speech? Chuck that out the window? It's ultimately up to the MP what they do. Do they let their faith get in the way? or do they do what they believe what is it the best interest of their constituents?

 

The Catholic Church doesn't belive in freedom of speech as the only voice that is correct is theirs!

[Boris]

Its bullying.. he has said in the past that politicians who voted against their faith wouldnt be welcome... their faith has nothing to do with their constituents.

 

Its disgusting, the day its made illegal for religious leaders to sway parliamentary decisions will be a very big step in the direction of complete democracy.

 

If the party was a religious party then so be it yes the religious leaders have every right to sway their chosen parlimentary figure heads.

 

Spot on KennyM, wot I said earlier.

 

So far we already have Opus Die in the Cabinet...

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

So what about freedom of speech? Chuck that out the window? It's ultimately up to the MP what they do. Do they let their faith get in the way? or do they do what they believe what is it the best interest of their constituents?

 

How can it be classed as a free ballot when the Catholic Church are effectively telling their members which way to vote?

[Toggie88]

The Catholic Church doesn't belive in freedom of speech as the only voice that is correct is theirs!

 

That's still freedom of speech.

 

Freedom of speech is being allowed to say what you believe. You can agree with giving someone freedom of speech without having to agree with their views.

[Toggie88]

How can it be classed as a free ballot when the Catholic Church are effectively telling their members which way to vote?

 

The members don't need to listen though, do they?

 

I could members of the Labour Party to vote for Independence...some may listen, some want. It's still a free ballot.

 

COB is the leader of the catholic church in Scotland, the Catholic church have certain beliefs. It's completely understandable for them to tell their members (who are members of the church at their own free will) which way they should vote. It's still completely up to the MP.

 

What about pressure groups? Is it not a free vote because they tell MPs how to vote?

[Toggie88]

I'm all for Freedom of speech, Obrian hasnt given his MP the freedom tho has he....

 

I'm all for freedom to practice religion but that should not encroach in any one else's life. You think different. Thats a shame as it shows your faith in a bad light, one that uses bullying to govern and protect.

 

I think it up to the person if they let it encroach on their life.

 

For the record, I don't have a problem with stem cell research.

[K1874M]

The members don't need to listen though, do they?

 

I could members of the Labour Party to vote for Independence...some may listen, some want. It's still a free ballot.

 

COB is the leader of the catholic church in Scotland, the Catholic church have certain beliefs. It's completely understandable for them to tell their members (who are members of the church at their own free will) which way they should vote. It's still completely up to the MP.

 

What about pressure groups? Is it not a free vote because they tell MPs how to vote?

 

Apart from the pressure from religious leaders....

[K1874M]

I think it up to the person if they let it encroach on their life.

 

For the record, I don't have a problem with stem cell research.

 

Any law based on religious beliefs would be encroaching on my life...

Hey the drink ban before half 12 on a Sunday is bad enuff.

[Toggie88]

Apart from the pressure from religious leaders....

 

If you take your view, nothing is a free ballot then.

 

Every time a vote is taken people are influenced by others. That may be pressure groups, constituents, religous leaders, scientists, doctors et al.

 

It's still ultimately down to whoever is voting, which they vote.

[Boris]

That's still freedom of speech.

 

Freedom of speech is being allowed to say what you believe. You can agree with giving someone freedom of speech without having to agree with their views.

 

Tell that to Martin Luther!

 

The RC church is saying that MP's have to follopw their lead or they will be disowned. Nothing like guilt to make people do what you want them to!

 

I assume you are so keen on the Cardinal given that you see some political hay to make in that you could perhaps prise the "catholic vote" in West Central Scotland from Labour over to the SNP. Personally I'm not so sure if the pulpit has that power anymore.

 

If it does though Toggie i would be ashamed to be involved in such blatant political prostitution.

 

To paraphrase and old slogan,

 

"Home Rule NOT Rome rule!"

[Toggie88]

Any law based on religious beliefs would be encroaching on my life...

Hey the drink ban before half 12 on a Sunday is bad enuff.

 

Petition the Parliament on the subject then.

[Toggie88]

Tell that to Martin Luther!

 

The RC church is saying that MP's have to follopw their lead or they will be disowned. Nothing like guilt to make people do what you want them to!

 

I assume you are so keen on the Cardinal given that you see some political hay to make in that you could perhaps prise the "catholic vote" in West Central Scotland from Labour over to the SNP. Personally I'm not so sure if the pulpit has that power anymore.

 

If it does though Toggie i would be ashamed to be involved in such blatant political prostitution.

 

To paraphrase and old slogan,

 

"Home Rule NOT Rome rule!"

 

I don't have any political motive here. If I was trying to prise the Catholic vote, I certainly wouldn't be doing it on JKB:mw_rolleyes:

 

The Cardinal is a Labour man anyhoo's. My whole point on this thread was about how it was not party political.

[K1874M]

Petition the Parliament on the subject then.

 

When you meet Adolf.... sorry Cardinal Obrian, please do ask him to keep the public havering up as all its doing is digging his hole deeper.

[doctor jambo]

Imagine the outcry if it was Muslim leaders telling MP's what to do

THe Daily Mail would be shaking with rage and supporting crazy embryo freakery

The Catholic Church should stick to what its good at- covering up paedophilia, exploiting the poor and promoting HIV in the third world

[Toggie88]

Opp here come the cheap shots at the catholic church.

[K1874M]

Opp here come the cheap shots at the catholic church.

 

Not half as cheap as bullying key decision makers of our country to protect draconian non factual beliefs which effect those who are not connected with the said religion.

[systemx]

Toggies posts are hardly surprising given that he's toeing the party line.The good Cardinal is hardly ever away from Bute House these days .

 

A free vote is hardly that if the Cardinal is whipping RC MPs.Well done to Jim Devine on this issue.

 

BTW Would be interesting if Margo challenged the Cardinal to a debate on Stem Cell Research.Might drop her an e-mail.

[BigC]

You stopped your highlighting a paragraph early in my opinion. The bit I've highlighted below was the most ill informed part of the article.

 

Again, just another example of blatant "lying for Jesus".

 

Well said.

 

Alan Johnson cynically suggests the Bill will bring about cures for such terrible afflictions as motor neurone disease, multiple sclerosis or Parkinson's. Yes, of course, everyone would like to bring such suffering to an end. But there isn't a shred of evidence that this will be the case.

 

[Colonel Kurtz]

Imagine the outcry if it was Muslim leaders telling MP's what to do

THe Daily Mail would be shaking with rage and supporting crazy embryo freakery

The Catholic Church should stick to what its good at- covering up paedophilia, exploiting the poor and promoting HIV in the third world

 

New labour in Scotland has a power base of lanarkshire catholics,wherer as coincillors they had different colour application forms for cathholics to ensure they got the jobs.

The minutes silence for the pope came about as a result of Celtic supportes asociation getting their msps to pressurer Slippery jack Mcconnell to put pressure on the GFA to find a way out which didnt involve Rangers.

Hearts were stiched right up

I notice the current Pontiff is on his last legs,and wonder what will happen

A lot of popes snuff it quickly because "Young Cardinals vote for Old Popes"

joan Burnie sums it up very well in her column in The Dr and describes O Brien as a"Cardinal from a minority church who has been elected by no one"

[doctor jambo]

The Catholic Church long ago lost its rights to act as a moral compass for anything

To try and assert itself in this matter is farcical

And Toggie- they may well be cheap shots, but they are indicative of the lack of moral fibre in the Church and how little respect I have for it

Which is sad- as his message is a decent enough one, but now it has come from O'Brian, the message is tarnished and less valid

[Toggie88]

Toggies posts are hardly surprising given that he's toeing the party line.The good Cardinal is hardly ever away from Bute House these days .

 

A free vote is hardly that if the Cardinal is whipping RC MPs.Well done to Jim Devine on this issue.

 

BTW Would be interesting if Margo challenged the Cardinal to a debate on Stem Cell Research.Might drop her an e-mail.

 

The Cardinal is Labour supporter.

 

When was the Cardinal last at Bute House??

[Toggie88]

The Catholic Church long ago lost its rights to act as a moral compass for anything

To try and assert itself in this matter is farcical

And Toggie- they may well be cheap shots, but they are indicative of the lack of moral fibre in the Church and how little respect I have for it

Which is sad- as his message is a decent enough one, but now it has come from O'Brian, the message is tarnished and less valid

 

In your opinion.

 

So your view is, your for freedom of speech if you agree with the message?

[BigC]

Opp here come the cheap shots at the catholic church.

 

They might be cheap shots, but it would take 2 minutes of googling to prove that they are all undisputed facts.

 

If the catholic church wants to be in charge of "moral guidance" it really has to get it's house in order first.

 

Surely it's not hard to realise why people find it objectionable that we are being told what to do by an organisation with THAT sort of track record.

[Toggie88]

New labour in Scotland has a power base of lanarkshire catholics,wherer as coincillors they had different colour application forms for cathholics to ensure they got the jobs.

The minutes silence for the pope came about as a result of Celtic supportes asociation getting their msps to pressurer Slippery jack Mcconnell to put pressure on the GFA to find a way out which didnt involve Rangers.

Hearts were stiched right up

I notice the current Pontiff is on his last legs,and wonder what will happen

A lot of popes snuff it quickly because "Young Cardinals vote for Old Popes"

joan Burnie sums it up very well in her column in The Dr and describes O Brien as a"Cardinal from a minority church who has been elected by no one"

 

New Labour has a power base of Lanarkshire, regardless of religion.