How Could The Catholic Church Allow Blair To Become Catholic..

[Smurf]

when his voting record in the House of Commons is quite consistent in voting for things against Catholic teaching?

Abortion and Homosexuality etc.

Surprised the church allowed him in..

[Johnny Vegas]

is it true a catholic can't be prime minister?

[wvkeeper]

The ignorance and pure hatred is abounding in this thread...

[Hampden_Hibby]

Originally Posted by wvkeeper
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

The ignorance and pure hatred is abounding in this thread...

Bit heavy.

[Johnny Vegas]

Originally Posted by wvkeeper
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

The ignorance and pure hatred is abounding in this thread...

eh?

i was asking a question

[Smurf]

Originally Posted by wvkeeper
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

The ignorance and pure hatred is abounding in this thread...

How's that then?
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[Riordan]

Originally Posted by Smurf
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

when his voting record in the House of Commons is quite consistent in voting for things against Catholic teaching?

Abortion and Homosexuality etc.

Surprised the church allowed him in..

Mabay he was trying to hide it
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[Dub]

Originally Posted by Smurf
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

when his voting record in the House of Commons is quite consistent in voting for things against Catholic teaching?

Abortion and Homosexuality etc.

Surprised the church allowed him in..

Its all about forgivness Dude.


Allegedly, although if GJP became cafflikk he still wouldnt be forgiven
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[egb_hibs]

Originally Posted by Smurf
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

when his voting record in the House of Commons is quite consistent in voting for things against Catholic teaching?

Abortion and Homosexuality etc.

Surprised the church allowed him in..

many people are asking the same question.

this [Only Registered Users Can See Links. Click Here To Register] suggests that it's the liberal english heirarchy behind it, with less enthusiasm in rome. but i'm not sure it squares with the pope's positive statements on the matter yesterday, although there again, that might just be diplomacy.

i think TB is a zelig like character, but even then i find it hard to believe he's had a sudden change of heart on the core anti-family manifesto of his party, which sits awkwardly with this conversion, to put it mildy.

in my opinion he can also feck off for waiting till he was just out of office. for someone so allegedly keen to thumb his nose at british tradition, he should have done it while in office. even if he was afraid of the nutter / bigot wing of the labour party, he could have done it in his last weeks in office when it would have made no real difference but would have had considerable symbolic value.

[Green Sleeves]

Originally Posted by egb_hibs
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

many people are asking the same question.

this [Only Registered Users Can See Links. Click Here To Register] suggests that it's the liberal english heirarchy behind it, with less enthusiasm in rome. but i'm not sure it squares with the pope's positive statements on the matter yesterday, although there again, that might just be diplomacy.

i think TB is a zelig like character, but even then i find it hard to believe he's had a sudden change of heart on the core anti-family manifesto of his party, which sits awkwardly with this conversion, to put it mildy.

in my opinion he can also feck off for waiting till he was just out of office. for someone so allegedly keen to thumb his nose at british tradition, he should have done it while in office. even if he was afraid of the nutter / bigot wing of the labour party, he could have done it in his last weeks in office when it would have made no real difference but would have had considerable symbolic value.

Has Blair joined up as an ordinary rank-and-file Catholic? Or does he have ambitions for the white smoke? Even Popedom might not be enough to satisfy his ego. Anything less than usurping God and running the show himself might seem beneath him.


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[Brizo]

Give him his due,to sign up just before the annual two hour snorefest thats midnight mass shows some commitment
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Might get in touch to see if his possee wants to join up with famille Brizo at St Theresas tomorrow night. Kind of think he might be more of a Brompton Oratory dude though
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[Colr]

Originally Posted by Johnny Vegas
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

is it true a catholic can't be prime minister?

Its not true but they can't be the monarch or marry into the royals. Sounds like a plus to me.

[cavalier]

Originally Posted by Colr
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Its not true but they can't be the monarch or marry into the royals. Sounds like a plus to me.

It's a bit of religious bigotry thats about 300 years out of date!
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[Colr]

Originally Posted by cavalier
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

It's a bit of religious bigotry thats about 300 years out of date!
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

The best solution is to get rid of the royal family not extend its potential membership.

[AndyM]

Originally Posted by egb_hibs
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

many people are asking the same question.

this [Only Registered Users Can See Links. Click Here To Register] suggests that it's the liberal english heirarchy behind it, with less enthusiasm in rome. but i'm not sure it squares with the pope's positive statements on the matter yesterday, although there again, that might just be diplomacy.

i think TB is a zelig like character, but even then i find it hard to believe he's had a sudden change of heart on the core anti-family manifesto of his party, which sits awkwardly with this conversion, to put it mildy.

in my opinion he can also feck off for waiting till he was just out of office. for someone so allegedly keen to thumb his nose at british tradition, he should have done it while in office. even if he was afraid of the nutter / bigot wing of the labour party, he could have done it in his last weeks in office when it would have made no real difference but would have had considerable symbolic value.

Fair enough. But bigger than all that I don't think that oor Tony's recent warmongering policies sit too well with most Catholic's and Christians generally - certainly not the ones I know anyway........

Whats the 'nutter/bigot wing' of the Labour Party BTW? Would that happen to include the West of Scotland Labour party who regularly used to meet every fortnight at Parkhead and went to Catholic schools?
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


When Alistair Campbell said to Blair 'we don't do God' he was not being bigotted - he was actually offering him the best piece of advice of his Premiership.

[egb_hibs]

Originally Posted by AndyM
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Fair enough. But bigger than all that I don't think that oor Tony's recent warmongering policies sit too well with most Catholic's and Christians generally - certainly not the ones I know anyway........

correct, its what many will feel strongest about. but looking at it logically, the war was a reactive thing- the kind of event driven thing politicians are forced to make a call on. whether you agree with the call or not, it's a different sort of thing to the ideological manifesto forged by that politician, the latter presumably being an articulation of the beliefs of him and / or his party. i therefore find it harder to imagine he's changed his mind on the latter.

Whats the 'nutter/bigot wing' of the Labour Party BTW? Would that happen to include the West of Scotland Labour party who regularly used to meet every fortnight at Parkhead and went to Catholic schools?
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

the kind that blair is afraid of. a media led metropolitan set that would have hounded him to death for it.

When Alistair Campbell said to Blair 'we don't do God' he was not being bigotted - he was actually offering him the best piece of advice of his Premiership.

it's a shame it had to be an issue i think. in any case; blair, campbell, mandelson et al are about the shadiest, manipulative control freaks british politics has ever known. i don't think anyone of them were channeling anything but their own mighty egos.

[wee 162]

Originally Posted by egb_hibs
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

many people are asking the same question.

this [Only Registered Users Can See Links. Click Here To Register] suggests that it's the liberal english heirarchy behind it, with less enthusiasm in rome. but i'm not sure it squares with the pope's positive statements on the matter yesterday, although there again, that might just be diplomacy.

i think TB is a zelig like character, but even then i find it hard to believe he's had a sudden change of heart on the core anti-family manifesto of his party, which sits awkwardly with this conversion, to put it mildy.

in my opinion he can also feck off for waiting till he was just out of office. for someone so allegedly keen to thumb his nose at british tradition, he should have done it while in office. even if he was afraid of the nutter / bigot wing of the labour party, he could have done it in his last weeks in office when it would have made no real difference but would have had considerable symbolic value.

If you are talking about allowing gay marriage here, how exactly is that "anti-family"? Do you actually think that gay people should still get married and live in a completely loveless life therefore not only fucking up their own life but their spouses as well?

If you are talking about abortion, then again, how is that "anti-family"? My understanding on the levels of abortion are mostly from people who are not in long term relationships, or are a result of birth control failure. So how exactly is that "anti-family"? Or are you suggesting that once someone gets pregnant then they should get married and again lock themselves into what might well be a loveless relationship with all the consequences that entails, not only for the couple, but also for the children of that marriage.

Or are you talking about allowing unmarried or homosexual couples to adopt or to parent children?

What exactly do you mean when you are talking about an "anti-family" manifesto? You bandy these sorts of phrases about like you're a Southern Baptist minister on crack and are never ever challenged about exactly what you mean by them. So enlighten us as to exactly what you mean by them. Or stop using them without being willing to explain exactly what you mean.

And btw, if I was a catholic and was asked to defend myself on supporting abortion, then I would inform whatever clerical authority asked that while I may be a catholic, others weren't and disagree with the churchs teaching. It's called living in a democracy. If they want to live in a theocracy fuck off to the Vatican City or Saudi Arabia.

[oo2beahibby]

Originally Posted by wee 162
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

If you are talking about allowing gay marriage here, how exactly is that "anti-family"? Do you actually think that gay people should still get married and live in a completely loveless life therefore not only fucking up their own life but their spouses as well?

If you are talking about abortion, then again, how is that "anti-family"? My understanding on the levels of abortion are mostly from people who are not in long term relationships, or are a result of birth control failure. So how exactly is that "anti-family"? Or are you suggesting that once someone gets pregnant then they should get married and again lock themselves into what might well be a loveless relationship with all the consequences that entails, not only for the couple, but also for the children of that marriage.

Or are you talking about allowing unmarried or homosexual couples to adopt or to parent children?

What exactly do you mean when you are talking about an "anti-family" manifesto? You bandy these sorts of phrases about like you're a Southern Baptist minister on crack and are never ever challenged about exactly what you mean by them. So enlighten us as to exactly what you mean by them. Or stop using them without being willing to explain exactly what you mean.

And btw, if I was a catholic and was asked to defend myself on supporting abortion, then I would inform whatever clerical authority asked that while I may be a catholic, others weren't and disagree with the churchs teaching. It's called living in a democracy. If they want to live in a theocracy fuck off to the Vatican City or Saudi Arabia.

Poetry, Al. Religion is only one of many lobby groups entitled to influence society.

Religion has its place in society for those who wish to follow a faith. However, a follower should not be subject to ALL of the faith's beliefs/teachings, and neither should a religion (any religion) have such an influence that it seeps into the judiciary and parliament.