Sunday, 19 September 2010

Beatify This

... Has he left yet?

Holy Hell, I hope so.

I'm sick of the Beeb's top news story of every day being Pope-related. I would much prefer to hear about Russell Brand's 'citizen arrest' or the axing of toilets on trains. I feel these stories truly have a comment to make on the society of today and bear greater relevance to 21st century life than Catholicism.

Being arrested for pushing a photographer who was attempting to pap a pic of your fiancée's privates, for example, says a huge amount about social boundaries, the desperate sexualisation of celebrity women and the death of chivalry, to name but a few issues. I think more can be learnt from this than the ramblings of an old man in a dress (who advocates condoms being 'unholy' and therefore actively encourages the spread of AIDS and multiplication of population in vulnerable over-crowded third world countries). And as for toilets no longer being a necessity on trains - what a hot topic. Are we really becoming that country, where people simply cannot and will not hold their bladders for one measly hour? And we become irrationally outraged that our birth-born human right of being able to urinate as and when we damn well please is flogged to spare expense? The expense being toilets which are almost instantly disgusting and riddled with complaints and upturned noses? The issue here is that this is classed an issue. The experience is always prickly: my arms are never long enough to be able to wee comfortably while holding the door firmly shut to protect my dignity. This leads to a forced wee, a red face and the onset of panic, which is hard to shake until I have returned to my seat, blushing, and stick my head in my book, as though I have done something shameful. Not to mention my thighs - I will of course be doing all of this hovering. Scrap the toilets and hold it in - it's character building.

But I digress - as I said, these issues are far more burning (insert witty call-back to do with urinating here) than a visit from a man who is key speaker for a religion which is constantly abusing its children, condemns any women who chose to abort (and most other women for that matter) and spurns homosexuals. Moral leader or corrupt dictator?

And what's with his right-hand-man calling Britain a "third world country"? Ouch. When the Pope's hoes issued an explanation, I was expecting something along the lines of airports/chaotic/disorganised etc, which would have been an inappropriate and insensitive analogy but would have disguised a racial slur as being impersonal and misunderstood. But no, the reference was indeed candidly referring to the multiculturalism of Britain. Oh right, so it was in fact a horribly ignorant remark implying anybody not Caucasian should belong to an impoverished country? Affirmative.

Crikey, I hope they come back super soon for more words of wisdom.

For anyone with similar sentiments, or perhaps not -
Stephen Fry kicks Catholic arse and does it insanely articulately

Third-world England

Paedophilia "petty gossip"

Opposition in great numbers, at last

1 comment:

  1. I see what you're saying about the Pope, especially since his visit was paid for using taxpayer money, but I do think there is (or was) a bit too much irrational Pope hate going around, when he visited.

    I had friends shouting, "I can't drive my car in London. Damn you, Pope!" I had friends shouting they want their taxes spent on something know, relevant. I also couldn't avoid, "He was in the Hitler Youth! From this I have deduced that he's a Nazi!"

    Before I go on, let me make it clear where I stand. Religion can be a wonderful thing. It can also, and is more often than not, a reason to tear apart communities, fight, and squabble. This is exactly what we've seen with the Pope's visit.

    That being said, I think the Pope is pretty progressive as far as Popes go. He's the first ever Pope to own up to all the allegations of child molestation, and say that things need to be done about it. That's a huge step.

    Sure, he still advocates that condoms are bad, but that's his job. Sure, he could rebel, and come out with the logical answer that safe sex is by no means a bad thing, but you've got to consider that it's his job to keep the millions of misled Catholics around the world under control. I've heard somewhere that he didn't even want the job, but now that he's landed it, I guess he's doing the best he can to make up for the church's past indiscretions, while trying not to contradict thousands of years of Catholic doctrine.

    Every little helps?