The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > The Vatican ambassador appointment: unconstitutional? > Comments

The Vatican ambassador appointment: unconstitutional? : Comments

By Max Wallace, published 14/5/2012

Why didn't the government send a militant protestant, or atheist, as its ambassador to the Holy See?

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. All
When, pray, are the Australian Government going to send an ambassador to the Appenine Republic of San Marino or Alpine Liechtenstein?
Posted by Vioetbou, Tuesday, 15 May 2012 8:03:39 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
More very compelling reasons as to why the vatican sux.

http://popecrimes.blogspot.com.au
Posted by Daffy Duck, Tuesday, 15 May 2012 12:57:52 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well, Australia recognises Israel as a nation-state, and they are not exactly 'human centered' are they?

Hell, we even recognise North Korea as a state too.

So the Vatican is in good company, at least.

But that apart, it is an outrage that Australia, once again, pays homage to God, and a very particular god at that, the Vatican model, on state funds.

I just heard Bill Kelty, that class traitor from the union movement, talk about the need for plain honest speaking in government.

Well, one could hardly accuse Rudd or Gillard of honesty or plain speaking when it comes to their eager support for Christianity, what with their support for the funding of the Pope's visit, Rudd's gifting of scarce tax dollars to the McKillop nonsense, and of course the $500m gone to school chaplains in state schools.

It is clear the ALP cannot be trusted with any debate concerning a transition to a republic here, since they have no understanding of the role of the 'wall of separation'.

Now, where's runner and OUG to refute everything here?
Posted by The Blue Cross, Thursday, 17 May 2012 9:07:03 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Because there are a lot more Catholics than hand-wringers. The last one to make such statements was in the CCCP; for instance, that pillar of rectitude, Stalin, asked "How many Divisions has he got?" (the Pope). The Pontif has be effectively exercising "Soft Power" for a long time for the benefit of all, apparently a recent one had some influence on the passing, after a lot of straining, of the CCCP.

Simply in a crass, materialistic basis, as a religion is does not teach the virtue of lying, probably better to do business with.
Posted by McCackie, Monday, 21 May 2012 9:47:00 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy