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 > Why we should not have an ambassador to the Holy See. > Comments

Why we should not have an ambassador to the Holy See. : Comments

By Meg Wallace, published 12/6/2019

Since when did the Australian people vote to share government with the Holy See? This undermines the separation of church and state.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. All
Meg Wallace is the president of the Rationalist Society, which is "in favour of evidence as opposed to 'superstition' and 'bigotry'".

So, we know where she is coming from. The Holy See is probably the headquarters of 'superstition' and 'bigotry', to her. Are we in for another one of the anti-Christian outbursts that are becoming increasingly popular in Australia, or is it all about the technicalities of having an ambassador in the Vatican?

She makes a thinly-veiled attack on Tony Abbott ("those who want to send him to the other side of the planet"), and refers to the 'claim' that the Holy See is a sovereign state.

The Vatican has international relations with 180 states, and according to an entry in Wikipedia: "The fact that the Holy See is a non-territorial institution is no longer regarded as a reason for denying it international personality".

Since 1973, Australia has had 18 ambassadors to the Holy See without anyone whinging about it. And, 87 countries are happy to provide an ambassador there and, the populations of those countries probably did not "vote to share government with the Holy See", as this unhappy looking lady laments.

I don't remember the public voting to send an ambassador anywhere!

Yes. It is clear that Meg Wallace has just taken another opportunity to badmouth Christian 'bigots' on behalf of her irrelevant organisation. And, speaking of bigots …...
Posted by ttbn, Wednesday, 12 June 2019 10:18:19 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
I could not care less about having an ambassador to Rome however I don't ever hear Meg speak up about the billions wasted and the destruction of our electricity system based on gw lies and religion. Very selective in her hatred. Personally after being one of the few men with the guts and convictions to stop the illegal boat trade and drownings as well as getting rid of the breathing tax Tony Abbott should be rewarded with whatever post he wants. Unlike Rudd, Turnbull and Bishop he actually did good for this country.
Posted by runner, Wednesday, 12 June 2019 10:27:25 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
Absolutely agree!
Alan B.
Posted by Alan B., Wednesday, 12 June 2019 10:51:11 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
Australia should have diplomatic relations with the Holy See, but do we really need a separate embassy and a separate ambassador to do so rather than combining it with Italy?
Posted by Aidan, Wednesday, 12 June 2019 4:25:59 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
There's obviously not a lot of interest in this piece, so here's something about the Holy See that might set the dogs barking:

"The Vatican released a 30-page document on Monday, titled “Male and Female he created them,” which rejected the idea that people can change their gender. The document said that the notion of gender being determined by personal feelings rather than biology was an attempt to “annihilate nature.”
Posted by ttbn, Wednesday, 12 June 2019 5:16:35 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
Excellent well argued essay.
But why even call the vatican the "holy see".

Toxic cesspool would be a more apt and accurate name/description

The "catholic" church is of course primarily, and indeed only a political institution the stated "mission" purpose of which is to control the religious aspirations of ALL of humankind.
It is simultaneously the original multi-national business corporation. As such its over-riding purpose is to protect its hugely enormous assets, and to expand its market share in the whats-in-it-for-me exoteric "religious" market place. Historically it has used and still uses ever trick in the book to achieve both its self-appointed political and business purposes.

The treaty establishing the vatican state gave it the political means to "legitimize" this project. As do the various concordats
http://www.concordatwatch.eu

The inherently authoritarian (and even totalitarian) "catholic" mission to control the religious aspirations of ALL of humankind in one stark image.
http://www.dartmouth.edu/~spanmod/mural/panel13.html
Posted by Daffy Duck, Wednesday, 12 June 2019 6:17:56 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
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. All

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