The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
10 Points

Ireland should pay the cost to the UK taxpayer of the Pope's forthcoming visit to Britain.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/4/2010 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,767 times Debate No: 12690
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (8)
Votes (2)




The Pope's forthcoming visit to Britain is going to cost the country �14 million [1] and I firmly assert that the Irish government should pay. Here's why:

The Irish aren't very adventurous with their food and they won't eat pasta, rice, noodles or any other "foreign muck" so when the potato harvests failed during the late 1840's, millions of Irish people were left with nothing to go with their succulent lamb chops, juicy pork steaks and rich beef and Guinness stews.

Therefore, millions of Irish people decided that life in the Emerald Isle was no longer worth living and they decided to sail across the Irish Sea to England, the country that had taken Ireland under its wing in 1603 and had nutured and developed the country since then. [2], [3]

Once in England, the new arrivals from Ireland received a warm welcome, offers of employment and, of course, the opportunity to gorge themselves on huge bags of lovely, golden-brown fish and chips.

Unfortunetly, the extra demand for potatoes to make the chips to feed the Irish immigrants meant that extra supplies had to be imported from Ireland, which, ironically, excerbated the acute shortage there and led to a million Irish people starving to death.

But never mind that, over in England, the Irish immigrants retained many of their traditional customs: heavy drinking; brawling in public; fixing horseraces; building houses on the cheap and operatng dangerous fairground rides are some of the many, but chief amongst the Irish imports was Catholism.

Before the Irish came, England was a wholly protestant country but today the decendants of the original immigrants have created sufficient demand to warrant a Papal visit to Britain.

Most British people are either protestant or not religious at all – it's the decendants of Irish immigrants that make up the majority of Catholics in Britain. So, since Britain helped Ireland out of a fix when they had a shortage of potatoes, surely it is only right and proper that the Irish government should pick up the tab for the Pope's visit to the UK?

Thank you.



I thank Mr. Eggleston for this engaging debate topic.

During this debate I will uphold that Ireland shouldn't pay for the Popes visit, and that neither should Britain. Rather, a much different course of action should be taken, which I will discuss later.

I will firstly address Brians comment about Britain being a haven for Irish emigrants. While this is to an extent true, the iris were victims of British Victorian snobbery. The British, owing vast swaths of land aroudn the world, thought they were a superior race and the inheritors of the Ancient Roman Empire. However, they did indeed look down upon people from their colonies, including Ireland.

A prominent feature in Britain right up until the 50's and 60's was "No Blacks, No Dogs, No Irish". The Irish faced huge discrimination, and as a result were confined to menial, low wage labour-based jobs. This led them to a woof heavy drinking, horse-fixing, etc. as Brian mentioned above. The famine itself was worsened by the fact Britain was unresponsive to the fame itself, and decided to curb the crisis by sending Maize but giving absolutely no cooking instructions! Asides from "Peels Brimstone", as the Maize was known, the majority of Irish landowners were protestant, who owned e vast farms of Ireland and decided to continue to sell various foodstuff back to Britain and elsewhere. Food was available, but only to robber Protestant who took land that the Catholic Irish rightfully owned!

Now, the context of the Irish of Britain aren't down-and-out scoundrels saved by British with a heart of Gold, they were just discriminated at home, forced to stave, and were then discriminated further in Britain, the source of the problem! The Irish are still a considerable minority, but have in recent times improved themselves, only since the arrival of Pakistanis and Indians which the British have focused their attention on [1].

The Irish do not have any burden to the British to foot the fee required for his Holiness to visit Britain, as the migration was one caused by the British themselves! However, I do not think the British people who are mostly hard workman people who were themselves victims of British aristocratic elitism should have to pay this bill. I feel the appropriate response should be, as Dawkins put it, "Arrest the Pope!" [2].

The Pope should be arrested when he immediately steps foot on British soil for being directly involved in the abuse of children[3], which can be construed as a violation of human rights. He would then be tried like an ordinary criminal, and sentenced to serve his time amongst other paedophiles in prison, where he will quickly have to learn not to pick up the soap, or else he will receive a "baptism" from his fellow man!

Should the Pope refuse to comply with the British show of justice, he should immediately shot down by the British Anti-Aircraft Rapier Missiles [4]. The ensuing explosion would hopefully fry the papal paedophilic man, and show the world that we've had enough of their kiddy diddling!

I await Mr. Eggglestons response and await a humorous second round.

[1] =
[2] =
[3] =
[4] =
Debate Round No. 1


I would like to thank Panda for accepting this debate and his considered response.

In reply, I would like to state that Panda's history teacher is clearly an Irish Republican who indoctrinates his students with nationalist propaganda – nothing else can explain his perverse interpretation of his Ireland's history.

I can assure you that the British only had Ireland's best interests at heart when they assumed control of the country and transferred the ownership of the farms to aristocratic English landowners, who then very kindly sent professional farmers over to manage and improve the agricultural production processes.

Furthermore, when potato blight damaged the crops, the British sent maize (corn in the US) over as a substitute. Panda asserts that this was unsatisfactory because it came without instructions, but this is nonsense.

The starving Irish peasants could easily have made the maize into corn tortillas and these could have then been served with a filling of guacamole, jalapeno peppers, onions, kidney beans and Cajun-style chicken to make a delicious snack. Alternatively, they could have simply put them on the barbeque and cooked them in their husks, eating them on the cob, drizzled with organic butter or extra-virgin olive oil. They didn't though, because maize is from America and the Irish don't like foreign food.

Moving on to Panda's money-saving solution of arresting the Pope on arrival in Britain and charging him with complicity to sexually assault minors, I'm afraid that Britain is diplomatically bound to grant heads of state immunity from prosecution.

I like the idea of shooting his plane out of the air, though, but missiles are expensive and I am adamant that Ireland should bear the financial cost of sabotaging the Pope's visit.

Unfortunately, though, Ireland doesn't have many military aircraft and their most potent air platform is the somewhat less-than-formidable Cessna 172 – a piston-engined, propeller-driven aircraft that entered service in 1972.

Now, because the Cessna only has a single seat and carries no weapons, the pilot would have to use a long-range rifle to shoot the Pope's plane out of the sky whilst simultaneously flying his own aircraft.

However, because Shepherd One (the Papal plane) is an Airbus A320, which cruises at an altitude of 36,000 feet and a speed of 511mph, and because the Irish Air Corps Cessna only cruises at 126mph and has a maximum service ceiling of just 10,000 feet, the pilot would have to intercept the Pope's plane and fire his shot as it flew 26,000 feet above him. I don't know if there are any rifles with that sort of range but I do know he'd only get one chance to hit something vital because if he missed there would be no way of catching the jet up in his little propeller plane.

Overall, I think we have to accept that it is inevitable that the Pope will come to Britain and arrive unscathed and that there will be a huge bill left to pay as a result. Because Ireland infected Britain with Catholicism and it's followers and they caused the Pope to come to Britain, it's only right that Ireland should picks up the tab.

Thank you.


I thank Brian for this humorous debate.

I am, however, quite dismayed with his revisionist history stance. When the British aristocrats came to Ireland, they didn't have the best interests of the Irish peasants at heart, but rather their bank balance. Many didn't even bother to visit their vast acres of land, seeing as they were too busy fornicating with women of low standards, as was the case with Oliver Cromwell [1].

As for Maize, the Irish simply didn't have the luxury to make such delicacies with Maize. It was quite regretful that Robert Peel failed to send a cookbook such "Your way out of this blight maize!" or "101 ways to replace hearty meals of Potato stew and Guinness with bland maize meals". Indeed, the blight itself came from the Isle of Wight and Britain first so without Britain Ireland would ave been munching Potatoes like there was no tomorrow.

Now, Britain can arrest the Pope, much like they arrested Augusto Pinochet for violating human rights [2]. The parallels between the two are remarkable:

- Both suppressed their victims from speaking up.
- Both aided in the abuse of children.
- Both deny claims of responsibility.

Furthermore, the trial would be broadcast and make huge profits for British broadcasting. People would pay top Dollar\Pound\Euro to see the Pope face his own inquisition. Furthermore, it would teach the Roman Catholic Church a lesson in England, as they have repeatedly threatened to dump children in orphanages out to the streets because of Englands marriage and abortion laws. They would be content with the children being screwed by the Church and then screwed by society on the streets before being finally screwed by the system in state care. It would show them the state will no longer stand for their tomfoolery or they will be sent to the West Indies as slaves as done back in the Middle Ages [3]!

I would, however, agree with Ireland compensating Britain for their missiles hitting the Popes plane, as long as it guarantee who goes from ashes to ashes. Indeed, the explosion rubble into a gigantic metal dildo which could be used to punish paedophiles in a tit for tat fashion. This would provide justice to the victims of Catholic Kiddy Fiddlers.

[1] =
[2] =
[3] =
Debate Round No. 2
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by mattrodstrom 7 years ago
not really...

only if you really think you need the help... (grammar's not my favorite game)

but I do recall you missing apostraphes all over the place.
Posted by I-am-a-panda 7 years ago
"iris" one missing letter, "woof", should be world of, "e" the, "ave" have, "who" he. Care to point out more?
Posted by mattrodstrom 7 years ago
can't even find'em can'ya


I can help if you'd really like me to... despite my disdain for the subject.. I'm not a complete dunce in that department.

Just say the word and I'll help ya' out.
Posted by I-am-a-panda 7 years ago
I made like ~2 mistakes per round. Not really enough to warrant s/g to Brian.
Posted by mattrodstrom 7 years ago
I'm not sure who deserves the win... But Spelling and grammar ought to go to Brian.

From what I could tell he demonstrated a comfortable mastery of his native tongue, with even his one minor "blunder" working for towards his goal (of hilarity that is)... whilst his opponent, perhaps not unexpectedly, as he isn't quite from England "Proper", seemed to stumble more often, and with less grace.
Posted by brian_eggleston 7 years ago
Ah, now, Panda...don't get annoyed...please let me apologise in advance - I didn't run a spell check before posting this and I'm afraid there are some errors - for example "nutured" should read "nurtured". Sorry about that.
Posted by heroes867 7 years ago
Argh! I was about to take this one, though it's probably more appropriate for someone in/from Ireland to debate.
You got this one.
Posted by I-am-a-panda 7 years ago
I got this one.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Brendan21 7 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Vote Placed by wmpeebles 7 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04