First, a couple of disrespectful guys climb New Mexico's Shiprock and post a scathing TR, and now this?

Isn't there such a thing as respect for another's culture and belief system anymore ???

Or, was it all designed just to gain recognition and votes ?

I agree that it can be viewed as incredibly offensive. He should have understood that there are many people here on SP (and of course millions worldwide) that are a proud part of that religion. There are good reports that are provocative, but this is definitely in my opinion beyond that.

He should not have posted that, period.

So offensive! Wait where's my explosive belt, gotta avenge that infidel...

I have my own offensive incursion into the Vatican to confess.

It was 1973, I was taking my Porsche to Corfu. There was a problem at the ferry in Bari, and I suddenly had about 10 days to kill in Italy. No plans or guidebook. A situation inconceivable in todays age of internet and cell phone.

So anyway, it was late at night and the world was a much darker place then. When you parked your car, at night, you turned the directional signal over so one tailight would stay on all night. Few street lights. I was lost in Rome and not happy squeezing through the tight little streets with the little cars up on the sidewalks. At some point, I’d also been robbed. Settled it out for about 80,000 lire, but I digress.

Suddenly, I was in a place with more space. A long curved colonnade. A huge open area. I accelerated listening to the engine. Such a relief. I got into the open area and started blowing doughnuts with the car. Stopped when a cartoon character or two came out of the building along the perimeter. The smoke disappated.

Fortunately, I had decent German and these cartoon guys spoke it but with a very heavy accent. I’d woken his Holiness with the screaming engine of the Porsche. I didn’t realize until some time later, it was St Peters Square.

To define "doughnut" for my non-american friends.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y5AqUwarbKs[/youtube]

Well, I didn't bother to read it (although i have nothing better to do) but I can infer that there is some jabs at religion thrown in.
Whatever, theres a point at which everyone should just let people think what they want to think and say what they want to say
So in short, lets leave it at that.
Don't see what I do not want to see,
you don't hear what I don't say.
Won't be what I don't want to be,
I continue in my way.

I can see people finding it offensive, especially this paragraph:

But there is ONE little one, which surpasses all others in craziness: the Vatican State, for not only it is a theocracy, having God's representative on Earth as its head of state, it is also a secular absolute monarchy with the monarch being elected. It is a state as small as nothing else in this world, a tax-free enclave, not represented in the United Nations, but with a super-tight network of „embassies“ across the world. It holds an army of Swiss mercenaries, as ridiculous as it is itself. It outsources policing to the Italians. Its population does not maintain itself through births, but through acquisition. Each of its citizens holds temporary double citizenships, as long as there is a job to do. It has its own stamps and one single mailbox. Its Euro coins sell higher on the street than their face value, and therefore they are completely superfluous as a means of payment. Its car license plates read „SCV“ – Stato della Città del Vaticano – and its official language is considered dead: Latin. It owes its stately existence to a criminal: Mussolini. And exactly as weird is all that surrounds the Vatican: it's a hoax, the most glorious, stuck-in-the-past, formal expression of the oldest still existing political institution in Europe: the Roman-Catholic Church.

If some are suggesting that the staff deletes the page, I do not intend to do that. It is better for the community to speak on this through the voting system and comments, in my opinion. SP has an article about finding God in the mountains and one posted as a rebuttal and mockery to it. Many people on both sides were offended by those articles, but they stayed, and there were spirited discussions in the comments threads.

The trip report will not, however, be put on the front page.

I can also see that it and the associated "mountain" page might be off-topic, but SP long ago accepted pages for non-mountain U.S. state highpoints, so it would be unfair to delete it on those grounds. I may, though, delete the "mountain" page on the basis that it is not a good page.

I do think the timing of this trip report, a week before a major world religion's second-most-important day, showed bad judgment even if there was no intent to offend.

I can't see how anyone can say that this TR was done in good taste. The tone, some of the language, and particularly the timing just before Christmas...it is just poor taste. Growing up Catholic, having spent 12 years in parochial school I suppose I should be offended. I'm not! I mostly just rolled my eyes.

That being said, I agree that the piece should not be taken down from SP. Vote it down or ignore it if it offends you. I don't think it is the job of the staff to remove it just because it's offensive to some. Although if a member routinely puts up offensive material I would hope the staff would want to discourage this, as this is a "climbing" website, not a website for getting your political/religious views expressed via TRs and other page submittals. If that is what you want to do, head to Off-Route.

SoCalHiker wrote:I agree that it can be viewed as incredibly offensive. He should have understood that there are many people here on SP (and of course millions worldwide) that are a proud part of that religion. There are good reports that are provocative, but this is definitely in my opinion beyond that.

He should not have posted that, period.

And are all of these true believers as humourless as a radical Islamist? I found the Trip Report very entertaining, informative, and yes, full of humour.

It's just a trip report. And hardly worth getting anyone's panties in a bunch over it.

I don't know if the intention of this thread is just to draw attention to the report, but that's all it does!

I was ready to begin gathering stones and bricks, but then I thought about the "humour factor."

Apparently, this is the writer's own (special) brand of humor. It HAS attracted plenty of attention,
which was probably the underlying intention of the writer.

So, like most works of humor, it should not be completely banned, but it also should not be applauded or believed.

It's a cover-up, I tell you.. just a bloody cover up !!!

Bob Sihler wrote:I may, though, delete the "mountain" page on the basis that it is not a good page.

Ooh, come on Bob, many censors have used this kind of justification in the history! . For sure the mountain page is not that good, but this is the only mountain page for this "country" submitted in the 10 years of existence of SP, and I guess there won't be any second one in the next 10 years...

I'm the first one to advocate for the respect of others' religious views and sensitivities, but censuring such pages would be very offensive to the author's own sensitivity, and for all members who value a bit freedom of thoughts and religion. For the offended members who missed the humour, please just read it again or ignore it!

Cheers,
Bruno

Bob Sihler wrote:I can see people finding it offensive, especially this paragraph:

But there is ONE little one, which surpasses all others in craziness: the Vatican State, for not only it is a theocracy, having God's representative on Earth as its head of state, it is also a secular absolute monarchy with the monarch being elected. It is a state as small as nothing else in this world, a tax-free enclave, not represented in the United Nations, but with a super-tight network of „embassies“ across the world. It holds an army of Swiss mercenaries, as ridiculous as it is itself. It outsources policing to the Italians. Its population does not maintain itself through births, but through acquisition. Each of its citizens holds temporary double citizenships, as long as there is a job to do. It has its own stamps and one single mailbox. Its Euro coins sell higher on the street than their face value, and therefore they are completely superfluous as a means of payment. Its car license plates read „SCV“ – Stato della Città del Vaticano – and its official language is considered dead: Latin. It owes its stately existence to a criminal: Mussolini. And exactly as weird is all that surrounds the Vatican: it's a hoax, the most glorious, stuck-in-the-past, formal expression of the oldest still existing political institution in Europe: the Roman-Catholic Church.

Bob, I read again the paragraph, and only found two words, "ridiculous" and "hoax", reflecting the author's opinion, and being potentially "offensive". All the rest stated in the paragraph are undisputed facts.

Or do you mean that the Vatican's population is maintained through births rather than acquisition? That would be quite offensive, even though historically quite true...

Second that - I can't find anything offensive in this TR but the slightly sarcastic tone maybe (the reception of which is not the author's problem). Vatican IS very much different from any other European country and if you follow Wolfgang's report's, you know that for him bagging European peaks is mostly an excuse to visit as many countries as possible and learn/tell something about them. It's his journey, his report and his reception of facts - not everyone has to be a catholic zealot and it's not a crime.