oh shit
Well-Known Member
you hidiot.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
!ninjaaaa hidiot type smilie?oh shit said:you hidiot.
jackwhite said:both Shell and Coke have been invited previously to publicy debate these issues and have declined. If they have nothing to hide then why won't they debate?
jackwhite said:the Catholic Church which has weekly meetings (masses) in every parish in the country
jackwhite said:Yes but when issues like abortion and divorce referendums arise then the Chruch kicks into full swing and issues letters from the Bishops which are read out at every mass telling people how to vote.
Yes not every priest is a rotten egg - there's good ones out there like Peter Mc Verry who an outspoken critic of the establishment - but the church is still a huge resource for conservative anti choice campaigners.
It ensures that 90% of kids in school are fed this line, while 100% of mass goers get it as well. That kind of access to an audience not even Shell or Coke could buy (yet).
If we had that sort of access to people to get our message across abortion would be free, safe and legal in Ireland now.
The church is the same organisation don't forget that blessed the blueshirts going to Spain to fight for Facism, ex communicated those who fought for the democratically elected government in Spain.
In Leitrim in the 30's the Church whipped up hysteria against a community hall that was built with the help of Jim Gralton a local socialist. Because the hall wasn't under the control of the priests they objected to it, got the government to bring in laws banning dances in halls and whipped up the local IRA and blueshirt mobs (an unholy alliance if there ever was one) to burn the hall down. The church is tamer these days but it is still inherently on the side of conservatism particularly the hierarchy.
would go as far as to say that most priests are not rotten eggs. I'll assume you're talking about conservative priests as opposed to child-abusing ones (that would make it a very ignorant comment). In any case just because someone is conservative doesn't make them a rotten egg.
.Issues that are legistlated for, but are primarily moral questions. The church is allowed to voice it's opinion on morality (as it sees it). If you're a Catholic, tough luck that's the line
Says who? That's ridiculous! If the churches audience defected to Labour/Labour youth we'd all be grand now would we?
The last time I was in school (about 5 years ago) the majority of Religious education was given over to learning about other religions (classes even went on tours of Synagogues and Mosques). With the influx into the country of children from other backgrounds I can hardly imagine religion classes continuing in the manner we were accustomed to for much longer.
I might be wrong but wasn't there talk recently of communion/confirmation preparations been taken out of schools? Think I read that somewhere.
That's super, but has no bearing on anything now
jackwhite said:So why should we with the little resources we have provide space for arguments that are aired all the time by the establishment?
jackwhite said:I agree with you that in fact most priests are to varying degrees probably good eggs, people who joined up because they wanted to serve God and their communities and so forth. The issue isn't with the individuals involved, it is more with the institution. Much the same as the Gardaí - there are plenty of decent individual Gardaí - the problem is with the institution. And despite the work of some progressive elements of the church - it is overwhelmingly a conservative institution.
Now most people who are involved in the church and going to mass are well intentioned people who wish to serve god and their community. There is no problem there as far as I'm concerned. The problem is that tied into that - and there is no choice of getting out of it unless you switch church - is that with catholicism comes a right wing conservative morality as set down by Rome, which in fact is a political set of values been passed off as religion. So while I might want to get a wee bit of mass in, a few prayers and maybe a cup of tea afterwards in the parish hall, I also get a bit of right wing conservative bullshit which has nothing to do with loving thy neighbour and in fact may be more about hatred thrown in.
I see the church as everyone who is involved, not just the hierarchy. I don't think any bishop or pope has the right to claim to be the sole interpreter of Catholic morality just so they can push a right wing conservative agenda.
Sorry I should have been clearer - when I said "we " I meant those of us who are pro choice. 40% of people in Ireland are pro choice - that's with the entire poltical establishment, church and 90% of the education system stacked against us. I bet if we had some of that on our side swinging 10% of the population to a pro choice view point would be easy.
You were lucky with your experience of religious teaching in school. I'd love to see communion and confirmation preparation taken out of school. Kids and parents are still to this day under huge pressure to conform and participate in these "big days"
Now I disagree with you totally on this point. The history of the role of the Chruch is very relevant. I'm not suggesting that they are as bad now as they were in the 30's - but if you want to know the true nature of a beast then you have to see the beast at the height of its power. Communism when it is a small oppositionary idea looks very benign and liberating. When it was in power under Stalin it was a different story with innocent people rounded up and sent off to die in slave labour camps in Siberia.
The power and influence of the Church is waning here - hence we don't immediately see just how conservative and oppressive they are, but given half the chance they lead mobs to burn non believers out of their homes as they did in Ireland 70 years ago. Its a long time ago, but not long enough that we should forget.
jackwhite said:Good question about getting speakers with opposing views - and the answer is yes we could ask them.
But for example those who are pro life or against same sex marriage all ready have all main political parties lining up on their side along with the Catholic Church which has weekly meetings (masses) in every parish in the country. They have massive resources on their side - they never invite pro choice speakers into mass or to a Fianna Fáil, PD, Fine Gael of Sinn Fein conference. So why should we with the little resources we have provide space for arguments that are aired all the time by the establishment?
jackwhite said:Yes but when issues like abortion and divorce referendums arise then the Chruch kicks into full swing and issues letters from the Bishops which are read out at every mass telling people how to vote.
.
jackwhite said:These are all fair points that are been raised.
Basically the speakers will not be debating such things as should same sex couples continue to be discriminated against and treated as second class citizens?
We are starting from the point of assuming that equality is what we want. It would be disengenuous of us to pretend that discriminating against people who are LGBT was up for discussion at our events. It isn't. That's not to say that if you have a different view you can't come along and express it respectfully - you are welcome, but we are committed to equality, full stop and have no time for discrimination.
jackwhite said:So where's the debate? Well there's lots of debate within the LGBT community about how we go about getting equality. Do we accept civil partnerships as a stepping stone to full equality or by accepting them, are we accepting that the state is entitled to discriminate against us.
There is a wide variety in the speakers chosen, who will have opposing views on how these issues can be solved. For example three of the speakers are anarchists, they don't believe in voting in elections. Another speaker is a T.D. who runs in elections. There is plenty of room for debate here about tactics, whether direct action is the way forward on these different campaigns, and if so how.
Wormo said:I respect your beliefs and I think I understand what you're trying to do but you don't seem to be expressing any sympathy or welcome to alternate opinions. (in your posts....) Your language usage speaks for itself. You clearly do have time for discrimination if you're refusing to acknowledge the multifarious and varied opinions that people have on the matters you're talking about, and their reasons for having them. You don't have to give opponents a platform, but you don't have to categorise people simply as discriminatory if they don't agree with your beliefs. That's discriminatory
saculusabcybium said:What about discussing stuff like creating a better society through reforming our policies or lack of policies on housing, development, transport and the environment not just these sexy hot issues that don't really do fuck all to sort out the mess we're in. Get some new ideas out ther cos oh lordy if you look at the alternatives they're well overdue.
I'd sooner talk about these issues and get going on creating a proper society than pussyfooting and pontificating around all these irrelevant (apologees to the .0005% of the population they affect) current popular nasties.
jackwhite said:These are all fair points that are been raised.
Basically the speakers will not be debating such things as should same sex couples continue to be discriminated against and treated as second class citizens?
We are starting from the point of assuming that equality is what we want. It would be disengenuous of us to pretend that discriminating against people who are LGBT was up for discussion at our events. It isn't. That's not to say that if you have a different view you can't come along and express it respectfully - you are welcome, but we are committed to equality, full stop and have no time for discrimination.
So where's the debate? Well there's lots of debate within the LGBT community about how we go about getting equality. Do we accept civil partnerships as a stepping stone to full equality or by accepting them, are we accepting that the state is entitled to discriminate against us.
There is a wide variety in the speakers chosen, who will have opposing views on how these issues can be solved. For example three of the speakers are anarchists, they don't believe in voting in elections. Another speaker is a T.D. who runs in elections. There is plenty of room for debate here about tactics, whether direct action is the way forward on these different campaigns, and if so how.
There is massive debate in the anti war movment over the last couple of years about tactics. Some people have taken actions like the Catholic Workers in Shannon who took an axe to a US military plane. Others in the movement have openly criticised them for doing this. All of these campaigns have relevant and ongoing debates about the way forward - debate that is crucial if we are to win on these issues and learn from our mistakes in the past.
We aren't interested in simply talking about these topics and debating them for the sake of it. We want to debate tactics so that we can win Shell 2 Sea, US military out of Shannon, the right to marry, a woman's right to choose and the right to join a union free from violence, fear, and torture.
jane said:left/right in politics exist along a continuum, and few people's political positions would fit entirely in either category. .
Upgrade your account now to disable all ads...
Upgrade nowWe use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.