Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Killarney Cross over Crucifix

Options
  • 09-06-2014 1:45pm
    #1
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,399 Mod ✭✭✭✭


    http://www.killarneytoday.com/atheists-get-cross-over-crucifix/
    Killarney Today wrote:
    A CONTROVERSIAL decision to place a crucifix on the wall of the Kerry County Council chambers is to be referred to the Equality Authority by infuriated atheists who claim it is in breach of a code of conduct councillors are asked to sign up to. The crucifix was erected in the renovated meeting room at the request of Killarney councillor John Joe Culloty whose proposal was carried on a 6-3 vote.

    Cllr Culloty said when he attends health forum meetings in the local authority chambers in Cork he notices there is a crucifix on the wall and there was no reason there shouldn’t be a similar symbol on the wall in the chambers in Tralee. But the move has been condemned by Atheist Ireland who have labelled it an attempt to promote religious supremacy. A spokesman said it places Christianity above all other beliefs and the views of those that don’t believe in any religion.

    Atheist Ireland said there is an onus on elected councillors to promote equality and avoid bias and the placing of the crucifix on the wall is making the State promote a particular religious belief. “If I placed a sign on the wall saying ‘There is no God’ Cllr Culloty would object,” said the spokesman who added that he plans to ask the Equality Aurhotity to investigate if it is in breach of equality legislation. Cllr Culloty said many people are insulted when religious symbols like crucifixes are removed from the walls of public buildings.

    It is almost reaching a stage where people are having to apologise for their religion and change is needed to rectify the situation, he maintained. “It’s part of my religion and the religion of the majority of people in this country. Four million people here are of Christian faith.,” he said. Cllr Culloty said when catholics do anything to promote their faith it is deemed to be controversial but that doesn’t mean that they should be reluctant to express their views.

    “We’re almost coming to a stage where we are apologising for it,” he said. “A lot of things in this country go from one extreme to the other and we have gone too far the other way.” There was uproar in Killarney four years ago when a statue of the sacred heart, which had been in place over the main entrance to the local community hospital for decades, was removed by the HSE.
    Comments are open at the end of the article if anybody wants to leave one.

    Michael Nugent was on Radio Kerry this morning discussing this.


«1345

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users Posts: 34,014 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    Cllr Culloty said when catholics do anything to promote their faith it is deemed to be controversial but that doesn’t mean that they should be reluctant to express their views.

    So he admits he is using public funds to promote a religion. He just sees nothing wrong with that provided it's HIS religion :rolleyes:

    There is no future for Boards as long as it stays on the complete toss that is the Vanilla "platform", we've given those Canadian twats far more chances than they deserve.



  • Options
    #3
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,399 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    ninja900 wrote: »
    He just sees nothing wrong with that provided it's HIS religion
    That's usually the case - it's "persecution" if you're not allowed to promote your religion, but "keeping religion out of politics" if somebody else can't promote theirs.


  • Options
    #4
    lazybones32
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,647 ✭✭✭lazybones32


    A Councillor wants a symbol of his religion to be present in the Chamber.
    He isn't attempting to prevent atheists, Muslims, Jews or other religious members having a representation of their faith on the wall. (what symbol would atheists use as a symbol of their non-belief?)
    Provided it isn't a solid gold crucifix, it will not cost the Council more than they spend on teabags in a week.

    Atheism Ireland have too much time on their hands. I have never been in the room where this crucifix is intended to be hung and probably never will be, so how is this a big deal? It is not explicit endorsement of one religion over another (awaits the arguments that 'prove' it is) but it is a request.
    If the walls are painted white, is that a promotion of the superiority of the Caucasian Race?


  • Options
    #5
    Cabaal
    Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 28,463 Mod ✭✭✭✭Cabaal


    Lazy, so you're proposing the council should have something on the wall for every faith? You know there's a lot of them right?

    Anything else gives favoritism to one specific faith, which goes against separation of church and state and the fact that the state should not promote one faith above another.


  • Options
    #6
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,458 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    lazybones32 wrote: »
    A Councillor wants a symbol of his religion to be present in the Chamber.
    if i became a councillor, would i be able to put up a poster of a spray tanned young lady draped over a lamborghini countach on the walls of the council chamber?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    lazybones32
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,647 ✭✭✭lazybones32


    magicbastarder wrote: »
    if i became a councillor, would i be able to put up a poster of a spray tanned young lady draped over a lamborghini countach on the walls of the council chamber?

    You could table the motion. If no-one reasonably objects...

    And how concerned would you be if some feminist with too much time on her hands, a few hundred miles away, got 'upset'? A feminist who will never be in that room - under normal circumstances - and is unlikely to be affected by any decisions made in that room. (Co. Councils are pretty powerless)
    Or are you concerned that it would be viewed as Government endorsement/sponsorship of Lamborghini?


  • Options
    #8
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,993 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    I think a Baphomet statue would look really good on the other side of the council chamber. (The dark side :D)


  • Options
    #9
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,993 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    lazybones32 wrote: »
    some feminist with too much time on her hands...
    Yeah, this a problem caused by having these new fangled dishwashers, and electric washing machines.


  • Options
    #10
    lazybones32
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,647 ✭✭✭lazybones32


    Cabaal wrote: »
    Lazy, so you're proposing the council should have something on the wall for every faith? You know there's a lot of them right?

    Anything else gives favoritism to one specific faith, which goes against separation of church and state and the fact that the state should not promote one faith above another.

    I said nothing of the sort. My statement was very clear and you may be served well to read it again.

    It is not Kerry Co.Co who are endorsing a particular religion but a Councillor who wishes to place an object on a wall.


  • Options
    #11
    lazybones32
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,647 ✭✭✭lazybones32


    recedite wrote: »
    I think a Baphomet statue would look really good on the other side of the council chamber. (The dark side :D)

    Looks like the thing from Pans Labyrinth...but the boy looks too close.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,993 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    Its more family friendly than a zombie on a stick?
    I mean everyone seems smiley and happy. No gruesome death scenes.


  • Options
    #13
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,993 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    lazybones32 wrote: »
    ..It is not Kerry Co.Co who are endorsing a particular religion ...
    The crucifix was erected in the renovated meeting room at the request of Killarney councillor John Joe Culloty whose proposal was carried on a 6-3 vote.
    What is the point of a council voting on a proposal, if not to decide whether to reject or endorse it?


  • Options
    #14
    slade_x
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 1,423 Mod ✭✭✭✭slade_x


    ninja900 wrote: »
    So he admits he is using public funds to promote a religion. He just sees nothing wrong with that provided it's HIS religion :rolleyes:


    Is this really just about promoting religion or a possible indictment of the status of our political landscape that an individual who happens to be a politician believes that erecting a symbol of an antiquated method of capital punishment can affect change in a council chambers.

    Is that what we need in this country, more crucifixes on our walls?. Lets also complement those crucifixes by mounting horse shoes on adjoining walls. With the good Lord and the fallacy of luck on our side there's no way this country could go to faecal matter

    edit: Ah yes swear filter, forgot about that, usually don't have a use for such words. the offending word has now been replaced by something more appropriate


  • Options
    #15
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users Posts: 34,014 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    lazybones32 wrote: »
    It is not Kerry Co.Co who are endorsing a particular religion but a Councillor who wishes to place an object on a wall.

    By placing the object on the wall the council are endorsing a religion and using public funds to do so.

    The councillor can go to one of the many fine church buildings or his own home if he wants to look at a crucifix. It is entirely inappropriate in a workplace especially one funded by the public (and yes that goes for schools and hospitals also.)

    There is no future for Boards as long as it stays on the complete toss that is the Vanilla "platform", we've given those Canadian twats far more chances than they deserve.



  • Options
    #16
    pauldla
    Registered Users Posts: 2,247 ✭✭✭pauldla


    lazybones32 wrote: »
    A Councillor wants a symbol of his religion to be present in the Chamber.
    He isn't attempting to prevent atheists, Muslims, Jews or other religious members having a representation of their faith on the wall. (what symbol would atheists use as a symbol of their non-belief?)
    Provided it isn't a solid gold crucifix, it will not cost the Council more than they spend on teabags in a week.

    Atheism Ireland have too much time on their hands. I have never been in the room where this crucifix is intended to be hung and probably never will be, so how is this a big deal? It is not explicit endorsement of one religion over another (awaits the arguments that 'prove' it is) but it is a request.
    If the walls are painted white, is that a promotion of the superiority of the Caucasian Race?

    A Councillor wants a symbol of his religion on the Chamber wall, but it's Atheist Ireland who have too much time on their hands?


  • Options
    #17
    lazybones32
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,647 ✭✭✭lazybones32


    recedite wrote: »
    Its more family friendly than a zombie on a stick?
    I mean everyone seems smiley and happy. No gruesome death scenes.

    A man with the head of a goat is "family-friendly"? Maybe in a circus...


  • Options
    #18
    lazybones32
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,647 ✭✭✭lazybones32


    ninja900 wrote: »
    By placing the object on the wall the council are endorsing a religion and using public funds to do so.

    The councillor can go to one of the many fine church buildings or his own home if he wants to look at a crucifix. It is entirely inappropriate in a workplace especially one funded by the public (and yes that goes for schools and hospitals also.)

    The crucifix was erected in the renovated meeting room at the request of Killarney councillor John Joe Culloty whose proposal was carried on a 6-3 vote.
    Democracy. A vote was held and people were free to decide.


  • Options
    #19
    lazygal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    lazybones32 wrote: »
    A man with the head of a goat is "family-friendly"? Maybe in a circus...

    So you don't really respect all faiths. Just those with a Jewish guy who died two millennia ago.


  • Options
    #20
    pauldla
    Registered Users Posts: 2,247 ✭✭✭pauldla


    lazygal wrote: »
    So you don't really respect all faiths. Just those with a Jewish guy who died two millennia ago.

    Allegedly died. It is conjecture; there is no proof. :p


  • Options
    #21
    kylith
    Registered Users Posts: 17,736 ✭✭✭✭kylith


    lazybones32 wrote: »
    A man with the head of a goat is "family-friendly"? Maybe in a circus...

    Friendlier that the graphic image of a bleeding Jewish man being tortured to death, but for some reason people think it's fine to put those is classrooms all over the country.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users Posts: 34,014 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    lazybones32 wrote: »
    The crucifix was erected in the renovated meeting room at the request of Killarney councillor John Joe Culloty whose proposal was carried on a 6-3 vote.
    Democracy. A vote was held and people were free to decide.

    Democracy does not mean the majority get the right to do whatever they like.

    So do you now accept that this motion forced the council to endorse a religion?

    Do you think it is acceptable for a government body to endorse a religion?

    There is no future for Boards as long as it stays on the complete toss that is the Vanilla "platform", we've given those Canadian twats far more chances than they deserve.



  • Options
    #23
    o1s1n
    Registered Users Posts: 34,483 ✭✭✭✭o1s1n
    Master of the Universe


    lazybones32 wrote: »
    The crucifix was erected in the renovated meeting room at the request of Killarney councillor John Joe Culloty whose proposal was carried on a 6-3 vote.
    Democracy. A vote was held and people were free to decide.

    What a ridiculous comment.

    There were only 9 people voting on it and even then, 33% of them didn't agree.

    Symbolism such as this has no place in a public building if you want to promote a society of equality.

    If you don't want to promote such a society, well, that's another thing...


  • Options
    #24
    lazybones32
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,647 ✭✭✭lazybones32


    lazygal wrote: »
    So you don't really respect all faiths. Just those with a Jewish guy who died two millennia ago.
    Nice try!
    What faith is baphomet in/from? Isn't there Jewish symbolism in it? the eye of solomon.
    kylith wrote: »
    Friendlier that the graphic image of a bleeding Jewish man being tortured to death, but for some reason people think it's fine to put those is classrooms all over the country.
    I never thought of that....and the kids go home from school and play PS3 where they play GTA or go out and play 'soldiers' etc...yeah, images of death must be so disturbing to children..but a man with a Goat's head is something you see everyday.


  • Options
    #25
    o1s1n
    Registered Users Posts: 34,483 ✭✭✭✭o1s1n
    Master of the Universe


    lazybones32 wrote: »
    I never thought of that....and the kids go home from school and play PS3 where they play GTA or go out and play 'soldiers' etc...yeah, images of death must be so disturbing to children..but a man with a Goat's head is something you see everyday.

    Ah okay, so all gore for children is okay then? I guess we better just remove all classifications from videogames/film etc.

    Two wrongs don't make a right you know? You can't justify one wrong by stating that another wrong is common place - both scenarios are still both wrong.

    How about we do this instead - remove all torture symbols from public buildings and try to stop our children consuming media that's not appropriate.

    Do you agree?


  • Options
    #26
    kylith
    Registered Users Posts: 17,736 ✭✭✭✭kylith


    lazybones32 wrote: »
    I never thought of that....and the kids go home from school and play PS3 where they play GTA or go out and play 'soldiers' etc...yeah, images of death must be so disturbing to children..but a man with a Goat's head is something you see everyday.

    Very few 6 year olds would play those games, but that's how old I was when one of my classmates started having nightmares because of the crucifix in the classroom.

    ETA: Animal/person mashups are no concern to children, in my experience. Stories like Beauty and the Beast and the Frog Prince introduce that concept early in life.


  • Options
    #27
    lazybones32
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,647 ✭✭✭lazybones32


    o1s1n wrote: »
    What a ridiculous comment.

    There were only 9 people voting on it and even then, 33% of them didn't agree.

    Symbolism such as this has no place in a public building if you want to promote a society of equality.

    If you don't want to promote such a society, well, that's another thing...
    ninja900 wrote: »
    Democracy does not mean the majority get the right to do whatever they like.

    So do you now accept that this motion forced the council to endorse a religion?

    Do you think it is acceptable for a government body to endorse a religion?

    Ladies or Gentlemen, if you suspect illegal activity, contact the Gardai or your Solicitor. Or Atheism Ireland

    There is a crucifix in a room somewhere in Kerry. The image of the crucifix will not be promoted by KCC (as in, it will not be included in their official documentation, notes, notices, vehicles or buildings)
    Allowing an article to be placed on a wall is not always explicit endorsement. It is an allowance.
    Continue twisting, squirming and magnifying all you wish but if this is an unconstitutional action, it should and will be rectified.

    Keep fighting!


  • Options
    #28
    Cabaal
    Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 28,463 Mod ✭✭✭✭Cabaal


    Anything you can do to try say your faith being promoted in government buildings is ok eh lazybones32?

    you can claim that this item has no cost to the tax payer but you know that its disingenuous to claim this, one way or another the purchasing of the item or the cost of putting it on the wall will be paid by the tax payer....a councilor can't just put it up themselves, nor should they be able to.

    This is incorrect use of tax payer money and incorrect usage of government/tax payer owned property for the promotion of a specific faith.

    Not to mention its wrong for the council to in anyway promote or to be seen in anyway to promote a faith that calls many of citizens "unnatural", just like it would be wrong to promote a faith that see's women as second class to men...oh wait, it does that too ;)


  • Options
    #29
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,993 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    Actually forget Baphomet, he's too goaty.
    Why not have life-sized Bugs Bunny up on the wall of the council chamber? That way they'd be keeping with that whole Easter theme.
    Maybe redecorate all the walls with designer chocolate egg wallpaper too.imgres?imgurl=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic.comicvine.com%2Fuploads%2Foriginal%2F14%2F146753%2F2807486-2013735_59654_bugs_bunny.jpg&imgrefurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.comicvine.com%2Fforums%2Fbattles-7%2Faunt-may-wcosmiccube-bugs-bunny-vs-lucifer-monring-742648%2F&h=300&w=300&tbnid=MXh2m2J8iSytsM%3A&zoom=1&docid=AMUFF0bypO7mzM&ei=dT6YU-HCC6vA7AaxooC4Bg&tbm=isch&client=firefox-a&ved=0CD0QMygHMAc&iact=rc&uact=3&dur=1097&page=1&start=0&ndsp=25


  • Options
    #30
    lazybones32
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,647 ✭✭✭lazybones32


    o1s1n wrote: »
    Ah okay, so all gore for children is okay then? I guess we better just remove all classifications from videogames/film etc.

    Two wrongs don't make a right you know? You can't justify one wrong by stating that another wrong is common place - both scenarios are still both wrong.

    How about we do this instead - remove all torture symbols from public buildings and try to stop our children consuming media that's not appropriate.

    Do you agree?

    The standard crucifix is not gore. Can you stop trying to put words in my mouth? A point was made that having a crucifix in a room (where no children will probably enter) is somehow exposing children to violence and that point was countered with examples.

    I agree that children shouldn't be exposed to inappropriate Media -especially that of a sexual nature.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    lazybones32
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,647 ✭✭✭lazybones32


    Cabaal wrote: »
    Anything you can do to try say your faith being promoted in government buildings is ok eh lazybones32?

    you can claim that this item has no cost to the tax payer but you know that its disingenuous to claim this, one way or another the purchasing of the item or the cost of putting it on the wall will be paid by the tax payer....a councilor can't just put it up themselves, nor should they be able to.

    This is incorrect use of tax payer money and incorrect usage of government/tax payer owned property for the promotion of a specific faith.

    Not to mention its wrong for the council to in anyway promote or to be seen in anyway to promote a faith that calls many of citizens "unnatural", just like it would be wrong to promote a faith that see's women as second class to men...oh wait, it does that too ;)

    I didn't write anything of the sort and you know I didn't. If you have trouble comprehending what I'm expressing, ask me to clarify it but don't try and paraphrase my words to suit your own agenda. It is disingenuous and disrespectful.


Advertisement