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
State spending €3million on communion rituals
Options
Comments
-
king mob,
first...calling my writing style childish...more pettiness despite the fact u can clearly understand the points in it. no probs ...im getting used to it.
The fact that you continue to post in such a silly manner makes you seem either like you don't actual know how to engage in a discussion, are 13 or are a troll. (Or all three.)
If you don't like people pointing out that posting in text speak is silly and childish and undermines your credibility, then stop.second...the members in the catholic church pay taxes in the u.s.
Members of a Golf Club pay tax. The Golf club pays tax based on the membership fees they receive.
Pulling in tax from the Church from the money they make in this country would pay for the benefit you think is so important and then some.
So why exactly shouldn't they tax the Church?third.....the weight of those numbers influences ....are u serious asserting it does not?fourth...it has more weight of numbers than any other demographic in this country
And I'd wager the number of people in Ireland who would vote in favour of taxing the church would be enough to be the majority.fifth....ive answered more than once why the savings u think u will make are an illusion.
blame the gov.
not struggling families and the culture they inherited.
Why doesn't the church pay if it's so important?
Whether or not you think that the money is going somewhere useful is irrelevant to this question.
And if they are to cut benefits, it's better that than cutting into weekly allowances by any amount.0 -
I'm drunk off my face & I can spot all that I've written below:Ickle Magoo wrote: »that's telling...Seriously, learn to type like an adult. You will get more respect in the long run.
It's really not that hard to put a few capital letters into your posts.
How can people just accept posts like this? I mean the rankest hypocrisy
can be exemplified by just examining Galvasean's own posts in this
thread. I mean more than one poster brags about their love for rational
thinking yet they totally ignore such craziness - why don't at least one of
those who brag about their love of rationality on this forum even just
examine this latest post in comparison with your earlier ones & apply
that critical thought process they'd apparently die for. You may dislike
&/or disagree with everything I'm saying as regards the argument but
you can't deny the hypocrisy of this latest comment or the others that
deserve equally confrontational responses.Your post makes no sense, beyond the childish writing style.
The childish writing style is the only thing that makes sense?
What a superfluous comment, I don't consider the post's in any way
childish & quite frankly I consider it extremely childish & petty to make
comments like this that betray all the cynical ignorance of bigots who
just don't like to accept anybody who looks different, who has long hair,
who like to read, who likes science etc... But of course who am I to
speak considering I'm just one of those others who posts different as
well so I'm obviously biased.The fact that you continue to post in such a silly manner makes you seem either like you don't actual know how to engage in a discussion, are 13 or are a troll. (Or all three.)
Such a scientific conclusion that just follows, as if by logic, from such
iron-clad premises. I see the truth table of possibilities you've drawn up
for us is just impeccably laid out & absolutely no other possibilities could
arise. People just accept these kinds of comments without question?But none of this addresses the question, if the catholic church cares about thier members and that people somehow desperately need this money to buy material things for a religious ceremony, why doesn't the church offer to help them out?
As fantastic a question as this is, it's entirely irrelevant to the thread &
I'm surprised such a trivial question could be offered as some form of
counterexample to the topic. Why should those greedy fcukers pay
for this? They don't care, in fact priests encourage emphasis on not
spending money on the day as it distracts from the event (as a quick
google can convince you of). It's the recognition of the non-religious
aspects of this event coupled with the historical societal importance
that fuels the government in providing for this, hence the rank ignorance
in the argument that religion has anything more than a coincidental
relationship to this issue.There are contradictory interpretations because it's a fecking poem, not a treatise on public spending.
As much as I want to respond entirely to your post I think this bit of
your response sums the rest up entirely in that you ignore what I say
& respond to something you've said in a manner to justify your previous
claim. Note that I called your charlatanism out & you respond with more
of it, I can't argue with nonsense like this, it's a total waste of time.Ickle Magoo wrote: »I disagree - I view it as robbing from those who genuinely have exceptional needs. If it isn't a case of completely over-indulging one particular sect of a multi-cultural society based on bygone celtic tiger-esque priorities - oh purlease tell me what it is?
Also, if you can give me a break down on why €300+ euro is required for a communion service then I'm willing to listen...as far as I'm aware, that's the only part that could possibly be argued as being necessitated by the equally antiquated school system.
Hysterical appeals to emotion and historical generosity are just that, btw.Cuts to communion allowance mean spirited– Seán Crowe TD
Dublin South West Sinn Féin TD Seán Crowe has described as “mean spirited” the government plans to cut discretionary payments for special occasions, like a child’s first communion, for low income families.
The Tallaght-based Deputy was speaking after the announcement that the regular discretionary payment of up to €305 was to be cut to €105.
Deputy Seán Crowe said:
“For Christians the communion and confirmation, for Judaism the bar mitzvah or the Muslim khatme quran are significant days in the life of a child.
“They are particularly important events for many low income families and this cut will impact severely on all of them.
“Suggestions that some families should consider clothing their children in hand-me-downs or cheap outfits shows a lack of understanding of just how big a milestone this is for families.
“The government ministers and the media pundits that are supporting these cuts are very unlikely to do the same for their own children.
“This outspoken support for cutting this discretionary allowance is in stark contrast to their silence when it comes to paying billions to faceless gamblers and speculators in the bond markets.
“The Fine Gael /Labour Government’s latest attack on low income families is mean spirited and cruel.
“Here is yet another example of the poor and the least well off being unfairly hit by another cruel austerity measure.”
http://seancrowe.ie/latest-news/1-news/190-cuts-to-communion-allowance-mean-spirited-sean-crowe-td
or not, as I know that would never work. I'm just telling you that you
are entirely ignorant, willingfully ignorant, of how much a part of our
culture this event is - whether you like it or not, whether you want to
deny reality or not (because that's what you are doing, sugar coat it
all you like). You can tell us it's not an exceptional need because your
biases tell you that it's not an exceptional need but if we enter the
world of reality, one in which mothers are whoring themselves out to
deal with this event, one which people really care about, we see that
plenty of people understand that this is an exceptional need - in the
same way a poor Jewish person could apply for their exceptional need
to fund a bar mitzvah (which I'd presume they'd get, as I doubt the
government would be that hypocritical, though if there's evidence of
this please show it).
Also, don't think I don't notice the dishonesty in yours (and everybody
else's) argument in focusing on this payment as if it's entirely for the
dress. Just mimicking the standards all you guys (in the gender neutral
use of that term as I know how petty things like this tend to get emphasized by those
with an axe to grind) accept without question when it furthers your agenda's
I should be calling you all children for making such a childish argument.
That subtle point, one consistently emphasized by those for whom
5 seconds of research is too much when raw anger takes control,
seems to be lost on all those who bang on about their rationality...
Though to be fair to you you've only focused on the dress when it
was convenient for you to do so & the latest post at least mentions
the entire communion so we're learning something as we go along,
though I still think it's dishonestly ignoring reality:Ickle Magoo wrote: »Still no break-down I see, that's telling...
When we focus on communion dresses as if that's the entire issue &
then shift our argument & chastise others for not being insanely pedantic,
I think that's telling. Surely there's a word to describe that...
Do we really need to break it down? Do you really think I couldn't do
that? Deeper question - can you really, truly & honestly not envision
how someone could easily blow 300 euro on an event like this?
This day that (only if we're willing not to deny reality, of course - which you evidentially
just flat out refuse to do) represents "a milestone" "for families". Note I'm
not asking for your personal opinion on the morality of poor people
blowing 300 on a day like this, I've just asked a question about the
mechanics of the situation (as I know anything deeper than that is
simply incomprehensible). I find it very sad that I'd have to paint a
picture of a realistic day to convince you of why people need this
kind of money for that "milestone" day "for families". Surely you'll
fess up & admit you don't need such a pedantic breakdown, note
that it will be done if requested with the assumption of your cheap
as fcuk 2nd hand dress.
Furthermore don't think I don't notice the extremely cynical dishonesty
in this argument (which is, of course, a cover) that we should be
devoting this money instead to hospitals etc... I mean your own logic
defunds the sciences & anything we care to mention - an argument
I've already mentioned & one that was totally ignored. Logically this
argument is impeccable, do you think we should be spending money
on the arts when spending money on the arts means we are basically
murdering people by not providing that money to them in the form of
a hospital bed? I mean a civics class should have caused this question
to never have been posed in the first place, people just forget what it
means to live in a society all of a sudden... As I already mentioned, there
are plenty of things I don't feel good about funding yet that's just part
of living in society. Note also that civics class can never answer this
question in a positive way because as a society that's what we do when
we devote money to physics or the arts etc... and don't devote it to
hospital beds etc... - I just consider it either ignorance to argue from
some moral high ground all of a sudden to take money from poor
people because of reason X while giving money to rich people ignoring
that reason X we cared so much about when poor people were involved
or just plain dishonesty.
Though of course nothing I say matters because of the shape/size of my
posts. How do people miss all (any???) of this? I'll try to be even
more systematic, more direct & more all-encompassing if I have the
time as this issue is just so insane that it needs to be done so I apologize
if I haven't gotten to addressing every miniscule issue at this precise
moment but please try to view this from my perspective in that I have
to chase down easy quotes nobody else cares to mention & it's a lot
for a person pissed off their skull (well, soberer now) to do.0 -
I love long posts, and especially long posts with multiple quote. I fly through the thread without even reading them.
It says so much about the character of the poster that one you've read them in their very FIRST post, you can put them on ignore and you'll miss nothing.0 -
-
MagicMarker wrote: »I'm really struggling to understand what made you write this, and your intentions in doing so.
MrP0 -
Advertisement
-
-
MagicMarker wrote: »I know that! Which only adds to the confusion.
I was out walking this morning and I could not find my magic mushrooms,0 -
MagicMarker wrote: »I know that! Which only adds to the confusion.
MrP0 -
-
sponsoredwalk wrote: »The childish writing style is the only thing that makes sense?
What a superfluous comment, I don't consider the post's in any way childish & quite frankly I consider it extremely childish & petty to make comments like this that betray all the cynical ignorance of bigots who just don't like to accept anybody who looks different, who has long hair, who like to read, who likes science etc... But of course who am I to speak considering I'm just one of those others who posts different as well so I'm obviously biased.
I have no idea why you post the way you do, but at least you are using spelling and grammar.sponsoredwalk wrote: »Such a scientific conclusion that just follows, as if by logic, from such iron-clad premises. I see the truth table of possibilities you've drawn up for us is just impeccably laid out & absolutely no other possibilities could arise. People just accept these kinds of comments without question?
That she is too lazy to write properly?
That writing in textspeak is cool or something?sponsoredwalk wrote: »As fantastic a question as this is, it's entirely irrelevant to the thread & I'm surprised such a trivial question could be offered as some form of counterexample to the topic. Why should those greedy fcukers pay for this? They don't care, in fact priests encourage emphasis on not spending money on the day as it distracts from the event (as a quick google can convince you of). It's the recognition of the non-religious aspects of this event coupled with the historical societal importance that fuels the government in providing for this, hence the rank ignorance in the argument that religion has anything more than a coincidental relationship to this issue.
And again, it's much preferable that they cut this payment than ones that actually are vital.0 -
Advertisement
-
It's interesting that the poster with the strange posting style is so quick to defend the other poster with the strange posting style.
PS: I posted twice in this forum after 4am. In both posts I'm complaining about poor sentence structure. How odd...0 -
I think kids should spend a bit more time in school learning basic grammar and a bit less time learning how to queue for and correctly eat silvermints. It would make the internet a far better place.0
-
sponsoredwalk wrote: »...can you really, truly & honestly not envision
how someone could easily blow 300 euro on an event like this?
o.O
Is this a serious question? Of course I can envisage how someone could easily blow €300 bucks on a post communion ceremony knees up, just the same as I could envisage how it's possible to blow €500 on an anniversary piss up or €1k on a birthday party - the question still remains why the tax payer should be expected to pick up the tab for such an unnecessary extravagance - or why it should be taken from coffers ear-marked for those with exceptional needs, for that matter...
"The Fine Gael /Labour Government’s latest attack on low income families is mean spirited and cruel." What a patently laughable response. Like cutting SNA's so that kids with special needs can no longer attend main-stream schools isn't cruel and mean spirited? Or closing down hospital units so those in out-lying areas are disadvantaged isn't mean spirited and cruel? FFS, there isn't some bottomless pit of money to pay for everything - ironically it's exactly that childish monopoly-money printing-press type thinking that's resulted in the IMF having to get involved. Funding has to be prioritised, it's ridiculous to suggest that money can be thrown at all the superfluous extravagances of the day and deny that it's exactly such wanton negligence which has led to cuts in funding for so many other, far more worthy, causes.0 -
dades,
Thx for p.m.
You're a gent( maybe a lady).
There's method to my madness.
In fairness ...you could have wrapped my knuckles much more...but i suspect you know ur game as a mod.
Much appreciated. Ill explain my naughtiness to mc...
But i think u should get recognition for pulling me privatley rather than publicly.
I tip my cap...
we dont have to agree in a thread...nor should we.0 -
mc,
I was a lil mischievious with you...but all in the best possible taste.
Midweek and weekends are good for me timewise...i couldnt resist the pun ...especially as i was being pulled on the way i write ...( for my own reasons)...rather than issues.
It has a double meaning...an innocent one or rude...the choice is there ...i left that free..
But it was very naughty...and please dont take offence.
Accept my apologies ...im responsible for writing it so i take the censure due.
best wishes.0 -
gbee,
The bottom issue here is applauding cuts to families who might need the money.
forget the (personal )reasons for cheering those cuts...they are still cuts to those who are honestly in need.
If that makes me mad. ( to question,raise a debate)..lock me up.0 -
indeed gbee,
We meet in agreement.
Thinking one has the edge, without understanding the conditions, is arrogant.
Lets together understand if there might be conditions we are overlooking.
even if its only one family.0 -
Seriously, learn to type like an adult.You will get more respect in the long run.It's really not that hard to put a few capital letters into your posts.0
-
Yeah, the usual gibberish - that'll teach 'em! :rolleyes:
Seriously guys, if you want someone to take you seriously, learning to cobble together a vaguely coherent argument should be top of your "to do" list.0 -
The bottom issue here is applauding cuts to families who might need the money.
forget the (personal )reasons for cheering those cuts...they are still cuts to those who are honestly in need.
No one is applauding cuts to families in need. It's just that people don't think that paying for clothes for first communion meets the requirement of exceptional needs.If you can read this, you're too close!
0 -
Advertisement
-
Dublin South West Sinn Féin TD Seán Crowe has described as “mean spirited” the government plans to cut discretionary payments for special occasions, like a child’s first communion, for low income families.
The Tallaght-based Deputy was speaking after the announcement that the regular discretionary payment of up to €305 was to be cut to €105.
Deputy Seán Crowe said:
“Suggestions that some families should consider clothing their children in hand-me-downs or cheap outfits shows a lack of understanding of just how big a milestone this is for families.
What's wrong with hand me downs
Or better still school uniforms on the day
Nothing like a politician to hop on a story and try to score points out of it
But I know if Sinn Féin were in power then another opposition TD would be saying the exact same thing. A Labour or Fine Gael TD would not hesitate to attack these cuts if Brian Cowan did it a few years ago
They don't care, just trying to make some headlines and get their name noticed0 -
gbee,
The bottom issue here is applauding cuts to families who might need the money.
forget the (personal )reasons for cheering those cuts...they are still cuts to those who are honestly in need.
If that makes me mad. ( to question,raise a debate)..lock me up.
What makes you sound so silly &/or ridiculously obtuse is trying to justify why the state should effectively sponsor piss ups...in the current economic climate and knowing the kind of irresponsible behaviour that has left this country on it's knees - attempting to justify frankly ridiculous payments to sponsor a voluntary social activity under the guise of being akin to those that require emergency dental treatment or parents who suddenly find themselves unable to feed or clothe their children is just disgusting, disgusting and greedy.0 -
dead one is a hat. Wardrobe of misunderstanding lacks pantaloons. Decadent West bass players in a band of ignorance and cheat. I am a little teapot.0
-
-
This thread is like a bad horror franchise. You think it's gone for good, only for it to come back (... again!) relatively unchanged.0
-
-
This thread is like a bad horror franchise. You think it's gone for good, only for it to come back (... again!) relatively unchanged.0
-
Okay, fun's over.
The next nonsense post gets deleted. The one after that gets a red bottom.
BACK ON TOPIC.0 -
As much as I want to chase the latest posts up, & I really do, I just don't
have the time because the detail involved in such posts, in chasing up the
details glossed over, gets far too big. Furthermore the majority of what
I write is ignored & not responded to (obviously because it's all just
nonsense I'm sure) & really not worth putting up with continually...
Though ignoring the substantive issues that the main topic of the thread
involve I think the incessant insults, the group-thought perspective of just
accepting some horrible comments aimed at the outsider, is fcuking
sickening.
Actually, I'll just respond to the one person who actually embraced the
entirety of my post & is someone I'd generally expect would continue to
do so if this conversation persisted:Typing out a response in text speak is childish and it makes it seem that Lucy is not interested in putting the time in to discuss her points.
I have no idea why you post the way you do, but at least you are using spelling and grammar.
As we have evidence of in this thread, your complimenting my spelling
& grammar is something unique to you, others prefer to ignore such
glorious aspects of my posts & instead focus on other aspects of the
posts & use these as a means to completely ignore me. Both your
compliments to me, your insults to Lucy & others insults to me & Lucy
illustrate the pathetically unconstructive & highly subjective nature of
focusing on trivial things like these.
Notice also that this response doesn't deny the comparison to those
whose cynical ignorance permits them to judge others who don't
conform to a way of life that they just demand others to conform to -
why in this case it's because "it seems" that (s)he's not interested in putting the time in to
discuss his/her points - and as atheists people in here just know how stellar
that logic is...What other possibilities are there?
That she is too lazy to write properly?
That writing in textspeak is cool or something?
A) She wants to?
She has dyslexia or some other writing-related abnormality?
C) She thinks it adds some form of definitiveness to separate sentences?
D) She does it as a means to ensure nobody skips a sentence as is
__ natural (especially in this thread unfortunately) when confronted with
__ a big blob of text?
E) She does it to intentionally force people to "ignore" her as a means to
__ weed out the similar nonsense so commonly posted with those who
__ laugh at others for the way their posts look (or their writing style, or
__ their choice of words etc... etc...)
There are plenty of reasons, & I haven't the time to get creative. Notice
none of them is a joke nor trivial.
I just can't fathom the urge to throw in some hateful comments aimed
at beating another person into expressing themselves in a manner you
expect them to, you might not like the way they express themselves but
I mean that by no means implies that others similarly feel that way &
even if they do that by no means implies, by any stretch of logic, that
you're right. You might have been right, but I mean look at the flaws
I've found, I think that in general you'll always find such flaws because
the idea is flawed to begin with. All of this nonsense can be avoided by
accepting others for who they choose to be (though of course I'm not
forcing you to do that, but the above logical insanity is generally
encountered & we will most likely continue down these avenues of
exposing how such ignorance forces a person to ignore trivially obvious
details, something I continue to find without exemption).Because it is to highlight the hypocrisy in Lucy's position. No doubt this vital and important service will suddenly
become not as vital if the onus to pay it shifts to the people who are pushing this event in the schools and who claim
to be charitable.
I know you were aiming for some sort of counterexample as a means to
highlight hypocrisy but notice the question in my post (pre-empting this
response) that asked the question "why" those greedy fcukers should be
forced to pay for this. Not to tout my own horn but I even went into the
specifics of why they shouldn't be paying for this as a further means to
highlight how much of a non-counterexample your question was. They
have their own justifications for not paying for this (which I've already
mentioned, & can easily be checked).
Notice why I bothered to mention this:
Because even if we assume that they should be forced to pay for this
(i.e. if we indulge you in your attempt at highlighting hypocrisy) they
have their own iron-clad reasons not to pay for it because it goes against
the spirit of what they are aiming for on the day which implies, again if
logic has anything to do with this conversation, that the religious aspects
of the day are nothing more than coincidental in this milestone social
event. There's a reason why another poster in another thread recently
offered up Alton Towers as a means to satiate a child from worrying
about not partaking in their communion rituals & I think we all know it
wasn't offered as a means to lull the child into forgetting the sense of
spiritual loss they'll feel for not having been in church that day...
Thus the example fails on two grounds, A) indicating how it's even
relevant, when examined it just illustrates the very point you all
are arguing against in the first place.And again, it's much preferable that they cut this payment than ones that actually are vital.
3 million, in the scope of things, in no way interferes with anything vital. If
it did then I think you'd be right. Portraying this as something that is
interfering with vital services is insane.
If a penny was taken from the SW of each person in the country this
could be paid for multiple times over, I'd wager a majority of people on
the SW would agree to that. I only mention this to highlight how we're
nowhere near questions of this being some form of payment that would
interfere with vital services.
If people are concerned about wasted money, I mean uncontroversially
wasted money, there are far, far, better examples.
Trying to take money from poor people based on absolutely flawed
premises is pure evil, nobody has bothered to explain how religion has
anything to do with this issue as anything more than a coincidental,
notice I've posted this fact multiple times so ignorance can't be argued.
So even pretending that this payment is wrong for reason X, none of
the reasons people argued for so vehemently in the thread thus far
stand up to scrutiny which implies a lot of things anybody can easily
deduce if they want to go down that avenue of thought..0 -
Advertisement
-
<verbose irrelevance snipped>sponsoredwalk wrote: »3 million, in the scope of things, in no way interferes with anything vital.
If 3 million is such a trifling sum, why doesn't the Catholic Church offer to pay it? Or do they have moral objections to paying for booze ups, while the taxpayer should not?
There are many, many areas where 3 million euro could make a real, beneficial difference to people's lives - e.g. special needs assistants, elderly home care, cystic fibrosis. But having a nice taxpayer-funded day out for cult members is more important, I suppose, eh?If a penny was taken from the SW of each person in the country this
could be paid for multiple times over, I'd wager a majority of people on
the SW would agree to that.
Grand so, as long as the taxpayer isn't forced to subsidise religious ritual.
Here's an idea - why not take it out of your church collection? Aren't religious congregations supposed to look after their less fortunate members? Why push that burden onto the taxpayer, as this is not an essential expense but an expense resulting from membership of your religion?Fingal County Council are certainly not competent to be making decisions about the most important piece of infrastructure on the island. They need to stick to badly designed cycle lanes and deciding on whether Mrs Murphy can have her kitchen extension.
0
Advertisement