Religion and the State

omnicorp

Should Religion (ie, The Catholic Church) have a say in how the state is run?

I don't think so as that would be unfair on the people of other Religions.

AngelofFire

You`re right,making laws to suit a particular religous order is secterian. For years the irish government and people were slaves to the will of the catholic church thanks to the 1937 consitution with its secterian article. Many Roman Catholic Clergy abused their position of power, we read articles about child abuse that went on years ago in the papers today. They are getting away very lightly aswell few catholic clergymen have been arrested or detained. if the church of ireland or the presbyterian church were involved in similar scandels i doubt they would of gotten away as easily.

therecklessone

omnicorp wrote:

Should Religion (ie, The Catholic Church) have a say in how the state is run?

I don't think so as that would be unfair on the people of other Religions.

Should Trade Unions?
Business groups?
Sports bodies?

Would you remove the Church's right to comment totally? Or limit it?

popinfresh

TBH, I think religious organisations should be internationally outlawed. Not religion, or peoples right to beleive in a god or to own a bible. Just religious organisations, who allow infants to join their organisation (not old enough too make their own choice) and tell them what to beleive. ie: the catholic church. Look at the middle east ffs. Ban em all

LegacyUser

therecklessone wrote:

Should Trade Unions?
Business groups?
Sports bodies?

Would you remove the Church's right to comment totally? Or limit it?

they should be allowed comment as they wish, it is a democracy, but no heed should be given to the ramblings of the church, the other groups/bodies you mention actually have serious bearing on peoples lives so their opinions are valid

Rezmuter Duane

Religion and State should be seperate. Period. They have no right to influence the law in any way. They are the same as a sports organisation. If we gave the FAI the right to influence government, we would be laughed at worldwide.

therecklessone

bananayoghurt wrote:

they should be allowed comment as they wish, it is a democracy, but no heed should be given to the ramblings of the church,
the other groups/bodies you mention actually have serious bearing on peoples lives so their opinions are valid

Maybe for you, but there are plenty of people out there for whom the Catholic Church (not the church there is more than one) has a great deal of relevance.

So the "ramblings" of the Catholic Church...should we pay any heed to them?

LegacyUser

therecklessone wrote:

Maybe for you, but there are plenty of people out there for whom the Catholic Church (not the church there is more than one) has a great deal of relevance.

So the "ramblings" of the Catholic Church...should we pay any heed to them?

no, as I said, they are free to say what they want, but paying heed to one form of ignorance over another simply because of a headcount is foolish, no offence intended

Victor

So were CORI wrong to lecture FF on their social responsibilities today?

sliabh

Rezmuter Duane wrote:

If we gave the FAI the right to influence government, we would be laughed at worldwide.

Just like the GAA has no influence over the government?

Imposter

sliabh wrote:

Just like the GAA has no influence over the government?

Or publicans, or developers, or anyone that has an interest in decisions they come to.

All these groups should have the right to express their opinions. The governemt should be competent enough to make their decisions taking these views on board but coming to a fair decision for all involved.

LegacyUser

Victor wrote:

So were CORI wrong to lecture FF on their social responsibilities today?

bananayoghurt wrote:

no, as I said, they are free to say what they want

anybody can make any point they wish, some will be about issues which have real bearing on peoples lives and if they succeed in influencing gov policy fair play to them, and if it's the Catholic church that makes a point then fair enough also, as long as it's an issue that is cross cultural and pertinant to all, however if its some daft religious thing like all school kids should be made to say the Angelus before lunch or condoms should be banned cause sex before marriage is sinfull then it should be ignored.

bonkey

bananayoghurt wrote:

however if its some daft religious thing ... then it should be ignored.

It should be pointed out that "some daft religious thing" is entirely subjective on someone's point of view.

I know plenty of devout religious people who will think that what you dismiss as something which should be ignored is, in fact, something where the church's guidance is critical and that you are the one to be ignored by saying that the church shouldn't influence us.

Ultimately, we all choose who's guidance we allow to influence us. Thats a personal choice.

jc

sliabh

bonkey wrote:

Ultimately, we all choose who's guidance we allow to influence us. Thats a personal choice.jc

The problem comes when you start imposing your views on others, in particular because you feel that they come from God and therefore must be right.

There are a load of examples in this country, from divorce to sunday opening, pubs being closed on Christmas day and Good Friday and so on. I am not a Catholic but Catholic laws are being imposed on me.

Your religion should be YOUR business, don't force it on everyone else.

LegacyUser

sliabh wrote:

Your religion should be YOUR business, don't force it on everyone else.

exactly

bonkey wrote:

Ultimately, we all choose who's guidance we allow to influence us. Thats a personal choice.

I want to buy drink at 9am on Sunday morning, it's a shame I don't have the luxury of personal choice

Batbat

omnicorp wrote:

Should Religion (ie, The Catholic Church) have a say in how the state is run?

I don't think so as that would be unfair on the people of other Religions.

They can have a say in how the state is run when they sort out how to run themselves without breaking the law and molesting children, bastards!

pork99

sliabh wrote:

There are a load of examples in this country, from divorce to sunday opening, pubs being closed on Christmas day and Good Friday and so on. I am not a Catholic but Catholic laws are being imposed on me.

Your religion should be YOUR business, don't force it on everyone else.

I agree but 2 days a year without a pub ain't going to kill you. I'm not a Catholic either but I think of those as traditional holidays that simply come with pubs being shut as part of that tradition.

err... shops open on Sundays nowadays, you can also get divorced now.

Admittedly it's embarrassing to have to admit to foreigners that we only got divorce legislation 6 or 7 years ago.

therecklessone

Batbat wrote:

That can have a say in how the state is run when they sort out how to run themselves without breaking the law and molesting children, bastards!

:rolleyes:

I was waiting for this. Welcome to my ignore list.

therecklessone

bananayoghurt wrote:

no, as I said, they are free to say what they want, but paying heed to one form of ignorance over another simply because of a headcount is foolish, no offence intended

No offence taken, I'm not a practising Catholic.

I'm just amazed at the violent disdain people show towards RC (see BatBat above) almost exclusively. Its like the Catholic Church has become the whipping boy of Irish society, no matter what it does it gets hammered.

Leave aside the child abuse (and weaseling out of its responsibility to compensate victims) and you'll find that very often it is Church leaders who highlight inequality and issues of social justice.

They should have a right to express whatever they see fit (whether we agree or not), just as SIPTU or IBEC have, but with the same effect, no more, no less. No one group deserves special status in Irish politics.

Batbat

therecklessone wrote:

:rolleyes:

I was waiting for this. Welcome to my ignore list.

happy to be there

Its a mystery to me in light of how the christian church behaves how anyone could defend their institution

sliabh

pork99 wrote:

I agree but 2 days a year without a pub ain't going to kill you. I'm not a Catholic either but I think of those as traditional holidays that simply come with pubs being shut as part of that tradition.

I am not pushed about getting a drink either, but it's the principle of the thing. What are in effect religious holidays are enshrined in law.

pork99 wrote:

err... shops open on Sundays nowadays, you can also get divorced now.

Yeah, the sunday shopping one is a poor example, but it's applicable in other countries.

You see scary examples of this sort of thing in other countries all the time, and not just in the middle east. The influence of Christian right in the US is a prime example. This is one area where I wish we were a lot closer to Berlin than Boston!

Batbat

therecklessone wrote:

Leave aside the child abuse (and weaseling out of its responsibility to compensate victims) and you'll find that very often it is Church leaders who highlight inequality and issues of social justice.

.

are you insane, and the cover-ups and their lawyers harassing victims, leaving all that aside “they do good work”, is that your argument, are you totally deranged?

sliabh

therecklessone wrote:

Leave aside the child abuse (and weaseling out of its responsibility to compensate victims) and you'll find that very often it is Church leaders who highlight inequality and issues of social justice.

They do so where it meshes with their message. In other cases they promote policies that cause a lot of suffering.

The Christian Church's position on birth control and AIDS prevention in the Third World is regressive and causing a lot of undue suffering by refusing to back artifical contraception for one and use of condoms for the other.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Imposter

sliabh wrote:

I am not pushed about getting a drink either, but it's the principle of the thing. What are in effect religious holidays are enshrined in law.


Yeah, the sunday shopping one is a poor example, but it's applicable in other countries.

You see scary examples of this sort of thing in other countries all the time, and not just in the middle east. The influence of Christian right in the US is a prime example. This is one area where I wish we were a lot closer to Berlin than Boston!

Would this be the same Berlin that gets far more of those religious holidays you're talking about than Ireland does?

sliabh

Imposter wrote:

Would this be the same Berlin that gets far more of those religious holidays you're talking about than Ireland does?

Touche!

It's also the same German government where if you declare yourself as a member of a religion they are happy to tax you an extra 10% and pass it on to your church. I have always wondered how popular that would be here if the government brought it in?

But in general European governments are refreshingly secular, even if some like the French are almost militantly so.

Batbat

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

yes thats true, and in fairness they have done some good over the years, but the institution as it stands now has very poor morals, its strange the left hand does some good then the right hand does bad, I would not mind but at the same time they preach to other people how they should live.

Imposter

sliabh wrote:

It's also the same German government where if you declare yourself as a member of a religion they are happy to tax you an extra 10% and pass it on to your church. I have always wondered how popular that would be here if the government brought it in?

Is it really 10%? For me here in austria it works out at just over 100€ a year. I've stopped paying it this year as I don't agree with it and have no problem 'changing' my religion if neccessary. A fact ze Germans and especially ze Austrians don't like being reminded of was that this law was put in place by none other than Hr. Hitler himself.

sliabh

Imposter wrote:

Is it really 10%? For me here in austria it works out at just over 100€ a year.

I am open to correction on that one. It's a figure I heard quoted a while back. Google has failed me on this one too

arcadegame2004

I consider religion to be a negative influence on humanity. Evidence? The Inquisition, persecution of Catholics/Protestants/Jew/Muslims by Protestant/Catholic/Catholic+Protestant countries, the ideology of fun=bad, e.g. religious-inspired rambling against gambling and sexual fun between adults, the hypocrisy whererby they tell everyone else not to do something e.g. sex outside marriage, then do it themselves.

The Church and State must be totally separated.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

sliabh

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

While these two states described themselves as athiest you can make a good argument that in practice they were not. In each case they replaced traditional religion with new state religions - Communism in the USSR and Naziism in Germany. There is volumes of literature on how leaders in both drew on religious ideas and methods in building and running their national movements.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Wacker

While the power of the Caholic Church has declined in Ireland in recent years, it hasn't declined enough, if you ask me. I read of a case recently where a couple had to get permission off the local catholic school in order to send their child to the nearby multi-denominational school. This permission wasn't forthcoming. Thats ust not right, by anyone standards (I assume.)

Paladin

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

True, but it served them to "teach" their students about catholicism.
"Religion" when I went to school was all about learning off prayers and crap. There was never any philosophical education. Even the basic whats good and bad issue is tarred when they try and teach kids.

Obviously stabbing someone is bad. But little Johnny asks is it bad if he is trying to kill Mammy and Daddy? Does it leads to discussion? Like hell it will. Shut up Johnny. NEVER question the catholic church! And gays are evil little Johnny.

I think a lot of why people are angry at the church is the fact the church blatently lied to them during their "education". And continue to lie. The church's teaching of children never educated them, it fed them lies stating that they were truth. No wonder kids turn away from the church when they find out Adam and Eve did NOT spawn all humans. If the church lied about that then why believe anything else.
Of course then the kids are told "These are just stories used to emphasise points".

Why could the church not have educated children honestly in the first place?
Instead there are so many major issues that people will rebel against that they are taught. Banning sex before marriage, gays evil, so many other things that dont make logical sense, people in Ireland were bound to rebel eventually. Religion doesnt offer the same comfort in this day and age as it used to.

Seperate state and church imho.

sliabh

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

I'd agree. If you are poor and "down trodden" you get angry and look for someone to blame. The guy over there with the funny religion is the easy target. Once it gets started then there is the historical grudge to keep it going.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Paladin

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

Agreed

Exactly, the church doesn't teach that. You are confusing fundamentalist Christianity with the Catholic Churches teaching.

Ah cmon. Catholic schools had Brothers from cathlic orders teaching this stuff. Primary school teachers did. Im not confusing anything. I know its christian doctrine, but thats what the catholic church is! The difference is that other christian orders didnt have a tight grip on schooling in Ireland.

Don't you mean why couldn't the church not have educated children in the way you believe? Why is banning sex before marriage wrong? Who decided that?

Why is banning sex before marriage wrong? Why is it right? People asked this and on not receiving a reasonable answer they rebelled. Look are Ireland! Almost everyone has sex before marriage now. A decreasing number of people believe gays are evil. My point stands omh. They should have educated honestly.

Depends, obviously you and I don't need comfort from it, but I'm not going to deny it to people that want it.

Also agreed. Im just pointing out that they, the catholic church, biased more people against themselves than they "comforted" through their control of education.

Victor

sliabh wrote:

Yeah, the sunday shopping one is a poor example, but it's applicable in other countries. You see scary examples of this sort of thing in other countries all the time, and not just in the middle east. The influence of Christian right in the US is a prime example. This is one area where I wish we were a lot closer to Berlin than Boston!

Would that be Berlin where almost everywhere is closed on Sunday?

Paladin wrote:

"Religion" when I went to school was all about learning off prayers and crap. There was never any philosophical education. ...... And gays are evil little Johnny.

This two point don't work together. Did you get philosophical education about homosexuality or not? and ever hear of "hate the sin, not the sinner"?

Paladin wrote:

Instead there are so many major issues that people will rebel against that they are taught. Banning sex before marriage, gays evil, so many other things that dont make logical sense, people in Ireland were bound to rebel eventually.

So how about we "unban" larceny, seeing as people don't follow the law anyway?

"Banning sex before marriage" isn't quite right - the church condemns adultery, coveting and fornication, but does not condemn.

ArthurDent

Wacker wrote:

While the power of the Caholic Church has declined in Ireland in recent years, it hasn't declined enough, if you ask me. I read of a case recently where a couple had to get permission off the local catholic school in order to send their child to the nearby multi-denominational school. This permission wasn't forthcoming. Thats ust not right, by anyone standards (I assume.)

Involved in the Educate Together Multidenominational Sector and have never heard of this happening - all Educate Together schools are open to children of all faiths and none and as far as I am aware you do not have to discuss your relgious affiliation with the school unless you choose to.

arcadegame2004

How can you tar every religious person with the same brush? You're making sweeping generalisations.

It's the ideology I'm slating not the people who claim affiliation with the ideology. Mnay such people don't believe a word of it.

Victor

Wacker wrote:

While the power of the Caholic Church has declined in Ireland in recent years, it hasn't declined enough, if you ask me. I read of a case recently where a couple had to get permission off the local catholic school in order to send their child to the nearby multi-denominational school. This permission wasn't forthcoming. Thats ust not right, by anyone standards (I assume.)

I suspect you have the wrong end of the stick. There is a ban on schools canvassing for / poaching students ouside their own area (for Catholic national schools this tends to mean parish, although in circumstances where one school doesn't have space and a neighbouring one does, a liberal arrangement will apply).

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Wacker

I was basing what I wrote on a Vincent Browne (I think) column I read in the Irish Times from a few weeks ago. I probably got it wrong, apologies. If anyone who read it could correct me, that would be great.

Paladin

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

No abstinance is not necessarily a bad thing, but for most people kids not running around having sex is better for social and not religious reasons, in that less single mothers, less STD's, less unplanned pregnancies is better for society.

Religiously, Im afraid the catholic churchs attempt to make people feel bad about having sex failed and Irelend, once a bastion of strict(?) catholicism is as debaucherous as any other country you care to name. Im not saying the church is at fault for this, but it didnt help. It encouraged repression of sexual education and advocated keeping condoms illegal in Ireland. No wonder so many people rebelled against the catholic church. Ireland isnt the stronghold of faith it was, maybe 50 years ago.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Paladin

This two point don't work together. Did you get philosophical education about homosexuality or not? and ever hear of "hate the sin, not the sinner"?

Victor wrote:

Paladin wrote:

"Religion" when I went to school was all about learning off prayers and crap. There was never any philosophical education. ...... And gays are evil little Johnny.

This two point don't work together. Did you get philosophical education about homosexuality or not?

Im not sure I follow. Why dont they work together?
And Ive given myself philosophical education outside of school thanks to the wonderful mediums of books and internet.

and ever hear of "hate the sin, not the sinner"?

Indeed I did. Ever hear of anyone obeying it? People dont seperate those things. If people believe the catholic church that homosexuality is wrong, they view gay people as evil. Find me someone who believes homosexuality is wrong but doesnt have anything against gays and Ill show you a liar.

So how about we "unban" larceny, seeing as people don't follow the law anyway?

You are drawing utterly pointless off-topic analagies for the sake of it. The law exists to protect people without putting too great a limit of freedom. Larceny crosses the line. Consentual sex does not. Democracy exists to decide these things.

"Banning sex before marriage" isn't quite right - the church condemns adultery, coveting and fornication, but does not condemn.

I assume you meant "but does not ban".
Yes you are right. The church does not have the power to implement law. If it did have the power it would ban it. If you view sins as something catholics are banned from doing then its a ban for catholics. However thats pointless wordplay.

Paladin

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

I think we agreed all along just climbed the hill from opposite sides
Interesting about those studies. Do psychologists offer reasons why? Id imagine its the fact that kids that pledged abstinance never prepared themselves mentally for sex or educated themselves properly.

pork99

The state here has been able to abdicate it's responsibilities in allowing the Catholic Church to run schools, hospitals, orphanages etc sometimes with unfortunate results.

What annoys me is the respect that has to be given to religions. If I believed that the story of some fairy tale let's say Jack and the Beanstalk was literally true and went around trying to persuade other people that this was the case I'd be considered mentally ill.

If 200 million others were to believe the same nonsense however ones opinions on life and death issues would be seriously sought, ones sensitivities would be respected in schooling etc.

This is my guru

Sleepy

Laws cannot be based on religeon by any society which considers itself to be civilised, sensible or realistic. As an agnostic, I personally resent that the catholic church can claim me as one of their group because I happened to be born into circumstances in which I could be baptised and confirmed before I had the ability to question their dogma. I resent that their beliefs can prevent me from going to a pub on one of their religeous holidays. I resent that their beliefs were able to deny me the right to a divorce for so many years. I resent them because they're the most hypocritical organisation on earth: ammassing enough wealth to rid the world of poverty and doing nothing about it, encouraging the ignorant to spread aids and have children they can't afford to support, condemning others for their sexualities or sexual practices. Yeah, they really treat others as they wish to be treated.

Now don't get me wrong, I'd have equal levels of scorn for almost any other religeon (I'd exclude some forms of Buddhism because they're more a belief structure in how one should live one's life than a dogma surrounding a deity), it's just that Christianity is the one that's had most impact on my life, given that they were given the role of educating (or should I say indoctrinating?) me.

Religeous beliefs are no basis for law. Yes, in fairness it can make sense to organise public holidays around days when the vast majority of the population are observing a religeous holiday for purely practical reasons. However, laws forcing others to abide by a religeon's customs for any of these holidays is an affront to their personal liberties. Think about it: how would you like to be forced to observe Ramadan?

omnicorp

Sleepy wrote:

Laws cannot be based on religeon by any society which considers itself to be civilised, sensible or realistic. As an agnostic, I personally resent that the catholic church can claim me as one of their group because I happened to be born into circumstances in which I could be baptised and confirmed before I had the ability to question their dogma. I resent that their beliefs can prevent me from going to a pub on one of their religeous holidays. I resent that their beliefs were able to deny me the right to a divorce for so many years. I resent them because they're the most hypocritical organisation on earth: ammassing enough wealth to rid the world of poverty and doing nothing about it, encouraging the ignorant to spread aids and have children they can't afford to support, condemning others for their sexualities or sexual practices. Yeah, they really treat others as they wish to be treated.

Now don't get me wrong, I'd have equal levels of scorn for almost any other religeon (I'd exclude some forms of Buddhism because they're more a belief structure in how one should live one's life than a dogma surrounding a deity), it's just that Christianity is the one that's had most impact on my life, given that they were given the role of educating (or should I say indoctrinating?) me.

Religeous beliefs are no basis for law. Yes, in fairness it can make sense to organise public holidays around days when the vast majority of the population are observing a religeous holiday for purely practical reasons. However, laws forcing others to abide by a religeon's customs for any of these holidays is an affront to their personal liberties. Think about it: how would you like to be forced to observe Ramadan?

religion souldn't be an organization