Would Pagans Occupy The Hill of Tara If It Was A Muslim Holy Site??

Hero Of College

Just a question. I think we have seen how touchy and sensitive people have been to Islamic interests recently and I wonder how Peep or Squeak or whatever her name is might have reacted if Tara was a Muslim site instead of a Christian one.

Of course, Peep or Squeak or whatever is one of those currently occupying the Hill along with that poor girl who is buried under the shaft.

Anyways, good luck with the protest. Those planners and developers are right bastards. 20m is too close.

Sapien

Tara is a Christian site?

Hero Of College

Sapien wrote: »

Tara is a Christian site?

Well......It must be. Tara Hill is where Patrick made his argument to the High King about the Holy Trinity. I can only assume that this is the only reason the Esker is still in situ.

scorplett

Protesters are not occupying the hill of Tara. They are being idiots down near the building site some miles away from the hill.
The stories regarding Patrick are not considered factual.
Archaeological evidence has been found at the site to suggest it has been an important political centre for centuries. These finds support the concept of Tara as the seat of Kings. To say what the High Kings and their people believed or observed religiously is ridiculous.

Sapien

Hero Of College wrote: »

Well......It must be. Tara Hill is where Patrick made his argument to the High King about the Holy Trinity. I can only assume that this is the only reason the Esker is still in situ.

Let me rephrase that:

Tara is not a Christian site.

Nerin

im confused by the question now,do you still want an answer but disregarding tara or what?

Hero Of College

Sapien wrote: »

Let me rephrase that:

Tara is not a Christian site.

Then whats the problem??? If it is not a Holy site, and is just a place where some pagan kings gathered, then whats the delay???

And St Patricks mere presence in the general Tara region is enough to make it a place of Christian significance.

If the Christians can turn a blind eye to this Esker and get on with things, then what is the rationale of those who try to defend the Esker in the name of Paganism and the history of the "High Kings" {sounds like some sort of posse of college hopheads, btw}

Hero Of College

scorplett wrote: »

Protesters are not occupying the hill of Tara. They are being idiots down near the building site some miles away from the hill.
The stories regarding Patrick are not considered factual.
Archaeological evidence has been found at the site to suggest it has been an important political centre for centuries. These finds support the concept of Tara as the seat of Kings. To say what the High Kings and their people believed or observed religiously is ridiculous.

I never said the Kings believed. I am saying that Tara is where St Patrick made his argument about the Holy Trinity- the first time this cornerstone of one of the Worlds main religions was uttered on this Island.

We know the Kings gathered at Tara.

We know that Patrick was brought before them.

Gurgle

Hero Of College wrote: »

Then whats the problem??? If it is not a Holy site, and is just a place where some pagan kings gathered, then whats the delay???

Sorry, missing your point completely:
Are you saying we should protect and preserve christian sites but its ok to destroy relics of a culture that predates christianity?

Instant Karma

what kind of a pointless question is this?

Why 'hypothetically' would there even be a Muslim religious site smack bang in the middle of a majority Christian country?

Anyway, anything that gets some media attention on this shameful disregard for an important Archaeological site should be welcomed. Who cares if it's a Christian/Pagan/Muslim?? site it should be preserved regardless.

Hero Of College

Gurgle wrote: »

Sorry, missing your point completely:
Are you saying we should protect and preserve christian sites but its ok to destroy relics of a culture that predates christianity?

No, I am saying that a site which predates Christianity but which embodies a lot of the Christian history of this Country needs to be viewed in just that light:- nobody has a monopoly on the site, and if there has been no major Christian objection to the development at Tara then maybe "Squeak" and buddies on the building site would be so kind as to take that into account. Tara isn't just about "High Kings" and such alone.

Hero Of College

Instant Karma wrote: »

what kind of a pointless question is this?

Why 'hypothetically' would there even be a Muslim religious site smack bang in the middle of a majority Christian country?

Anyway, anything that gets some media attention on this shameful disregard for an important Archaeological site should be welcomed. Who cares if it's a Christian/Pagan/Muslim?? site it should be preserved regardless.

I agree it should be preserved. But would "Squeak" and buddies be so fast to invade Tara if Tara was, say, the Dome of the Rock??

I shouldn't think so.

BTW somebody needs to go up and get that girl out fo there before she is hurt.

Doctor DooM

Hero Of College wrote: »

I agree it should be preserved. But would "Squeak" and buddies be so fast to invade Tara if Tara was, say, the Dome of the Rock??

I shouldn't think so.

BTW somebody needs to go up and get that girl out fo there before she is hurt.

She's been out for two days.

Your points kind of irrelivant. Would a Muslim charge to the defense of a Catholic site?

If the area is of such import to Christians, how come I am not seeing COI priests and Roman Catholic priests on site?

Hero Of College

SDooM wrote: »

She's been out for two days.

Your points kind of irrelivant. Would a Muslim charge to the defense of a Catholic site?

If the area is of such import to Christians, how come I am not seeing COI priests and Roman Catholic priests on site?

No, but a Muslim might be slower to hijack a Christian site for the pursuit of his Islamic agenda, the same way a Pagan should be slower to move on a Christian site to further a Pagan agenda {High Kings, Druids, Halloween, all that blarney, parden the pun}

In short, the very reason the COI and RCC have been reticient is due to the fact that they don't have a dogmatic attitude about roads being built near or around random deposits of stone and gravel covered with grass, and, thus, are not prepared to dig tunnels which could endanger human life by weakening roads built in the vicinity- Christian site or not.

Doctor DooM

Hero Of College wrote: »

No, but a Muslim might be slower to hijack a Christian site for the pursuit of his Islamic agenda, the same way a Pagan should be slower to move on a Christian site to further a Pagan agenda {High Kings, Druids, Halloween, all that blarney, parden the pun}

In short, the very reason the COI and RCC have been reticient is due to the fact that they don't have a dogmatic attitude about roads being built near or around random deposits of stone and gravel covered with grass, and, thus, are not prepared to dig tunnels which could endanger human life by weakening roads built in the vicinity- Christian site or not.

Why would it be highjacking? Should there not be co-operation? I doubt the protesters would deny anyone trying to help them. It's a site of historical importance, tbh I don't see why religion should be involved at all.

Shiminay

I agree, I think the focus should be on the historic rather than the religious. There have been all manner of things done at Tara for any number of reasons and so any number of "groups" or whatever can lay claim to it. Your claims about pagans moving on a "Christian site" will only lead to one thing, the pagans saying they were there first (and in truth, you can't deny that). It's a pointless arguement though.

The unfortunate truth is that there seems to be a lot of mis-information being spread about all this (I personally have no idea what's going on and I have no desire to with all the bull being spoken about it).

My biggest fear is that with all these muppets wandering around and showing about as much care for the place as Irish people will (which is to say, almost none), the place will be closed off to the public and then no one except the OPW will be able to lay claim to it.

Sapien

Hero Of College wrote: »

Then whats the problem??? If it is not a Holy site, and is just a place where some pagan kings gathered, then whats the delay???

And St Patricks mere presence in the general Tara region is enough to make it a place of Christian significance.

If the Christians can turn a blind eye to this Esker and get on with things, then what is the rationale of those who try to defend the Esker in the name of Paganism and the history of the "High Kings" {sounds like some sort of posse of college hopheads, btw}

So you're some kind of Christian then, I take it?

Are you just trying to let the pagans who use this forum know that you think Paganism is rubbish, in a way that is just oblique enough to avoid outright banning? Because I can't detect the vaguest whif of an argument beyond that rather juvenile intention.

Nerin

SDooM wrote: »

Why would it be highjacking? Should there not be co-operation? I doubt the protesters would deny anyone trying to help them. It's a site of historical importance, tbh I don't see why religion should be involved at all.

thats a big +1 from me. why should anyones religion come into something historical OP? a christian can protect a muslim site, a hindu can protect a pagan site. its a love of the history more than anything religious i would have thought. if someone was going to build a house in a field and one said "hey, you can't, thats a religious site for me where i practice whateverism," do you think they are more or less entitled to stop it? but if one said "hey, you can't, its a historically important area," someone might respect it more.
well, at least i think so, its probably down to opinions, some people support the protests, others think theyre being silly hippies.

Kharn wrote: »

The unfortunate truth is that there seems to be a lot of mis-information being spread about all this (I personally have no idea what's going on and I have no desire to with all the bull being spoken about it).

My biggest fear is that with all these muppets wandering around and showing about as much care for the place as Irish people will (which is to say, almost none), the place will be closed off to the public and then no one except the OPW will be able to lay claim to it.

+1 again. its gotten somewhat out of hand, and neither side seems to be doing the right thing.

Sapien wrote: »

So you're some kind of Christian then, I take it?

Are you just trying to let the pagans who use this forum know that you think Paganism is rubbish, in a way that is just oblique enough to avoid outright banning? Because I can't detect the vaguest whif of an argument beyond that rather juvenile intention.

i was suspicious of this... perhaps :pac:

Hero Of College

SDooM wrote: »

Why would it be highjacking? Should there not be co-operation? I doubt the protesters would deny anyone trying to help them. It's a site of historical importance, tbh I don't see why religion should be involved at all.

I agree on cooperation, but the historic significance is amplified by the existence of a religious connection, and given that the Christian faith has largely supplanted paganism as a way of life, or as the predominant faith, its fair to say that the religious significance of Tara has been ignored. I feel that these protestors, who are most certainly closer to Paganism than to Christianity {judging by their names, mores, etc....} would have done well to consider that before they began their unilateral "defence" of the Esker.

Hero Of College

Sapien wrote: »

So you're some kind of Christian then, I take it?

Are you just trying to let the pagans who use this forum know that you think Paganism is rubbish, in a way that is just oblique enough to avoid outright banning? Because I can't detect the vaguest whif of an argument beyond that rather juvenile intention.

I am a Roman Catholic, so yes, I am "some kind of Christian".....as you put it.

I never said, or intended to imply, that Paganism is or was "Rubbish"....in fact I am suggesting the existence of a "Christianity Is Rubbish" attitude on behalf of the individuals who, being of a far less Christian persuasion than myself, have taken to launch a unilateral "defence" of a site whose importance FOR ME is derived from circumstances or events which are of less importance or significance to Pagans.

Thus, I asked, if Tara had an Islamic connection, with all that that entails, would "Squeak" and buddies have been so fast as to dig their tunnels and launch their defence of Tara upon some Pagan, or as you put it, "Historic" grounds?

I should think not.

But old, banal, harmless Christianity, it seems, is there to be walked on at every given moment, without the slightest of consideration or consultation.

As I already said, I refuse to place too much "historic" importance on a deposit of shingle and sand. By that same token I recognise it has that "historic" importance and I seek to avoid willful insult- and I would ask the Pagan element mounting this "defence" of Tara to extend the same courtesy to the Christian element of society which holds Tara in high esteem on Christian grounds.

lostexpectation

I think the lack of comment from the church aurhorities shows that tehy themselves think of hte site as pagan and not worried about it being diminished, seeing they have along history of trying to destroy or and assimulate paganism which continues to this day.

Doctor DooM

Hero Of College wrote: »

I am a Roman Catholic, so yes, I am a"some kind of Christian".....as you put it.

I never said, or intended to imply, that Paganism is or was "Rubbish"....in fact I am suggesting the existence of a "Christianity Is Rubbish" attitude on behalf of the individuals who, being of a far less Christian persuasion than myself, have taken to launch a unilateral "defence" of a site whose importance FOR ME is derived from circumstances or events which are of less importance or significance to Pagans.

Any examples of this from anyone currently occupying Tara? Has anyone there said they are protesting on religious grounds? Any quote from them ecrying Christianity? Or are you just assuming?

Hero Of College wrote: »

Thus, I asked, if Tara had an Islamic connection, with all that that entails, would "Squeak" and buddies have been so fast as to dig their tunnels and launch their defence of Tara upon some Pagan, or as you put it, "Historic" grounds?

I should think not.

As, as far as I know there's is not a religious protest, actually they probably would, as long as a site of historical importance was threatened. In England, any forest is worth defending, I assume its the same here.

Hero Of College wrote: »

But old, banal, harmless Christianity, it seems, is there to be walked on at every given moment, without the slightest of consideration or consultation.

Please dont play the "poor old Christianity" card. The Roman Catholic Churches damage in this country is still being repaired. The RCC should have to face up to criticism for its mistakes, just like you seem to think paganism should.

Hero Of College wrote: »

As I already said, I refuse to place too much "historic" importance on a deposit of shingle and sand. By that same token I recognise it has that "historic" importance and I seek to avoid willful insult- and I would ask the Pagan element mounting this "defence" of Tara to extend the same courtesy to the Christian element of society which holds Tara in high esteem on Christian grounds.

As I said, any proof of a pagan element? I know two COI people involved in the protest.

Just because you think Tara is not a place of historical importance doesn't mean others do not.

Unless you have any proof of what you're saying, this is a very pointless thread and seems to be a random flailing against those you do not approve of.

Talliesin

So is Squeak a Pagan then?.

Nevyn

Talliesin wrote: »

So is Squeak a Pagan then?.

Y'know I somehow doubt a person who has kept thier identity out of the public would be wanting their personal religious stand point out there be they pagan christian or atheist.

Sapien

Hero Of College wrote: »

I never said, or intended to imply, that Paganism is or was "Rubbish"....in fact I am suggesting the existence of a "Christianity Is Rubbish" attitude on behalf of the individuals who, being of a far less Christian persuasion than myself, have taken to launch a unilateral "defence" of a site whose importance FOR ME is derived from circumstances or events which are of less importance or significance to Pagans.

If there is any logic buried in that, or in anything else you've posted on this thread, I shan't do my self an injury by trying to pry it out.

The best I can make out at a glance is that you perceive some anti-Christian sentiment behind protests against the development near Tara. I don't know why. I understand that some of these protestors are pagan. I don't see what that has to do with it. Where Islam comes in - I have absolutely no clue. Perhaps you could be so kind as to spell out exactly what your qualm is, or, failing that, go away and have a bit of a think.

Shiminay

Hero, you seem to think that because the place *might* have been somewhere St Patrick went to, this suddenly makes it Christian? I don't quite see it that way myself.

"Behold, this is the toilet where St Nonsense once took a dump - it clearly must be a place of religious significance! It doesn't matter that it's a public toilet in the middle of a busy place that thousands of people have taken a dump in, it's obviously religiously significant."
:rolleyes:

Hero Of College

Talliesin wrote: »

So is Squeak a Pagan then?.

hard to say, though anybody who buries themselves under an esker with only a car jack holding them up must have a pretty strong faith in something, apart from car jacks.

Hero Of College

Kharn wrote: »

Hero, you seem to think that because the place *might* have been somewhere St Patrick went to, this suddenly makes it Christian? I don't quite see it that way myself.

"Behold, this is the toilet where St Nonsense once took a dump - it clearly must be a place of religious significance! It doesn't matter that it's a public toilet in the middle of a busy place that thousands of people have taken a dump in, it's obviously religiously significant."
:rolleyes:

He didn't just "go" there. He deliberately went there with a view to gaining the audience of the High King. A seminal moment in Irish History, religious or otherwise, wouldn't you say. He received the Kings audience, and having done so, the end of Paganism in this country as the predominant religious affiliation was in sight. Tara is as Christian as it is Pagan, and I fail to see why you should have an issue with this. Patrick didn't take a dump on Tara {though maybe he should have, I'm sure Squeak has shat all over Tara} and even if he did, it most certainly was NOT his main order of business- confronting a Pagan King and converting him was.

Now you can piss all over Christianity if you want, thats your decision. I'm sure Jesus pissed himself on the way to Calgary, but Calgary is still Calgary, and the "main event" of Calgary was a crucifixion. Only one man has preached Christianity to a hitherto Pagan Ireland on Tara, and that man was Patrick.

So again, if Christians can tolerate {and it is a matter of tolerance} the developments on Tara, why can't the Pagans????

Hero Of College

Sapien wrote: »

If there is any logic buried in that, or in anything else you've posted on this thread, I shan't do my self an injury by trying to pry it out.

The best I can make out at a glance is that you perceive some anti-Christian sentiment behind protests against the development near Tara. I don't know why. I understand that some of these protestors are pagan. I don't see what that has to do with it. Where Islam comes in - I have absolutely no clue. Perhaps you could be so kind as to spell out exactly what your qualm is, or, failing that, go away and have a bit of a think.

Tara is a Christian site. Lets take the Islamic view- and suppose for a minute that Tara was instead a Muslim shrine. What treatment do you think the Pagans on Tara would be in for if they defiled a Muslim Shrine.

And, with this in mind, would they be so fast to defile it in the first place??

Thus, two points, which you seem incapable or unwilling to grasp.

1. Tara is Christian.

2.Christianity is a soft touch.

And, while I am at it:- 3. Pagans need to show some respect to the Christian nature of Tara- they wouldn't do it to a Muslim place {chop chop} so why do it to a Christian place. I am sure there were some pretty heady Zoroastrian times down Iran way back in the day, but you don't see Squeak and buddies flouting Iranian dress sense in Tehran in defence of Zoroastrians, now do you.

Hero Of College

lostexpectation wrote: »

I think the lack of comment from the church aurhorities shows that tehy themselves think of hte site as pagan and not worried about it being diminished, seeing they have along history of trying to destroy or and assimulate paganism which continues to this day.

I think Paganism got badly enough damaged the day that Patrick went firestarting on Tara Hill. This was years before the Church in Ireland. The High King of Ireland did more damage to Paganism than any Pope ever did.

Shiminay

I'm very confused...

I don't consider Tara to be a religious site. Religious things have happened there, I've no doubt, but as the seat of power for a nation, that can't come as a surprise. By your rationale, Dáil Éireann and the Whitehouse in Washington DC are also religious sites as they are seats of power where religious things have happened (swearing in with God as their witness etc). Do you believe this to be the case?

I'm not here to have a go at Christianity, I spent too long in my past being that "angry aethiest-Christian" and I'm done with it - live and let live tbh. I'm just curious as to why you think that hundreds/thousands of years of a certain way of life have been suddenly made null and void because someone had a different idea that's no more or less valid than the last.

Hero Of College

Kharn wrote: »

I'm very confused...

I don't consider Tara to be a religious site. Religious things have happened there, I've no doubt, but as the seat of power for a nation, that can't come as a surprise. By your rationale, Dáil Éireann and the Whitehouse in Washington DC are also religious sites as they are seats of power where religious things have happened (swearing in with God as their witness etc). Do you believe this to be the case?

I'm not here to have a go at Christianity, I spent too long in my past being that "angry aethiest-Christian" and I'm done with it - live and let live tbh. I'm just curious as to why you think that hundreds/thousands of years of a certain way of life have been suddenly made null and void because someone had a different idea that's no more or less valid than the last.

You see, I don't equate "religions things" with what happened in/around/on Tara. Going to mass is a "religious thing". A crucifix is a "religious thing". But when Christ broke bread for the first time or when Christ was crucified....these are more than "religious things". They are seminal events, seismic almost. They are new departures. I know you don't believe, and thats cool. But the fact remains, even from a Pagan perspective, that the arrival of Saint Patrick into Ireland and his audience with the High Kings is a seminal moment. It is not an instance of "Saint Nonsense" taking a "dump". Even, and I reiterate, from a Pagan Perspective, it must be a seminal moment- and, ironically, you make the point for me in a backhanded sort of way in the second part of your post.

I agree, and you will see why, that the Pagan history of this Island is important and is not to be trod upon gleefully. To do so would be to embrace a Hitler-esque stance. Hitler once said, in preparing his "Final Solution".... who, after all, remembers the Armenians". This country cannot afford to trample on past traditions, simply because nobody ever met the High Kings.

However, look at Istanbul. Once the predominating belief was Roman and Christian. Today it is Turkish and Islamic. Who remembers and reveres Byzantium? The Hagia Sophia was turned into a Mosque, then into a Museum. The ideas and ways of the Eastern Roman Empire {Constantinople} were quite valid, and amongst the most cultured of Europe, a far cry from the general brutality of Medieval Europe. But they were swept aside by a more vibrant force whose time, it seems, had come.

Pagans of Ireland must realise this. I despise the dogma of organised religion, I believe in Jesus and therefore God but in the sense of God as a MAN, not some invisible deity who can see what I am doing.:rolleyes: And I believe the word and teachings of that man were made known to the native inhabitants of this island at Tara some 1600 years ago, and that those teachings were readily embraced voluntarily, and not by force, as was the case with Islam in Constantinople- but peacefully, and to the betterment of the Island. {Think Boru at Clontarf} And THAT, for me, is of considerable religious significance.

All I ask is that the protesting Pagans bear that in mind.

Peace.

Sapien

Hero Of College wrote:

Tara is a Christian site.

What do you mean by this? Do you mean it is also a Christian site - as well as pagan and pre-Christian? Do you mean it is more Christian than pagan? Do you mean it is solely Christian, and has ceased to be pagan? How does this relate to its standing in secular heritage? Do Christians have a special claim over it?

Hero Of College wrote:

Lets take the Islamic view- and suppose for a minute that Tara was instead a Muslim shrine. What treatment do you think the Pagans on Tara would be in for if they defiled a Muslim Shrine.

The pagans, like the rest of the protesters at Tara, are trying to prevent it from being "defiled". They are trying to preserve it. The fact that some people, apparently, attach a Christian significance to Tara has absolutely nothing to do with it. The pagans, presumably, want it to be preserved because it figures importantly in their spirituality. Others wish for it to be preserved because it is part of the history, heritage and culture of Ireland. Others, possibly, want it to be preserved because it features in the legend of Patrick. These different approaches are not exclusive - they converge upon the same aim. Now, unless you are suggesting that, for a reason that is far from obvious, pagans are being anti-Christian by preventing Tara from being destroyed, I fail to see what your problem is.

Hero Of College wrote:

Thus, two points, which you seem incapable or unwilling to grasp.

1. Tara is Christian.

Not in any meaningful sense. Please answer the above questions.

Hero Of College wrote:

2.Christianity is a soft touch.

Whatever. You seem to have managed to warp the desire of these people to protect Tara into some mysterious anti-Christian agenda. I still have no idea why.

Hero Of College wrote:

And, while I am at it:- 3. Pagans need to show some respect to the Christian nature of Tara- they wouldn't do it to a Muslim place {chop chop} so why do it to a Christian place.

Ah. Why be maieutic about it when you can just come out and say it. Socrates would be proud.

Hero Of College wrote:

I am sure there were some pretty heady Zoroastrian times down Iran way back in the day, but you don't see Squeak and buddies flouting Iranian dress sense in Tehran in defence of Zoroastrians, now do you.

No idea...

Shiminay

That's the first bit of sense you've made on this thread I think I got the distinct impression that you were of the opinion that Pagan's no longer had any sort of "claim" to the place because St Patrick is supposed to have had his audience with the Kings there. For the record, I think Tara should be enjoyed by everyone and again make the point that all this sort of protesting and so on will only serve to give the OPW the urge to take control of the whole site and put up gates and fences, which whatever about a road being build several miles away, that would be the biggest crime.

WindSock

Instant Karma wrote: »

Why 'hypothetically' would there even be a Muslim religious site smack bang in the middle of a majority Christian country?

Spain?

Also, I think Tara is of more Historical signifigance than Religious. What exactly are you getting at here? Are you saying Pagans are Anti Islamic and Pro Christian?

Doctor DooM

Hero Of College wrote: »

All I ask is that the protesting Pagans bear that in mind.

Peace.

Hi Hero,

I notice you completely ignored my post and seem to be picking your arguments.

Do you have any evidence at all there is some form of Pagan influence in the Tara protests?

I ask because, as stated above, I happen to know two Church of Ireland people who are involved. Which kind of completely debunks your point.

Perhaps Squeak is a Catholic, just like yourself?

Or are you just picking on a minority you dislike?

Hero Of College

WindSock wrote: »

Spain?

Also, I think Tara is of more Historical signifigance than Religious. What exactly are you getting at here? Are you saying Pagans are Anti Islamic and Pro Christian?

Not at all.

Actually, as good a point as Spain was, try the converse, and consider Istanbul.

The Pagans aren't anti Christian, I just wonder if they wouldn't be a little more reticient about occupying the place if a Fatwah was put on them. Thats all.

I think they {as evidenced by the girl in the tunnel} are as big a risk to themselves as anything else.

Hero Of College

SDooM wrote: »

Hi Hero,

I notice you completely ignored my post and seem to be picking your arguments.

Do you have any evidence at all there is some form of Pagan influence in the Tara protests?

I ask because, as stated above, I happen to know two Church of Ireland people who are involved. Which kind of completely debunks your point.

Perhaps Squeak is a Catholic, just like yourself?

Or are you just picking on a minority you dislike?

I am

1. At work

2. On dialup.

Give a bro a chance.

Hero Of College

Sapien wrote: »

What do you mean by this? Do you mean it is also a Christian site - as well as pagan and pre-Christian? Do you mean it is more Christian than pagan? Do you mean it is solely Christian, and has ceased to be pagan? How does this relate to its standing in secular heritage? Do Christians have a special claim over it?

It is both. It has significance, and rightly so, to both groups. I defend it on the grounds that it is {a} the historical site of power in Ireland and {b} the place in which Christianity first raised its ugly head, so to speak. If people will stare at holes made by asteroids, they should at least respect Tara Hill.

Sapien wrote:

The pagans, like the rest of the protesters at Tara, are trying to prevent it from being "defiled". They are trying to preserve it. The fact that some people, apparently, attach a Christian significance to Tara has absolutely nothing to do with it. The pagans, presumably, want it to be preserved because it figures importantly in their spirituality. Others wish for it to be preserved because it is part of the history, heritage and culture of Ireland. Others, possibly, want it to be preserved because it features in the legend of Patrick. These different approaches are not exclusive - they converge upon the same aim. Now, unless you are suggesting that, for a reason that is far from obvious, pagans are being anti-Christian by preventing Tara from being destroyed, I fail to see what your problem is.

The "problem" is that, as I see it, the "defence" of Tara has been unilateral, from the Pagan POV, with very little cross dialogue. Now maybe thats the fault of more than one group....but your flat out denial of Taras status as a Christian site leads me to believe that Pagans have a particularly entrenched view, namely that historical significance outweights religious signifiance.

Sapien wrote:

You seem to have managed to warp the desire of these people to protect Tara into some mysterious anti-Christian agenda. I still have no idea why.

Not anti-Christian, just indifferent.It would be a trifle polite if they considered the Christian nature of the place and, well, gave Christians a shout out. I fail to see why the entire thing should be so exclusive.

Caoimhín

OP.
Are you suggesting christians should behave the same way muslims do if their holy sites are desecrated?

Sapien

Hero Of College wrote: »

The "problem" is that, as I see it, the "defence" of Tara has been unilateral, from the Pagan POV, with very little cross dialogue. Now maybe thats the fault of more than one group....but your flat out denial of Taras status as a Christian site leads me to believe that Pagans have a particularly entrenched view, namely that historical significance outweights religious signifiance.

I am not a pagan. I simply think the Christian associations of Tara are trivial compared to its connection with Ireland's pre-Christian heritage.

So your problem is not with the actions of these alleged pagans, but with the fact that they have not asked Christians to join in. Is that it? You agree with their aims, but want to be in on the action?

Hero Of College wrote: »

Not anti-Christian, just indifferent.It would be a trifle polite if they considered the Christian nature of the place and, well, gave Christians a shout out. I fail to see why the entire thing should be so exclusive.

I think I'm getting it now. How preposterously petulant of you. How have you managed to convince yourself that Christian apathy towards Tara is the fault of pagans? And why on earth did you feel the need to use the word "defile" so many times?

So basically, if Tara is saved, you don't like the idea that pagans and not Christians will get the credit for it. Are the pagans somehow preventing Christians from campaigning and protesting? Why should people who have no interest in Christianity make an effort to highlight this Christian folk tale, when there are millions of self-professed Christians in the country who could, if they were bothered, do it themselves?

And, once again, the "Christian nature" of Tara is a wishful invention of yours. The legend that Patrick visited Tara is a throwaway novelty compared to the mythological attribution of Tara as the seat of the Tuatha De Danann, and both of these pale in significance to the historical importance of the place in pre-Christian politics. Tara looms large as an asset in our heritage - the Patrick story is a mere scribbled footnote.

Now explain where Islam comes into it.

Nevyn

Hero Of College wrote: »

It is both. It has significance, and rightly so, to both groups. I defend it on the grounds that it is {a} the historical site of power in Ireland and {b} the place in which Christianity first raised its ugly head, so to speak.

Actually historical record show there were christains on cape clear Island off the coast of cork 30 years before St Patrick was meant to have 'brought' christianity to here.

But you have already stated you think for a site to be sacred it has to be of christian import which I find rude and dismissive.

Hero Of College wrote: »

The "problem" is that, as I see it, the "defence" of Tara has been unilateral, from the Pagan POV,

Actually it has not. Infact the likes of tarawatch have come in for some very scathing comments by myself and other regular pagan posters in this forum.

I disagree with their reasonings and methods quiet frankly and with the disrepute some of their members are bringing to paganism as a whole in Ireland, one of thier very active members is not just banned from this forum but was site banned.

I don't' see the point of saying Tara is not a christian site as well when there is clearly a church up at the hill of Tara I might as well try and say that there are no stars in the sky.

But again even this thread is falling into the trap of only talking about Tara as in the Hill and not the fact the protesters are not at the Hill of Tara and that the Hill of Tara is not under threat the issue is the routing of the road through the Skryne Valley where there was a better route available.

Hero Of College wrote: »

Not anti-Christian, just indifferent.It would be a trifle polite if they considered the Christian nature of the place and, well, gave Christians a shout out. I fail to see why the entire thing should be so exclusive.

I don't think that the efforts to do 'somthing' ( no matter how misguided it is ) are closed to those who are christian. It has been stated twice in this thread there are CoI people invovled.

I have complained repeatedly going back two years at this stage that making
the ill chosen route of the road seem like a pagan only issue would be very damaging to getting people engaged and getting them to care and lobby to have this mess sorted out.

I think that the Hill and the Valley are of historical importance to everyone no matter their creed or beliefs.

Doctor DooM

Thaedydal wrote: »

I think that the Hill and the Valley are of historical importance to everyone no matter their creed or beliefs.

This would be my POV as well.

Surely if the entrenched religions of Ireland are not defending this site which apparently is of import to you, OP, it is their fault, not the Pagans?

As there is no "Church of Pagianity" I don't even think its fair to be referring to the Pagans involved as some form of umbrella organisation, opposed to Christianity's involvement, tbh.

Hero Of College

Thaedydal wrote: »

Actually historical record show there were christains on cape clear Island off the coast of cork 30 years before St Patrick was meant to have 'brought' christianity to here.

But you have already stated you think for a site to be sacred it has to be of christian import which I find rude and dismissive.

Tell me, was "Cape Clear Island" of the Coast of Cork the traditional haunt of the most powerful Pagan Kings? No, it wasn't. Then again, you have probably missed the point on the distinction which exists between minor and major events. They could have re-enacted the crucifixion of Christ on Inis Moir, for all the difference it would have made- what made Patricks interevention here so important was its manner:- he gained Audience with men who were prepared to lead the people of the island in a new {Christian} direction. Thats the significance- he appealed to the highest authority in the land- the first such movement in the history of Ireland, and one of the earliest introductions of Christianity on a formal basis anywhere on the earth {I think Armenia and Ethiopia have even younger Christian traditions}




Never said that. In fact, I said I held it in esteem for two reasons, one historical, the other religious.

Thaedydal wrote:

Actually it has not. Infact the likes of tarawatch have come in for some very scathing comments by myself and other regular pagan posters in this forum.

I disagree with their reasonings and methods quiet frankly and with the disrepute some of their members are bringing to paganism as a whole in Ireland, one of thier very active members is not just banned from this forum but was site banned.

Well, there you go. A lot of the media reporting has left this out. I'm not for bannings or confrontations but thanks for pointing these things out. I wasn't aware of where exactly you personally stood, nor did I say that the Pagan movement on Tara was indicative of the ENTIRE pagan population- but it is unilateral in the sense that it gives jack-sh!t in the line of credence to the POV that Tara is a Christian site.

Thaedydal wrote:

I don't' see the point of saying Tara is not a christian site as well when there is clearly a church up at the hill of Tara I might as well try and say that there are no stars in the sky.

Grand. Thats something that more people should take into account.

Thaedydal wrote:

But again even this thread is falling into the trap of only talking about Tara as in the Hill and not the fact the protesters are not at the Hill of Tara and that the Hill of Tara is not under threat the issue is the routing of the road through the Skryne Valley where there was a better route available.

Possibly so- but the media insist on calling it "Tara" so there's one explanation, also, with developers making statements like "they eat their kids on the Northside" its not hard to see how hardnosed some of these sh!ts can be when it comes to getting their own way with these "developments".

Thaedydal wrote:

I don't think that the efforts to do 'somthing' ( no matter how misguided it is ) are closed to those who are christian. It has been stated twice in this thread there are CoI people invovled.

Bottom line is that the preponderance of people in this country are of a RC persuasion. WHen it comes to swinging something in ones favour, its best to appeal to the majority. I think it was an awful error for people to represent the defence of Tara as being a "Crusty" issue, immediately turning off an awful lot of potential support, as happened with the Glen of the Downs. Thats just how a democracy works, its a numbers game. Calling oneself "Squeak" and then disappearing down a hole with a candle is not good PR, and lets face it, its all about PR. We are appealing to a BEBO generation for help here, unfortunately.

Thaedydal wrote:

I have complained repeatedly going back two years at this stage that making the ill chosen route of the road seem like a pagan only issue would be very damaging to getting people engaged and getting them to care and lobby to have this mess sorted out.

Exactly. See above. Sapien thinks I fear that the "Pagans will Win" and Christians will lose out on the support and clamour which follows. Nonsense. An opportunity has been lost here for people to pool in on this- and I don't think we are getting another chance.

Thaedydal wrote:

I think that the Hill and the Valley are of historical importance to everyone no matter their creed or beliefs.

Exactly...and the first thing the first person who got to the top should have done was plant a flag to that effect. Unfortunately it appears the situation has degraded to the state that it bears more in common with the Glen Of The Downs than it does with say an anti-war protest in O'Connell Street. In otherwords- its exclusive. And thats never good.

Hero Of College

Sapien wrote: »

I am not a pagan. I simply think the Christian associations of Tara are trivial compared to its connection with Ireland's pre-Christian heritage.

Nonsense. The Irish Constitution is one of the finest documents of our era, and it draws heavily on this Country and its Christian traditions. Given that the Constitution is the basis of the State, and the Constitution is based on Christian beliefs and mores, and that our Christian beliefs and mores were introduced by Patrick at Tara, then surely more significance must be attached to Tara as a Christian site.

Sapien wrote:

So your problem is not with the actions of these alleged pagans, but with the fact that they have not asked Christians to join in. Is that it? You agree with their aims, but want to be in on the action?

As stated in a previous response, we are in the PR game now, and some numbers might help. Getting extra support involves sending the right messages. The PERCEPTION of a crusty down a hole with a candle and a car jack is likely to turn the entire thing into one great big joke, thus playing into Johnny Developers hands more and more.





[Qupte=Sapien]I think I'm getting it now. How preposterously petulant of you. How have you managed to convince yourself that Christian apathy towards Tara is the fault of pagans? And why on earth did you feel the need to use the word "defile" so many times?[/Quote]

Christian apathy towards Tara is a result of our apathy as a nation in general. In general, people are sheep, prepared to be pushed and herded and taxed and bullied. In an apathetic age as ours, it behoves concerned activists to inform and educate and gather support, not reduce themselves to laughing stock.

As for "DEFILE"...maybe that is too strong. But they shouldn't have dug a tunnel system. Sure that is as bad as a bleeding road......

Sapien wrote:

So basically, if Tara is saved, you don't like the idea that pagans and not Christians will get the credit for it. Are the pagans somehow preventing Christians from campaigning and protesting? Why should people who have no interest in Christianity make an effort to highlight this Christian folk tale, when there are millions of self-professed Christians in the country who could, if they were bothered, do it themselves?

No. Read above. Tara won't be saved BY ANYONE.

Sapien wrote:

And, once again, the "Christian nature" of Tara is a wishful invention of yours. The legend that Patrick visited Tara is a throwaway novelty compared to the mythological attribution of Tara as the seat of the Tuatha De Danann, and both of these pale in significance to the historical importance of the place in pre-Christian politics. Tara looms large as an asset in our heritage - the Patrick story is a mere scribbled footnote.

Tara has a distinct Christian nature. Your refusal to acknowledge it is so childish and head-in-the-sand as to be ridiculous. Most kids in the street think De Dannan is a band or something, and that Tuatha are something in your mouth. Pre Christian politics be damned, this Country of ours is run by a Parliament in Dublin who is beholden to a Constitution, one of the finest documents for Government ever written, and that Constitution was based in Christian mores and beliefs, and that Christian faith was introduced by Patrick to this country via the High Kings at Tara. You can dismiss "The Patrick Story" as "mere scribbled footnote", but you can NEVER dismiss the Constitution as same. And I'll say this much- at least Patrick could write....The High Kings only had Ogham. There was precious little being scribbled before Patrick, most of our "scribbling" I think you will find took place during our age of Enlightenment, when Christian Ireland led the way during the "Dark Ages".

Sapien wrote:

Now explain where Islam comes into it.

You would NEVER diss a Muslim like you just dissed me, for fear of your life. Thats where Islam comes into it. They have a solution for you. I don't, other than to patiently spell out my opinions and ask others to patiently tolerate them.

Tabnabs

Hero Of College wrote: »

You would NEVER diss a Muslim like you just dissed me, for fear of your life.

Shiminay

I don't think state and religion should EVER be mixed and as such, I'm ashamed of our constitution and all that has sprung up around it. By it's very nature, it excludes non-Christians and as a result, we see that in everyday Ireland where people are looked at as having something wrong with them if they say they're Pagan (this happens to me all the time) or that they're foreign if they're (for example) Islamic.

You're assuming a Muslim person would commit murder on the grounds of someone having no interest in or being dismissive of in their faith is just so disappointing. I honestly felt you'd clawed back some credibility in this thread (at least in my eyes you had), but you lost it all with that statement.

Wasn't that long ago when the Christians put people to death for having differing beliefs too - but then again, people and religions change. They're even giving people who commit suicide funerals now aren't they? Just something you should think about...

Sapien

Hero Of College wrote: »

Nonsense. The Irish Constitution is one of the finest documents of our era, and it draws heavily on this Country and its Christian traditions. Given that the Constitution is the basis of the State, and the Constitution is based on Christian beliefs and mores, and that our Christian beliefs and mores were introduced by Patrick at Tara, then surely more significance must be attached to Tara as a Christian site.

Whose "Christian beliefs and mores" exactly? Certainly not mine. Nor these pagans either. I couldn't care less if the Constitution invoked the name of L Ron Hubbard. This is a secular republic and no one's religious convictions are given precedence. The folk tale of Patrick is a blip in the millennia long story of Tara. Just because Christianity happens to be more important to you, to Irish Catholicism and to the authors of the Constitution, it doesn't mean that an alleged stunt by a fifth century Christian missionary gets to trump thousands of years of pre-Christian ritual and politics.

Hero Of College wrote:

As stated in a previous response, we are in the PR game now, and some numbers might help. Getting extra support involves sending the right messages. The PERCEPTION of a crusty down a hole with a candle and a car jack is likely to turn the entire thing into one great big joke, thus playing into Johnny Developers hands more and more.

I see. And some rosary rattling old dears would send a better message? I hate to break it to you, Hero, but as religions go, Christianity is no more appealing to the masses than paganism. At least paganism is interesting, new in one sense, ancient in another, vibrant, eccentric and going somewhere. I've no doubt the local pp could muster up a troop of doddering legionnaires to sit in front of the bulldozers while saying decades - but in terms of PR? Please! What quicker way to make conservation of Tara grey, uninteresting and oppressively trite, I cannot imagine. And for what? - a folk tale that isn't even recognised by the Church or believed by any remotely discerning historian.

Hero Of College wrote:

Christian apathy towards Tara is a result of our apathy as a nation in general. In general, people are sheep, prepared to be pushed and herded and taxed and bullied. In an apathetic age as ours, it behoves concerned activists to inform and educate and gather support, not reduce themselves to laughing stock.

And so far, among the only groups to take an active interest in Tara's conservation are pagans. And you condemn them for it. And the Christians who stay at home and turn a blind eye as their elected officials prepare to plough through their heritage - these are the victims in your scenario. You should really think through this again.

Hero Of College wrote:

No. Read above. Tara won't be saved BY ANYONE.

I don't see how that's a response to what I wrote. So you're pessimistic about the developments being prevented. What does that have to do with it? Are the pagans doing anything to prevent Christians, or anybody else, from campaigning to save Tara? How can they be blamed for the apathy of others?

Hero Of College wrote:

Tara has a distinct Christian nature. Your refusal to acknowledge it is so childish and head-in-the-sand as to be ridiculous.

Is this "distinct Christian nature" simply because of the story of Patrick lighting the bonfire, or is there something more to it? Was there a monastic settlement of some kind of which I am unaware? Any lasting Christian presence? Anything that is more significant that an alleged stunt by a missionary? If not, then I'm very sorry, but Christianity barely makes a dent. It may seem to you that this droplet of Christianity in an ocean of pre-Christian history makes the whole thing a creature of your religion, but that's only because it is your religion, you are being blindly subjective. If you had any objectivity whatsoever, you would have the grace to accept that Tara means at least as much to other people as to yourself, and for different reasons, and that your unique claim to it is jaundiced and paltry. But I'm increasingly getting the impression that access to such perspectives is just a bit beyond you.

Hero Of College wrote:

Pre Christian politics be damned, this Country of ours is run by a Parliament in Dublin who is beholden to a Constitution, one of the finest documents for Government ever written, and that Constitution was based in Christian mores and beliefs, and that Christian faith was introduced by Patrick to this country via the High Kings at Tara. You can dismiss "The Patrick Story" as "mere scribbled footnote", but you can NEVER dismiss the Constitution as same.

Of course I can. Your esteem for the Constitution is as baffling as it is bizarre. You seem to revere it as some would a holy text. To hell with the Constitution. And even if I did think highly of the Constitution, what this would have to do with the issue we're discussing, I don't know. If you are suggesting that, because the state in which I was born was founded by people of a particular religious conviction, I should share or defer to that religious conviction - I'm sorry but that is one of the most feeble arguments in support of the religious establishment I have ever heard.

Hero Of College wrote:

You would NEVER diss a Muslim like you just dissed me, for fear of your life.

Of course I would. I do it all the time. I have only known a handful of Muslims personally, but I have never been reticent with them on the topic of religion. Not all Muslims are jihadis, you know. Not only are pagans crusty freaks, but Muslims are habitual murderers. Charming. Tell me - might you be a bit of a Christian chauvinist and bigot?

The idea that critics of Christianity somehow pull punches with other major world religions is irritatingly widespread and completely without basis in fact. And I have only "dissed" you because of the wretchedly poor arguments you have been posting, and the baseless impugnations you sling against pagans who are ingenuously trying to conserve our common heritage. For no other reason, it seems, than that they are pagan. Or not Christian. Your mention of Islam in the title of the thread must then suggests that pagans are somehow "dissing" Christianity by the very act of protecting Tara. That is a mysterious contention, and one which you have failed to justify.

Hero Of College

Sapien wrote: »

Whose "Christian beliefs and mores" exactly? Certainly not mine. Nor these pagans either. I couldn't care less if the Constitution invoked the name of L Ron Hubbard. This is a secular republic and no one's religious convictions are given precedence. The folk tale of Patrick is a blip in the millennia long story of Tara. Just because Christianity happens to be more important to you, to Irish Catholicism and to the authors of the Constitution, it doesn't mean that an alleged stunt by a fifth century Christian missionary gets to trump thousands of years of pre-Christian ritual and politics.

I don't care about your beliefs.;) In the spirt of Democracy, the Constitution takes note of the beliefs and mores of the preponderance of the population at the time it was constructed. Now the beauty of the Constitution is that, unlike hardcore religious dogma {of any persuasion} we can change or have it changed as the majority sees fit. Examples being the Citizenship Referendum and the Abortion Referenda. The Constitution recognises the majority- and sometimes, as we saw with the Divorce referendum, that majority can be damn slim. As soon as your beliefs are in the majority, you can get things changed. Then agai, your mindset seems to revolve around "trumping" and general one-up-manship. It may grind the sh!t out of you, but the modern Constitutional Republic that this Country is draws not on "thousands of years" {like you were there} of Pre-Christian worship but on 1600 years of POST-PAGAN beliefs.

Sapien wrote:

I see. And some rosary rattling old dears would send a better message? I hate to break it to you, Hero, but as religions go, Christianity is no more appealing to the masses than paganism. At least paganism is interesting, new in one sense, ancient in another, vibrant, eccentric and going somewhere. I've no doubt the local pp could muster up a troop of doddering legionnaires to sit in front of the bulldozers while saying decades - but in terms of PR? Please! What quicker way to make conservation of Tara grey, uninteresting and oppressively trite, I cannot imagine. And for what? - a folk tale that isn't even recognised by the Church or believed by any remotely discerning historian.

What makes you think that the vanguard of Christian sentiment is comprised of "rosary rattling old dears". Paganism is "vibrant and exciting"??? I'm sorry, but the image of the Brazilian football team, arm in arm reciting the Our Father in Brazilian before the World Cup Final in 2002 largely kicks the crap out of any crusty inspired mud-caked nonsense that currently goes on in "Pagan New Age" demonstrations. Doddering Legionaries? HA!! I am in a Boxing Club with a half dozen Born Again Christians who wouldn't be too long about, well, converting the current mindset you have about Christians as physically decrepit octagenarians.. Somehow I should think the sight of an extremely fit, attractive well-paid footballer blessing himself and looking to the heavens after each goal {Kaka, Ronaldo, Ronaldinho} largely trumps any of this "hip vibrant" paganism that you speak of. You didn't see Kaka after the European Cup Final last year, did you? He didn't have a T-shirt that said sanything about fairies and druids.:D

Sapien wrote:

And so far, among the only groups to take an active interest in Tara's conservation are pagans. And you condemn them for it. And the Christians who stay at home and turn a blind eye as their elected officials prepare to plough through their heritage - these are the victims in your scenario. You should really think through this again.

I didn't condemn them for it- I criticised the unilateral manner in which they behave.

Sapien wrote:

Is this "distinct Christian nature" simply because of the story of Patrick lighting the bonfire, or is there something more to it? Was there a monastic settlement of some kind of which I am unaware? Any lasting Christian presence? Anything that is more significant that an alleged stunt by a missionary? If not, then I'm very sorry, but Christianity barely makes a dent. It may seem to you that this droplet of Christianity in an ocean of pre-Christian history makes the whole thing a creature of your religion, but that's only because it is your religion, you are being blindly subjective. If you had any objectivity whatsoever, you would have the grace to accept that Tara means at least as much to other people as to yourself, and for different reasons, and that your unique claim to it is jaundiced and paltry. But I'm increasingly getting the impression that access to such perspectives is just a bit beyond you.

Any lasting Christian presence? Well....try this for size: one minute the Country is Pagan, the next its Christian, and the leading light of Europe int he Dark Ages. We don't need to show you some rotten concrete blocks, just have a look at the last Census. I think its a safe bet that the lasting legacy of this "alleged stunt" is a wholesale castin-off of Pagan Beliefs in preference of/for Christianity. Who needs a ruined church when you have wholesale Conversion??

Sapien wrote:

Of course I can. Your esteem for the Constitution is as baffling as it is bizarre. You seem to revere it as some would a holy text. To hell with the Constitution. And even if I did think highly of the Constitution, what this would have to do with the issue we're discussing, I don't know. If you are suggesting that, because the state in which I was born was founded by people of a particular religious conviction, I should share or defer to that religious conviction - I'm sorry but that is one of the most feeble arguments in support of the religious establishment I have ever heard.

Of course I revere it. "To Hell With The Constitution" you say. A document written in 1937 when the world was GOING TO POT.....the single greatest document for Government in this Islands history. I am not asking you to defend a religious conviction, I am merely struck by your inability to see how the Reloigious Persuasion of POST PAGAN Ireland inspired the Constitution, and how the malleability of the Constitution and its inherent content helps to make this Country what it is today. The Constitution guarantees your Rights of Free Association, Speech etc. Not some fairy down the woods under a stone. When your rights are infringed, the Constitution is there to defend you- and it does so IRRESPECTIVE of your religion, sexuality, financial status, gender etc.

Sapien wrote:

Not all Muslims are jihadis, you know. Not only are pagans crusty freaks, but Muslims are habitual murderers. Charming. Tell me - might you be a bit of a Christian chauvinist and bigot?

I never said any of that. But its a safe bet that Muslims are far less patient when their "God" is infringed in some way. Thats all I meant. They do have a tendency to dispense with dialogue a little bit sooner.

Shiminay

It's not a safe bet at all you rascist, you've lost all credibility here so please stop digging. Post reported.

Tabnabs

And there we finally have, the no holes barred fundamentalist rant. :rolleyes::mad:

How long before the Islam forum will get the same treatment? :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: