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.