Time for complete separation of church and state.

hamonrye

In light of this weeks report is it not time to reform the constitution and for the state to regain control of the school system.

As well as this shouldn't the christian brothers and other such organisations be closed down despite whatever good work they apparently have done. I mean the national socialist party didn't get to continue building the autobahns after WW2.

passive

fastest Godwin's ever...

seamus

Well, this was what I was thinking - shouldn't this be good cause to CPO every church-run school in the country? After all, you wouldn't let a child molestor run a creche because, "Well he's OK, he hasn't touched any kids in 20 years".

If it was me, the "agreement" which Bertie and his cronies ****ed up would have been the handing over (for free) of all church-run schools...

Dinner

seamus wrote: »

After all, you wouldn't let a child molestor run a creche because, "Well he's OK, he hasn't touched any kids in 20 years".

Well unless the schools are seriously considering allowing an offender to work in a school again because he "hasn't touched kids in 20 years", then I don't see the relevence of that point.


Don't get me wrong, I firmly believe in the separation of church and state. But I don't think that the new report should be viewed as a driver for it. What happened was abhorrent. But I'm not convinced that it could happen again, especially on that scale.

seamus

Dinner wrote: »

Well unless the schools are seriously considering allowing an offender to work in a school again because he "hasn't touched kids in 20 years", then I don't see the relevence of that point.

Well, my point being that these kinds of abuses were still going on in public and private schools as late as the late 1980's. Indeed, many of the animals who did the acts directly and the people who then covered up or denied their actions are still in positions of power in these institutions. It's all well and good to apologise for the actions of one's predecessors, but many of the people in these institutions were there, and took part in these actions.

Although the thread's been Godwin'd, it would be like the Nazi party turning around after WWII and going, "Yep, really sorry about that, it was totally out of order, won't happen again. We're still in charge though, right?".

dvpower

passive wrote: »

fastest Godwin's ever...

hamonrye

this report specifically states that the church and the department worked together to cover up the actions of these child abusers. the religious orders run nearly all the primary schools and a good deal of the secondary ones. how they will be still be able to do so after the report is beyond me. the educate together and vec management companies should take them over and the local councils should have some responsibility in running them for once. along with some sort of 1st amendment type of reform brought in. taking care of the blasphemy mess aswell

dvpower

hamonrye wrote: »

this report specifically states that the church and the department worked together to cover up the actions of these child abusers. the religious orders run nearly all the primary schools and a good deal of the secondary ones. how they will be still be able to do so after the report is beyond me. the educate together and vec management companies should take them over and the local councils should have some responsibility in running them for once. along with some sort of 1st amendment type of reform brought in. taking care of the blasphemy mess aswell

I can't for the life of me understand the logic of religious orders running education in this country to the extent that they do. I understand the history that brought us to where we are, but I'm frustrated by the complete lack of movement by various governments in the Celtic Tiger years, where we have invested a lot of resources in education, to tackle the 'problem' of the excessive church input into education.

Proponents often argue that the religious orders provided an education service when the state could not, and i'd give them credit for that (notwithstanding the scandals). But that credit ran out a few decades ago. Unfortunetely reform in this area isn't on the agenda at all.

I'm in favour of freedom of religion so long as we also have freedom from religion. But education, especially at primary level, isn't 'free' from religious indoctrination and tbh, I can't see any action (in this area or any other) following on from the report.

jhegarty

hamonrye wrote: »

As well as this shouldn't the christian brothers and other such organisations be closed down

I don't think you understand the concept of separation of church and state.

mewmoo

Word up dude, you totally have the DL on this situation.

bnt

jhegarty wrote: »

I don't think you understand the concept of separation of church and state.

He did say "as well as this', implying that he's making a separate proposal to his original one.

Someone* once said "never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity". How stupid do you have to be to treat children that way? You'd have to see them as not-quite-human, as "things" to be beaten in to the shape you want, and used in whatever way you desired. To me it raises incredibly important questions about what kind of people go in to the clergy in the first place. I know there are good, smart, dedicated people in the Churches, and I don't mean to tar them all with the same brush, so please don't accuse me of generalisation.

I've never thought about becoming a priest, but from what I read today, it sounds like a lot of work goes in to it: a degree in Philosophy, followed by several years of Theological study, before they'll ordain you. Was this always the case, in Ireland? I assume that the training of a priest includes training in Ethics at some point, about the responsibilities you have towards the health and well-being of your "flock"? I ask this because it sounds like a few imbeciles made it through the process, men who never learned to control themselves like good clergy are supposed to. (Is Onanism a sin, too, and banned? If so, that's a recipe for disaster right there!)

Then there's the matter of other clergy, such as nuns, where there are fewer (if any?) formal qualifications required. It's a cliché, in old books, that the "ugly sister" goes in to a Convent, because she could never hope to marry, and they will take anyone, regardless of their personal history. Again, I don't know how true that is these days; but it only has to be a factor for a tiny minority of nuns, in the past, to explain a few things. How must it feel to know that you will never have children, yet to be charged with looking after or teaching large numbers of children? It must be frustrating in the extreme, and frustration needs an outlet, doesn't it? :mad:


* No, it probably wasn't Napoleon Bonaparte. :cool:

hamonrye

jhegarty wrote: »

I don't think you understand the concept of separation of church and state.

ye that was a side note, but if the state and church were separated it would make it easier to close down these groups. do you think if these were protestant or muslim organisations that they'd still be up and running and teaching children? they have clearly shown their collective dishonesty in the management of these institutions and shouldn't be allowed to continue. but nothing will be done, we'll forget about it in a week and celebrate the church for providing educating becuase the state can't. great country we live in.