When will Ireland have its freedom from the Catholic Church?

dilbert2

Obviously, I'm not referring to people practicing their religion here, or wanting to remain Catholic. No, I'm referring to the continuing grip that the Catholic Church holds on our countrys governments and institutions, particulary in some areas of policy, little more than string puppets for Rome and its backward ideology. When is this country going to be a Republic along the lines of other Republics which took their influence from Enlightenment ideology and philosophies, which were more often quiet adamant in ridding Europe and the West of the tyranny of Catholic authoritarian rule.

Ironically, despite claiming ourselves to be a Republic, much of our government and people have been controlled by this institution since the inception of the state. When are Irish people and the Irish government actually going to release themselves from the grip of Roman Catholic mind control and teachings, and become a republic like say France, whose government and society is based on pluralistic and enlightenment notions of citizenship and personal freedoms, as opposed to much of Ireland were the Church has pretty much ruled the country from behind the scenes like a fiefdom.

TerryTibbs!

72 years and 4 months

mawk

TerryTibbs! wrote: »

72 years and 4 months

Sounds about right. I'll stick it on the calender

ThinkAboutIt

Just because it "controls" other people, doesn't mean it controls you.

You can have your freedom the minute you stop worrying about what other people are doing with their life and worry about your own!

KeithAFC

Reject Rome and that is it.

Mr. Incognito

When the pope $hits in the woods

dilbert2

KeithAFC wrote: »

Reject Rome and that is it.

If I criticise the Roman Catholic Church, it does not mean I am endorsing Protestantism, or some other Christian sect. Far from it, a world without any form of Christianity or Religion would be a borderline utopia to me. It just so happens that the RCC has a lot of sway in Ireland, and has done for a long time. I am coming at this from a secular and atheistic angle, and have no interest in getting involved in silly Catholic-vs-Protestants are right or wrong arguments.

texidub

Some commentators believe it will happen around tea time. I'm more inclined to think it will be after the cows have been milked in the morning. Either way Ireland will definitely be free from the yoke of oppression before lunch and --depending on which part of the country you are in-- after the postman comes.

I hope this helps.

LostCorkGuy

Well the constitution states ireland is a secular state so I don't know why on earth we're being oppressed by the church ?
As for the government being ruled by the church that's rubbish the politicians are doing what will get them re-elected so therefore its not the church its the public opinion !

ICE HOUSE

12/12/2012 AD

Dotrel

When everyone has digital television to tell them what to do, buy, and think.

Brendog

If Norris was elected I'm sured they'd just leave.

Manach

The same French Republic that during their revolution murdered hundreds of thousands of political/catholic opposition which did not agree with them?
This state that is bankrupt and is only being kept going by IMF handouts which is hardly to be blamed on the Church is it? As well, our legal system is now inferior to the EU Laws and our "Sovereign" laws can be overturned by the EU regulations.
The Church, which still has many members in Ireland and worldwide, and provides a firm moral framework which does not bend unlike whatever moral relativism that is the de facto fad of the day.

Galtee

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

When the pope $hits in the woods

If it's a guinness one, I reckon he makes a noise.

Killer Pigeon

KeithAFC wrote: »

Reject Rome and that is it.

Reject the Queen and the Church of Ireland too!!

Galwayguy35

KeithAFC wrote: »

Reject Rome and that is it.

Yeah thats been going on a longtime up your end of the country all right. How did it work out?

I Heart Internet

dilbert2 wrote: »

No, I'm referring to the continuing grip that the Catholic Church holds on our countrys governments and institutions, particulary in some areas of policy,

OP. Please give examples of how, in 2011, the institutional RCC controls any area of government, public policy or institutions against the will of most of their clients. Just so we don't go down a blind-alley here, citizens who happen to be catholic (or not) influencing public policy doesn't count.

Killer Pigeon

In before philologos (a.k.a., Jakkass)

ColeTrain

I Heart Internet wrote: »

OP. Please give examples of how, in 2011, the institutional RCC controls any area of public policy. Just so we don't go down a blind-alley here, citizens who happen to be catholic (or not) influencing public policy doesn't count.

Shutting the boozers on Good Friday :mad:

dilbert2

Manach wrote: »

The Church, which still has many members in Ireland and worldwide, and provides a firm moral framework which does not bend unlike whatever moral relativism that is the de facto fad of the day.

From the same institution that burnt young women as witches for centuries, invaded the Middle East in the name of god and plundered half the place and in more recent times covered up child sex abuse. Yeah, this crowd have so much to teach us 'moral relativists'. :rolleyes:

yutta

The Catholic Church has every right to lobby the Government for change. This is a democracy after all.

KeithAFC

Killer Pigeon wrote: »

Reject the Queen and the Church of Ireland too!!

No. Don't. Please..:pac:

mathepac

Well at least it's not as bad as England where Lizzie is both Head of State and head of the Church of England (Defender of the Faith). Her bishops, as princes of the Church, automatically get seats in the House of Lords where they are free to comment on, review and influence legislation, including legislation effecting their own religion and others.

Until recently the House of Lords was also the ultimate judicial authority where Lizzie's religious Lords could decide on / influence the outcome of secular law cases. This changed when the Supreme Court was established.

yutta

dilbert2 wrote: »

From the same institution that burnt young women as witches for centuries, invaded the Middle East in the name of god and plundered half the place and in more recent times covered up child sex abuse. Yeah, this crowd have so much to teach us 'moral relativists'. :rolleyes:

So how many were killed per year in say, the Crusades, vs. the number killed by atheist regimes in the 20th century? You'll find that the 20th century was by far the bloodiest.

OldGoat

LostCorkGuy wrote: »

Well the constitution states ireland is a secular state so I don't know why on earth we're being oppressed by the church ?
As for the government being ruled by the church that's rubbish the politicians are doing what will get them re-elected so therefore its not the church its the public opinion !

One has to swear to a god to take office.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oath_of_office#Ireland

The Constitution of Ireland specifies, for each of three offices, a "declaration" which the holder must "make and subscribe" before taking office.[19]
Office Declaration: In the presence of Almighty God I, (name), do solemnly and sincerely promise and declare that I will...

President ...maintain the Constitution of Ireland and uphold its laws, that I will fulfil my duties faithfully and conscientiously in accordance with the Constitution and the law, and that I will dedicate my abilities to the service and welfare of the people of Ireland. May God direct and sustain me.

Member of the Council of State ...faithfully and conscientiously fulfil my duties as a member of the Council of State.

Judge ...duly and faithfully and to the best of my knowledge and power execute the office of (office) without fear or favour, affection or ill-will towards any man, and that I will uphold the Constitution and the laws. May God direct and sustain me.

Killer Pigeon

KeithAFC wrote: »

No. Don't. Please..:pac:

The Queen and the Pope ... burn them all!!

I Heart Internet

ColeTrain wrote: »

Shutting the boozers on Good Friday :mad:

And yet, last time I checked, it was government controlled licensing laws. Strange that.

Which bishop, priest, nun, monk, or RCC organisations is preventing government from changing this piece of legislation?

yutta

OldGoat wrote: »

One has to swear to a god to take office.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oath_of_office#Ireland

Taking a figurative oath to a higher power isn't the end of the world for non-believers (they are, after all, non-believers). There's both a historical precedence and constitutional continuity to be mindful of. Endless tinkering with the constitution based on the popular opinion of the day will ultimately render the broad thrust of the constitution to the grave.

Anyway, having to swear an oath before God is pretty serious business for believers and it's better to keep it in the constitution even if only 50% of the population identify with God. Public oaths before God are another layer of protection against evil acts. Should we remove these oaths, we'll be opening the flood-gates.

parrai

Killer Pigeon wrote: »

The Queen and the Pope ... burn them all!!

Wow

Snakeblood

yutta wrote: »

Taking a figurative oath to a higher power isn't the end of the world for non-believers (they are, after all, non-believers).

How do you know that it's not a big deal to nonbelievers?

dilbert2

yutta wrote: »

Taking a figurative oath to a higher power isn't the end of the world for non-believers (they are, after all, non-believers). There's both a historical precedence and constitutional continuity to be mindful of. Endless tinkering with the constitution based on the popular opinion of the day will ultimately render the broad thrust of the constitution to the grave.

Anyway, having to swear an oath before God is pretty serious business for believers and it's better to keep it in the constitution even if only 50% of the population identify with God. Public oaths before God are another layer of protection against evil acts. Should we remove these oaths, we'll be opening the flood-gates.

I believe that an atheist, or simply a non-religionist of any shade should not be forced to take an oath to a god they do not believe in just becuase they want to run for office. Why should they? As an atheist, I take great offence at such a concept.

Doc Ruby

Killer Pigeon wrote: »

The Queen and the Pope ... burn them all!!

What was it yerman said... people will only be free when the last queen has been strangled by the entrails of the last priest...

parrai

dilbert2 wrote: »

I believe that an atheist, or simply a non-religionist of any shade should not be forced to take an oath to a god they do not believe in just becuase they want to run for office. Why should they? As an atheist, I take great offence at such a concept.

Cause they want the money!! it's all about the money.

yutta

dilbert2 wrote: »

I believe that an atheist, or simply a non-religionist of any shade should not be forced to take an oath to a god they do not believe in just becuase they want to run for office. Why should they?

Like I said in my post, the purpose of the public oath is to keep people in line. The public can hold the office-holder to their oath. To simply do away with oaths is to put a crack in the dam of corruption. Better to err on the side of caution.

KeithAFC

dilbert2 wrote: »

I believe that an atheist, or simply a non-religionist of any shade should not be forced to take an oath to a god they do not believe in just becuase they want to run for office. Why should they? As an atheist, I take great offence at such a concept.

Turn the Bible and find Jesus then. Not difficult.

Mike 1972

KeithAFC wrote: »

Reject Rome and that is it.

How are you with Milan ?

I Heart Internet

dilbert2 wrote: »

I believe that an atheist, or simply a non-religionist of any shade should not be forced to take an oath to a god they do not believe in just becuase they want to run for office. Why should they? As an atheist, I take great offence at such a concept.

I see your point. I'd encourage you to lobby your TD, write to newspapers, etc to have the constitution changed to better reflect your point of view. But don't blame the RCC because our constitution doesn't quickly change to reflect your particular, niche, point of view.

petroltimer2

women mostly want to get married in a church and have babies baptised. Until they come to their senses the church will still have power.

Killer Pigeon

Doc Ruby wrote: »

What was it yerman said... people will only be free when the last queen has been strangled by the entrails of the last priest...

Yes. Yerman, the Philosopher, of the Yerman tribe.

ColeTrain

I Heart Internet wrote: »

And yet, last time I checked, it was government controlled licensing laws. Strange that.

Which bishop, priest, nun, monk, or RCC organisations is preventing government from changing this piece of legislation?

No Catholic Church = Pubs open on that day.

Doc Ruby

Killer Pigeon wrote: »

Yes. Yerman, the Philosopher, of the Yerman tribe.

The very fellow...

yutta

ColeTrain wrote: »

No Catholic Church = Pubs open on that day.

Heaven forbid you had to take a day off drinking. I assume you don't have a problem with not drinking the odd Friday?

Anyway, you can always go down to the off-licence and stock up on a Thursday and have a "Good Friday Facebook Party" and invite all your heathen mates over...

I Heart Internet

ColeTrain wrote: »

No Catholic Church = Pubs open on that day.

No Catholic Church = No Catholic Church

No Catholic Church /= Pubs open on that day

Legislators change law = Pubs open on that day

Equals sign /= automatically making your comment more sensible

old hippy

As long as they are indulged, revered and allowed to continue with their nefarious ways, Ireland will never be rid of this pestilence.

Galwayguy35

petroltimer2 wrote: »

women mostly want to get married in a church and have babies baptised. Until they come to their senses the church will still have power.

And they are perfectly entitled to do so if the wish. Get over it.

old hippy

petroltimer2 wrote: »

women mostly want to get married in a church and have babies baptised. Until they come to their senses the church will still have power.

In which circles? In what context?

Less than half my female friends want that. Yeah, some want & do get married (registry or otherwise) and some have babies but not "most", IMHO

OldGoat

yutta wrote: »

Taking a figurative oath to a higher power isn't the end of the world for non-believers (they are, after all, non-believers). There's both a historical precedence and constitutional continuity to be mindful of. Endless tinkering with the constitution based on the popular opinion of the day will ultimately render the broad thrust of the constitution to the grave.

Anyway, having to swear an oath before God is pretty serious business for believers and it's better to keep it in the constitution even if only 50% of the population identify with God. Public oaths before God are another layer of protection against evil acts. Should we remove these oaths, we'll be opening the flood-gates.

Snakeblood wrote: »

How do you know that it's not a big deal to nonbelievers?

Plus 1
You are advocating that the President of the country should start off his role of office with a hypocritical lie to the people of the nation? Just because we profess no religeon dosen't mean that we have no sense of integraty and as such lying under oath is a bit much to ask of anyone.

yutta wrote: »

Like I said in my post, the purpose of the public oath is to keep people in line. The public can hold the office-holder to their oath. To simply do away with oaths is to put a crack in the dam of corruption. Better to err on the side of caution.

I didn't see anyone ask to do away with the oath but I for one would be happy to see a non-secular oath in it's place.

I Heart Internet wrote: »

I see your point. I'd encourage you to lobby your TD, write to newspapers, etc to have the constitution changed to better reflect your point of view. But don't blame the RCC because our constitution doesn't quickly change to reflect your particular, niche, point of view.

Or perhaps have a discussion on it in a public forum?
Niche? Really?

mcmoustache

Killer Pigeon wrote: »

In before philologos (a.k.a., Jakkass)

He's no Catholic.

Piriz

texidub wrote: »

Some commentators believe it will happen around tea time. I'm more inclined to think it will be after the cows have been milked in the morning. Either way Ireland will definitely be free from the yoke of oppression before lunch and --depending on which part of the country you are in-- after the postman comes.

I hope this helps.

nice effort but didn't work unfortunately (for you)

Ellis Dee

Ireland will have its freedom from the Catholic Church (and from many other forms of ignorance) when enough people have copped on to the absurdity of all that sky fairy bumpf and the reality that the church is more concerned about its wealth and power than in tackling things like its big kiddy-fiddling problem. In the meantime - happy that I was able to have my kids raised as atheists abroad and not subjected to the pressure they would have been under in Ireland - I essentially just ignore it and hope I live to see the day we write a new constitution and remove all references to that imaginary entity god from it.:D:D

Ellis Dee

mcmoustache wrote: »

He's no Catholic.

Surf, Daz, Persil --- :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: Different packs, same contents.:)