Accords budget cut by goverment....why are they being given money??

Cabaal

http://www.thejournal.ie/accord-redundancies-1232890-Dec2013/

Catholic marriage service ACCORD to cut staff
ACCORD says the amount of money it has had no choice but to cut staff after the amount of State funding it receives was cut.

CATHOLIC MARRIAGE AGENCY ACCORD says it has had to make staff redundant due to a major reduction in the amount of money it receives from the Government.

Disgusted to hear yet another Catholic organization is receiving money from the government,

Is their a list of the Catholic organizations that are receiving money?

Dave!

Catholic specifically, or religions in general?

Orion

For me Catholic specifically but I'd have no problem expanding that to people who restrict their work only to people who comply with their religious edicts. Accord is a perfect example where staff have been instructed to deny counselling to same sex couples. If they are state funded then they must act equitably but they don't. I'd like to see all state funding pulled from them for this alone. And that's apart from it being illegal - the exemption in the Equal Status Act only applies to schools and hospitals.

Hotblack Desiato

Cabaal wrote: »

Disgusted to hear yet another Catholic organization is receiving money from the government,

There is a wider question here, I heard recently that the majority of 'charitable' income in the country is actually provided by the taxpayer.

Charity is by definition voluntary, if organisation X is inefficient, excessively enriching its executives, promoting bigotry, or anything else objectionable I can choose to not support it (ignoring, for now, the huge issues about lack of transparency and regulation :rolleyes: ). In theory I can satisfy myself as to the bona fides of a charity before deciding to donate.

This disappears when the state is reaching into my pocket to involuntarily make a donation 'for me' using my money :mad:

If a charitable purpose is regarded as vital to society and warranting a large amount of taxpayer funding, e.g. services to the disabled, it should be provided by a state body. It is demeaning to people to have to rely on charity for what they should be getting by right.


Getting back to this case - even given the messed-up way we do things in Ireland that straddle the supposed boundary between church and state, providing funding to an actively discriminatory body is entirely wrong.

Phoebas

Cabaal wrote: »

Is their a list of the Catholic organizations that are receiving money?

Most hospitals and schools.

magicbastarder

ninja900 wrote: »

If a charitable purpose is regarded as vital to society and warranting a large amount of taxpayer funding, e.g. services to the disabled, it should be provided by a state body. It is demeaning to people to have to rely on charity for what they should be getting by right.

this is the way the irish government has been operating for decades though - let an NGO take care of something which should be provided for by a staturory body. which is why they were getting so much funding; i know someone who was working for an NGO which was providing services which should have been delivered by the health service, and if my memory is any good, their grant was reduced from €400k to €50k in the space of a couple of years.

December2012

For most people they are the only kind of marriage counselling that they can afford.

Brian Shanahan

Cabaal wrote: »

Is their a list of the Catholic organizations that are receiving money?

Every single catholic organisation with representation in the country (well maybe not Iona, though I'd be suprised if the govt. weren't shovelling money down their gullets).

December2012 wrote: »

For most people they are the only kind of marriage counselling that they can afford.

Being told how to run a family by a man and woman neither of whom are supposed to have a romantic relationship is the kind of marriage advice that nobody can afford.

December2012

The counselling is not given by priests.

Brian Shanahan

December2012 wrote: »

The counselling is not given by priests.

What, you think a catholic church run organisation is going to let its people do and say things which go against priestly edict? Even if no priest were involved the instructions and what the "counsellors" say and do will be solely at the dictates of unmarried men who don't know squat about love.

And quite a few of my friends who have been married or are soon to be so have been "counselled" by either priests or nuns through the "good offices" of accord.

Nodin

December2012 wrote: »

The counselling is not given by priests.

But does it reflect church doctrine?

Obliq

I've been to accord for marriage counselling (way back in a totally different life, thankfully) and as December 2012 rightly says, it was the only affordable service that was available (in Limerick) at the time. The counselor we saw was a fully accredited psychologist who was highly skilled at her job and didn't mention god once. In fact, I can remember telling them I was an atheist when I phoned to request an appointment, and was told it wasn't a problem.

This is an interesting development though. Heard about it on newstalk last week sometime and apparently the majority of psychologists and counselors who are actually providing the service are now clashing with the catholic organisation they work for:

"The former director of a Catholic marriage advice charity has claimed that the reason for her dismissal was that she wished to extend counselling services to gay, divorced and unmarried couples."

http://eile.ie/2013/10/16/catholic-charity-director-allegedly-fired-for-pro-gay-views/

"The national executive of Accord, the Catholic Church's marriage counselling agency, overruled a motion which would have required it to offer couples sexual counseling to divorced, gay and unmarried people, which would be against Catholic teaching. .....

The issue has emerged as part of a lawsuit taken by former Accord director Ms Ruth Barror, who is claiming she was dismissed unfairly by the organisation.

Counsel for Ms Barror, Sile O'Kelly, told the Employment Appeals Tribunal on Thursday that the motion was the real reason for her dismissal.

Counsel for Accord have denied this claim. "

http://www.ionainstitute.ie/index.php?id=3220

Obliq

Nodin wrote: »

But does it reflect church doctrine?

Yes, it does now. See above ^^ :mad:

Nodin

...there is then the issue of fairness. If the state funds a catholic marriage advisory service (that strictly espouses catholic doctrine) it should (for reasons of fairness and equality) provide funding for those of other religions - Jews, Muslims, Protestants, Orthodox and Buddhists. And secularists.

Obliq

Yeah, it's the same ol', same ol' thing. State perfectly happy to have service provided for it by RCC, as it is off the hook providing affordable service itself. State will find way to procrastinate about RCC discriminating against people (as that is the RCC 'ethos' and within their rights) while carefully and cleverly sidestepping the real issue which is that the state is NOT providing this essential service to everyone equally.

This fired director Ruth Barror who is bringing the case hasn't a prayer :rolleyes:, but it will highlight the problem.

Hotblack Desiato

Obliq wrote: »

This fired director Ruth Barror who is bringing the case hasn't a prayer :rolleyes:, but it will highlight the problem.

That very much remains to be seen, Accord don't (afaik)* have the exceptions in the so-called Equal Status Act that schools, etc. do.


* Actually Orion did mention this in post no.3.

Obliq

ninja900 wrote: »

That very much remains to be seen, Accord don't (afaik)* have the exceptions in the so-called Equal Status Act that schools, etc. do.


* Actually Orion did mention this in post no.3.

Yes, will be interesting alright. Either way, she did a good thing by tabling that motion.


And sorry Orion! Didn't spot you *mentioning* Accord's ban on counselling for gay marriages already!

*actually detailing. Sorry again. Jaysus, can I not read even 4 or 5 lines without losing concentration. Grr. Christmas.

lazybones32

The majority of the Irish population identify themselves as Catholic and people here get uber-offended when the State subsidises a service for Catholic citizens. The State is not promoting the RCC but is helping fund Catholic social services: are the same cries of discrimination shouted for Govt. support of other social services run by interest-groups?
Accord offers marriage counselling from a Catholic perspective; why should they be forced to offer advice that is contrary to their ethos? Are the same standards expected of every organisation or are there different rules and standards for the different agencies providing the same service?

Sheldons Brain

lazybones32 wrote: »

The majority of the Irish population identify themselves as Catholic and people here get uber-offended when the State subsidises a service for Catholic citizens. The State is not promoting the RCC but is helping fund Catholic social services: are the same cries of discrimination shouted for Govt. support of other social services run by interest-groups?

Exactly. The 84% of taxpayers who are Catholic and married wish to support their marriages. If you wish to support your marriage then you go to people who believe in marriage, not those who advise whatever you're having yourself. Other people don't get married etc and they can also be supported by government. The government supports all sort of minorities all the time.

Nodin

Sheldons Brain wrote: »

Exactly. The 84% of taxpayers who are Catholic and married wish to support their marriages. Other people don't get married etc and they can also be supported by government. The government supports all sort of minorities all the time.

.....theres funded advice services for all the various minorities?

Sheldons Brain

.....theres funded advice services for all the various minorities?

I'm pretty sure that any minority that sets up a useful service can have funding according to the number of people involved.

Why not set up a marriage counselling service for people opposed to everything?

the_syco

lazybones32 wrote: »

Accord offers marriage counselling from a Catholic perspective; why should they be forced to offer advice that is contrary to their ethos? Are the same standards expected of every organisation or are there different rules and standards for the different agencies providing the same service?

Accord is funded by the state.
Accord is the company that the state uses to provide marriage counselling.

The state does not, IIRC, provide any other marriage counselling other than Accord.

Thus, if Accord can deny marriage counselling to people selectively, why are they getting money from the State?

the_syco

Sheldons Brain wrote: »

Why not set up a marriage counselling service for people opposed to everything?

I'm pretty certain the RCC opposes pretty much everything.

donegal11

Nodin wrote: »

.....theres funded advice services for all the various minorities?

Set one up and look for funding and then complain, the government didn't set up accord but believe it has a value so funds it.

Sheldons Brain

the_syco wrote: »

I'm pretty certain the RCC opposes pretty much everything.

It is pretty keen on marriage, which is the purpose of the exercise.

Turtwig

donegal11 wrote: »

Set one up and look for funding and then complain, the government didn't set up accord but believe it has a value so funds it.

If an organisation is to receive funding from the state the minimum expectation its citizens should have is that that organisations treats everyone equally. Now, maybe the law allows for the unequal treatment. If it does though then it's silly. People of every religion, race and culture need to be regarded as equals. When you have the state actively funding an organisation that practices otherwise how are you supposed to justify those mixed messages on equality?
Accord may have a value but not to the state. If people want it they should fund it themselves. Not expect the state to fund it and then have it actively discriminate various groups of the population.

lazybones32

the_syco wrote: »

Accord is funded by the state.
Accord is the company that the state uses to provide marriage counselling.

The state does not, IIRC, provide any other marriage counselling other than Accord.

Thus, if Accord can deny marriage counselling to people selectively, why are they getting money from the State?

They are providing Catholic marital support for Catholic citizens. I haven't yet needed counselling but I'm sure they don't identify themselves as a multi-denominational/atheist/secularist marriage-counselling service. If they did, and then refused help, it would be discrimination. No, they identified their mission statement from the beginning...


Do you ask your dentist to diagnose your foot pain?

the_syco

lazybones32 wrote: »

Do you ask your dentist to diagnose your foot pain?

To use your analogy; Does Accord teach maths?

Sheldons Brain

If an organisation is to receive funding from the state the minimum expectation its citizens should have is that that organisations treats everyone equally.

So no women's organisations, travellers organisations, organisations for old people? All of these deal with sub groups of society.

In any case what discrimination has occurred? Divorced, gay and unmarried people are not married and should not be the business of a marriage counselling service. As in the example above this is analogous to asking publicly funded dentists treat your feet. Accord has no more business dealing with such people as teaching maths.

Turtwig

lazybones32 wrote: »

They are providing Catholic marital support for Catholic citizens. I haven't yet needed counselling but I'm sure they don't identify themselves as a multi-denominational/atheist/secularist marriage-counselling service. If they did, and then refused help, it would be discrimination. No, they identified their mission statement from the beginning...


Do you ask your dentist to diagnose your foot pain?

By this logic if the state was funding the KKK who'd idenitfied their mission statement from the beginning that'd be ok. Except it wouldn't because the state should not as a principle be funding any organisation that is actively discriminating a group of the population.

lazybones32

the_syco wrote: »

To use your analogy; Does Accord teach maths?

Yes.

And?...or was that it?