Prayers in the Dáil

ZorbaTehZ

If you look at the video on this page at the 1:55 mark a prayer is read out in the Dáil.
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/shatter-attacks-fianna-f%C3%A1il-over-garda-allegations-1.1705214

I had no idea this happened until now, but apparently it has been the tradition for 80 years, a prayer is read out before any session starts. Am I overreacting in saying that this is completely outrageous?

weisses

ZorbaTehZ wrote: »

If you look at the video on this page at the 1:55 mark a prayer is read out in the Dáil.
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/shatter-attacks-fianna-f%C3%A1il-over-garda-allegations-1.1705214

I had no idea this happened until now, but apparently it has been the tradition for 80 years, a prayer is read out before any session starts. Am I overreacting in saying that this is completely outrageous?

I think there are so many more pressing issues regarding politics that you could/should be outrages about.

So my answer would be Yes to your question

Peregrinus

It's been the tradition since the foundation of the state. It was a practice inherited from the UK parliament at Westminster, where it still goes on. It's a practice also followed in many other parliaments throughout the world. The US Senate and the House of Representatives not only have daily prayers; each House has an official chaplain. (How do they reconcile this with a constitutional prohibition on the establishment of religion? I have no idea.)

Is it wrong? Yes. Should it be stopped? Yes, immediately. But is it an outrage? Well, your mileage may vary, but I tend to reserve "outrage" for things like the invasion of Iraq or the Enniskillen bombing.

lazygal

http://touch.boards.ie/thread/2056940176/1/#post84437840

robindch

weisses wrote: »

I think there are so many more pressing issues regarding politics that you could/should be outrages about.

Given that it takes no effort to stop this religious silliness, well, why not?

lazygal

robindch wrote: »

Given that it takes no effort to stop this religious silliness, well, why not?

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/politics/reflective-silence-replaces-seanad-prayer-184806.html

It takes some effort. Although the silence follows the prayer in the Upper House so an Irish solution etc.....

Cabaal

lazygal wrote: »

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/politics/reflective-silence-replaces-seanad-prayer-184806.html

It takes some effort. Although the silence follows the prayer in the Upper House so an Irish solution etc.....

Silence eh?

http://static3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20110727145234/tardis/images/1/13/Silent.jpg

weisses

robindch wrote: »

Given that it takes no effort to stop this religious silliness, well, why not?

Ah well I expect people to respect each other... If they want to pray in the dail I say let them

To much effort is used to try to tackle everything religious ... That is what i label as silliness

Cabaal

weisses wrote: »

Ah well I expect people to respect each other... If they want to pray in the dail I say let them

To much effort is used to try to tackle everything religious ... That is what i label as silliness

and what if tomorrow a group of TD's wanted women TD's to sit in a certain area?

Should we respect that choice/belief as well?

rughdh

weisses wrote: »

Ah well I expect people to respect each other... If they want to pray in the dail I say let them

To much effort is used to try to tackle everything religious ... That is what i label as silliness

I respect the people praying, not the fact that they are praying in the houses of parliament in a secular republic. "Everything religious" can be tackled with little effort. It's simply a matter of not praying before Dail or Seanad sessions.

lazygal

Cabaal wrote: »

and what if tomorrow a group of TD's wanted women TD's to sit in a certain area?

Should we respect that choice/belief as well?

And wanted them to cover their tempting hair while they're at it?

PopePalpatine

Cabaal wrote: »

and what if tomorrow a group of TD's wanted women TD's to sit in a certain area?

Should we respect that choice/belief as well?

I wouldn't be surprised if Ronan Mullen supported that idea. :rolleyes:

Riskymove

Cabaal wrote: »

and what if tomorrow a group of TD's wanted women TD's to sit in a certain area?

Should we respect that choice/belief as well?

I am not bothered about this one way or the other

However imo reading out a prayer does not discriminate against anyone, they can all choose to believe or join in or ignore

if they were all required to recite it or swear in or something like that then that would be different imo

rughdh

ZorbaTehZ wrote: »

If you look at the video on this page at the 1:55 mark a prayer is read out in the Dáil.
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/shatter-attacks-fianna-f%C3%A1il-over-garda-allegations-1.1705214

I had no idea this happened until now, but apparently it has been the tradition for 80 years, a prayer is read out before any session starts. Am I overreacting in saying that this is completely outrageous?

I'd forgotten we still had a Dáil, ZorbaTehZ, because I don't have a telly. It's wrong and should be stopped. Thanks for reminding me. I'll write to my TDs about it. (The prayers, not the Dáil)

old hippy

I wouldn't say it's outrageous, just archaic and outdated.

The Black Oil

PopePalpatine wrote: »

I wouldn't be surprised if Ronan Mullen supported that idea. :rolleyes:

In the Examiner piece lazygal linked to he claimed - “It is Christians who are the most persecuted minority in the world.”

lol

old hippy

The Black Oil wrote: »

In the Examiner piece lazygal linked to he claimed - “It is Christians who are the most persecuted minority in the world.”

lol

In some countries, there is no doubt persecution of Christians. But yeah, not in Ireland. You might as well say white people or homophobic people are the most persecuted :rolleyes::D

Qs

weisses wrote: »

Ah well I expect people to respect each other... If they want to pray in the dail I say let them

To much effort is used to try to tackle everything religious ... That is what i label as silliness

They can pray at home instead of wasting time while they are supposed to be working for us.

Cabaal

Riskymove wrote: »

I am not bothered about this one way or the other

However imo reading out a prayer does not discriminate against anyone, they can all choose to believe or join in or ignore

I find it hard to believe you have no problem with women being designated and forced into a certain area because of other people's religious beliefs.

If reading out a prayer doesn't discriminate then I suppose you have no problem with prayers from other faiths also being added, after all even if there was one or two muslims in the dail the rest can just ignore the prayers for them.

SpaceTime

Here it is :

Oireachtas Website wrote:

Paidir

Iarraimíd Ort, a Thiarna, d'anáil naofa a chur fúinn chun sinn a stiúradh inár ngníomhartha agus neart do ghrásta a bhronnadh orainn chun iad a thabhairt chun críche, ionas gur uaitse a thosófar ár n-uile bhriathar agus ár n-uile ghníomh feasta, agus gur tríot a chríochnófar iad; trí Chríost ár dTiarna.

Prayer

Direct, we beseech Thee, O Lord, our actions by Thy holy inspirations and carry them on by Thy gracious assistance; that every word and work of ours may always begin from Thee, and by Thee be happily ended; through Christ our Lord. Amen.

The above prayer is said at the commencement of each day's business in the Dáil by the Ceann Comhairle, and in the Seanad by the Clerk of the Seanad.

http://www.oireachtas.ie/viewdoc.asp?fn=/documents/a-misc/prayer.htm

.... Democracy or theocracy ??

NB: Note underlined - it's as inclusive as asking atheists and non-Christians to sit in on Mass.

How does that flavour a debate on something that the christian church (especially the Catholic Church) frowns upon e.g. abortion, divorce, gay marriage, compensation of victims of abuse in religious-run institutions, secularising the education system, church-state separation?

To me this just says : Welcome to Ireland's Legislature - Brought to you in association with The Roman Catholic Church and possibly The Church of Ireland.

It would make a lot more sense if the TDs and senators all stood up and swore to do their duty honestly, diligently and in the best interests of the country and the electorate who put them in office!

robindch

weisses wrote: »

Ah well I expect people to respect each other... If they want to pray in the dail I say let them

And if they want to pray in the dail on their own time, then I say let them.

weisses wrote: »

To much effort is used to try to tackle everything religious ... That is what i label as silliness

And avoiding the question is what I label as silliness.

Riskymove

Cabaal wrote: »

I find it hard to believe you have no problem with women being designated and forced into a certain area because of other people's religious beliefs.

well done

If reading out a prayer doesn't discriminate then I suppose you have no problem with prayers from other faiths also being added, after all even if there was one or two muslims in the dail the rest can just ignore the prayers for them.

so now you want to now what theoretical things might theoretically bother me if they theoretically happened?:rolleyes:

I am talking about this prayer which is being read out, apparantly simply because it has been for 80 years. It does not bother me one way or the other.

SpaceTime

To me this is corruption of democracy and it's no different from having any other lobby group installed in parliament.
If this was a requirement to carryout legislation in accordance with the best practises of the institute of property developers and mortgage bankers there'd be uproar.

I have no problem with people having religious view and opinions but you do not install a large, powerful 3rd party lobbying organisation in the middle of your legislature.

Religious groups are completely free to openly lobby like anyone else.
They shouldn't be getting insider status like this.

Riskymove

SpaceTime wrote: »

How does that flavour a debate on something that the christian church (especially the Catholic Church) frowns upon e.g. abortion, divorce, gay marriage, compensation of victims of abuse in religious-run institutions, secularising the education system, church-state separation?

imo what is said in the actual debate would be what counted, I don't beleive this would flavour it at all

It would make a lot more sense if the TDs and senators all stood up and swore to do their duty honestly, diligently and in the best interests of the country and the electorate who put them in office!

it would

SpaceTime

Riskymove wrote: »

imo what is said in the actual debate would be what counted, I don't beleive this would flavour it at all

Hmm.. you don't think the Catholic Church (or at least its associated lobbyists) had a tiny weeny influence on Irish social policy over the years?

Little things like being unable to buy condoms in Ireland form 1935 until 1978 and then with extremely huge levels of restrictions until 1992 !!!?!

Our first divorce happened in 1997...

Homosexuality effectively completely illegal until the state was sued into decriminalising it in the European Court of Human rights.

I'm sorry, but that may be your opinion but it does not appear to be reflected in fact and reality or historical evidence.

Yes, many TDs (particularly the liberal ones) may just see it as some kind of irrelevant anachronism but, it still serves a purpose to chill debate an set an agenda.

It would be hugely naive to think that this wasn't inserted as a deliberate attempt to ensure heavy church oversight of public policy and to make TDs and senators aware that they were firmly under the church's thumb and watchful gaze!

It's 'corporatism' - i.e. where powerful interests are inserted directly into the running of state bodies. Quite a common feature of fascist states oddly enough e.g. Franco's regime in Spain and Mussolini's Italy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatism

Sadly, Ireland had a lot of features of that kind of governance until rather recently.

We're still fond of "neo-corporatism" as a means of governance where we bring in various interests to set social and economic policy i.e. the social partnership model - a handpicked group of what are effectively lobbying interests come in and hammer out a deal with the government on broad ranging pay, economic and social issues.

Some people see it as a good thing, others would see it as fundamentally undermining the very basis of democracy and the usefulness of an elected legislature.

I just think Ireland has an unhealthy relationship with corporatism and with outsourcing social policy where possible.

I prefer the idea that the Dail and Seanad actually do what they're paid and elected to do - draw up legislation and where lobbyists are allowed to lobby in a normal transparent way.

Time and time again, corporatist tendencies in Irish government systems have crashed the economy and caused major social problems yet, we still don't seem to be able to take a cold hard look at the system and see this is just totally screwed up and is leading to insider dealing and corruption.

weisses

Cabaal wrote: »

and what if tomorrow a group of TD's wanted women TD's to sit in a certain area?

Should we respect that choice/belief as well?

What has that to do with the OP ?

Riskymove

SpaceTime wrote: »

Hmm.. you don't think the Catholic Church (or at least its associated lobbyists) had a tiny weeny influence on Irish social policy over the years?

No I said I dont think this prayer has any influence

also..there have been people of other (and no) religions in the Dail and I doubt this prayer influenced them either

as I say i dont care one way or the other

SpaceTime

Riskymove wrote: »

No I said I dont think this prayer has any influence

also..there have been people of other (and no) religions in the Dail and I doubt this prayer influenced them either

as I say i dont care one way or the other

Well, to me it's just symptomatic of Church-State corporatism. The whole country is riddled with it.

I don't think this kind of actual serious discussion about how our country functions ever really gets much air time or journalistic interest at all. We tend to just accept what is a deeply flawed system in many ways.

weisses

Qs wrote: »

They can pray at home instead of wasting time while they are supposed to be working for us.

They are wasting to much time anyway claiming this to be time wasting is a bit pedantic imo

I think its more a case of the anti religious brigade finding something to complain about again

lazygal

Riskymove wrote: »

No I said I dont think this prayer has any influence

also..there have been people of other (and no) religions in the Dail and I doubt this prayer influenced them either

as I say i dont care one way or the other

If no one's influenced by it why do we need it?

Riskymove

lazygal wrote: »

If no one's influenced by it why do we need it?

who said we needed it?

old hippy

weisses wrote: »

They are wasting to much time anyway claiming this to be time wasting is a bit pedantic imo

I think its more a case of the anti religious brigade finding something to complain about again

Not anti religious, just see it as having no place in a house of parliament.

lazygal

Riskymove wrote: »

who said we needed it?

Why is it there at all?

SpaceTime

I actually think this is an issue that goes beyond just secularism and atheism and all of those things. Our country has huge problems because we put powerful external 3rd parties into policy formation without proper democratic oversight or transparency.

Simple as that and we just keep doing it over and over.

It doesn't matter if it's the church, the banks, the charitable sector, the trade unions. None of them should be setting policy any more than the posters on this board should! We can all lobby, but we shouldn't be getting special, privileged access.

I don't think people even understand that it's a problem, yet we just keep repeating the same errors. Watch as we go head first into some new banking crisis or social scandal that all stems from this.

weisses

robindch wrote: »

And if they want to pray in the dail on their own time, then I say let them.And avoiding the question is what I label as silliness.

I answered by letting people respect each other i thought

Claiming from the word go that i am avoiding the question .... really ? why the hostility ?

weisses

old hippy wrote: »

Not anti religious, just see it as having no place in a house of parliament.

If it would have affect on their decisions I would agree with you.

What are we talking about ... 1 or 2 minutes ?

Think people should be more worried about the time spend at the Bar

Riskymove

SpaceTime wrote: »

I actually think this is an issue that goes beyond just secularism and atheism and all of those things. Our country has huge problems because we put powerful external 3rd parties into policy formation without proper democratic oversight or transparency.

Simple as that and we just keep doing it over and over.

It doesn't matter if it's the church, the banks, the charitable sector, the trade unions. None of them should be setting policy any more than the posters on this board should! We can all lobby, but we shouldn't be getting special, privileged access.

I don't think people even understand that it's a problem, yet we just keep repeating the same errors. Watch as we go head first into some new banking crisis or social scandal that all stems from this.

wow maybe this prayer has a lot of power after all

old hippy

weisses wrote: »

If it would have affect on their decisions I would agree with you.

What are we talking about ... 1 or 2 minutes ?

Think people should be more worried about the time spend at the Bar

Oh, that as well. I'm such a killjoy...

lazygal

weisses wrote: »

If it would have affect on their decisions I would agree with you.

What are we talking about ... 1 or 2 minutes ?

Think people should be more worried about the time spend at the Bar

The symbolism of the prayer is that the Irish parliament is legislating with a supernatural, specifically christian, deity in mind. Does that suggest that it doesn't bother with laws that may not reflect christian doctrine? Or that the views and beliefs of non christians do not need to be considered? If the prayer referred to Allah, or Zeus, or Freemasonry, would that be ok?

Riskymove

lazygal wrote: »

The symbolism of the prayer

I accept that it symbolises such things for some people but I simply believe it to be a symbol of the country 80 years ago.

I do not believe it means anything today..as said..we have TDs of other and no religions in the Dail.

They could keep it or drop it or replace it with some more appropriate sentiment....it wouldn't change a thing in how the Dail operates...imo

robindch

weisses wrote: »

I answered by letting people respect each other i thought

Saying prayers isn't respecting atheists, is it?

weisses

lazygal wrote: »

The symbolism of the prayer is that the Irish parliament is legislating with a supernatural, specifically christian, deity in mind. Does that suggest that it doesn't bother with laws that may not reflect christian doctrine?

You must consider that people in parliament hold religious beliefs ... a moment of silence or a prayer in the Dail doesn't change that. You wouldn't seriously belief that removing this would change much regarding legislation and the working of parliament ?

lazygal wrote: »

Or that the views and beliefs of non christians do not need to be considered? If the prayer referred to Allah, or Zeus, or Freemasonry, would that be ok?

If you can come up with beliefs of non Christians that are not catered for please share them

weisses

robindch wrote: »

Saying prayers isn't respecting atheists, is it?

Taking offense from someone praying is more short sighted then being religious imo.

I am non religious but have no problem if people take some time to say a prayer as is shown in the OP.

A bit of courtesy wouldn't harm no one.

robindch

weisses wrote: »

Taking offense from someone praying is more short sighted then being religious imo.

Uh, why? If I was in the Dail, I wouldn't want to listen to some twit reeling off a load of religious prose. And if I were as sensitive about sitting through the wrong kind of religion as religious people often are, then I might even get upset about it.

Why not keep the dail for legislating? And the churchs for praying? That's what each of them are for, unless I'm missing something.

Riskymove

robindch wrote: »

Uh, why? If I was in the Dail, I wouldn't want to listen to some twit reeling off a load of religious prose.

I'd rather hear prayers than some of the stuff TDs come out with it

weisses

robindch wrote: »

Uh, why? If I was in the Dail, I wouldn't want to listen to some twit reeling off a load of religious prose. And if I were as sensitive about sitting through the wrong kind of religion as religious people often are, then I might even get upset about it.

If this kind of anger and short sighted views means your a proper atheist i think i'll pass for the privilege

robindch wrote: »

Why not keep the dail for legislating? And the churchs for praying? That's what each of them are for, unless I'm missing something.

When the prayers are having an effect on the Dail and legislation i would wholeheartedly agree with you

SpaceTime

This is what annoys me about Ireland.

The "ah sure it's grand and sure we can never change it and sure isn't that just Ireland begorah" type attitude.

We're very radical when it comes to things like not being British but when it comes down to fixing many of the fundamental flaws in how we do things in terms of governance nothing happens and the status quo prevails forever.

Having prayers in the legislature of a country that calls itself a republic is just wrong on many levels.
It's establishing a de facto state religion (actually explicitly outlawed in the constitution btw, despite the preamble) and it's symbolic of inserting interest groups directly into positions of power without ever having to be answerable to the people.

Riskymove wrote: »

wow maybe this prayer has a lot of power after all

It's not the prayer, it's the message that it sends out that "we are the establishment and you better bloody well recognise that!" is where the power comes from.

The ironic thing is that we probably carried some of this stuff over from the British system in the sense that the Houses of Parliament in England are incredibly religious to the level of having the Church of England Bishops sitting as the "Lords Spiritual" sitting in the House of Lords!

The whole idea of becoming a Republic was surely to get away from all this medieval claptrap ?

The UK doesn't claim to be a republic, it's a constitutional monarchy with an established church. We set the bar very high by calling ourselves a republic and claiming to have republican values then we just ignore all of them and carry on with the old ways taken from a monarchy.

robindch

Riskymove wrote: »

I'd rather hear prayers than some of the stuff TDs come out with it

weisses wrote: »

If this kind of anger and short sighted views means your a proper atheist i think i'll pass for the privilege
When the prayers are having an effect on the Dail and legislation i would wholeheartedly agree with you

Ah, sure that's grand then.

Great discussion there lads.

Points addressed head-on, like real men.

//sheesh

lazygal

robindch wrote: »

Ah, sure that's grand then.

Great discussion there lads.

Points addressed head-on, like real men.

//sheesh

Ah now They might be wimminz.

weisses

lazygal wrote: »

Ah now They might be wimminz.

Looks down





Nope

robindch

lazygal wrote: »

Ah now They might be wimminz.

I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest they're both men.