Religious oppression in Ireland

Peregrinus

recedite wrote: »

I'm struggling unsuccessfully to find an online source for this, but I heard it anecdotally from people who are now dead. Its the kind of thing that tends to disappear from the historical record, people remember what they want to remember. I found this though. All those badges on display at the funeral must have come from somewhere.

In 1947? Europe was awash with souvenired Nazi memorabilia. You could pick them up by the hundredweight.

recedite wrote: »

Of course, nobody alive today is related to any of those swastika-wearing people.
We are all relatives of the heros who fought in the GPO in 1916

Of course!

(Ironically, many of those who surrounded and supported the likes of Goertz really were relatives of those who fought in the GPO. While republicans who couldn't come to terms with the Free State mostly tended left, there was a minority that tended to the right, and that's who Goertz hooked up with on his arrival in Ireland.)

frostyjacks

recedite wrote: »

Nazis were very adept at cultivating nationalist and separatist groups within other countries, and encouraging them to fight their own governments. Notably Croats against Yugoslavia, Ukrainians against Russia, Flemish and Bretons against France and Belgium. Irish republicans were seen as a resource to be used against Britain and/or Ireland; just part of that strategy. A large part of the SS were recruited from such nationalists after occupation. When the war ended, many of the Croat, Flemish and Breton SS men were secretly channelled to Ireland by RC religious orders such as De La Salle. No other European country was safe for them to retire to. One SS guy Albert Folens actually ended up teaching here, and no matter what school you attended in Ireland, you were probably educated through his Folens' publishing company books. Another, Yann Goulet became a reasonably well known sculptor.

That's not really a Nazi strategy; look at how many Irishmen were coerced to fight for Britain in the two world wars.

What's the issue with an educationalist and a sculptor starting new lives in Ireland after the war?

recedite

frostyjacks wrote: »

That's not really a Nazi strategy..

Not exclusively a nazi strategy of course; divide and conquer has always been a successful strategy.

frostyjacks wrote: »

What's the issue with an educationalist and a sculptor starting new lives in Ireland after the war?

No issue, if they had served out their sentence for war crimes.

Albert Folens, who died in 2003 at 86 after founding Ireland's leading academic text-book publisher, was involved in the Gestapo and Waffen SS.
The documentary claims he was a volunteer in the Waffen SS Flemish legion, serving on the eastern front until he was wounded.
After treatment in an SS hospital, he joined the Gestapo and claimed to have worked at its Brussels headquarters as a translator.
His name is said to have appeared on the US army's Central Registry of War Criminals and Security Suspects. Folens always denied any involvement in torture or inhumane treatment.
Arrested by the British Army in Germany, he was sentenced to 10 years after a military trial. But he escaped after 30 months and fled to the Republic on a false passport.

source 1
source 2
says De La Salle facilitated him as he was (or had been?) a seminarian.

Whatever about 1938, it was inexcusable to wear a swastika in 1947, IMO. The photos of the piles of corpses at Belsen had been published and widely circulated. And I don't believe for a minute that those people at the funeral picked up their swastikas in post-war souvenir shops.

Hotblack Desiato

frostyjacks wrote: »

look at how many Irishmen were coerced to fight for Britain in the two world wars.

Every Irish resident who joined up in both world wars was a volunteer. (Look up the WWI 'Conscription Crisis')

Irish residents in Britain, US, Australia etc. (Germany, perhaps?!!) risked being conscripted, but proper order imho. If you are willing to make your home in a country, and don't GTFO the instant war breaks out, it's only fair to be called upon to defend it.

Peregrinus

Nitpick: Britain, etc, only conscripted their own citizens. I don't think Irish citizens risked being conscripted in any of the countries mentioned.

During WWI Irish men risked being conscripted if they resided in Britain. Conversely British men could avoid conscription by residing in Ireland.

Hotblack Desiato

I have heard of Irish citizens post-war having to do national service (UK), or being drafted (US). I can't imagine they were more lenient during WWII.

Actually an Irish-born relative of a friend was drafted in the US and served in Vietnam. I don't know if he had US citizenship but I think he was only over there a few years at the time.

Edit:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conscription_in_the_United_States

The Selective Service (and the draft) in the United States is not limited to citizens. Howard Stringer, for example, was drafted six weeks after arriving from his native Britain in 1965.[102][103] Today, non-citizen males of appropriate age in the United States, who are permanent residents (holders of green cards), seasonal agricultural workers not holding an H-2A Visa, refugees, parolees, asylees, and illegal immigrants, are required to register with the Selective Service System.[104] Refusal to do so is grounds for denial of a future citizenship application.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conscription_in_the_United_Kingdom

By 1942 all male British subjects between 18 and 51 years old and all females 20 to 30 years old resident in Britain were liable to be called up, with some exemptions:
British subjects from outside Britain and the Isle of Man who had lived in the country for less than two years
Northern Ireland
Students
Persons employed by the government of any country of the British Empire except the United Kingdom
Clergy of any denomination
Those who were blind or had mental disorders
Married women
Women who had one or more children 14 years old or younger living with them. This included their own children, legitimate or illegitimate, stepchildren, and adopted children, as long as the child was adopted before 18 December 1941.

I see religion got its usual preferential treatment :rolleyes: even though it's a trade the armed forces have a use for!

Non-British subjects were exempt, but given the migration back and forth between our two islands and the status of Ireland pre-1948 I can imagine many who considered themselves Irish were nonetheless regarded as "British subjects"!

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Peregrinus

Yes, but as Hotblack's quote notes, British subjects from outside Britain were exempt from the draft unless they had lived in Britain for at least two years. "British subjects" at the time included citizens of all Commonwealth countries; there was no separate Australian citizenship, Canadian citizenship, etc until 1948. In practice Irish citizens and other British subjects were not drafted even after the two years was up; they needed a steady supply of migrant workers to take up jobs vacated by called-up Britons, and they were afraid the supply would dry up if there was a perception that non-Britons were liable to be called up.

DarkyHughes

Links234 wrote: »

Censorship of art and expression isn't oppression, you heard it here first folks! :rolleyes:

A Clockwork Orange was an interesting case, because Kubrick himself asked the distributors to withdraw the film after him and his family recieving death threats and protests because it was linked to the murder of a homeless person. But that aside the UK has it's own sordid history of censorship too, the whole "video nasty" scare and the video recordings act, Mary Whitehouse's moral crusade. And before you question the artistic legitamacy of dodgy 80's horror movies, it's still censorship whether you like the thing that's being censored or not.

Don't forget banning Sinn Fein from the airwaves in the late 80's.

Cabaal

I think this is most suited in this thread as it shows just how oppressive and backwards this country was because of the church

http://www.thejournal.ie/readme/the-condom-train-2374718-Oct2015/

T WAS A glorious, mischievous, notorious event. Simply by going on a train journey, a group of brave women made the Catholic Church and the Irish state look ridiculous, and forced the issue of contraception into the public arena for the first time.

On 22 May 1971, 47 women very publicly made that trip, bought contraceptives and confronted the customs men in Connolly Station, demanding that they be either allowed through or arrested.

Of course, either course of action would show the law to be an ass.

Of course things didn't properly change until mid mid 1993 as this happened:

July, 1979 - Health (Family Planning) Act 1979 is enacted under Charles Haughey, Minister for Health. The Act legalises contraception but specifies that contraception, including condoms, are only available on prescription from a doctor and the doctor must be satisfied that the person is seeking the contraceptives for bona fide family planning purposes. This is largely interpreted to mean that only married couples are legally entitled to access contraception.

September, 1983 - Dr Andrew Rynne is fined £500 for selling 10 condoms to a patient. This was the first case to be taken under the (Health) Family Planning Act 1979.

March, 1985 - The Health (Family Planning)(Amendment) Act 1985 is enacted under Barry Desmond, Minister for Health. The Act allows for the sale of condoms and spermicides without a prescription to people aged 18 and over. However, condoms can only be sold in chemists, doctors' surgeries, health boards, family planning clinics and hospitals providing maternity services or treatment for sexually transmitted infections.

May, 1990 - IFPA is convicted by the District Court selling condoms without a license in the Virgin Record Store. A fine of £400 imposed.

February, 1991 - On Valentine's Day, the IFPA appeals against the conviction for the illegal sale of a condoms in a Virgin Megastore in Dublin. A week later Judge Hanrahan rejects the appeal and increases the fine to the maximum under the law of £500 for a first offence. Richard Branson, Millionaire CEO of Virgin Megastores, testifies on behalf of the IFPA. Irish rock band U2 steps in to pay the fine on behalf of the IFPA.

July, 1992 - Jul Health (Family Planning) (Amendment) Act 1992 is enacted. The Act lowers the age at which a person can buy condoms from 18 to 17 without a prescription. Condoms can be sold outside of pharmacies but not in vending machines or areas where young people under 17 are unsupervised.

June, 1993 - Jun Health (Family Planning) (Amendment) Act 1993 is enacted. Condoms are no longer defined as a contraceptive and can therefore be deregulated. This means that there are virtually no restrictions on where condoms can be sold or supplied, including vending machines. The Act also removes any age limit on buying condoms.

A complete joke when you read about the situation now, its actually laughable but it shows a deep level of control that backward thinking fools had in this country for such a long long time.

Some very insightful reading on the subject of sexual health over the years in Ireland 1861 - now
https://www.ifpa.ie/Media-Info/History-of-Sexual-Health-in-Ireland

frostyjacks

Hasn't there been an increase in STIs since the decline of the Church? And this is a good thing how?

kunst nugget

frostyjacks wrote: »

Hasn't there been an increase in STIs since the decline of the Church? And this is a good thing how?

Who said it was a good thing?

We could be more mature as a state, accept that people are having sex and educate people on the risks of STIs by running highly visible public information campaigns about the issue but we seem incapable of doing that. People could point to our prudishness about this issue to the influence of the church on our attitudes to sexuality.

PopePalpatine

frostyjacks wrote: »

Hasn't there been an increase in STIs since the decline of the Church? And this is a good thing how?

Funnily enough, the USA's Bible Belt has the highest STD rates.

Delirium

frostyjacks wrote: »

Hasn't there been an increase in STIs since the decline of the Church? And this is a good thing how?

Who has said that any level of STIs in the population (be it up, down or fixed) is good?

Mark Hamill

frostyjacks wrote: »

Hasn't there been an increase in STIs since the decline of the Church?

Has there?

robindch

frostyjacks wrote: »

Hasn't there been an increase in STIs since the decline of the Church?

There may well have been a decrease in STI's amongst priests.

frostyjacks

Mark Hamill wrote: »

Has there?

Yes, there has. It's only going to get worse the way things are going. I guess that's the price to pay for living in a liberal society.

pauldla

frostyjacks wrote: »

Yes, there has. It's only going to get worse the way things are going. I guess that's the price to pay for living in a liberal society.

Sure it's written in The Book, it's a sign of the coming End of Days. Rejoice! For The Lord will surely be with us again soon.

frostyjacks

pauldla wrote: »

Sure it's written in The Book, it's a sign of the coming End of Days. Rejoice! For The Lord will surely be with us again soon.

I'd prefer to have a religion over an STI.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Delirium

frostyjacks wrote: »

I'd prefer to have a religion over an STI.

the two aren't mutually exclusive.

Links234

frostyjacks wrote: »

I'd prefer to have a religion over an STI.

I don't know if that's a better choice, I mean there's no topical ointment for religion.

pauldla

frostyjacks wrote: »

I'd prefer to have a religion over an STI.

Hadn't realised it was an either/or kinda thing.

Why can't so many religious people be happy with their religion? The signs are of the coming End, when they shall be one with God and enjoy His bliss for all eternity. Shouldn't they be quite content with the Good Lords creation and their place in it? Instead it's a preoccupation with the condition of the genitalia of complete strangers.

pauldla

Delirium wrote: »

the two aren't mutually exclusive.

A&A Quiz Time! What medical condition was once known as The Roman Disease, and why?

:pac:

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

pauldla

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Damn, I am undone. I should have specified 'STI'.

Blame it on the boogie.

The Randy Riverbeast

frostyjacks wrote: »

Yes, there has. It's only going to get worse the way things are going. I guess that's the price to pay for living in a liberal society.

The death rate of "illegitimate" children has lowered. Why is that a bad thing?

Hotblack Desiato

Cabaal wrote: »

I think this is most suited in this thread as it shows just how oppressive and backwards this country was because of the church

http://www.thejournal.ie/readme/the-condom-train-2374718-Oct2015/

Of course things didn't properly change until mid mid 1993 as this happened:

A complete joke when you read about the situation now, its actually laughable but it shows a deep level of control that backward thinking fools had in this country for such a long long time.

Some very insightful reading on the subject of sexual health over the years in Ireland 1861 - now
https://www.ifpa.ie/Media-Info/History-of-Sexual-Health-in-Ireland

They left out one doozy - in 1974 the FG/Lab government attempted to bring in a bill to permit the sale of contraceptives (the Supreme Court had already ruled the ban was unconstitutional.) Taoiseach Liam Cosgrave voted against his own government's bill, and along with the opposition of other defectors and FF it was defeated.

Links234 wrote: »

I don't know if that's a better choice, I mean there's no topical ointment for religion.

"Do you get a burning sensation when you kneel?"

Hotblack Desiato

The Randy Riverbeast wrote: »

The death rate of "illegitimate" children has lowered. Why is that a bad thing?

You don't get it, everything was altogether better in the good old days, everything is getting worse and worse these days. Don't pay any attention to all those liberal statistics like life expectancy, infant mortality, or malnutrution (rife among children in Ireland until at least the 1970s), everything is worse now and the only way for things to get better is for society to subjugate itself to the one true catholic and apostolic church once more. We should be grateful to brother frostyjacks for pointing us to the true path.

Mark Hamill

frostyjacks wrote: »

Yes, there has. It's only going to get worse the way things are going. I guess that's the price to pay for living in a liberal society.

Any proof there has?