Varadkar accuses the left of "wanting to turn religious people into pariahs"

Graces7

looksee wrote: »

I think you know perfectly well that this is not relevant to the discussion.

Religious people can do all these things, the problem arises when they have the right to do them within their own terms of reference and ignoring whether the non-religious wish to be cared for, educated etc on those terms.

I have little enthusiasm for religious beliefs. I do accept that they play a valuable role for some people in coping with their life, certainly they should be able to pursue their beliefs. It is absolute nonsense to talk about making people into pariahs simply because of their beliefs. I don't have a great deal of enthusiasm for football, or fashion either but I do believe people are entitled to dedicate their lives to these interests, if they wish.

However if those beliefs impinge on my life, and if the government chooses to allow and even sponsor this then I do have the right to protest.



If an individual feels that they have been personally rejected because other people do not fall in with their beliefs and demands, then so be it; that is a matter of maturity and social awareness on the individual's part.

That is not what faith ie religion is about!!! REALLY! Living a faith is a way of life that can be challenging, not a kind of... pacifier!

McMurphy

Leo believes in the separation of church and state....

So it's safe to assume the state won't be saddling the cost of the upcoming Papal visit, which I think I read somewhere was to cost (the state) 20 million?

HappyAsLarE

People often underestimate the importance of religious teachings in our society.

Sacrifice your son, recognise that sacrifice is often necessary. Don’t seek immediate gratification.

Carry your cross, it is your responsibility to pull your own weight.

Rise from the dead. Know that even in the depths of pain and torture you can reinvent yourself and come through.

Eat the fruit from the tree and become self aware of your nakedness. Be cautious about indulging in expedience.

Yeah you can all say “oh but I don’t need all those made up stories to be a good person”. Well the world needs them. We don’t know a world without them.

If you don’t believe in God then you don’t know what God is.

Wanderer78

HappyAsLarE wrote:

If you don’t believe in God then you don’t know what God is.

I don't believe in God, and I've been told I'm a very moral person by believers, so I dunno

HappyAsLarE

Wanderer78 wrote: »

I don't believe in God, and I've been told I'm a very moral person by believers, so I dunno

No doubt you are. Belief in a supernatural God and morality are mutually exclusive.

My point was that the importance of religious teachings (see above examples) can and do pave our moral paths.

conorhal

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Varadkar is trying (badly) to appeal to both sides here. I'm surprised you're surprised OP.. One thing Leo has proven surely is that he HAS no real convictions - he'll go with whatever he thinks will get him the best media coverage and likes on social media :rolleyes:

The guy is so populist and weak that I half think he confused FG with FF when he signed up. In some ways he's worse than Enda who may have been arrogant and out of touch (and similarly all about himself and his 'legacy'), but who rightly or (generally) wrongly, usually stuck by whatever position he'd take on an issue.

No doubt this sudden defence of ‘traditional values’, right out of nowhere, is little more than a PR press release from his expensive Dept of Spin, which is probably telling him FG have lost a few points due to the repeal the 8th referendum, so he needs to make a quick speech from the parish steps to stop the rural conservative voters from grumbling.


It's grotesque how cynical, amoral and utterly devoid of principles politicians are. Sure they've always been that way to a certian degree, but never to this degree.
“Those are my principles, and if you don't like them...well I have others.”- Groucho Marx

bloodless_coup

Why always the FG hate?

FF **** the country, FG recover it, FG get blamed for everything, FF voted back in, rinse and repeat.

Franz Von Peppercorn

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Varadkar is trying (badly) to appeal to both sides here. I'm surprised you're surprised OP.. One thing Leo has proven surely is that he HAS no real convictions - he'll go with whatever he thinks will get him the best media coverage and likes on social media :rolleyes:

The guy is so populist and weak that I half think he confused FG with FF when he signed up. In some ways he's worse than Enda who may have been arrogant and out of touch (and similarly all about himself and his 'legacy'), but who rightly or (generally) wrongly, usually stuck by whatever position he'd take on an issue.

I think he actually made a strong statement here which clearly annoyed one side more than the other.

Wanderer78

HappyAsLarE wrote:

My point was that the importance of religious teachings (see above examples) can and do pave our moral paths.

It's a very good point, I do realise the importance of religion in society, and the positives it has brought, we spend a lot of time, possibly too much, focusing on the negative aspects of it, which almost ignores the positives. Religion will probably always exist on this planet, and we must respect those that believe, as it has brought positive aspects to our planet and our species.

Wanderer78

doylefe wrote:

FF **** the country, FG recover it, FG get blamed for everything, FF voted back in, rinse and repeat.

Unfortunately we re stuck for the moment, as there's no clear alternatives, and we re probably not the only ones in the western world

HappyAsLarE

Wanderer78 wrote: »

It's a very good point, I do realise the importance of religion in society, and the positives it has brought, we spend a lot of time, possibly too much, focusing on the negative aspects of it, which almost ignores the positives. Religion will probably always exist on this planet, and we must respect those that believe, as it has brought positive aspects to our planet and our species.

It even goes beyond that. Religion is the collective consciousness of humanity. It has naturally evolved and been selected as our way of teaching things over millennia.

If you don’t believe in it then you are probably misunderstanding what it is. Most priests don’t understand what religion is FFS.

Wanderer78

HappyAsLarE wrote:

It even goes beyond that. Religion is the collective consciousness of humanity. It has naturally evolved and been selected as our way of teaching things over millennia.

Ah no, I'd disagree to a point, religion is just a method of understanding ourselves and our environment, and it has done a fine job of it to, but it's important to remember, it is just that, i.e. a method, i.e. there are other methods, and we must find common ground, and respect each others methods

HappyAsLarE

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Ah no, I'd disagree to a point, religion is just a method of understanding ourselves and our environment, and it has done a fine job of it to, but it's important to remember, it is just that, i.e. a method, i.e. there are other methods, and we must find common ground, and respect each others methods

What are the other methods?

stimpson

HappyAsLarE wrote: »

People often underestimate the importance of religious teachings in our society.

Sacrifice your son, recognise that sacrifice is often necessary. Don’t seek immediate gratification.

Carry your cross, it is your responsibility to pull your own weight.

Rise from the dead. Know that even in the depths of pain and torture you can reinvent yourself and come through.

Eat the fruit from the tree and become self aware of your nakedness. Be cautious about indulging in expedience.

Yeah you can all say “oh but I don’t need all those made up stories to be a good person”. Well the world needs them. We don’t know a world without them.

If you don’t believe in God then you don’t know what God is.

My favourite was:

Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's

Even Jesus was a secularist.

markodaly

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Anything less than a complete and total segregation between religions institution and public services represents a fundamental compromising of separation between church and state.

There is a separation of church and state in the USA, however, there are still religious schools and religious providers of health care.

What the left is saying is that religious organisations - churches, orders, etc - should have literally no input (absolutely none whatsoever) into any aspect of Irish life outside their own doors.

Do you extend the same rules to all other organisations? Charities, Unions, political parties, business organisations or lobby groups?

What you are proposing is that any group who have a religious ethos be hounded out of public life. It's a form or tyranny actually.

Wanderer78

HappyAsLarE wrote: »

What are the other methods?

the scientific method, maybe?

markodaly

Deleted User wrote: »

Yet another sign of that shift of "mainstream" Irish political opinion to the right.

....two weeks after we repeal the 8th amendment.
Yeap, we are so right wing these days.

Franz Von Peppercorn

stimpson wrote: »

My favourite was:

Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's

Even Jesus was a secularist.

Not clear that that wasn’t a play on words. The Sanhedrin were trying to trap him to say it was God’s coin (as everything belongs to God) thus committing treason, or it was Caesar’s coin thus committing heresy.

He actually said neither. He didn’t say the coin was Caesar’s coin. He just said that Caesar was on it, and we should render to Caesar what was Caesar’s. The two seem related but in fact a religious member of the audience wouldn’t have caught him out as a heretic and the Romans heard it as we hear it.

Clever chap.

Grayson

HappyAsLarE wrote: »

It even goes beyond that. Religion is the collective consciousness of humanity. It has naturally evolved and been selected as our way of teaching things over millennia.

If you don’t believe in it then you are probably misunderstanding what it is. Most priests don’t understand what religion is FFS.

You're looking at it from a Hegelian perspective and I kinda agree. Religion became more sophisticated over the ages. We started off worshiping the sun and moon, then onto anthropomorphized deities like Zeus and Mars. Eventually we end up with more abstract concepts like the christian God.

But I do think science is far better at teaching.

suicide_circus

An unprincipled spoofer.

I don't believe he believes a word out of his own mouth.

markodaly

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Leo believes in the separation of church and state....

So it's safe to assume the state won't be saddling the cost of the upcoming Papal visit, which I think I read somewhere was to cost (the state) 20 million?

The Pope is a head of state and will be given the same courtesy as every other head of state.

We heard the same ol'****e from redneck republicans about the Queen's visit, even though it reaped in extra millions in tourism euros.

Wanderer78

markodaly wrote: »

We heard the same ol'****e from redneck republicans about the Queen's visit, even though it reaped in extra millions in tourism euros.

...and potentially helping to heal old wounds, created by past divisions

Red_Wake

I wonder would the same pack of **** giving out about Leo have any issue with government funding of Islamic, Church of Ireland, Jewish, etc schools?

Seems to always be the Catholic Church that gets the target painted on its arse.

Franz Von Peppercorn

It’s amazing that people here are accusing him of having no principles and straddling the fence. His statement was pretty clear and far from fence straddling it has enraged some people.

As someone who not only is atheist but comes from an atheist family, and who agrees with getting the church out of the institutions, his position on the attitude towards religion is standard western liberalism. Old school liberalism. Not the modern anti speech kind.

Religion can’t be relegated to the private sphere entirely, as religions are private civic organisations and religious people vote.

Grayson

Wanderer78 wrote: »

It's a very good point, I do realise the importance of religion in society, and the positives it has brought, we spend a lot of time, possibly too much, focusing on the negative aspects of it, which almost ignores the positives. Religion will probably always exist on this planet, and we must respect those that believe, as it has brought positive aspects to our planet and our species.

We must be tolerant, within limits. I have no problem with people believing any codswallop they want but it should remain within the private sphere.

Part of me thinks it that public preaching and conversions should be banned. A religion is based completely on faith and has no actual proof of it's veracity. Some "religions" like scientology actually look for vulnerable people to get them involved. I'd place religion in the same category as homeopathy and astrology.

Gravelly

The title would be more accurate if it was "the left want to turn some religious people into pariahs"

If your religion promotes the subjugation of women, the killing of infidels, and the spread of your beliefs by violence, then the left, far from turning you into a pariah, will defend your beliefs, and will attack anyone who questions them, and will aid you in the spread of those beliefs.

Zebra3

Hard to believe there’s people out there who would have an issue with the RC Church.

All they’ve done is facilitate widespread rape and molestation of young children, terrorise society with their threats so the state would give into their demands, as well as con people with their rubbish about “God” and hell.

Why would people want a criminal organisation like that marginalised from the state?

Franz Von Peppercorn

Grayson wrote: »

We must be tolerant, within limits. I have no problem with people believing any codswallop they want but it should remain within the private sphere.

Part of me thinks it that public preaching and conversions should be banned. A religion is based completely on faith and has no actual proof of it's veracity. Some "religions" like scientology actually look for vulnerable people to get them involved. I'd place religion in the same category as homeopathy and astrology.

Or gender studies.

If you want to ban non scientific speech there would be a lot if bannings.

looksee

Graces7 wrote: »

That is not what faith ie religion is about!!! REALLY! Living a faith is a way of life that can be challenging, not a kind of... pacifier!

And in accepting that challenge, people find peace in themselves. Accepting the challenge is a personal decision though, it is not something that is 'required' of everyone. You have to believe that the challenge should be accepted, if you do not believe it then you have no obligation.

tl/dr just because you believe something does not make it fact.

Grayson

markodaly wrote: »

There is a separation of church and state in the USA, however, there are still religious schools and religious providers of health care.





Do you extend the same rules to all other organisations? Charities, Unions, political parties, business organisations or lobby groups?

What you are proposing is that any group who have a religious ethos be hounded out of public life. It's a form or tyranny actually.

yes, let's all learn from the US when it comes to education.....

Religious schools can exist, however they should be privately funded. The government should not be funding a the teaching of a religion as a fact. Sure, have a class that teaches about religions but we shouldn't be actively supporting the teaching of a religion.