Sex Tips from the Bishops for Teenagers

techdiver

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I support alternatives for parents in education.

Your comments don't back up that statement. You can wrap up your statements in any fashion you want but you are not willing to upset the status quo in order for equality of access to education for non religious people. If that is your position then that is fine, but at least own it.

Your solution for parents in my position is to shut up and be grateful the church will educate my children (funded for by all tax payers) or give up work and home school them. That is not a viable choice no matter how many times you say so. You shouldn't have to take a stand or protest to have adequate access to non religious schools be an option for all. It should be the default position that there is the access and availability for school places for every child without religious involvement if they so want. That is 100% not the case at the moment, no matter how many times you quote the constitution.

I know that is a pipe dream but at the very least there should be a divestiture as there is no way we require 90%+ school places being religious in this country.

techdiver

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

I think it is just as stomach churning that horrible mistakes and culture (defined by the few) define the many.
Plus the population of Ireland was also complicite in those mistakes because they went along with it.

It currently means that the many decent hard working people involved in that religious institution are all tarred with the same brush. Such as in the post above.

They are tarred with the same brush because the organisation still doesn't take ownership of the horrific atrocities of their past.

Constant obstructions of investigations, resistance of outside oversight, failure to pay redress as they should have and are bailed out by the state. They approach these things in the very opposite way that their religion preaches.

Leg End Reject

Graces7 wrote: »

Maybe have a look at exactly what was said about this?

rte news on April 26th. as per education council " "sex gift from God"

( Cannot post links),,

All is as the various authorities, secular as well as clerical, have approved; including the clear message that any child can be withdrawn from any part of the teaching.

So no problems in reality. No obligation to participate

The problem is that all children should receive factual sex education - understand their own bodies, how the menstrual cycle works and the fertile stage, respect for a partner, waiting until ready to have sex, safe sex including knowledge of STIs and preventing pregnancy etc. without the inclusion of religion.

There shouldn't be an opt out option, all children and teenagers need to know this, it could be a gradual approach over all the years they spend in school. Ideally it would be covered at home of course, but many parents do not have the knowledge themselves, are reluctant to do it, or some just don't care.

Pandiculation

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

I think it is just as stomach churning that horrible mistakes and culture (defined by the few) define the many.
Plus the population of Ireland was also complicite in those mistakes because they went along with it.

It currently means that the many decent hard working people involved in that religious institution are all tarred with the same brush. Such as in the post above.

I don't agree. Institutions fail and can be corrupt, rotten and completely dysfunctional.

People need to start having a backbone about some of this. I wasn't religious, but was baptised and because I couldn't reconcile my world view and the Catholic Church's stance on a vast array of things, as well as not being very religious, I opted to formally defect from the church and I do not tick boxes on censuses saying I'm Catholic, nor do I use Catholic Church ceremonies for anything.

We have a tendency to try to paper over the failures of an organisation by narrowing in on a handful of people. The reality is the institution itself is completely dysfunctional and behaved abysmally.

If we just keep on going 'ah but there are nice people' it will never be resolved. The nice people need to hold it to account properly or it will just consume itself in its own toxicity and that is exactly what has happened to it.

As for the population of Ireland, governments changed, laws changed, people were held to account. The state renews, refreshes and is governed by different people with different policies, answerable to democracy. The church simply is not. It's a private organisation (or a collective of private organisations) with its own rules and agendas that's accountable to nobody but itself in many respects. It has even been granted basically state status through the Vatican, but has no electorate or democracy. It has mostly dodged the issue again and again and again.

Acosta

Even leaving aside for a minute why anyone would want to expose their children to an institution who's members caused so much suffering to thousands of children, and for the most part got away with it, I just think it's ridiculous that kids are indoctrinated into the church in the first place.

People tend to live until they're 80 + these days. If someone wants to become spiritual they can decide for themselves in their own time.

techdiver

Acosta wrote: »

Even leaving aside for a minute why anyone would want to expose their children to an institution who's members caused so much suffering to thousands of children, and for the most part got away with it, I just think it's ridiculous that kids are indoctrinated into the church in the first place.

People tend to live until they're 80 + these days. If someone wants to become spiritual they can decide for themselves in their own time.

Couldn't agree more. How many "believers" would there be if it wasn't drilled into them as children. The Church knows this and is why their number one target is children as their organisation would die otherwise.

Pandiculation

techdiver wrote: »

Couldn't agree more. How many "believers" would there be if it wasn't drilled into them as children. The Church knows this and is why their number one target is children as their organisation would die otherwise.

I was talking to an older relative of mine who grew up in Dublin and she was telling me about how a priest barged into their house in the 1940s to lecture my grandmother and her brother about why they didn't go to mass. He was shown the door fairly aggressively and thrown out, but it just shows the kind of bizarre place it was in those days.

They were quite non-religious, which was unusual in those days, but the pressure to conform was not just some kind of opt-in thing. There was huge level of coercion and control and it was literally 'beaten into you' at school by all counts I've ever heard.

I know my relatives all talk about how they were regularly down on their knees praying, reciting catechism under pain of severe punishment for getting it wrong and being threatened by some nun with a big stick if they made a wrong move.

It wasn't a normal public school system, it was a state endorsed, compulsory attendance indoctrination service and I think there's still a large cohort out there who are very much either suffering from Stockholm Syndrome or were successfully brainwashed.

One eyed Jack

techdiver wrote: »

Your comments don't back up that statement. You can wrap up your statements in any fashion you want but you are not willing to upset the status quo in order for equality of access to education for non religious people. If that is your position then that is fine, but at least own it.

That’s not my position, so I won’t be owning it any time soon. You can wrap up my statements in any fashion you want, but what I’m not willing to do is entertain anti-theists who continue to support a theistic education model for their children while complaining that they have no choice but to do so. As I pointed out - it is those parents who are willing to maintain the status quo because they view any alternatives as just not viable in their circumstances.

techdiver wrote: »

Your solution for parents in my position is to shut up and be grateful the church will educate my children (funded for by all tax payers) or give up work and home school them. That is not a viable choice no matter how many times you say so. You shouldn't have to take a stand or protest to have adequate access to non religious schools be an option for all. It should be the default position that there is the access and availability for school places for every child without religious involvement if they so want. That is 100% not the case at the moment, no matter how many times you quote the constitution.

No, that’s not my solution, nor does it even come close to anything I’ve suggested because frankly I don’t care for your personal circumstances (and neither does the Dept. of Education). What I do care about, is establishing and supporting a diverse range of patron bodies in the Irish education system in order to give parents more choice in how they choose to educate their children. That’s not going to happen without protest in some form, and gaining popular support for the idea as opposed to just shutting up and putting up with the status quo because it’s more convenient than the alternative which you dismiss as not viable. The reason I quote the constitution is in regards to the fact that parents are not obligated by the State to enrol their children in schools which are inconsistent with their values or world views. It’s in response to people who say they have no choice but to do so. They have a choice, and I can understand the difficulty they have in weighing up their priorities in terms of their principles, or their children’s education.

techdiver wrote: »

I know that is a pipe dream but at the very least there should be a divestiture as there is no way we require 90%+ school places being religious in this country.

It’s not a pipe dream, it’s just unfortunately ridiculously slow and bogged down in all manner of bureaucratic and legal wrangling between all the stakeholders involved in the Irish education system. Rather than waiting on divestment which is unlikely to make a dint in that 90% figure, dilution through the establishment and support of alternative forms of education is IMO a far more productive endeavour which is far more supported than the idea of removing human rights established in law or denying parents who want any particular type of education for their children.

Acosta

Acosta wrote: »

Even leaving aside for a minute why anyone would want to expose their children to an institution who's members caused so much suffering to thousands of children, and for the most part got away with it, I just think it's ridiculous that kids are indoctrinated into the church in the first place.

People tend to live until they're 80 + these days. If someone wants to become spiritual they can decide for themselves in their own time.

As usual with internet commentary I can’t really tell if this is common belief or not. Communion seems as popular as ever. And confirmation too.

I’d ban both.

Here’s a list of over subscribed schools.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/news/education/schools-in-south-dublin-among-the-most-oversubscribed-in-the-country-1.4370786%3fmode=amp

There are some over subscribed ET schools so there’s some indication of unfulfilled demand there. Also, and never mentioned on this thread, there’s an oversubscribed COI school.

So my guess the school demand works like this.

1) Catholics who want a Catholic education.
2) Protestants who want a COI education.
3) Cultural versions of the above. They want to continue with the ceremonies.
4) Atheists, agnostics, cultural catholics, cultural protestants, and even other religious types who want the best school. Could be ET. Could be Catholic. Whatever. With the option of getting out of religious classes.
5) People hostile to religion who would prefer a fully secularised school, for themselves and everybody.

3) and 4) probably the majority.

We do need more ET schools though.

KevRossi

KevRossi wrote: »

Favouritism shown openly to those from a certain part of town and discrimmination to those from the 'wrong' side of town. A sex abusing teacher, now in prison, was protected for years by the priests that ran it and by some other teachers.

Not very Catholic.

That's pretty much par for the course in the vast majority of Catholic schools, unfortunately. One could argue that it is Very Catholic.

Hoboo wrote: »

If a village is 10% catholic and not 90% as per the register they don't have a mandate.

I have zero sympathy.

But those figures only exist because it was made impossible to leave. If the census says 90% catholic, then the real figure is way down below that. You cannot count people who don't want to be counted as being on your side, then use that as a stick with which to beat down the opposition.

95% of Boards users agree with this statement. Therefore its now true.

Geuze wrote: »

I don't know about other churches, but the Catholic church isn't anti-science.

The RCC believes we were made from a rib, that the entire world was created in less than a week and that the main man came back from the dead. That's as Anti-science as you can be, I'm afraid.

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

Plus the population of Ireland was also complicite in those mistakes because they went along with it.

Lol....."it's your fault for putting up with it, the wifebeater said to his bloodied spouse"

GTFO of here with that nonsense.

Choochtown

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

I think it is just as stomach churning that horrible mistakes and culture (defined by the few) define the many.
Plus the population of Ireland was also complicite in those mistakes because they went along with it.

It currently means that the many decent hard working people involved in that religious institution are all tarred with the same brush. Such as in the post above.

Absolute nonsense. If any right-minded person worked for an organisation that protected child sex-abusers they would leave that organisation as soon as it became apparent.
By continuing to collect money for that very organisation every priest continues to give tacit approval to it.

This is not petty theft we are talking about here. These are the most horrific crimes imaginable.

The "population was complicit" line was invented by the church to attempt to use good old-fashioned catholic guilt to control their "flock". It's sickening how many people have fallen for it.

Purple Mountain

The thread title is a bit misleading

optogirl

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

And to add to that some of the educate together schools are really badly run

Some schools, ET or not, are badly run. Being an ET has f-all to do with it

techdiver

One eyed Jack wrote: »

No, that’s not my solution, nor does it even come close to anything I’ve suggested because frankly I don’t care for your personal circumstances (and neither does the Dept. of Education).

How Christian of you. Not unlike the Catholic Church though.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

What I do care about, is establishing and supporting a diverse range of patron bodies in the Irish education system in order to give parents more choice in how they choose to educate their children. That’s not going to happen without protest in some form, and gaining popular support for the idea as opposed to just shutting up and putting up with the status quo because it’s more convenient than the alternative which you dismiss as not viable. The reason I quote the constitution is in regards to the fact that parents are not obligated by the State to enrol their children in schools which are inconsistent with their values or world views. It’s in response to people who say they have no choice but to do so. They have a choice, and I can understand the difficulty they have in weighing up their priorities in terms of their principles, or their children’s education.

There you go again. What is this choice you talk of? I'm not talking in theoretical terms. I'm talking real tangible terms. If you accept that 90%+ of the school places are faith based, where is the alternative for the rest? The numbers don't compute. If you believe 90% of the population all want catholic education then you are deluded.

You come across as having a "Let them eat cake" attitude.

StupidLikeAFox

If I ever have a band I'm gonna call it Bishops for Teenagers, and the first single is gonna be Sex Tips

One eyed Jack

techdiver wrote: »

How Christian of you. Not unlike the Catholic Church though.

What has not wanting to know anyone’s personal circumstances got to do with either being Christian or Catholic? I’m more concerned with policies relating to education rather than individuals particular circumstances. It’s not just your personal circumstances I don’t care about, so don’t take it personally.

techdiver wrote: »

There you go again. What is this choice you talk of? I'm not talking in theoretical terms. I'm talking real tangible terms. If you accept that 90%+ of the school places are faith based, where is the alternative for the rest? The numbers don't compute. If you believe 90% of the population all want catholic education then you are deluded.

You come across as having a "Let them eat cake" attitude.

In real tangible terms, the choice is to enrol their children in schools which are inconsistent with their values and world views, or not. I don’t believe that 90% of the population want Catholic education, I don’t think even 90% of Catholics want Catholic education, but they too appear to want people to believe they have no choice in the matter. I only know that if I didn’t want to enrol my child in a school which was inconsistent with my values and world view, I wouldn’t. It’s why I didn’t enrol my child in the more convenient ET school, not because it’s not a great school, it’s a very good school, but I simply do not share the values of the ET philosophy.

That doesn’t mean I wouldn’t contribute financially when they were seeking local funding and support to establish a secondary school in the area. Far from let them eat cake, I’d rather the choice was there for parents who wanted to avail of it in supporting the values and world views their children are taught at home and within their own communities.

techdiver

One eyed Jack wrote: »

What has not wanting to know anyone’s personal circumstances got to do with either being Christian or Catholic? I’m more concerned with policies relating to education rather than individuals particular circumstances. It’s not just your personal circumstances I don’t care about, so don’t take it personally.





In real tangible terms, the choice is to enrol their children in schools which are inconsistent with their values and world views, or not. I don’t believe that 90% of the population want Catholic education, I don’t think even 90% of Catholics want Catholic education, but they too appear to want people to believe they have no choice in the matter. I only know that if I didn’t want to enrol my child in a school which was inconsistent with my values and world view, I wouldn’t. It’s why I didn’t enrol my child in the more convenient ET school, not because it’s not a great school, it’s a very good school, but I simply do not share the values of the ET philosophy.

That doesn’t mean I wouldn’t contribute financially when they were seeking local funding and support to establish a secondary school in the area. Far from let them eat cake, I’d rather the choice was there for parents who wanted to avail of it in supporting the values and world views their children are taught at home and within their own communities.

So no viable alterative choice so. Thank you.

One eyed Jack

techdiver wrote: »

So no viable alterative choice so. Thank you.

The viable alternative choice when you don’t want to do something is to say “No thank you”, and what you do after that is pretty much your own business (with the caveat of course that the State mandates that all children receive a minimum standard of education). I wouldn’t presume to tell you your business, that’s just rude.

BingCrosbee

landofthetree wrote: »

Dont send your kids to a Catholic school if you dont like it.

Only for the Catholic Church we wouldn’t be the articulate educated people we are. They were there from the very start and their role in our history in this aspect must be commended.

eviltwin

BingCrosbee wrote: »

Only for the Catholic Church we wouldn’t be the articulate educated people we are. They were there from the very start and their role in our history in this aspect must be commended.

Some of us paid a very high price for that

Odhinn

BingCrosbee wrote: »

Only for the Catholic Church we wouldn’t be the articulate educated people we are. They were there from the very start and their role in our history in this aspect must be commended.

You think they acted out of altruism?

SupaCat95

listermint wrote: »

I went to a tech. The local Brothers school was full of erm.. how to put it scumbags. The notion that there was a higher quality of education in there is gas. You are deluded btw. And obviously have strong skin in the game. I suspect you might also subscribe to the teachings of our good friend senator Mullen.

I went to the Tech too. It is a breeding ground for educational apathy. The only reason you went to the Tech was because you couldnt into an "A" grade class in town or your parents couldnt afford the bus fare into town. Guess which group I was in. Some teachers were good and other were far below the minimum bar (ie watching the calendar and other watching the clock for retirement). I dont blame the teachers, plenty of the kids were degenerates brought up with no respect for education. Soft money building and working in the Glass factory will do that. I wanted to go to the De Le Salle and was accepted. Sending your child to a Tech is a cop out of formal education.

Hoof Hearted2

BingCrosbee wrote: »

Only for the Catholic Church we wouldn’t be the articulate educated people we are. They were there from the very start and their role in our history in this aspect must be commended.

Only for the catholic church we wouldn't now be attempting to unravel and clean up the mess that was created by them during their reign, which thankfully now is in coming to an end.

One eyed Jack

One eyed Jack wrote: »

The viable alternative choice when you don’t want to do something is to say “No thank you”, and what you do after that is pretty much your own business (with the caveat of course that the State mandates that all children receive a minimum standard of education). I wouldn’t presume to tell you your business, that’s just rude.

LOL.... Are you for real?

"People have to go to Catholic schools, there's no other choice!
They do have a choice
Oh, yeah, what choice do they have?
They can choose to not go to Catholic schools"

Are you for real?

One eyed Jack

[Deleted User] wrote: »

LOL.... Are you for real?

"People have to go to Catholic schools, there's no other choice!
They do have a choice
Oh, yeah, what choice do they have?
They can choose to not go to Catholic schools"

Are you for real?

Are you talking about parents, or their children here?

Mad_maxx

Odhinn wrote: »

You think they acted out of altruism?

probably not the institution itself but there were many individual selfless people ( both priests and nuns etc ) who dedicated their lives to educating people

Mad_maxx

SupaCat95 wrote: »

I went to the Tech too. It is a breeding ground for educational apathy. The only reason you went to the Tech was because you couldnt into an "A" grade class in town or your parents couldnt afford the bus fare into town. Guess which group I was in. Some teachers were good and other were far below the minimum bar (ie watching the calendar and other watching the clock for retirement). I dont blame the teachers, plenty of the kids were degenerates brought up with no respect for education. Soft money building and working in the Glass factory will do that. I wanted to go to the De Le Salle and was accepted. Sending your child to a Tech is a cop out of formal education.

i went to a community school ( began in 1990 ) , always thought a " tech " was more geared towards preparing people for trades ?

i may be entirely wrong on that but if im right ? , i dont see much wrong with a more practical minded school ?, techs were on the way out by the time i started secondary

Guy:Incognito

landofthetree wrote: »

Why are Catholic schools so popular at a time of increased secularisation?
Opinion: Academic strength, a sense of community and strength of purpose are just some of the reasons behind their ongoing popularity with parents

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/education/why-are-catholic-schools-so-popular-at-a-time-of-increased-secularisation-1.3777895?mode=sample&auth-failed=1&pw-origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishtimes.com%2Fnews%2Feducation%2Fwhy-are-catholic-schools-so-popular-at-a-time-of-increased-secularisation-1.3777895

unless non denominational schools are empty then "popular" is a relative term.


Why is the only pub in the village the one everyone drinks in? I guess its a mystery we'll never figure out.

Guy:Incognito

Geuze wrote: »

Historians widely accept the historical figure of Jesus.

The white guy in the middle east? Or is the church wrong?

Overheal

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

The white guy in the middle east? Or is the church wrong?

Neither. Republican Jesus.