CruelCoin wrote: » I thought we had a new law recently that religion couldn't be used anymore in deciding school places? I'd like to see them removed entirely from schools, but i wouldn't agree that there is no desire.
One eyed Jack wrote: » It’s not, and certainly not in Ireland where religion is one of the cohesive elements in education among both Irish children and their immigrant counterparts (or second and subsequent generation immigrant counterparts). Religion is also a cohesive element in socioeconomic and cultural values among Irish and immigrants for the most part (it hasn’t gone unnoticed), particularly in urban areas where there are concentrations of both extremes - DEIS schools and fee paying schools - both will share the same ethos, but one will have significantly more resources than the other and will have a far better pupil:teacher ratio. That’s not accounting for ET schools (which are a bit of a mixed bag in terms of the socioeconomic backgrounds of their student population), nor is it accounting for schools which are not recognised by the State and therefore receive no State funding (which are again something of a mixed bag between Steiner schools and religious ethos schools) or home school networks which again would share core values and educational standards which must meet a non-defined minimum standard of education for the children, overseen by TUSLA. There are many different demographics which have no desire to participate in a more secular liberal education, France being one of the more extreme examples, but it’s evidenced in Germany and the UK too, and to a lesser degree here in Ireland, precisely because there is no real desire to remove religious influence from our education system. Undoubtedly, the influence of religion presents something of a paradox or conundrum for liberal academics, who all too often choose to do as you have done, and pretend that religion is a completely separate issue in terms of multiculturalism. They’re thinking of multiculturalism on their terms (an abstract ideological concept which they can theorise and quantify and predict with statistical data which suits their ideological and political leanings), and not what multiculturalism actually is in reality - it’s like mixing oil and water for the most part. That’s not to suggest a stable and sustainable multicultural society is an impossible achievement, but in order for the process to work, it’s important to acknowledge and understand all contributing factors rather than simply ignore or discard factors which don’t gel with a liberal understanding of multiculturalism, and soap, lots and lots of soap
RobbieTheRobber wrote: » I would like to go further and for the state to ban religious education in all state funded schools and if the schools wish to continue religious education it can be done as a extra curricular activity after the regular school day has finished.
jmreire wrote: » And by definition, these 4 million down the road,will need how many million to support their pension's? and so on and so on??? I'm not sure how long this model will work for.....especially when you think about how job demographic's are changing with AI etc.
bubblypop wrote: » I would go further and suggest that religious indoctrination take place in their place of worship, alongside whatever type of service they attend.
CruelCoin wrote: » I've always thought that was a double standard people have. Madrassas; bad. Teaching children that if they don't believe 5 fish fed thousands, they're going to hell; Good!
If one is evil indoctrination, then so is the other. That the state would allow this behaviour is abhorrent.
Esho wrote: » My mother wore a headscarf leaving the house when I was young. Same ****, different headscarf here now.
Esho wrote: » Most of the illegals here have been paying tax and are working. I've no problem with this myself. I agree with you that there is a problem where diverse = black from all the types who live on planet zog - like social justice warriors, journalists, politicians and others who are too lazy to think or to spineless to address this issue head on.
RobbieTheRobber wrote: » So in terms of schooling the state has already made progress in removing two major issues affecting immigrants in school places and hopefully creating greater integration opportunities within our communities.
One eyed Jack wrote: » One thing politicians have actually addressed head on is the issue of modern day slavery where employers are exploiting illegal immigrants by not paying them properly for their labour, and avoiding paying employers PRSI, leaving employees in the lurch where they do not qualify for any form of social protection. There are massive problems in the area of what is now called the ‘underground economy’ or ‘shadow economy’ (it’s not referred to as the black economy any more, but it’s the same thing, just by a different name). Both those issues were more of a hassle for Irish parents than they were any sort of a barrier for parents coming from countries where the majority of the population are predominantly Catholic, Protestant or some other minority religious denomination. The language barrier was more of an issue than either of the above, and in schools which are oversubscribed (a minority of schools in urban areas), what was known as ‘the sibling rule’ was a handy way to keep out undesirables, who would then have no issues with enrolment in their local DEIS schools. I know, and therein lies the conundrum I referred to earlier. It’s multiculturalism of course, but on your terms, which aims to up-end Irish society in a way which suits only a tiny minority of people, as opposed to the current education system which appears to be meeting the educational needs at least, of the vast majority of the population, and the vast majority of immigrants who are choosing Ireland as the type of society in which they are choosing to settle and raise their children.
RobbieTheRobber wrote: » I am Irish by birth and by decent I do not want Catholic schools I do not want religious schools I am not alone. Only 78% of respondents stated Catholic as their religion in the 2016 census yet over 90% of our state funded schools are Catholic a further 5 to 6% are other Christian denominations even our non religious patron schools must teach religious education. In the last census over 10% of the population was declared as no religion do we not deserve our fair place in Irish society?
One eyed Jack wrote: » I know, and therein lies the conundrum I referred to earlier. It’s multiculturalism of course, but on your terms, which aims to up-end Irish society in a way which suits only a tiny minority of people, as opposed to the current education system which appears to be meeting the educational needs at least, of the vast majority of the population, and the vast majority of immigrants who are choosing Ireland as the type of society in which they are choosing to settle and raise their children.
Deleted User wrote: » Only if you deal in absolutes, in which case you'd fit in well with both religious groups. And all schools deal in indoctrination, whether they be religious, private or State run. Western religions (and their schools) have changed as a result of changes in society.. Islamic schools change as a result to changes within Islam.. not society. So we see a hardening of views among many Islamic followers, which is imparted to their children. There is also the aspect that with funding coming from certain sources, both Mosques and schools, can have a political (combined with religious) drive behind them. We've seen a softening of Western Christianity (not including the US) over time, where society no longer tolerates the negative behaviors that were associated with the past. That's an important difference.
Deleted User wrote: » You have your fair place. You can go to a State/private school and request that religion not be taught to your children. Whereas my sister is an Atheist (they never go to mass, or engage in any religious activities as a family), but wants her children to experience religion for themselves, so that they can come to their own decisions as to what they believe.. so they go to a religious school. When they finish primary school, the kids themselves will decide whether they continue in a religious school or go elsewhere. The eldest chose the community college (secondary school) which doesn't place any importance on religion, and parents can opt out their kids from any religious related subjects. You want more than a fair place. You want everyone to live under your preferred conditions. ie. no religious schooling.
Esho wrote: » Most of the illegals here have been paying tax and are working. I've no problem with this myself.
One eyed Jack wrote: » They’re thinking of multiculturalism on their terms (an abstract ideological concept which they can theorise and quantify and predict with statistical data which suits their ideological and political leanings), and not what multiculturalism actually is in reality - it’s like mixing oil and water for the most part. That’s not to suggest a stable and sustainable multicultural society is an impossible achievement, but in order for the process to work, it’s important to acknowledge and understand all contributing factors rather than simply ignore or discard factors which don’t gel with a liberal understanding of multiculturalism, and soap, lots and lots of soap
CruelCoin wrote: » I'm sure we can agree that some religions are worse than others, from a liberty and fundamentalism standpoint, no doubt about that. But I don't get what one being worse has to do with the other being bad? That one's worse, so this one is ok?
bubblypop wrote: » I believe this is the wrong way around. The state should provide education without any religious education. If parents wish their children to receive religious education, they should pay for their kids to go to a private religious run school, or go to class at whatever religious service they themselves attend. religion is a private matter and should be kept out of state education facilties.
Deleted User wrote: » No. You missed the point. Western Christianity has been evolving due to social pressure, and the reaction to it's past behavior. The Catholic religion today is not what it was 30 or 40 years ago, either in itself, nor the way it interacts with modern western society. It doesn't have the influence it once did, nor the goodwill that people held towards it. The various scandals, and subsequent drop in popularity for the Church, has ensured that the Church has needed to change with the times, in the hopes of encouraging people back into the fold. This isn't the case of saying that just because Islam is worse, Catholicism is fine. Catholicism, for all it's faults supports western culture and values... Islam doesn't. I have zero issue with Islamic culture being taught in Islamic countries. I do take issue with Islamic culture being taught in Western nations, because I do see it leading to divisions and friction.
RobbieTheRobber wrote: » I'm sorry but both the marriage referendum and the abortion referendum show that Catholicism does not have as much in common with modern Irish culture and values. They were both overwhelmingly supported by the population yet opposed by the catholic church in Ireland.
The fastest growing religious belief in Ireland according to the most recent census is no religion (76.1% increase on 2011 census) how does growth in no religious belief tie in with Catholic values?
Deleted User wrote: » My parents are both devout Catholics. Regular mass attendees, observing all the religious days, and such. They voted wholeheartedly for both the marriage referendum, and abortion. I know the same for a variety of relations, who would also be devout Catholics. Just as I have an uncle who left the priesthood, has since married, and wholeheartedly supports such changes in the laws. You seem to have problems understanding that for many Catholics, there is a difference between the RCC and their actual belief in Catholicism. The days of believing the Church as being the sole link to God, has disappeared long ago.. along with the belief that the RCC presents the best representation of what Jesus/God would have wanted. Many Catholics are able to hold modern views while also being strong believers in their faith. The RCC provides all manner of rules, and expectations... but as time goes by, many Catholics are moving away from that administration.
Deleted User wrote: » The core moral values that are taught by Catholicism are not exclusive to being a believer or an Atheist. Catholic values are intertwined in many of our social/cultural values, and it would difficult to tell where one started and the other finished.
RobbieTheRobber wrote: » On the one hand you say the church is adapting to modern values in Ireland then when I question that you say actually its not the church its people beliefs. So if the church is not adapting and people beliefs are and people aren't attending church what the hell has Catholicism got to do with modern Ireland and why is it given centre stage in our education system and allowed to force indoctrination on over 90% of our schools.
The core moral values of sanctity of marriage and no to homosexuality are very much a part of Catholicism and nothing to do with no religious belief.
Justin Credible Darts wrote: » never understood this mentality that things like morality, compassion , sanctity of marriage etc have to be associated with some moronic imbecilic invisible man in the sky nonsense.
In fact i find some of the most ignorant, least compassionate, dogmatic, oppressing people anywhere are those who believe in santa for adults.
Justin Credible Darts wrote: » I dont believe in god dont believe in religion either and my faith in "man" has never been lower . What irritates me about religious people is they expect people to tolerate their belief in an invisible man, but are quick to knock anyone that questions the existence of this figment of imagination. I don't see atheists or agnostics knocking at my door or posting me begging envelopes. Dont recall any atheist pedo rings covered up, like the catholic church. anyone brainwashing children with this god nonsense and telling them they are born with sin and guilt should be arrested for child abuse.
Dont remember atheists stopping me from buy condoms during the HIV crisis...let that sink in.
Wibbs wrote: » As an aside it wasn't so overwhelming though considered and largely reported as such. Understandably as most of us, at least myself were glad they both passed. IIRC the nays were a little over 30% in one and nearly 40% in the other. A third of the Irish electorate were against. "overwhelmingly supported" would be more like 80% plus. Regardless and more to the point of this thread, quite the number of migrants from outside the EU, if the same votes were restricted to them, I'd bet the farm the results would be quite different. We see this in our neighbour the UK when their Muslim population have been surveyed and attitudes to matters like homosexuality were very much of a deeply conservative nature. Half of British Muslims think that homosexuality itself should be illegal. Many African cultures aren't exactly pro Gay. It's not just along "race" lines either, Russian and some Eastern European cultures aren't exactly San Francisco either. Again how do you integrate those cultural differences and often deeply held ones into our increasingly liberal cultures? And as we see from our European neighbours who have been running this multicultural experiment for generations if anything attitudes have hardened over time, or at least stayed stable while native Europeans changed. There is an awful lot of again wishful thinking that because our Western European liberal culture has become more open and laissez-faire around such topics(in a short timeframe with it) that other cultures will do the same.
Stage 1 Nutfa (Sperm)[9] This is the stage from conception to 40 days since the semen has fertilized the ovum. In this stage, Hanafites permit abortions, the majority of Shafites permit abortions, some Hanbalites permit it, but Malikites do not. Among contemporary Sunni scholars, Yasir Qadhi states that abortion may be performed within the first 40 days of pregnancy "for a very legitimate reason", but is prohibited after that period, at which point ensoulment occurs.[10] Stage 2 Alaqa (Blood Clot) This is the stage 40-80 days after conception when the fertilized egg has become blood clot-like. In this stage, Hanafites permit abortions, while only some Shafites and Hanbalites permit it. Stage 3 Mudgha (Embryo) This is the stage 80-120 days after conception where the blood clot has now formed into flesh. In this stage, Hanafites permit abortions, only some Shafites and Hanbalites permit it. Stage 4 Khalqan Akhar (Spirit) This is the stage 120 days after conception when based on Islam a soul/spirit has entered the body. In this stage none of the four schools of thought permit abortions.
Deleted User wrote: » When was this? I've been able to buy condoms all my adult life, and I'm in my 40s.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w2.vanillicon.com/v2/20f4606d019ca0b240328ff30d91e82b.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w8.vanillicon.com/v2/82b9314ae845d8523534648f9bd7209e.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w6.vanillicon.com/v2/6b0748b4741870baaad828fe92174b3c.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w9.vanillicon.com/v2/9c6ef39403f5dc93bd4b9e77a11c1821.svg)
