Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Sex Tips from the Bishops for Teenagers
Options
Comments
-
I have great trust in the young people growing up today. They see the Roman organisation for what it is and with sideline it appropriately.
What are they doing in the Hyacinth House?
0 -
Cluedo Monopoly wrote: »I have great trust in the young people growing up today. They see the Roman organisation for what it is and with sideline it appropriately.
Until they have children of their own, and then it appears their children’s education takes priority over their principles, maintaining the dominance of the Roman organisation in education, precisely because they see it for what it is, and they see the alternatives for what they are too.0 -
One eyed Jack wrote: »Until they have children of their own, and then it appears their children’s education takes priority over their principles, maintaining the dominance of the Roman organisation in education, precisely because they see it for what it is, and they see the alternatives for what they are too.
I suppose we can all rest easy in our beds knowing the church in Ireland is thriving with all these young minds being educated according to its ethos. Let's ignore the reality that tells us that young people and older people don't really believe in the catholic way. Recent changes would make that quite clear.0 -
Would people be happy with this sort of stuff being taught to their kids?
This is one book here "The Lauras" that is recommended for Irish Teenagers to read in their classroom contains:
''several scenes of physical violence, drug-use and scenes set in Strip clubs and Drag clubs, where the minor in the story lets an adult “dress me like a doll”. Every chapter is infused with references to sexual acts or sexual thoughts and apart from the undisguised theme of the joys of Lesbianism, and the promotion of the non-necessity of being assigned a certain gender, other than the one you choose, has no other obvious theme or redeeming merit for the classroom.
On pages 56 - 60 there is a graphically described scene, in which a minor is subjected to oral sex in a car by an older man, and decides afterwards she rather enjoyed the experience.This scene is explicit, describes in detail, the man’s penis (“dick”) and what he expects the girl to do with it, what she does to it with her mouth and tongue, what it felt/tasted like etc. etc.''
Another book on the Junior cycle: The book of lost things
''describes horrifc scenes of bondage and torture and promotes bestiality example -
The huntress, an adult,kisses her victim, a minor, on the lips and exposes herself to him, totally naked, as she chains him to the table and falls asleep on a pallet beside him.
Bloody, torn flesh and graphic gore and violence, combined with sexual scenes, make up a substantial part of this book. David, a minor, is even unwittingly lured into a sexual scenario involving his mother/step-mother.
In chapter XXIX “a bedchamber contained a naked woman and a naked man and the Crooked man would bring children to them…..and the man and the woman would whisper things to them in the darkness of their chamber, telling them things that children should not know, dark tales of what adults did together in the depths of the night….”0 -
0
-
Advertisement
-
Would people be happy with this sort of stuff being taught to their kids?
This is one book here "The Lauras" that is recommended for Irish Teenagers to read in their classroom contains:
''several scenes of physical violence, drug-use and scenes set in Strip clubs and Drag clubs, where the minor in the story lets an adult “dress me like a doll”. Every chapter is infused with references to sexual acts or sexual thoughts and apart from the undisguised theme of the joys of Lesbianism, and the promotion of the non-necessity of being assigned a certain gender, other than the one you choose, has no other obvious theme or redeeming merit for the classroom.
On pages 56 - 60 there is a graphically described scene, in which a minor is subjected to oral sex in a car by an older man, and decides afterwards she rather enjoyed the experience.This scene is explicit, describes in detail, the man’s penis (“dick”) and what he expects the girl to do with it, what she does to it with her mouth and tongue, what it felt/tasted like etc. etc.''
Another book on the Junior cycle: The book of lost things
''describes horrifc scenes of bondage and torture and promotes bestiality example -
The huntress, an adult,kisses her victim, a minor, on the lips and exposes herself to him, totally naked, as she chains him to the table and falls asleep on a pallet beside him.
Bloody, torn flesh and graphic gore and violence, combined with sexual scenes, make up a substantial part of this book. David, a minor, is even unwittingly lured into a sexual scenario involving his mother/step-mother.
In chapter XXIX “a bedchamber contained a naked woman and a naked man and the Crooked man would bring children to them…..and the man and the woman would whisper things to them in the darkness of their chamber, telling them things that children should not know, dark tales of what adults did together in the depths of the night….”
Would any teacher stand up in front of a class of teenagers didiscussing that.
Not when I was a teenager anyway, there'd be more laughter than in a comedy club.0 -
I can't believe there's not a thread about this already, it seems like an absolute creamy shcreamer of a topic.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/education/new-catholic-primary-school-sex-education-programme-published-1.4547221
Who better to teach our children that being gay isn't bad, but it's not recommended either.
Oh and puberty is a gift from God. Just like the ceovid, he gave us pimples, absolutely raging hormones and NRBs.
"Ever since I discovered that my god given male member was going to give me no peace, I decided to give it no rest in return" - Christopher Hitches.
Probably more practical advice than anything the bishop's have come up with ha.0 -
I suppose we can all rest easy in our beds knowing the church in Ireland is thriving with all these young minds being educated according to its ethos. Let's ignore the reality that tells us that young people and older people don't really believe in the catholic way. Recent changes would make that quite clear.
Let’s also not ignore the reality that it’s precisely because of young minds having been educated according to the Catholic ethos, is the reason why many of them as adults are completely opposed to it for future generations. I mean, the Catholic Bishops have done a bang up job of turning people off Catholicism! They’ve been doing it since the 70’s when the Irish electorate voted by a two-thirds majority in favour of removing the special consideration given to the Catholic Church in our Constitution, without even looking at recent changes.
The changes that are necessary are the ones anyone with any interest in the provision of alternatives to Catholic education should be looking at pursuing, as opposed to maintaining traditional education for their children because they haven’t done too badly for themselves from it themselves. It’s one thing to proclaim that the education system in Ireland should change, it’s another thing to galvanise any popular support for the idea which requires people making an effort to take the less convenient alternative for their children’s education sake.0 -
Nothing shocking about this thread, only shocking thing is that some posters appear shocked.
A Catholic school devises a Catholic sex ed programme based on Catholic teachings.
Shock horror!
--
--
I am not a practising Catholic myself, in fact I would consider myself an atheist.
But if these are the beliefs of the Catholic religion. Either follow it or don't. Plenty of other religions you can opt for for a child.
Or failing that the child can opt out of religion/sex ed in the school altogether if the parent does not agree with it.
Plus the parent can teach their child themselves if they so wish.
Problem solved - next.
Plus we all well know that many people pick Catholic schools to have their child educated in.
Simply because it normally has high quality levels of education. Even if the parents do not believe in all/some/many of the teachings of the Catholic church.
People seem to want their cake and eat it can't have it both ways. It is almost akin to Britain's approach to the EU. Cherry Picking all the 'nice bits' of a Catholic education while either been non believer/non practising.Guff about stuff, and stuff about guff.
0 -
One eyed Jack wrote: »It’s not semantics, it’s fact - we don’t pay for education.
The fact is that the choice does exist - send your children to a school who’s ethos you don’t share, or don’t. Parents can’t be forced to, as though they have no choice. The State only requires that children receive a minimum standard of education.
You keep saying this as if it is fact when it is not.
In my town for instance school admission is based on Siblings, then catchment area etc. The only ET school is on the other side of town and every other school is faith based. Ergo, no choice.
Just because there is an notional mention of choice in the constitution does not make it so in reality and people who state such are just interested in maintaining the status quo.
Also, back on topic, why is something like sex education the being defined by Bishops when other tenets of education have no interference such as history, geography etc? It's a very convenient way of another form of indoctrination. Teaching a science and civics based subject within the realm of faith is wrong both morally and scientifically. By all means tech religion class about fair tales all you like but don't let that interfere with important subjects.0 -
Advertisement
-
Cilldara_2000 wrote: »Fantastic that Galileo Galilei is the first result there. A man whose theories were denounced as heretical and his books banned by the church.
Old school cancel culture.
I was taught science by a Christian brother. Evolution and biology. He was the only religious in the school.
If you are worried about anti scientific thought creeping into the education system I’d look elsewhere.0 -
One eyed Jack wrote: »Let’s also not ignore the reality that it’s precisely because of young minds having been educated according to the Catholic ethos, is the reason why many of them as adults are completely opposed to it for future generations. I mean, the Catholic Bishops have done a bang up job of turning people off Catholicism! They’ve been doing it since the 70’s when the Irish electorate voted by a two-thirds majority in favour of removing the special consideration given to the Catholic Church in our Constitution, without even looking at recent changes.
The changes that are necessary are the ones anyone with any interest in the provision of alternatives to Catholic education should be looking at pursuing, as opposed to maintaining traditional education for their children because they haven’t done too badly for themselves from it themselves. It’s one thing to proclaim that the education system in Ireland should change, it’s another thing to galvanise any popular support for the idea which requires people making an effort to take the less convenient alternative for their children’s education sake.
I don't think the RCC has done much to endear itself and its way of life to a younger audience but you have to look at how the shrinking of the world thanks to travel and tv and the internet has opened minds up to other ways of life. Growing up I believed for years the everyone was a catholic or at least believed in God and those who didn't were presented as uneducated and primitive and something to be pitied or just plain bad. We know different now and we ain't going back to the blind ignorance that allowed the church to thrive.
I don't think their role in education is as insidious as some think, maybe we look at our own childhood and think nothing has changed but it has. Young minds are only impressionable to a point and as Mariaalice said its the impact of parenting that is more important long term. If catholic education was so good at producing good catholics we wouldn't be having this discussion.0 -
You keep saying this as if it is fact when it is not.
In my town for instance school admission is based on Siblings, then catchment area etc. The only ET school is on the other side of town and every other school is faith based. Ergo, no choice.
Just because there is an notional mention of choice in the constitution does not make it so in reality and people who state such are just interested in maintaining the status quo.
Also, back on topic, why is something like sex education the being defined by Bishops when other tenets of education have no interference such as history, geography etc? It's a very convenient way of another form of indoctrination. Teaching a science and civics based subject within the realm of faith is wrong both morally and scientifically. By all means tech religion class about fair tales all you like but don't let that interfere with important subjects.
How big is your town? Do they restrict places to catchment areas?0 -
You keep saying this as if it is fact when it is not.
In my town for instance school admission is based on Siblings, then catchment area etc. The only ET school is on the other side of town and every other school is faith based. Ergo, no choice.
Just because there is an notional mention of choice in the constitution does not make it so in reality and people who state such are just interested in maintaining the status quo.
Also, back on topic, why is something like sex education the being defined by Bishops when other tenets of education have no interference such as history, geography etc? It's a very convenient way of another form of indoctrination. Teaching a science and civics based subject within the realm of faith is wrong both morally and scientifically. By all means tech religion class about fair tales all you like but don't let that interfere with important subjects.
When I was in a primary Catholic school in Dublin there were various children who could 'opt out' of subjects. One was born and raised in the USA and moved to the school in 5th class. She was exempt from Irish class.
There was another two kids who were brought up in the Muslim faith so they were exempt from taking religion.
In answer to your question why is sex education being defined by the Bishops?
The answer is in the article.
Ethos of the school and sex education are entwined. The Catholic teaching is that sex is for procreation and part of loving marriage between a man and woman.
Simple as that.Guff about stuff, and stuff about guff.
0 -
[Deleted User] wrote: »How big is your town? Do they restrict places to catchment areas?
Large Midlands Town. 20,000+ population. Yes admissions policy is by catchment area. So unless they are under subscribed there are no places outside your catchment.0 -
Let's not forget what happened when the state set up non-catholic schools via the Vocational Education Act.
The catholic church had such power that they only agreed to allow it if these new schools were 2nd class schools. It was inscribed in law that no student attending a non-catholic secondary school could complete their leaving certificate thereby rendering these schools as lesser schools than the catholic-run schools.
Even today in some Irish towns that may have 2 secondary schools the catholic school is referred to as the secondary school and the non-catholic school (run by the local ETB) is referred to as "the tech".0 -
Cilldara_2000 wrote: »Fantastic that Galileo Galilei is the first result there. A man whose theories were denounced as heretical and his books banned by the church.
Ok but can you please add dates of all that! as in early 1600s
It has of course been set right. And there was as you know a lot more to that event than you say. wikipaedia will help you!0 -
Is it not stomach-churningly sick that nearly 90% of our primary school children attend institutions run by an organisation that routinely enabled child sex-abusers?0
-
You keep saying this as if it is fact when it is not.
In my town for instance school admission is based on Siblings, then catchment area etc. The only ET school is on the other side of town and every other school is faith based. Ergo, no choice.
Just because there is an notional mention of choice in the constitution does not make it so in reality and people who state such are just interested in maintaining the status quo.
No, it’s not “ergo, no choice” or just the notional mention of choice in the constitution. The fact is that the State allows parents to choose whether or not to enrol their children in school of any description, or not, and take it upon themselves to educate their own children in their values and so on, while at the same time the State mandates that all children receive a minimum standard of education. It’s up to parents themselves to prioritise what is most important to them in terms of their children’s education.
That’s why I have great admiration for those parents who do have the courage of their convictions and make sure their children are receiving an education which is consistent with their values as opposed to having no time for parents enrolling their children in schools which are not consistent with their world views or values, and complaining about it at the same time as though they have no choice in the matter. The reason I point out the inconsistency is precisely because it is they who are maintaining the status quo, while complaining about the status quo being maintained, much like the poster who complained about having to do the Catholic marriage course in order to be able to hold the marriage ceremony in a church, while complaining that it’s the Church is trying to drag people back to the 1950’s… I mean, where does one even start?
I support alternatives for parents in education. I’m fortunate to have the opportunity to have my child educated according to my values and world views, which are different to for example my neighbours and their children, but I support their campaign for the establishment of more schools which are consistent with their values and world views even though I don’t share them myself. It has never meant that I should have to give up the type of education which I value, which is what some posters here are calling for. I don’t support that, and I don’t think it’s likely to happen, for numerous reasons.Also, back on topic, why is something like sex education the being defined by Bishops when other tenets of education have no interference such as history, geography etc? It's a very convenient way of another form of indoctrination. Teaching a science and civics based subject within the realm of faith is wrong both morally and scientifically. By all means tech religion class about fair tales all you like but don't let that interfere with important subjects.
It’s not just a science and civics based subject though. Understanding that much answers your question as to why the curriculum for Relationships and Sex Education in Catholic schools is defined by the Catholic Bishops of Ireland. It’s precisely because of the foundation being Catholic Education that it is taught the way it is in Catholic schools, not just as part of a religion class, but as part of what defines the type of education provided in the school overseen by the patron body of the school. The same is true of other types of education provided by other patron bodies such as Educate Together, the Minister for Education, An Foras Pátrúnachta, etc.0 -
One eyed Jack wrote: »Until they have children of their own, and then it appears their children’s education takes priority over their principles, maintaining the dominance of the Roman organisation in education, precisely because they see it for what it is, and they see the alternatives for what they are too.
No I think the young people today have a lot more backbone and courage of their convictions. They will elect TDs that will separate church from state. The young today are under no illusions what the church did to men, women and especially children over past decades. It appalls them and they are not stupid enough to believe the "a few bad eggs" narrative.What are they doing in the Hyacinth House?
0 -
Advertisement
-
The church is trying to adapt but this is an institution that has been around hundreds of years.
It's slow going.
The easiest way is to force schools that receive government funding become areligious - not even teach about religion at all.0 -
Cluedo Monopoly wrote: »No I think the young people today have a lot more backbone and courage of their convictions. They will elect TDs that will separate church from state. The young today are under no illusions what the church did to men, women and especially children over past decades. It appalls them and they are not stupid enough to believe the "a few bad eggs" narrative.
If only it were that simple, in London catholic primary schools have long waiting lists and are very sought after 2 catholic primary schools are in the top 3 primary schools in London.0 -
The church is trying to adapt but this is an institution that has been around hundreds of years.
It's slow going.
The easiest way is to force schools that receive government funding become areligious - not even teach about religion at all.
A lot of what is taught is more humanities than religion and thats a positive. Id like to see schools teach what religion is and to learn anout the various beliefs as well as agnosticism and atheism rather than to be indoctrinated in any particular one.0 -
surely the bias title of the thread needs to be changed to something more reflective of the general topic discussion??0
-
Old school cancel culture.
I was taught science by a Christian brother. Evolution and biology. He was the only religious in the school.
If you are worried about anti scientific thought creeping into the education system I’d look elsewhere.Ok but can you please add dates of all that! as in early 1600s
It has of course been set right. And there was as you know a lot more to that event than you say. wikipaedia will help you!
I'm not commenting on the quality of science education or whether there's a great deal of anti-scientific thought in Irish schools.
My comment there was merely pointing out the ridiculousness of Galileo being used as an example of the RCC not being anti-science.
You say refer to wikipedia. It backs up what I said about heresy and banned books:
"Galileo's discoveries were met with opposition within the Catholic Church, and in 1616 the Inquisition declared heliocentrism to be "formally heretical." Heliocentric books were banned and Galileo was ordered to abstain from holding, teaching or defending heliocentric ideas.[2]
Galileo went on to propose a theory of tides in 1616, and of comets in 1619; he argued that the tides were evidence for the motion of the Earth. In 1632 Galileo published his Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, which implicitly defended heliocentrism, and was immensely popular. Responding to mounting controversy over theology, astronomy and philosophy, the Roman Inquisition tried Galileo in 1633 and found him "vehemently suspect of heresy", sentencing him to indefinite imprisonment. Galileo was kept under house arrest until his death in 1642."
Source: Galileo Affair article on Wikipedia.0 -
Cilldara_2000 wrote: »This tax thing is extreme petty semantics. We pay taxes. The taxes pay for stuff. Ergo, we pay for stuff.
That article is fine aspirational stuff. The facts of the matter are that in vast swaths of the country the choice outlined in section 3.1 doesn't exist in practice because all schools in the area are catholic ethos.
I'd also add4:The State shall provide for free primary education and shall endeavour to supplement and give reasonable aid to private and corporate educational initiative, and, when the public good requires it, provide other educational facilities or institutions with due regard, however, for the rights of parents, especially in the matter of religious and moral formation.
It does not achieve that with 90%+ Catholic schools and 94% religious schools.
If you were to actually meet the aspirations of that article of the constitution, the schools would probably need to be secular, with religious education provided for whoever wanted it in whatever flavour they wanted, probably in a block of class time that was separate from the normal schedule.
The state mostly provides a one-size-fits all Catholic school model, and anyone who doesn't like it is free to go off and find some alternative, which seemingly mostly does not exist.
It's basically like Henry Ford: "Any customer can have a car painted any colour that he wants, so long as it is black."0 -
Cluedo Monopoly wrote: »No I think the young people today have a lot more backbone and courage of their convictions. They will elect TDs that will separate church from state.
That was already done by referendum back in the ‘70s, and by a two-thirds majority of the electorate. Young people now aren’t any different than young people then. They elect TDs who they imagine will best serve their interests, only to be figuratively at least, screwed.Cluedo Monopoly wrote: »The young today are under no illusions what the church did to men, women and especially children over past decades. It appalls them and they are not stupid enough to believe the "a few bad eggs" narrative.
People were under no illusions then either as to what the Church did to men, women and children. In fact they were often threatened with being sent to reform schools or the convent if they brought shame upon their families. It’s precisely because they would rather not think of their grannies and grandads as utterly contemptible fcuknuggets that they are perfectly willing to go along with the few bad eggs narrative or the idea that it was only the clergy were craw-thumpy authoritarians rather than acknowledge the reality that their sweet grandma was ever a particularly nasty individual in her youth.0 -
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 participate0 -
Well yeah, you can opt out of religious instruction in schools here, but it's a bit like being asked if you'd like the vegetarian option, but being given a beef lasagne and a fork to pick out the beef.
There's a whole very religious content laced through the day in schools here and very deliberately so, particularly at primary level where it's not very easy to distinguish one subject from the next and religion isn't just slotted into a single module that can be opted out of.
We've a recipe for a school system that will ultimately create a very divided society as Ireland becomes more diverse. It's something that only could work in a monoculture and even then it fed into sectarian notions.
The answer to how do you accommodate people who aren't from the majority here is: 'go off and build your own school and stop annoying me.'0 -
Advertisement
-
Choochtown wrote: »Is it not stomach-churningly sick that nearly 90% of our primary school children attend institutions run by an organisation that routinely enabled child sex-abusers?
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.Guff about stuff, and stuff about guff.
0
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
Advertisement