SU Election Candidates - Mod Warning post 196

TheeItcha · 21-02-2010 03:59AM

shmici wrote: »

mmm.....thought it was about time i got myself on boards!!

Shudda over those six packs of Bavaria and Fight Club lol tbh tbf imho lmfao

Welcome to the tinternets, please leave your dignity at the door.

shmici · 21-02-2010 04:01AM

TheeItcha wrote: »

Shudda over those six packs of Bavaria and Fight Club lol tbh tbf imho lmfao

Welcome to the tinternets, please leave your dignity at the door.

i know you now our boi!!!!
took a wee while there!!!:D

TheeItcha · 21-02-2010 04:04AM

shmici wrote: »

i know you now our boi!!!!
took a wee while there!!!:D

New(see what I did there?) you from the username.

Have a badger.

the_observer · 21-02-2010 04:04AM

Hi all. Just want to say that the Blog called the Student Observer is now up and running. It will be blogging on the Union elections and USI for now with attention to both Uni and national political issues. We hope to engage and include the student and encourage a greater participation from the student body. We are also looking to expand beyond Maynooth and to other colleges so anybody interested should get in touch. Our overall aim is to have a transparent, non-political party blog and the number one source for student political debate and news.

Your following is much appreciated.

http://studentobserverireland.blogspot.com/

-Juvenal & Pangloss.

TheeItcha · 21-02-2010 04:07AM

the_observer wrote: »

Hi all. Just want to say that the Blog called the Student Observer is now up and running. It will be blogging on the Union elections and USI for now with attention to both Uni and national political issues. We hope to engage and include the student and encourage a greater participation from the student body. We are also looking to expand beyond Maynooth and to other colleges so anybody interested should get in touch. Our overall aim is to have a transparent, non-political party blog and the number one source for student political debate and news.

Your following is much appreciated.

http://studentobserverireland.blogspot.com/

-Juvenal & Pangloss.

Can we submit articles?

shmici · 21-02-2010 04:08AM

TheeItcha wrote: »

New(see what I did there?) you from the username.

Have a badger.

eh.....

thanks!!!!!!

the_observer · 21-02-2010 04:15AM

We accept all submissions. Just email them to studentobserverireland@gmail.com

CnaG · 21-02-2010 02:43PM

We accept all submissions. Just email them to studentobserverireland@gmail.com

Can I just point out that that's really quite a terrible combination of colours you have going there. The grey, the green, the two different shades of orange and manky yellow background... (shudders)

On the other hand, I like your idea.

philologos · 21-02-2010 02:50PM

Rozabeez wrote: »

I think you and Jakkass are going to get on just great!

I doubt I will be running for Students Union President however, and I am quite happy to let the SU exec represent me.

I think if Christians are seriously considering SU office they will have to realise that the Students Union is there to represent all students. I.E It's an impartial fora by which all students can be supported. I can see room for all people being supported in the SU, and indeed in any contact I have had with the SU over this year, they have been very supportive to the Christian Union. However, Christians have no role in limiting how others are supported and I wouldn't dream of it.

I think it is good that the Students Union leaves open both discussion of contraceptives and abstinence on SHAG week, perhaps more of the latter but I don't mind. (I probably wouldn't hold as strong a position on contraceptives, but I do think waiting until marriage is the best option)

I also think that it is good that the Students Union supports both the LGBT society and stands up against homophobia, even if I personally do not support gay marriage. (I do take the Evangelical Alliance's current position on supporting Civil Partnership)
At the same time, I would hope that the Students Union would be willing and ready to support Jews, Christians and Muslims in the future and not support divisive policies that would isolate any grouping, whether they be LGBT, pro-lifers, pro-choicers, non-believers, or people of faith on campus.

Likewise I would hope that the Students Union will continue to be willing to let people of faith have a chance to put forward their piece on campus.

Does this compromise my faith in Christianity? No, I don't think so. It isn't anyone's place trying to enforce belief on others, if anything faith is something to be discussed and shared out of compassion in the right avenues.

Would ones faith be helpful in an SU position? Yes, absolutely. The recognition that all people are created in the likeness of God, and have huge potential, and that all people are deserving of correct treatment is a great asset to have. I would really prefer if people stopped referring to faith as a blight, but I am sure it probably will happen into the future.

I have one point of disagreement with Jayo4Prez's post and that is this quoted section:

Jayo4Prez wrote:

Now, the Good Lord states that religion practiced privately is stronger than public demonstrations. Paraphrasing: Dont let your left hand see what your right hand is doing etc. There's a quiet room in the passage too..... somewhere.

I believe that ones faith should permeate their lives. There is a role for this in SU positions, not through enforcing ones faith, but in discussing it in a light manner with those who you meet. Christianity to me if it doesn't in some way shape your public life is not Christianity at all. I have to say, I find it sad that you even have to go through a litmus test about your faith to even be considered for president.

banquo · 21-02-2010 03:11PM

Jakkass wrote: »

I doubt I will be running for Students Union President however, and I am quite happy to let the SU exec represent me.

I think if Christians are seriously considering SU office they will have to realise that the Students Union is there to represent all students. I.E It's an impartial fora by which all students can be supported. I can see room for all people being supported in the SU, and indeed in any contact I have had with the SU over this year, they have been very supportive to the Christian Union. However, Christians have no role in limiting how others are supported and I wouldn't dream of it.

I think it is good that the Students Union leaves open both discussion of contraceptives and abstinence on SHAG week, perhaps more of the latter but I don't mind. (I probably wouldn't hold as strong a position on contraceptives, but I do think waiting until marriage is the best option)

I also think that it is good that the Students Union supports both the LGBT society and stands up against homophobia, even if I personally do not support gay marriage. (I do take the Evangelical Alliance's current position on supporting Civil Partnership)
At the same time, I would hope that the Students Union would be willing and ready to support Jews, Christians and Muslims in the future and not support divisive policies that would isolate any grouping, whether they be LGBT, pro-lifers, pro-choicers, non-believers, or people of faith on campus.

Likewise I would hope that the Students Union will continue to be willing to let people of faith have a chance to put forward their piece on campus.

Does this compromise my faith in Christianity? No, I don't think so. It isn't anyone's place trying to enforce belief on others, if anything faith is something to be discussed and shared out of compassion in the right avenues.

Would ones faith be helpful in an SU position? Yes, absolutely. The recognition that all people are created in the likeness of God, and have huge potential, and that all people are deserving of correct treatment is a great asset to have. I would really prefer if people stopped referring to faith as a blight, but I am sure it probably will happen into the future.

I have one point of disagreement with Jayo4Prez's post and that is this quoted section:

I believe that ones faith should permeate their lives. There is a role for this in SU positions, not through enforcing ones faith, but in discussing it in a light manner with those who you meet. Christianity to me if it doesn't in some way shape your public life is not Christianity at all. I have to say, I find it sad that you even have to go through a litmus test about your faith to even be considered for president.

Jakass wins the thread.

the_observer · 21-02-2010 04:48PM

CnaG wrote: »

Can I just point out that that's really quite a terrible combination of colours you have going there. The grey, the green, the two different shades of orange and manky yellow background... (shudders)

On the other hand, I like your idea.

Hmmm, I doubt the stylistic conventions of background colour have much to do with the quality of content but I will see what I can do. A jazzy new makeover will be underway once a few blogs go up and the ball gets rolling.

Thank you for your input. You are therefore the first outside contributor and will receive..............This Button and our hearty congratulations. Button will be 7-24 weeks for delivery.

Ataxia · 21-02-2010 05:41PM

Jakkass wrote: »

I would really prefer if people stopped referring to faith as a blight, but I am sure it probably will happen into the future...

I have to say, I find it sad that you even have to go through a litmus test about your faith to even be considered for president.

I don't think faith is a "blight" per se, although I have problems with the concept from an epistemological point of view, but I think certain kinds of faith are. I think when faith leads to supporting reactionary views, that's certainly a bad thing for humanity. In particular, reactionary Catholic dogma is hugely harmful to human society as it is a barrier to full equality for homosexuals and to women's autonomy over their own bodies; it promotes a backwards and repressed view of sexuality and is actively harming people by condemning condom use and by trying to hold back scientific progress in the field of embryonic stem-cell research.

Should any of this be a barrier to a persons candidacy for some political office? No, of course not. But I think we have every right to question such a candidate about their faith, particularly when they openly express belief in a religion that propagates reactionary opinions like those above.

allandanyways · 21-02-2010 05:50PM

Jakkass, the reason I asked Jason about how his strong faith would affect his actions and reactions as a potential President was because I have a lot of interest in the way women's health is treated in Ireland, realistically, it's still very much a "You go girl, getting your health checked out!", 90s type attitude, and I think that universities are perhaps the crux around which Ireland has the potential to make women's health the obvious thing for Irish women (and men) to be informed about, and not the "well informed" and "clued-in" way that it's currently portrayed in Ireland.

What I mean is, that we're all go go go for cervical smears and all that, but things like contraception options and abortion issues are also pertinent to women's physical and mental health, and I wouldn't like to see these things ignored simply because a candidate was so religiously opposed. I've no problem if a candidate has a strong faith, be it Catholic, Muslim or Jewish, or a complete lack therof.. My problem would be when that faith restricted access to services and information vital to Irish women in Universities.

philologos · 21-02-2010 06:06PM

Ataxia wrote: »

I don't think faith is a "blight" per se, although I have problems with the concept from an epistemological point of view, but I think certain kinds of faith are. I think when faith leads to supporting reactionary views, that's certainly a bad thing for humanity. In particular, reactionary Catholic dogma is hugely harmful to human society as it is a barrier to full equality for homosexuals and to women's autonomy over their own bodies; it promotes a backwards and repressed view of sexuality and is actively harming people by condemning condom use and by trying to hold back scientific progress in the field of embryonic stem-cell research.

Your concerns are valid, and I share many of them. I don't think it is appropriate for me to comment on Catholicism, due to the fact that I am not a Roman Catholic.

I believe that Christians are obliged to respect everyone irrespective of sexual orientation, beliefs or lack there of. I support the Civil Partnership Bill, and I do not believe that Christians should be using the courts unless there is a severe infringement to our rights. If I may quote a piece from the Evangelical Alliance report on Civil Partnership:

We suggest that evangelical Christians should support the basic thrust of the Bill. The Government is seeking to legislate for greater justice and fairness for co-habiting couples, both same-sex and opposite-sex couples. As Christians we should really support that stance. Co-habiting couples are a reality - this legislation seeks to deal with that reality from a legal perspective. We may disagree on the detail of the legislation but as followers of a just and compassionate God we can recognise the justice and fairness of providing some legal protection for the reality of same-sex and opposite-sex cohabiting relationships.

...

The Christian Scriptures make it clear that God's purpose for His gift of sex is that it would be the ultimate physical expression of love between a man and a woman in the context of the covenant of marriage. However the Gospel requires of us that we show grace to those who fundamentally disagree with our convictions and who do not shape their lives according to what we believe is good for them. Jesus requires of his followers that they love and do good to those who oppose them or who hold to different ethical standards than they do.

Just because we disagree with others doesn't mean that we should not show grace to them.

Condom use. I personally believe that sexuality is best kept in marriage. However, I recognise that people will most likely have sex anyway and that people need to make their own choice. I can only put forward my own view and allow others to decide.

Embryonic stem cell research - Pluripotent stem cells taken from adult stem cells perform the same function as embryonic stem cells. We don't need embryos. In Japan last year they made break through research. At the Christians in Science conference last year they explained the ins and outs of stem cell research. [slides] [mp3]

It's a misnomer that Christians hold back scientific research. For the most part we embrace it. Personally, and a lot of people question me when I say this knowing my beliefs, I hold that science is a gift by which we can use to advance our understanding of the world and I praise it. However, science must be ethical, it must be right. Science if it is unethical is only going to be harmful to humanity. Eugenics is a perfect example of this.

Ataxia wrote: »

Should any of this be a barrier to a persons candidacy for some political office? No, of course not. But I think we have every right to question such a candidate about their faith, particularly when they openly express belief
in a religion that propagates reactionary opinions like those above.

I never said it was. However, I believe it should be more balanced. People should also be questioned on their political beliefs, involvement in societies, if they lack belief they should be asked about how they are going to tolerate people of faith on campus, particularly if they are running for welfare.

Personally, I would heavily dispute that faith is a blight any more than holding to political views are a blight, or supporting atheism / anti-theism is. I'd like to see Christians being more a part of campus life, but only if they regard the Students Union as a place that represents all students. I would also expect atheists, LGBT, pro-choice, pro-life to do the same. Show grace to those who disagree with you, and recognise them as your fellow students. That's what I expect of anyone in an Students Union position.

mickstupp · 21-02-2010 06:14PM

Can I vote for Jakkass?

Ataxia · 21-02-2010 06:28PM

To avoid dragging the thread wildly off-topic, I'm not going to go down through your post point-by-point, but I do agree with you that a persons religious beliefs are not the only aspect of their thinking that should be explored.

funky penguin · 21-02-2010 06:29PM

Can we stop debating religion? I'm not smart enough for this.

banquo · 21-02-2010 06:34PM

funky penguin wrote: »

Can we stop debating religion? I'm not smart enough for this.

PrivateEye · 21-02-2010 06:51PM

In this thread: Loads of people talk about religion.

Duddy · 21-02-2010 07:26PM

So anyway. Elections on Wednesday:D

Aldebaran · 21-02-2010 07:33PM

Duddy wrote: »

So anyway. Elections on Wednesday:D

Really? Someone should start a thread about that.

Thwip! · 21-02-2010 07:33PM

banquo wrote: »

google-imaged penguin and this was one of the first things to pop up

Duddy · 21-02-2010 08:42PM

Aldebaran wrote: »

Really? Someone should start a thread about that.

But...I did

Jayo4Prez · 21-02-2010 08:42PM

LeixlipRed wrote: »

Absolute rubbish. Totally twisting what was said that day. We felt trade embargoes weren't enough and we certainly didn't imply we wanted anyone to "attack" Israel.

Beg your pardon. Antagonise. I do believe, however, I did go down the road of embargoes and avoidance. Again, I haven't got a filing cabinet to consult every conversation that I have ever had with someone.

Again, I am not disputing that I came off second to you in that chat. I am just wondering as to the relevance when I have already explained my position on topics that are a bit beyond me.

But set the record straight.

TheeItcha · 21-02-2010 08:50PM

Jayo4Prez wrote: »

Beg your pardon. Antagonise. I do believe, however, I did go down the road of embargoes and avoidance. Again, I haven't got a filing cabinet to consult every conversation that I have ever had with someone.

Again, I am not disputing that I came off second to you in that chat. I am just wondering as to the relevance when I have already explained my position on topics that are a bit beyond me.

But set the record straight.

I have a spare shovel in case that one breaks.

Jayo4Prez · 21-02-2010 08:57PM

Pajoe89 wrote: »

Jayo, i appreciate and commend you (as any one who has done) for coming on and defending yourself and I do agree that petty name calling is a bit divvy(especially on the internet).

HOWEVER, I think you have managed to do more damage to yourself and your campaign by doing so. Fair enough you are a practicing R.C, can't fault you on that but the fact you say that and make no bones of it on your literature is irrelevant to the campaign and has only brought upon you arguments among everyone here.

Like in governmental campaigns you have opened up the can of worms that include abortion and Gay rights etc. In doing so you have to take the position of your faith which in these cases are controversial and isolating. The only ones you seem to impress are the Pro-lifers!

The Isreal issue too. WTF? I didn't know NUIM had it as a campaign issue :P

As a presidential candidate, you (and the others)have to appeal to as many groups of students as possible. In a college which has the highest and most active LGBT group, these issues which you have been forced to tackle are only damaging and come as the least attractive candidate to represent them. Further more, you isolate yourself from the left leaning and liberally minded students (not to mention the non religious).

This is nothing personal, and i understand this it is your "personal faith" rather then a political platform (which it should never be). I just feel you have committed political suicide by being dragged into this argument when you had set out just to answer a few personal slanderings on your appearance.

Okay. Lets get a few things straight.

In my answers/comments so far, I have put myself out there. I am not a politician and am an aspiring teacher. I have no political agenda and have no alterior motives for looking for this job only to see if I can do a better one than previous presidents.

Now, I opened no can of worms. A question was asked of me (and by the way, the other candidates were asked the same question and have yet to answer it) about how would my ethics, based as they are on R.C. doctrine, influence the way that I conduct my affairs as President. The answer is, by and large other than staying honest and true to myself, they wont.

Consequentially, I have been branded as a religious fanatic that would rival Bill O'Reilly and Fox News in the Conservative stakes.

Then, people started questioning me on various points of Church doctrine and whether I agree with them or not, not whether it would influence how I do my job.

Now, I have said this already in reply to Rosabeez. I understand, as a regular contributer to this site and as a fairly nice guy, Aengus is the preferred choice of the Boards community, and that is fine.

However, if I thought he was the best man for the job, then I wouldn't be running myself........ by myself!!!!!!!!!!

So, while I appreciate the good comments, the props and the questions here (which, by the way, I will continue to answer), I do think lads saw an opportunity to take pot-shots, and, probably foolishly, I opened the door. But I pulled no triggers.

Jayo4Prez · 21-02-2010 08:59PM

TheeItcha wrote: »

I have a spare shovel in case that one breaks.

I think that this reply, and the numerous other comments that you have posted, speak for themselves.

TheeItcha · 21-02-2010 09:04PM

Jayo4Prez wrote: »

I think that this reply, and the numerous other comments that you have posted, speak for themselves.

:eek:

Jayo4Prez · 21-02-2010 09:07PM

Jakkass wrote: »

Your concerns are valid, and I share many of them. I don't think it is appropriate for me to comment on Catholicism, due to the fact that I am not a Roman Catholic.

I believe that Christians are obliged to respect everyone irrespective of sexual orientation, beliefs or lack there of. I support the Civil Partnership Bill, and I do not believe that Christians should be using the courts unless there is a severe infringement to our rights. If I may quote a piece from the Evangelical Alliance report on Civil Partnership:

Just because we disagree with others doesn't mean that we should not show grace to them.

Condom use. I personally believe that sexuality is best kept in marriage. However, I recognise that people will most likely have sex anyway and that people need to make their own choice. I can only put forward my own view and allow others to decide.

Embryonic stem cell research - Pluripotent stem cells taken from adult stem cells perform the same function as embryonic stem cells. We don't need embryos. In Japan last year they made break through research. At the Christians in Science conference last year they explained the ins and outs of stem cell research. [slides] [mp3]

It's a misnomer that Christians hold back scientific research. For the most part we embrace it. Personally, and a lot of people question me when I say this knowing my beliefs, I hold that science is a gift by which we can use to advance our understanding of the world and I praise it. However, science must be ethical, it must be right. Science if it is unethical is only going to be harmful to humanity. Eugenics is a perfect example of this.

I never said it was. However, I believe it should be more balanced. People should also be questioned on their political beliefs, involvement in societies, if they lack belief they should be asked about how they are going to tolerate people of faith on campus, particularly if they are running for welfare.

Personally, I would heavily dispute that faith is a blight any more than holding to political views are a blight, or supporting atheism / anti-theism is. I'd like to see Christians being more a part of campus life, but only if they regard the Students Union as a place that represents all students. I would also expect atheists, LGBT, pro-choice, pro-life to do the same. Show grace to those who disagree with you, and recognise them as your fellow students. That's what I expect of anyone in an Students Union position.

You should have ran, not me!!!!!!!!!!!!

TheeItcha · 21-02-2010 09:58PM

Duddy wrote: »

So anyway. Elections on Wednesday:D

These have been the best elections since I have been in Maynooth imo.

SU Election Candidates - Mod Warning post 196

Comments