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

Atheist Ireland protect Free Speech in Ireland again.

Options
2

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Dades
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,558 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dades


    Arcus Arrow, the next time you ignore a warning and use an unrelated thread to spout off unsubstantiated stuff about someone you'll be taking a holiday. AI have a forum - take your issues with them there.

    If you have an issue with doing this take it to PM, or helpdesk. I don't want to hear it here.


  • Options
    #33
    CatHerder
    Registered Users Posts: 37 ✭CatHerder


    I suppose I don't need to point out that the statement "There was an incredibly sophisticated campaign [against me], mainly on the internet" are the words of Mr Ahern according to the Sunday Times. I can't imagine that he'd have said that if Atheist Ireland didn't exist.

    It was quite entertaining for me when AI released the 25 Blasphemous Quotes. The next day Mr Nugent rang me in a bit of a fluster to say that both atheist.ie and blasphemy.ie had gone down. He was quite concerned because AI had just published the 25 blasphemous quotes and this was a bad time to be having server problems.

    After looking into the problem I found that the sites just couldn't handle the amount of traffic they were getting, and it was whatever he had done (published the 25 blasphemous quotes) that was causing the problem. It was a Sunday and I just had to tell Michael that there was nothing we could do until Blacknight support were available on Monday, and that if it's any consolation he must be doing something right if we're getting this much traffic.

    When I went back to my inbox I found an email from Blacknight Solutions telling us that they were aware of the problem and had moved our sites to a different server as they were crippling other sites on the server they were on. It turns out that Blacknight were already on top of it and the sites still couldn't handle the amount of traffic they were getting.

    Well that's probably a boring story for some of you but it does illustrate that the Blasphemy campaign attracted quite a bit of international media attention, and that Mr Ahern may have had the international media banging on his door as a new years present (even if RTE weren't that interested)

    In respect to the 25 blasphemous quotes, I myself thought it was a very clever way of illustrating the asininity of the law. I felt that AI was being put in the unenviable position of having to offend people in order to challenge the law and I felt that this was wrong. I mean, who are you going to offend by desecrating the host? Your granny? No thanks, I don’t want to offend my granny just to make a point. In any case, personally I'd view stuff like desecrating the host and publishing Danish cartoons as pure stunts that would do Atheist Ireland more harm than good. After all we're trying to appeal to the broader mass, aren't we?

    And as for this:
    Arcus Arrow wrote: »
    I think the problem stems from the chairman as to the way Atheist Ireland is run. The whole blasphemy hullabaloo served one purpose: it was used by Mr. Nugent to up his media profile off the backs off the blindsided membership as did his assumption of power from the start.

    I thinking someone might be hoping to get onto the Irish quango gravy train in the future.
    That's libellous defamation of character and irrespective of free speech boards.ie should probably treat it as such.

    For the purposes of disclosure :rolleyes: I'm a member if AI and used to be on the committee.


  • Options
    #34
    CatHerder
    Registered Users Posts: 37 ✭CatHerder


    CatHerder wrote: »
    That's libellous defamation of character and irrespective of free speech boards.ie should probably treat it as such.
    Sorry Dades, I probably shouldn't have said that seen as you've already pulled him up on it.

    -snip-

    MOD NOTE
    No more personal talk about AI committee members. They have their own forum for venting.


  • Options
    #35
    Funglegunk
    Registered Users Posts: 1,566 ✭✭✭Funglegunk


    nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »
    The man is changing the law less than three months after having it brought into law and in his comments on changing the law he directly cited only one campaign against it. They are the only facts I have to go on and based on that I can only congratulate those involved in the campaign for being part of the outcome.

    He did not cite the campaign as the reason he was introducing the blasphemy referendum, he cited it as one of the sources of him being labeled as right wing. Read the quote again:
    Dermot Ahern wrote:
    “There was a lot of nonsense about that blasphemy issue and people making me out to be a complete right-winger at the time,” he said. “There was an incredibly sophisticated campaign [against me], mainly on the internet. I was only doing my duty in relation to it, because clearly it is in the constitution. The attorney general said ‘there is this absolute, mandatory thing… it is an offence, punishable by law.”

    Atheist Ireland are congratulating themselves for apparently forcing Ahern to do something he clearly intended to do anyway. Ahern's explanation for passing the Defamation Bill was that it was a short term solution to an inevitable constitutional change, and that it was a decision of political expediency as he did not want to hold a standalone referendum last summer.

    I have yet to see a single shred of evidence to suggest that this was not the case.


  • Options
    #36
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,338 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    Again if you are aware of anyone else towards whom I can direct my congratulations and thanks for working against Aherns actions in bringing the law in, then I would be more than happy to do so.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    Dades
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,558 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dades


    I'd say those of us who wrote to the papers or the Dept of Justice deserve a mention. :)


  • Options
    #38
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,338 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    You indeed do have my thanks then :) Well done.


  • Options
    #39
    drkpower
    Registered Users Posts: 5,475 ✭✭✭drkpower


    Of course, while people are being thanked, the various religous churches/organisations/lobbies who said that they didnt want this law should be front of the queue.

    It was their lack of support for the blasphemy law which left him looking the most ridiculous. If he had their support, he would have been in a far stronger position in dismissing the criticisms of AI etc.


  • Options
    #40
    Arcus Arrow
    Registered Users Posts: 296 ✭✭Arcus Arrow


    In March, speculation that the government would hold an autumn referendum on the law was downplayed by Minister Dermot Ahern who said there were no plans for such a referendum in “the immediate future”, according to the Irish Times.
    http://www.thejournal.ie/blasphemy-law-pushes-ireland-from-first-to-tenth-in-press-index-2010-10/

    Have I missed the Blasphemy Law referendum brought about by the "incredibly sophisticated internet campaign"....?

    Did I miss the date?

    Has anyone been charged yet?

    Has anyone been fined?

    How many people in Ireland even care given the present circumstances of the country?

    At the end of November this year (2010) Dermot Ahern announced his decision to retire from politics which he says he made with his family in 2007. The Blasphemy Law was passed in July 2009 after he knew he was going to retire with, as we know, a big fat golden handshake with accompanying pension. He will quite likely in the future be getting a little medal or some other trinket from his masters in Rome for service to the cause.

    Whatever was behind the Blasphemy law we may never know.

    One thing is for sure: if it was distraction bait aimed at particular gaping mouths they swallowed it wholesale.

    Bait can be fattening.


  • Options
    #41
    Galvasean
    Registered Users Posts: 30,746 ✭✭✭✭Galvasean


    I've yet to hear of one person being prosecued under the law, depsite many trying to achieve it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Arcus Arrow
    Registered Users Posts: 296 ✭✭Arcus Arrow


    Galvasean wrote: »
    I've yet to hear of one person being prosecued under the law, depsite many trying to achieve it.

    I somehow doubt we ever will. I'd like to think that at this stage no one can doubt the devious and corrupt nature of politics in Ireland. I'm told today the daughter of Jackie Healy Ray is about to be appointed to some board where she gets 3 or €400 for reading a submission or some such. Some handy number to cushion the impact of the debt her oul fella just helped saddle us with. If that's true what price the votes of the few that make life misery for the many?

    There doesn't appear to be any obvious reason why Dermot Ahern brought in a blasphemy law. Since it has had no effect in terms of enforcement and since there were no obvious reasons for it the question is then what was behind it?

    I think it might have been intended, whether in a clumsy or a very well calculated way, to divert a perceived possible problem expected to come from opponents of religion. The most obvious target would then possibly have been the first ever atheist group in Ireland.

    The Ferns report came out in 2005. The inquiry that led to the Ryan report was ongoing. Justice Laffoy had resigned in 2003 after being frustrated in her attempts to get at the truth.

    She was frustrated by the same people who brought in the Blasphemy Law.

    The Irish Independent newspaper reported on the proposed Blasphemy law in April 2009.
    http://www.independent.ie/national-news/ahern-defends-new-blasphemy...

    I started the idea of an atheist organisation late October 2008. I took a gamble and booked a hotel room based on the reaction. Atheist Ireland came into being on November 30 2008.

    The website had been building up numbers, slowly but surely, for over a year. The scandals that increasingly engulfed the Catholic Church were building for a lot longer as were the attempts to limit the damage.


    The Ryan Report was released in May 2009.

    The Blasphemy Law was passed in July 2009.
    http://www.independent.ie/national-news/libel-and-blasphemy-bill-pa...

    In 2002 Catholics in the Government had engineered the Indemnity Deal. That protected the assets of the Catholic Church. Were efforts mooted to try to limit the reaction?

    The 2008 Blasphemy Law may have been an attempt to limit the criticism and at least distract a good portion of the people they expected to attack the Catholic Church. That they were probably wrong about the threat just means they were overcompensating in their prepartions.

    Whatever the Blasphemy Law was designed to do it certainly had the effect of sending a lot of particular people off on a wild goose chase. Mention Blasphemy Law to a bunch of organised paid up card carrying Irish Catholic Atheists and they'll go off like scalded cats spinning around the inside of a 45 gallon drum...which is exactly what happened.

    It may have become apparent to Mr. Ahern later that the threat was non-existent in the first place and even that it was a pretty bad idea in the first place. The law now lies gathering dust in the pages of the statute books while AI are left with the memories of their bogus blasphemy campaign ......or..........er..having successfully protected free speech not once but twice depending on where you stand.

    The Grand old Duke of Atheism led his troops up the hill only to find the enemy wasn't there. So then he led the troops all the way back down again. The Grand Old Duke thinks the enemy ran away. The Blasphemy ruse worked.


  • Options
    #43
    strobe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,872 ✭✭✭strobe


    Arcus Arrow wrote: »
    Whatever the Blasphemy Law was designed to do it certainly had the effect of sending a lot of particular people off on a wild goose chase. Mention Blasphemy Law to a bunch of organised paid up card carrying Irish Catholic Atheists and they'll go off like scalded cats spinning around the inside of a 45 gallon drum...which is exactly what happened.

    It may have become apparent to Mr. Ahern later that the threat was non-existent in the first place and even that it was a pretty bad idea in the first place. The law now lies gathering dust in the pages of the statute books while AI are left with the memories of their bogus blasphemy campaign ......or..........er..having successfully protected free speech not once but twice depending on where you stand.

    The Grand old Duke of Atheism led his troops up the hill only to find the enemy wasn't there. So then he led the troops all the way back down again. The Grand Old Duke thinks the enemy ran away. The Blasphemy ruse worked.

    Your personal grudge against AI is strange and bewildering to me. Did Michael Nugent run over your dog?


  • Options
    #44
    Arcus Arrow
    Registered Users Posts: 296 ✭✭Arcus Arrow


    strobe wrote: »
    Your personal grudge against AI is strange and bewildering to me. Did Michael Nugent run over your dog?

    The last dog I had I left behind in Ohio. I miss him more than the ex wife. Some day I'm gong to buy another Kerry Blue.

    There is a situation with AI in as much as most of the members have been conned to some extent. Basically I don't like hypocrisy and if one doesn't like hypocrisy then that should apply whether it's Muslim, Catholic, Protestant or atheist. To think otherwise would make one a hypocrite.

    How hypocritical is it to be claiming to be striking a blow for free speech when the same people start trying to censor anyone who criticises them?

    Members of AI did that during the blasphemy campaign.

    Ask the OP a direct question on that one.

    In the OP you have a member of AI touting for the organisation. I don't think it's up to anyone to say join or don't join. The thing is you should know what it is exactly you are joining. To know that you should know as much as possible and then make up your own mind.

    When I describe AI as Irish Catholic Atheists it's not a jibe or a slag. It's a serious collective description of the way the membership is run and the way they act collectively. To my mind you're not really an atheist thinker if you expect people to be raised steeped in a historic culture that they can suddenly mentally disemburse themselves of at the flick of a switch. Most people know what they think without constantly asking themselves why they think what they think. That's why I've said before that only in Ireland would atheists elect themselves a Pope.

    The Wiki page could even be described as an atheist organisation engaging in what the Catholic Church calls "mental reservation".

    This version of mental reservation works by omitting facts in order to leave only those that suit the history that a few people want you to believe. Of course that's only my opinion.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheist_Ireland

    It's also a little bit of a shame seeing potential being wasted, especially with the support of those whose potential is being wasted. With some people it's with grudging support, others tacit, still others unknowingly while a few, at the top, have betrayed their own principles (assuming they had them to begin with). Some people traded what integrity they may have had for 4th division grand sounding titles and a teaspoonful of power as a reward for their loyalty.

    This is the real question: does the truth matter?

    If it doesn't matter for atheist organisations then it doesn't matter for the claims of religious ones either.


  • Options
    #45
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,229 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Seriously dude what the hell are you talking about?


  • Options
    #46
    strobe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,872 ✭✭✭strobe


    Arcus Arrow wrote: »
    The last d[....]her.[/I]

    Man, I am inthrolled(sc). I kinda think AI is as silly as my local church. True.

    But what exactly happened to make you set your self in total opposition to them? I'm trying my best not to be facetious, but really, did someone straighten out a snake and fire it at you out of a long bow? Dead sly, the're always at that.


    No but really man, I kinda see where you're coming from. A lot of the people in AI have a very real Pat Rabbitt vibe off of them. In so far as they are using any organisation they come across to get to mark one more qualification down on their "I should be a politician" form. That's politics...........The cure is lots and lots of fertiliser, so I've heard..... But ohhhh no we can't do that, it might make someone no one gives a sh1t about late for work. Ohhhh the humanity!!!!

    Giberish....Total giberish...!


  • Options
    #47
    liamw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,780 ✭✭✭liamw


    strobe, your posts never disappoint at the weekend


  • Options
    #48
    Arcus Arrow
    Registered Users Posts: 296 ✭✭Arcus Arrow


    strobe wrote: »
    Man, I am inthrolled(sc). I kinda think AI is as silly as my local church. True.

    How ironic is it to have an Irish Catholic atheist organisation lectured by Darry Ray who wrote a book based around the inability of religious believers to see the faults in their own religion while being perfectly able to see the same faults in another? AI follows the exact same trait.

    The God Virus by Darrel Ray
    Product Description
    What makes religion so powerful? How does it weave its way into our political system? Why do people believe and follow obvious religious charlatans? What makes people profess deep faith even as they act in ways that betray that faith? What makes people blind to the irrationalities of their religion yet clearly see those of others?
    http://www.amazon.com/God-Virus-religion-infects-culture/dp/0970950519
    strobe wrote: »
    But what exactly happened to make you set your self in total opposition to them? I'm trying my best not to be facetious, but really, did someone straighten out a snake and fire it at you out of a long bow? Dead sly, the're always at that.

    I spent far more time and money than anyone getting things to the point where it was possible to have an organisation.
    At the same time I just detest committees, hierarchical power, bureaucracy and red tape. AI scores 10 out of 10 on all of them. What has any of that got to do with the self presented champions of freethinking, open mindedness and free speech? In the OP you have a sniff of that very Catholic trait "do as I say not as I do".

    The time and the money don't bother me (or even to some extent the credit.) I've poured time and money into groups supporting victims of Catholic child rape as well and I didn't join their clubs either.

    Also though I just don't like self promoters and chancers getting away with it. What I dislike about AI is the same things I dislike about the Roman Catholic Church. The little one reflects the bigger one that produced it.
    strobe wrote: »
    No but really man, I kinda see where you're coming from. A lot of the people in AI have a very real Pat Rabbitt vibe off of them. In so far as they are using any organisation they come across to get to mark one more qualification down on their "I should be a politician" form. That's politics...........The cure is lots and lots of fertiliser, so I've heard..... But ohhhh no we can't do that, it might make someone no one gives a sh1t about late for work. Ohhhh the humanity!!!!

    I think that bit in bold is a lot closer to the truth than even you might realise.

    It's no accident that the most prominent limelight hogging member of AI is a failed political candidate. The Roman Catholic virus means the membership maintain a deferential, almost reverential, faith in their leader as being "the best man for the job".

    Of all the media opportunity's, lectures etc that AI has been invited out of the 300 or so member one man dominates overwhelmingly.
    The last time I was sent the count I think out of 65 occasions he scored over the 60 mark. Overall it's beyond doubt that one man has been and is, using AI for his own self promotion.


  • Options
    #49
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,229 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Arcus Arrow wrote: »
    Of all the media opportunity's, lectures etc that AI has been invited out of the 300 or so member one man dominates overwhelmingly.
    The last time I was sent the count I think out of 65 occasions he scored over the 60 mark. Overall it's beyond doubt that one man has been and is, using AI for his own self promotion.
    Seriously dude, you're not coming off as rational..... or sane.

    What has AI or Mike Nugent done that has irked you so?


  • Options
    #50
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Arcus Arrow wrote: »

    I spent far more time and money than anyone getting things to the point where it was possible to have an organisation.
    At the same time I just detest committees, hierarchical power, bureaucracy and red tape. AI scores 10 out of 10 on all of them. What has any of that got to do with the self presented champions of freethinking, open mindedness and free speech? In the OP you have a sniff of that very Catholic trait "do as I say not as I do".

    The time and the money don't bother me (or even to some extent the credit.) I've poured time and money into groups supporting victims of Catholic child rape as well and I didn't join their clubs either.

    Also though I just don't like self promoters and chancers getting away with it. What I dislike about AI is the same things I dislike about the Roman Catholic Church. The little one reflects the bigger one that produced it.

    ....the need to feel and be treated like a Martyr...thats a often religous thing too....


  • Options
    #51
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Arcus Arrow wrote: »
    Of all the media opportunity's, lectures etc that AI has been invited out of the 300 or so member one man dominates overwhelmingly.
    The last time I was sent the count I think out of 65 occasions he scored over the 60 mark. Overall it's beyond doubt that one man has been and is, using AI for his own self promotion.

    Repeating what King Mob has said here. What is your problem with Michael Nugent?

    Having briefly met him, he's nothing short of a gentleman.

    As for Michael taking part in a large proportion of the events where AI was invited to speak. Michael as chairperson is the overall representative of AI therefore one would expect him to represent the organisation on more occasions than not.

    That said, AI have used regional representatives to speak on radio, and take part in university debates. I don't see very many other organisations apart from AI that are willing to promote dialogue in respect to atheism on a larger scale in Irish society, or indeed that have been as widely published as they have apart from say the Humanist Association of Ireland, and Irish Skeptics.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,993 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »
    Well done all involved and well done Atheist Ireland who have protected free speech in Ireland a second time this week, after earlier this week causing Dermot Ahern to fold on the Blasphemy law, citing as he did the "incredibly sophisticated campaign [against me], mainly on the internet.”

    Of course anyone can support Atheist Ireland by Joining Up, using their forum, or even financially by using the PayPal options to either join Atheist Ireland formally or engage in once off or ongoing donations.

    I didn't notice this was posted back in March when I started reading it, so i clicks on the link to see about this referendum to remove the offence of blasphemy from the Constitution, that AI has forced .....

    "The plebiscites are expected to take place in October, on the same day as the a vote for a new directly elected mayor of Dublin, and three Dail by-elections in Donegal South-West, Dublin South and Waterford."

    Politicians; so generous when it comes to promises and Dail pensions. :mad:


  • Options
    #53
    Arcus Arrow
    Registered Users Posts: 296 ✭✭Arcus Arrow


    Nodin wrote: »
    ....the need to feel and be treated like a Martyr...thats a often religous thing too....

    It sure is. I already expected that one.

    I've gotten a lot of emails from original members who no longer take part because for the reasons I've described above. But is that not the problem with this country? Walk away and say nothing. It seems the red tape is choking any dissent but that's what red tape tends to do.

    It's just as much religious tribalism for atheists to expound one set of standards for religions organisations and another set for atheist organisations.

    Is it just as hypocritical for an atheist organisation to attempt censorship while claiming to be defending free speech as it is for a religious one or not?


  • Options
    #54
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,229 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Arcus Arrow wrote: »
    It sure is. I already expected that one.

    I've gotten a lot of emails from original members who no longer take part because for the reasons I've described above. But is that not the problem with this country? Walk away and say nothing. It seems the red tape is choking any dissent but that's what red tape tends to do.

    It's just as much religious tribalism for atheists to expound one set of standards for religions organisations and another set for atheist organisations.

    Is it just as hypocritical for an atheist organisation to attempt censorship while claiming to be defending free speech as it is for a religious one or not?
    Again you haven't actually listed any reasons to not like AI just random unsubstantiated accusations about non specific crimes of hypocrisy and for some reason don't get the idea of what a spokesperson's job is.

    frankly all your rambling smack of butthurt because AI aren't what you and you alone think they should be.


  • Options
    #55
    DeVore
    Business & Finance Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 32,387 Mod ✭✭✭✭DeVore


    http://www.atheist.ie/2010/03/ahern-proposes-referendum-on-blasphemy-this-autumn/

    Did I sleep through a referendum on this silliness?!?

    Its past autumn...

    DeV.


  • Options
    #56
    Dades
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,558 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dades


    ^^ Methinks a lot of stuff like this is indefinitely on the back-burner with the country in such a state and all that.


  • Options
    #57
    Arcus Arrow
    Registered Users Posts: 296 ✭✭Arcus Arrow


    Jakkass wrote: »
    Repeating what King Mob has said here. What is your problem with Michael Nugent?

    Having briefly met him, he's nothing short of a gentleman.

    I'll presume your'e not advancing that as some sort of argument. I spoke to a very mannerly and charming chap one day a long time ago in Dublin. Hours before he'd killed a man dead with a sawn off shotgun. Personal conduct is a facet of self advancement, a survival technique and a self defence mechanism.
    Jakkass wrote: »
    As for Michael taking part in a large proportion of the events where AI was invited to speak. Michael as chairperson is the overall representative of AI therefore one would expect him to represent the organisation on more occasions than not.

    This is supposedly an atheist organisation. Why presume that it should be organised around a figurehead? It goes against claims that atheism is not in some ways a religion. How could one person claim to be speaking for people who are defined only by the fact they don't believe in a religious entity. With that type of structure there go all those "atheism is not a religion" arguments.
    We are supposed to be talking about somewhat independent minded people of diverse opinions that can't be predefined by that which they don't believe.

    In fact I'd even be inclined to think if religion in Ireland was abandoned and banished forever you'd have similarly structured organisations spring up in not time. Not being religious doesn't cure the impulses that create it and thereby the conditions that raise the next crop of charlatans.
    Jakkass wrote: »
    That said, AI have used regional representatives to speak on radio, and take part in university debates. I don't see very many other organisations apart from AI that are willing to promote dialogue in respect to atheism on a larger scale in Irish society, or indeed that have been as widely published as they have apart from say the Humanist Association of Ireland, and Irish Skeptics.

    I had a file that one of the committee members sent me updates on regularly. It listed all the occasions a member of AI spoke on it's behalf. I deleted it when I changed laptops but the score was something like out of 60 odd occasions there were less than 5 and certainly less than 10 when someone other than the chairman spoke or was interviewed. Certainly all the main and most important ones were hogged by the chairman. That you think that's a good idea and I might not is neither here nor there in some ways. However do you think people should know that going in before they hand over their money? Your comment also doesn't exclude the fact that one individual can't be using the contributions of the many for self promotion.

    And on another point I'll ask you directly: is it two faced hypocrisy for an organisation claiming to be defending free speech to be attempting censorship of it's critics at the same time?

    You could ask the OP a direct question on that one but I doubt you'll get an answer. Apparently the faithful are under orders to stay stum and not come out of the chicken coop.


  • Options
    #58
    Arcus Arrow
    Registered Users Posts: 296 ✭✭Arcus Arrow


    Dades wrote: »
    ^^ Methinks a lot of stuff like this is indefinitely on the back-burner with the country in such a state and all that.

    I doubt if there is anyone in the country who gives a crap about the blasphemy law. Why would anyone when they're in negative equity and their wages are being cut. The question still remains though what was the thinking behind bringing it in at all. It's also worth remembering that it's still on the statute books. It's possible the plan was to use it to crush an underfunded and small organisation like AI but even that doesn't stack up.


  • Options
    #59
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,229 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Arcus Arrow wrote: »
    I'll presume your'e not advancing that as some sort of argument. I spoke to a very mannerly and charming chap one day a long time ago in Dublin. Hours before he'd killed a man dead with a sawn off shotgun. Personal conduct is a facet of self advancement, a survival technique and a self defence mechanism.



    This is supposedly an atheist organisation. Why presume that it should be organised around a figurehead? It goes against claims that atheism is not in some ways a religion. How could one person claim to be speaking for people who are defined only by the fact they don't believe in a religious entity. With that type of structure there go all those "atheism is not a religion" arguments.
    We are supposed to be talking about somewhat independent minded people of diverse opinions that can't be predefined by that which they don't believe.

    In fact I'd even be inclined to think if religion in Ireland was abandoned and banished forever you'd have similarly structured organisations spring up in not time. Not being religious doesn't cure the impulses that create it and thereby the conditions that raise the next crop of charlatans.



    I had a file that one of the committee members sent me updates on regularly. It listed all the occasions a member of AI spoke on it's behalf. I deleted it when I changed laptops but the score was something like out of 60 odd occasions there were less than 5 and certainly less than 10 when someone other than the chairman spoke or was interviewed. Certainly all the main and most important ones were hogged by the chairman. That you think that's a good idea and I might not is neither here nor there in some ways. However do you think people should know that going in before they hand over their money? Your comment also doesn't exclude the fact that one individual can't be using the contributions of the many for self promotion.

    And on another point I'll ask you directly: is it two faced hypocrisy for an organisation claiming to be defending free speech to be attempting censorship of it's critics at the same time?

    You could ask the OP a direct question on that one but I doubt you'll get an answer. Apparently the faithful are under orders to stay stum and not come out of the chicken coop.
    Seriously, how are you not getting this "spokesperson speaks for the group" thing?
    Which part aren't you grasping?

    Can you point out where Mike Nugent has ever done self promotion or are you just assuming this whenever he appears?
    And where exactly have AI censored people?


  • Options
    #60
    sponsoredwalk
    Registered Users Posts: 3,038 ✭✭✭sponsoredwalk


    Thought I was reading about Julian Assange in the wiileaks thread there :p,
    the hate & condemnation is so similar with arguments about former members,
    the constant refrain about a personal media image, the whining about a
    public figure even though the organization is against that yada yada yada...
    Still though, haven't read comparisons to murderers with sawn-off shotguns
    in that thread, merely rape there :pac:


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,338 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    DeVore wrote: »
    http://www.atheist.ie/2010/03/ahern-proposes-referendum-on-blasphemy-this-autumn/

    Did I sleep through a referendum on this silliness?!?

    Its past autumn...

    True Alas.

    From what I have heard (and I do not pretend expert knowledge on this at all nor how up to date my information is) the plan is to hold several together. Blasphemy is one of them, a change to the courts structure another and finally one related to Children's Rights.

    The final one is the bottleneck and is disputed by more groups than was originally expected. Until sorted the Cabinet will not agree to hold them together and send them off to the Referendum Commission to have actual questions drafted.

    Of course as has been pointed out there is likely other motivations. It would be difficult to justify holding referendum but not by-elections and the government has obvious motivations for delaying that too.

    A referendum on the issue was promised, and I have faith (sic) it is coming, but clearly not when expected.


Advertisement