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

Our Religious Freedom is at stake ( Childrens rights referendum )

13567…13

Comments

  • #62
    Penn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,916 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    totus tuus wrote: »
    Then it would be better for Christians to not send their children to state-run schools!

    But even in a home-school setting, they cannot teach that homosexuality is bad, as part of their academic lessons. So it makes no difference whether they're home-schooled or state-schooled, anyone teaching a child cannot teach them that homosexuality is bad. It is only outside of school (in the case of home-schooling, outside of teaching hours and in private time) that parents can teach (term used loosely as not in academic sense) that homosexuality is bad.


  • #63
    Onesimus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,055 ✭✭✭Onesimus


    totus tuus wrote: »
    What sort of moral reasons???

    Exactly. What does the state regard as ''true morals''. For example, in the Catholic world it's morally wrong to teach your children that contraception is ok. In the states view, its absolutely morally ok to teach your children that contraception is good and that teaching them otherwise is wrong. So ya see it opens up a can of worms for us all. Our Religious liberty is at stake.

    In Canada as noted with the whole ''teaching that the homosexual act in a Catholic home school setting is against the law'' this already is a violation of what parents can teach their children in accordance to what they deem to be in the best interests of the child. If the child during my homeschooling program asks me if homosexual acts are sinful...? what am I to do? tell a lie? deny my faith?

    It's a complete and utter attack upon religous liberty.


  • #64
    lmaopml
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,080 ✭✭✭lmaopml


    mdebets wrote: »
    Because it doesn't cover psychological abuse. It is also very wide open to interpretation of what moral reasons are.

    I'm anyhow wondering how our Board.ie Catholics could support such a wording. They are always the first to claim, how atheistic the Irish state is. As the state is the one to interpret the law, wouldn't that mean that going by the above wording, the state could just take away any child from its family, if the parent's don't teach them an atheist moral?

    I haven't really got any interest in this referendum in relation to Atheists and Christians as much as I have in relation to the 'Family' and 'Children', and indeed as a parent whether a person is an Atheist one or no mdebets is not my first interest. I've canvased to have minority groups represented in education etc. because it's a basic right that they should have imo - My opinion as a Catholic that is...we're not all that bad you know....looking to control you mwa haha....

    However, I DO have something that is just bugging me about this which I'll try to elaborate on...

    As far as I can see, they could just as easily legislate using the old format for these things things based on the Constitution as it is.

    The Constitution is there in the sense that it should point the way for future legislation, not BE legislative - or indeed to give the 'State' more power over the 'Family' - there is a subtle shift here in relation to the legislation that emerges from it. That's important!

    In so far as having a child removed and placed in permanent adoption for their own protection - even this could be sought after using the current wording in the Constitution, and using the ordinary legislative system as it is.....


    Look, nobody wants to be the 'baddy' that says we don't want our children protected as best as possible. I'm just wondering why they never bothered pursuing the means that has always been available to them, and are now looking to change the Constitution in order to make it a 'duty' of the State to legislate....

    They can already. Without having all this referendum bull.....they just need to DO it. :)


  • #65
    totus tuus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 375 ✭✭totus tuus


    Onesimus wrote: »
    Exactly. What does the state regard as ''true morals''. For example, in the Catholic world it's morally wrong to teach your children that contraception is ok. In the states view, its absolutely morally ok to teach your children that contraception is good and that teaching them otherwise is wrong. So ya see it opens up a can of worms for us all. Our Religious liberty is at stake.

    In Canada as noted with the whole ''teaching that the homosexual act in a Catholic home school setting is against the law'' this already is a violation of what parents can teach their children in accordance to what they deem to be in the best interests of the child. If the child during my homeschooling program asks me if homosexual acts are sinful...? what am I to do? tell a lie? deny my faith?

    It's a complete and utter attack upon religous liberty.

    Well said!


  • #66
    Onesimus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,055 ✭✭✭Onesimus


    Lmao as you took note of earliar, the law is sufficient as it is, why then are these crooks who failed our children, continue to make cuts to child benefit, disability allowance for children ( even did that in the boom years ) and have made many families go bankrupt looking to intervene and gain more power and control in the area of families? Its going to be a disaster if we vote yes.


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    Keylem
    Closed Accounts Posts: 532 ✭✭✭Keylem


    In reality it's a “power grab of monstrous proportions” by government aimed at erasing the natural rights of parents and of children.
    http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/irish-childrens-rights-referendum-poses-major-threat-to-families-parents-sa


  • #68
    lmaopml
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,080 ✭✭✭lmaopml


    Onesimus wrote: »
    Lmao as you took note of earliar, the law is sufficient as it is, why then are these crooks who failed our children, continue to make cuts to child benefit, disability allowance for children ( even did that in the boom years ) and have made many families go bankrupt looking to intervene and gain more power and control in the area of families? Its going to be a disaster if we vote yes.


    Keylem, people have stopped peacefully demonstrating in this country unfortunately...There are families living quite literally in poverty and others who don't care because they're doing ok...Plus, IMF etc. they are always going to hit the people who don't shout the loudest.

    In fairness the CB and the SNA's, even the extension of paid maternity leave and the semi introduction of some paternity leave were all pressures put on our State from outside to introduce....

    That's the 'good' bit! :)

    However, it's blatently apparent that they don't seem to know where to start or how to go about legislating, and this to me seems like enshrining this wording in the Constitution so that we don't have to really think about it at all, and just adopting recommendations through the legal system that others have done the work on in other countries - A one size fits all approach, which is probably not what Irish people would like.

    I could be way off - but I don't see the necessity of touching the Constitution at all in order to do these things if the will is there to pursue through the ordinary system....

    It's the real lazy way. I don't like the ever so slight shift there from Family to State either - it makes me nervous if I'm honest. Not that I think our State is going to impose craziness, but slowly over time I'm not so sure - That's why it was worded the way it is right now, to protect the Family unit and to support them first.


  • #69
    Corkfeen
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,940 ✭✭✭Corkfeen


    Onesimus wrote: »
    Exactly. What does the state regard as ''true morals''. For example, in the Catholic world it's morally wrong to teach your children that contraception is ok. In the states view, its absolutely morally ok to teach your children that contraception is good and that teaching them otherwise is wrong. So ya see it opens up a can of worms for us all. Our Religious liberty is at stake.

    In Canada as noted with the whole ''teaching that the homosexual act in a Catholic home school setting is against the law'' this already is a violation of what parents can teach their children in accordance to what they deem to be in the best interests of the child. If the child during my homeschooling program asks me if homosexual acts are sinful...? what am I to do? tell a lie? deny my faith?

    It's a complete and utter attack upon religous liberty.

    To borrow from Joe Biden, that's a load of malarkey. It's not acceptable for a person who is homeschooling to utilise their position as a teacher to push their agendas. For example it would also be unacceptable to teach creationism to a child in a homeschooling situation. It also isn't part of any educational syllabus which the parent is supposed to adhere to. You're allowed to push your agenda outside of the time when you are supposed to be teaching them. This is not in breach of your freedom of religion.

    I've already asked you elsewhere. Do you intend on leaving the country if it is a 'yes' vote? If not, it would indicate that you don't have much faith in what you are claiming to be fact.


  • #70
    Onesimus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,055 ✭✭✭Onesimus


    To borrow from Joe Biden, that's a load of malarkey. It's not acceptable for a person who is homeschooling to utilise their position as a teacher to push their agendas. For example it would also be unacceptable to teach creationism to a child in a homeschooling situation. It also isn't part of any educational syllabus which the parent is supposed to adhere to. You're allowed to push your agenda outside of the time when you are supposed to be teaching them. This is not in breach of your freedom of religion.

    Denying any act of faith in a homeschool setting and placing conditions on when and where we should talk about the faith is a violation of religious liberty.

    Telling us we can't teach our children this stuff in a homeschool setting is the state pushing their agenda on to our kids. Touche
    I've already asked you elsewhere. Do you intend on leaving the country if it is a 'yes' vote? If not, it would indicate that you don't have much faith in what you are claiming to be fact.

    I'm not in a position to leave the country, I'll have to sit here and suffer the persecuction of it Corkfeen. Leaving is not the answer anyway, thats what an unfit parent does, the fit and ready parent stays and fights for their kids and becomes a light to them.


  • #71
    Corkfeen
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,940 ✭✭✭Corkfeen


    It's an abuse of the parent's role as teacher. Teaching your child something that you believe to be a fact that labels an entire demographic of society as sinners isn't part of your religious freedom. You can do so outside of homeschooling. You're basically arguing for your right to abuse the role as a teacher to brainwash your child with the beliefs that you hold. Homeschooling your child is still within the bounds of the education system so there are rules that one must adhere to, you are viewed as a teacher and the role is to educate rather than teach a faith's fairly questionable stances on groups of people.

    View it as a persecution that you cannot teach a child to look down upon a branch of society if you wish(within school hours though). :pac: It won't make it true though.


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    Onesimus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,055 ✭✭✭Onesimus


    Corkfeen wrote: »
    It's an abuse of the parent's role as teacher. Teaching your child something that you believe to be a fact that labels an entire demographic of society as sinners isn't part of your religious freedom. You can do so outside of homeschooling. You're basically arguing for your right to abuse the role as a teacher to brainwash your child with the beliefs that you hold. Homeschooling your child is still within the bounds of the education system so there are rules that one must adhere to, you are viewed as a teacher and the role is to educate rather than teach a faith's fairly questionable stances on groups of people.

    View it as a persecution that you cannot teach a child as a teacher to look down upon a branch of society if you wish. :pac: It won't make it true though.

    Aren't I so glad people like you are not running the country. I'm pretty sure you are related to Stalin. :pac:

    The state do not have a right to abuse us and brainwash us with what they deem to be true, contraception, abortion, homosexual marriage and so on which violates our religious freedom.

    Religious liberty all the way. I'll be voting NO on November 10th and I can't wait.

    If you want to vote for a government that has failed our children in the past, cut childrens benefits and so on even in the boom years, then go ahead, but your making a big mistake allowing this government that has already failed this nations children by voting yes. So this is the government you trust with your childs best interests is it Corkfeen? Fools really really do exist so it seems. :cool:


  • #73
    Corkfeen
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,940 ✭✭✭Corkfeen


    Onesimus wrote: »
    Aren't I so glad people like you are not running the country. I'm pretty sure you are related to Stalin. :pac:

    The state do not have a right to abuse us and brainwash us with what they deem to be true, contraception, abortion, homosexual marriage and so on which violates our religious freedom.

    Religious liberty all the way. I'll be voting NO on November 10th and I can't wait.

    If you want to vote for a government that has failed our children in the past, cut childrens benefits and so on even in the boom years, then go ahead, but your making a big mistake allowing this government that has already failed this nations children by voting yes. So this is the government you trust with your childs best interests is it Corkfeen? Fools really really do exist so it seems. :cool:
    You've just likened me to Stalin. :rolleyes: You'll find that i'm perfectly in favour of religious people having as much freedom as they like but I draw a line at the abuse of the education system to shove agendas. I'd have as much of an issue if schools started to teach that the religious are evil, it's effectively using education to smear a part of society. Do you really believe the rule in Alberta to be stalinist?


  • #74
    Onesimus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,055 ✭✭✭Onesimus


    Corkfeen wrote: »
    You've just likened me to Stalin. :rolleyes: You'll find that i'm perfectly in favour of religious people having as much freedom as they like but I draw a line at the abuse of the education system to shove agenda. Do you really believe the rule in Alberta to be stalinist?

    You cannot tell people ''I respect your religous freedom but draw the line where you cannot practice or spread your religion in such and such a setting because....''

    That's not respecting religous freedom, thats called being a bully.


  • #75
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,066 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    Onesimus wrote: »
    You cannot tell people ''I respect your religous freedom but draw the line where you cannot practice or spread your religion in such and such a setting because....''

    That's not respecting religous freedom, thats called being a bully.

    No it's not. It's establishing boundaries as to where education ends and where religious instruction begins.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • #76
    Corkfeen
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,940 ✭✭✭Corkfeen


    Onesimus wrote: »
    You cannot tell people ''I respect your religous freedom but draw the line where you cannot practice or spread your religion in such and such a setting because....''

    That's not respecting religous freedom, thats called being a bully.

    No it isn't. If a parent has the religious belief that black people are lesser beings, would you say it should be fine to teach white supremacy in a home schooling environment? You can label the syllabuses of education systems as government bullying but that doesn't make it true.


  • #77
    Onesimus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,055 ✭✭✭Onesimus


    koth wrote: »
    No it's not. It's establishing boundaries as to where education ends and where religious instruction begins.

    It's called ''religious education''. You can use semantics all you want, but semantics do not change realities Koth.


  • #78
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    Onesimus wrote: »
    It's called ''religious education''.

    In teaching the onus in 'religious education' is to teach the child about religions in general, not in your own.
    To be allowed to 'home school' you have to function as a 'teacher'.


  • #79
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,066 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    Onesimus wrote: »
    It's called ''religious education''. You can use semantics all you want, but semantics do not change realities Koth.

    Religious instruction isn't viewed as part of the education system. That's for parents and the respective religious groups to look after.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • #80
    Onesimus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,055 ✭✭✭Onesimus


    Corkfeen wrote: »
    No it isn't. If a parent has the religious belief that black people are lesser beings, would you say it should be fine to teach white supremacy in a home schooling environment? You can label the syllabuses of education systems as government bullying but that doesn't make it true.

    That's not even a religious belief. The Nazis taught that Jews were inferior beings but it wasn't a religous belief. Stop creating fairytales we don't have Corkfeen.

    You can label Catholic education as bullying and abuse but that doesn't make it true either. I've exhausted my time in this thread and don't see why I should spend any more time with anti-religious having to reiterate myself time and time again the same points.

    I'm not worried either. I know this nation as a whole both religious and non-religious are going to give this referendum the boot anyways.


  • #81
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    Onesimus wrote: »
    That's not even a religious belief. The Nazis taught that Jews were inferior beings but it wasn't a religous belief. Stop creating fairytales we don't have Corkfeen.

    You can label Catholic education as bullying and abuse but that doesn't make it true either. I've exhausted my time in this thread and don't see why I should spend any more time with anti-religious having to reiterate myself time and time again the same points.

    I'm not worried either. I know this nation as a whole both religious and non-religious are going to give this referendum the boot anyways.

    You are about 20 years behind the times, the State will become secular, it's inevitable. Your faith will be up to you, as it should be in any fair and just society.


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    Sarky
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,967 ✭✭✭✭Sarky


    Onesimus is in fact so unfazed by the referendum that he started a thread full of slippery slopes, strawmen and sensationalist propaganda against the topic.


  • #83
    Corkfeen
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,940 ✭✭✭Corkfeen


    Hypothetically Onesimus! Mormonism didn't give equal statuses to black people until 1978 btw .... You were the person who used the word 'bullying' and I merely asserted that it was 'abuse ' of the role of teacher.


  • #84
    Onesimus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,055 ✭✭✭Onesimus


    Sarky wrote: »
    Onesimus is in fact so unfazed by the referendum that he started a thread full of slippery slopes, strawmen and sensationalist propaganda against the topic.

    144185625540464668_QntErygP_b.jpg


  • #85
    totus tuus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 375 ✭✭totus tuus


    Revelation 13:4 ;)


  • #86
    G.K.
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,704 ✭✭✭G.K.


    Onesimus, you are missing the point. You are not being stopped from teaching (Or indoctrinating, as you put it in the OP) your children with your catholic beliefs out of school, but being homeschooled doesn't mean your children are no longer in the education environment. It's just a different method of teaching. You still have to conform to the same standards as any other teacher would. A teacher refusing to teach the curriculum would be sacked.

    If this means you have to teach something you don't like/that goes against your faith, then by all means tell your kids what you believe when you are out of the teaching environment. But having your kids at home doesn't mean you can teach them whatever the hell you want in their formal education. There are standards which you have to follow.


  • #87
    Sarky
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,967 ✭✭✭✭Sarky


    totus tuus wrote: »
    Revelation 13:4 ;)

    Ooh, I'm a dragon worshipper! Sweet!
    Hunter S. Thompson wrote:
    “Every now and then when your life gets complicated and the weasels start closing in, the only cure is to load up on heinous chemicals and then drive like a bastard from Hollywood to Las Vegas ... with the music at top volume and at least a pint of ether.”

    See, I can quote from books written in the middle of a narcotics binge too.


  • #88
    YoungIreland
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40 ✭YoungIreland


    The title of this thread is, imho, scaremongering. The wording clearly states that children will only be taken away when the parents fail in their duty and when the child is in danger. Somehow, I don't think that religious practice would qualify under that rationale. Indeed, the arguments made by No campaigners have already been refuted:

    http://tellingitasitisirl.blogspot.ie/2012/09/kathy-sinnott-wrong-about-referendum.html
    http://tellingitasitisirl.blogspot.ie/2012/10/patrick-mccrystal-and-childrens.html

    To be fair, they do have a point about what is going on in Britain, however, I think that the problems there stem from a lack of accountability more than anything else:

    http://tellingitasitisirl.blogspot.ie/2012/10/destruction-of-families-in-uk-due-to.html

    So that's what I think about the referendum anyway. If anyone has any questions, don't hesitate to ask.


  • #89
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,165 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    Onesimus wrote: »
    144185625540464668_QntErygP_b.jpg

    A bit rich, seeing as this is coming from the guy who said another person was related to Stalin...


  • #90
    totus tuus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 375 ✭✭totus tuus


    10 reasons to vote NO!!



  • Advertisement
  • #91
    YoungIreland
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40 ✭YoungIreland


    See above. They have all been refuted.


Advertisement