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

NUIG Suspends Legion of Mary over Leaflets

12467…12

Comments

  • #92
    krudler
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34,788 ✭✭✭✭krudler


    BMJD wrote: »
    I wanna see a Legion Of Doom Vs Legion Of Mary deathmatch

    "And its Sister Mary Francis dropping the big leg off the top rope, will she for for the Crucifix? she tags in the Mother Superior for the double team!"


  • #93
    Phoebas
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,371 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    Dravokivich wrote: »
    It's a form of conditioning. That's what therapy is. It wasn't objectionable viewpoints they "banned." Nothing has been "banned." They've suspended an organisations application to form a society, as all their society appears to be doing, is targeting a group of individuals and attacking them.

    There is nothing to state that the idea of discussing homosexuality, supporting or against, is forbidden there. They just can't endorse a society that is not only staunchly against it, but seeks to target and victimise those who are.
    Ok. 'Banned' isn't the correct term. But they are limiting the LoM because of their views on homosexuality. I don't think the college should be limiting organisations just because they don't 'endorse' them.


  • #94
    efb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 35,514 ✭✭✭✭efb


    Phoebas wrote: »
    Ok. 'Banned' isn't the correct term. But they are limiting the LoM because of their views on homosexuality. I don't think the college should be limiting organisations just because they don't 'endorse' them.

    A university can't support a society that doesn't respect equality


  • #95
    folan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,630 ✭✭✭folan


    Phoebas wrote: »
    Ok. 'Banned' isn't the correct term. But they are limiting the LoM because of their views on homosexuality. I don't think the college should be limiting organisations just because they don't 'endorse' them.

    why not? if they are funding them, or allowing them access to their campus, then not endorsing them is as good a reason as any to stop that.


  • #96
    Dravokivich
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Music Moderators, Politics Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 22,360 CMod ✭✭✭✭Dravokivich


    Phoebas wrote: »
    Ok. 'Banned' isn't the correct term. But they are limiting the LoM because of their views on homosexuality. I don't think the college should be limiting organisations just because they don't 'endorse' them.

    They aren't limiting LoM. LoM have themselves to blame for not following the proper processes, just as much, along with what they intend on doing. Who knows what the rest of their agenda is and who else they may target? They never provided anything to NUIG to state their purpose or intentions. Which is the main reason for the suspension. This campaign is a contributing factor, as a prominent thing they looked to do from the offset, is to attack people. It doesn't matter that those they chose to attack first are homosexual.


  • Advertisement
  • #97
    Phoebas
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,371 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    efb wrote: »
    A university can't support a society that doesn't respect equality
    The LoM mightn't agree that they don't respect equality.

    It seems that the university did support the LoM, just so long as the LoM stayed quiet about their beliefs.
    NUIG wrote:
    Joining a Society is often the first time a student has the chance to get involved with a cause or belief that is important to them. Societies like the Animal Rights Society, the Voluntary Workers Abroad Society, the Legion of Mary and People Before Profit help you develop your sense of Societial justice and put you in touch with like-minded people.


  • #98
    eviltwin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    Phoebas wrote: »
    Ok. 'Banned' isn't the correct term. But they are limiting the LoM because of their views on homosexuality. I don't think the college should be limiting organisations just because they don't 'endorse' them.

    I think its not so much the LOM that is the issue, after all its a long standing Catholic group so you would expect it to be against homosexuality, its more its connection in this instance with Courage and their "treatments".


  • #99
    Phoebas
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,371 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    Dravokivich wrote: »
    They aren't limiting LoM.
    They clearly are limiting them, by suspending them as a college society.
    Dravokivich wrote: »
    LoM have themselves to blame for not following the proper processes, just as much, along with what they intend on doing. Who knows what the rest of their agenda is and who else they may target? They never provided anything to NUIG to state their purpose or intentions. Which is the main reason for the suspension. This campaign is a contributing factor, as a prominent thing they looked to do from the offset, is to attack people. It doesn't matter that those they chose to attack first are homosexual.
    I have to say I'm sceptical of the college mixing in 'process' reasons for their suspension with the complaints about the LoM's beliefs on homosexuality.


  • #100
    Dravokivich
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Music Moderators, Politics Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 22,360 CMod ✭✭✭✭Dravokivich


    Phoebas wrote: »
    The LoM mightn't agree that they don't respect equality.

    It seems that the university did support the LoM, just so long as the LoM stayed quiet about their beliefs.

    That is why they can't be seen to endorse'em. Listing them as an official society implies an association with them, in a supportive and agreeable nature from NUIG and is the reason behind their suspension.
    Phoebas wrote: »
    They clearly are limiting them, by suspending them as a college society.


    I have to say I'm sceptical of the college mixing in 'process' reasons for their suspension with the complaints about the LoM's beliefs on homosexuality.

    You are mixing up quite a few things here. The issue with LoM is not their "beliefs" on homosexuality. It's their targeting of homosexuals, or who else they may decide to target for whatever reason.


  • #101
    Daith
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,246 ✭✭✭Daith


    Phoebas wrote: »
    They clearly are limiting them, by suspending them as a college society.

    Their argument is the soc is infringing on the colleges no discrimination policy. Societies in college don't have the freedom to do whatever they want!


  • Advertisement
  • #102
    whatstherush
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 669 ✭✭✭whatstherush


    Phoebas wrote: »
    The LoM mightn't agree that they don't respect equality.

    It seems that the university did support the LoM, just so long as the LoM stayed quiet about their beliefs.

    I really don't get your point. The college is the administrator of the society system, it is their right (a form of freedom of speech if you will) to decide who they allow into that system. If they don't like the views of a society they have every right to remove that society from their system.

    If I joined the LOM group but didn't share any of their views on sexuality and openly campaigned against them, are the LOM group allowed to remove me from their group?


  • #103
    Christy42
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,106 ✭✭✭Christy42


    Phoebas wrote: »
    The poster said nothing about eating disorders or discrimination.

    I was saying encouraging them is similar to what the poster is saying. If you have freedom of speech to say that gay people should be cured I don't see why you can't encourage these things either. If you ban the two above then I feel you should ban the poster about praying away the gay. I think they should all be banned as they actively harm people in the community. While complete freedom of speech is a nice idea, it just leads to people discriminating and bullying others while hiding behind it.


  • #104
    Phoebas
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,371 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    whatstherush wrote: »
    I really don't get your point. The collage is the administrator of the society system, it is their right (a form of freedom of speech if you will) to decide who the allow into that system. If they don't like the views of a society they have every right to remove that society from their system.

    If I joined the LOM group but didn't share any of their views on sexuality and openly campaigned against them, are the LOM group allowed to remove me from their group?
    I've no argument with NUIG's right to suspend them.
    I would just expect that a university should have a more liberal attitude than I'd expect from the individual student societies. Universities are supposed to be a place for learning and exchange of ideas (even objectionable ideas).
    They obviously have to draw a line somewhere - and going on the text of the poster alone, I think they're being too restrictive.


  • #105
    eviltwin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    The college has a greater duty of care to its students and staff than to any group on or off campus. They did the right thing.


  • #106
    Phoebas
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,371 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    Christy42 wrote: »
    I was saying encouraging them is similar to what the poster is saying. If you have freedom of speech to say that gay people should be cured I don't see why you can't encourage these things either. If you ban the two above then I feel you should ban the poster about praying away the gay. I think they should all be banned as they actively harm people in the community. While complete freedom of speech is a nice idea, it just leads to people discriminating and bullying others while hiding behind it.
    The poster in question didn't say this.


  • #107
    Dravokivich
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Music Moderators, Politics Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 22,360 CMod ✭✭✭✭Dravokivich


    Phoebas wrote: »
    I've no argument with NUIG's right to suspend them.
    I would just expect that a university should have a more liberal attitude than I'd expect from the individual student societies. Universities are supposed to be a place for learning and exchange of ideas (even objectionable ideas).
    They obviously have to draw a line somewhere - and going on the text of the poster alone, I think they're being too restrictive.

    You have read the poster right? It doesn't need to read "Fags stop being so gay" to be offensive.

    You have read the article linked in the OP as well? The poster itself wasn't even the primary issue.
    Phoebas wrote: »
    The poster in question didn't say this.

    Could you summarise the poster, because you seem to be reading it differently than everyone else. Even those who supported LoMs right to publish it.


  • #108
    eviltwin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    Phoebas wrote: »
    The poster in question didn't say this.

    It clearly stated that anyone looking for more information should email Courage directly - not the LOM funnily enough. You can imagine what information they would then be giving.


  • #109
    Phoebas
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,371 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    Dravokivich wrote: »
    Could you summarise the poster, because you seem to be reading it differently than everyone else. Even those who supported LoMs right to publish it.
    It calls gay people to chastity - a mainstream Catholic teaching. Some other mumbo jumbo about not defining yourself on your sexuality alone.

    How did you read it?


  • #110
    Timmyctc
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,825 ✭✭✭Timmyctc


    If you're managing to find a negative slant to what NUIG did RE: this issue you're absolutely wrong tbh


  • #111
    Phoebas
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,371 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    Dravokivich wrote: »
    You have read the article linked in the OP as well? The poster itself wasn't even the primary issue.
    Yeah. I read the article.
    As I said earlier, I sceptical about the colleges' reasoning. This is bound to be seen as suspending them because of their religious beliefs on homosexuality.


  • Advertisement
  • #112
    Daith
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,246 ✭✭✭Daith


    Phoebas wrote: »
    It calls gay people to chastity - a mainstream Catholic teaching. Some other mumbo jumbo about not defining yourself on your sexuality alone.

    How did you read it?

    Move gay people beyond the confines of a homosexual label?

    That could be read in so many ways.


  • #113
    old hippy
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,441 ✭✭✭old hippy


    Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »
    so you're not for free speech or airing your opinion, great. just say that in the future.

    There's freedom of speech and there's wilful incitement to hatred.


  • #114
    Phoebas
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,371 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    eviltwin wrote: »
    It clearly stated that anyone looking for more information should email Courage directly - not the LOM funnily enough. You can imagine what information they would then be giving.
    I've had a quick browse. It seems to be pretty mainstream Catholic stuff.
    Daith wrote: »
    Move gay people beyond the confines of a homosexual label?

    That could be read in so many ways.
    Clearly. I'd be in favour of letting university students draw their own interpretations.


  • #115
    efb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 35,514 ✭✭✭✭efb


    Phoebas wrote: »
    The LoM mightn't agree that they don't respect equality.

    It seems that the university did support the LoM, just so long as the LoM stayed quiet about their beliefs.

    Mightened agree, but are not respecting equality


  • #116
    Phoebas
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,371 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    old hippy wrote: »
    There's freedom of speech and there's wilful incitement to hatred.
    Where exactly do you find the 'wilful incitement to hatred'?


  • #117
    Daith
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,246 ✭✭✭Daith


    Phoebas wrote: »
    Clearly. I'd be in favour of letting university students draw their own interpretations.

    And a number of them found it as discrimination which NUIG found also.


  • #118
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    F*ck religious extremism, and f*ck censorship. They're as bad as eachother.

    *Prepares for an influx of flaming*


  • #119
    efb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 35,514 ✭✭✭✭efb


    “I’m a child of God, don’t call me gay”


  • #120
    old hippy
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,441 ✭✭✭old hippy


    Phoebas wrote: »
    Where exactly do you find the 'wilful incitement to hatred'?

    From societies/organisations/groups who seek to pray or cure homosexuality. And their apologists who claim "freedom of speech" when all they usually wish to do is be free to discriminate and/or victimise.


  • Advertisement
  • #121
    Phoebas
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,371 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    old hippy wrote: »
    From societies/organisations/groups who seek to pray or cure homosexuality. And their apologists who claim "freedom of speech" when all they usually wish to do is be free to discriminate and/or victimise.
    Can you be some specific - in the poster where do you find the 'wilful incitement to hatred'?

    Is praying for someone 'wilful incitement to hatred' these days?


Advertisement