Will you eat meat tomorrow

efb · 09-03-2014 05:01PM

I can't marry who I want, and the Bishops have come out against that already.

I Heart Internet · 09-03-2014 05:03PM

papu wrote: »

It prevents people from going onto the street , expressing freedom of speech against something they believe is wrong and damaging to humanity and could technically be fined or arrested by blasphemy laws

Where as others can go onto the streets and use the same freedom of speech to bathe an unwilling public in a pro-religious , anti equality or anti-choice speech which is perfectly legally.

No it doesn't.

What things has it prevented you (or others) from bringing to the streets?

I Heart Internet · 09-03-2014 05:04PM

efb wrote: »

Who said I couldn't say what I wanted???

So there is freedom of speech?

efb · 09-03-2014 05:06PM

I Heart Internet wrote: »

So there is freedom of speech?

No! There is not free speech in this country!!!! As I explained by citing the blasphemy laws to MrsByrne

I have no wish to blaspheme currently

Tasden · 09-03-2014 05:07PM

I Heart Internet wrote: »

Absolutely agree.

But what kind of things are we (all of us) prevented from saying due to the blasphemy law?

Anything considered "blasphemous" no?

I'm not going to feign knowledge of the law though, I don't know what that would include.

Can anyone answer, hypothetically if a Catholic organisation are to send out those magazines about how much Jesus loves us and how we are living in sin if we do x y z, is an atheist organisation equally within their rights to distribute magazines stating that its bs and people are living in denial if they do x y z as Catholics? Or would it be blasphemous for the latter?

Cause I'm under the impression its only if they publish or distribute something its governed by law?? Or am I getting it wrong, I know I can Google it but if someone could explain in simple terms that'd be handy

I Heart Internet · 09-03-2014 05:08PM

shruikan2553 wrote: »

So you are happy with the rights homosexuals have in Uganda. Uganda also happens to have Christians as the majority and guess whos the biggest group? The RCC. As long as the majority are for it it must be ok.

No, I'm not. Neither is the RCC, which campaigned against the recent hateful laws.

shruikan2553 wrote: »

They can hold an opinion but if they want a law that will negatively affect a group of people based of their belief system to be enforced on everyone, including people not part of their group they will need something to back it up, especially if what the law is about has no affect on the people who want the law.

For example, I dont like chinos. I could find lots of people who dont. Why would we campaign against these when we could just not wear them?

Anyone can make their case, if their case is found wanting, it won't be convincing and the rest of society will ignore them.

I don't like chinos either.

shruikan2553 wrote: »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irreligion_in_the_Republic_of_Ireland
53% of people answer no to "Does religion occupy an important place in your life?"
Other interesting stats in there too.

Two points:
- 84.2%
- "important place" (entirely subjective)

I Heart Internet · 09-03-2014 05:09PM

efb wrote: »

No! There is not free speech in this country!!!! As I explained by citing the blasphemy laws to MrsByrne

I have no wish to blaspheme currently

So what are others prevented from saying?

The One Who Knocks · 09-03-2014 05:11PM

So..... Did ya's eat meat or what?

I Heart Internet · 09-03-2014 05:12PM

Tasden wrote: »

Can anyone answer, hypothetically if a Catholic organisation are to send out those magazines about how much Jesus loves us and how we are living in sin if we do x y z, is an atheist organisation equally within their rights to distribute magazines stating that its bs and people are living in denial if they do x y z as Catholics? Or would it be blasphemous for the latter?

That's not blasphemy. That's opinion about religion.

I'm still waiting to hear how Ireland's blasphemy law is preventing people from saying whatever they want or holding them back in any way.

Jamsiek · 09-03-2014 05:13PM

Jeremias Tender Cheese wrote: »

I cant see why anyone would rather work the day and have its religious significance removed rather than have a day off in return for not being able to buy drink.

I like the way it is here where I live and in lots of countries, Good Friday off work with the pubs open for those that want to have a drink when they want it. I wouldn't want it any other way.

Tasden · 09-03-2014 05:15PM

I Heart Internet wrote: »

Two points:
- 84.2%
- "important place" (entirely subjective)

The whole census which religion are you/I'm Catholic, is entirely subjective too tbh. I was basically baptised against my will as a baby and am now unable to undo that so technically I am Catholic- up til recently because of this I would've ticked catholic on the census despite having no religious belief or any respect for the church itself. My sister is baptised and would class herself as catholic because of this- she believes in god but not much else, she wouldn't set foot in a RC church. I'm sure there's plenty others who would class themselves as RC for whatever reason but its all subjective.

Fred Swanson · 09-03-2014 05:16PM

This post has been deleted.

Jamsiek · 09-03-2014 05:18PM

catallus wrote: »

It is a sad state of affairs when godless fiends can openly demand that any country should be secular.

Are people not entitled to be heard?
Would you rather live in a fascist dictatorship?

I Heart Internet · 09-03-2014 05:18PM

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

This post makes no sense. Are you saying that the 84% figure is correct and they are "attempting to force their beliefs on the remaining 16%" or that the 84% is "grossly inflated."

It can't be both.

Also:

People afraid of the census person

LOL

Fred Swanson · 09-03-2014 05:21PM

This post has been deleted.

I Heart Internet · 09-03-2014 05:24PM

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

How is this?

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Loads

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I do, but I had to deal with the glaring contradictions in the post first.

shruikan2553 · 09-03-2014 05:26PM

I Heart Internet wrote: »

No, I'm not. Neither is the RCC, which campaigned against the recent hateful laws.

I think I remember the pope blessing one of the people involve in creating it. There could well be a few members are against it but the organisation itself promotes that homosexuality is a sin.

I Heart Internet wrote: »

Anyone can make their case, if their case is found wanting, it won't be convincing and the rest of society will ignore them.

I don't like chinos either.

It still doesnt excuse discriminating or forcing religious beliefs on others. Someone buying alcohol on 1 day has no affect on you. Everyone else is willing to respect if someone doesnt want to eat meat, those who want to eat meat just eat meat. Every has a choice. What benefit is there to banning meat being sold by law? Its just "well if I cant have meat nobody can!"

I Heart Internet wrote: »

Two points:
- 84.2%
- "important place" (entirely subjective)

84.2% what?
It is subjective but many people can say whether or not religion has an important place in their life. I can safely say it doesnt for me and Im sure theres someone here who can say it does for them, we can tell ourselves if it is or not.

P_1 · 09-03-2014 05:26PM

Jeremias Tender Cheese wrote: »

I am a practicing catholic and it has both religious significance and I like the day off aspect.

The most reason I keep referring to the day off aspect though is that I cant see why anyone would rather work the day and have its religious significance removed rather than have a day off in return for not being able to buy drink.

I dunno about anyone else but generally I like to choose when I'd like to take a day off rather than have the day chosen for me.

Tasden · 09-03-2014 05:28PM

I Heart Internet wrote: »

That's not blasphemy. That's opinion about religion.

I'm still waiting to hear how Ireland's blasphemy law is preventing people from saying whatever they want or holding them back in any way.

The 1961 Act includes the offence of blasphemy, as quoted above. The Minister for Justice is proposing to replace this reference with a new proposed offence, stating: “A person who publishes or utters blasphemous matter shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable upon conviction on indictment to a fine not exceeding €100,000.”

“Blasphemous matter” is defined as matter “that is grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters held sacred by any religion, thereby causing outrage among a substantial number of the adherents of that religion; and he or she intends, by the publication of the matter concerned, to cause such outrage.

From blasphemy.ie. So its only opinion unless a Catholic person takes offence or deems it insulting. But if I find it insulting to be told in a magazine that I'm living in sin because I don't live how god wants me to then my only option is to do the christian thing and turn the other cheek?

And again, it doesn't have to affect anyone personally for us to acknowledge its existence.

I Heart Internet · 09-03-2014 05:29PM

shruikan2553 wrote: »

I think I remember the pope blessing one of the people involve in creating it. There could well be a few members are against it but the organisation itself promotes that homosexuality is a sin.

You remember the story you were told maybe. The truth is somewhat different:

In December 2012, Kadaga was in Rome to give a speech at the Seventh Session of the Consultative Assembly of Parliamentarians for the International Criminal Court and the Rule of Law.[9][10] Reports have circulated that Kadaga received a blessing from Pope Benedict XVI at a Vatican mass.[11] Soon after the news broke, Vatican spokesman Father Federico Lombardi issued a statement that said: “relations with the delegation were not out of the ordinary and no blessing was given.” The group of Ugandan MPs greeted the Pope “just like any other individuals attending an audience with the Pope would” and this was “by no means a specific sign of approval of Kadaga’’s actions or proposals.”[12]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebecca_Kadaga

09-03-2014 05:46PM

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

If they are in the majority (which they are) then that's the way it works in every walk of life, majority rules. Anytime there is a vote on something and you are in the minority do you go around saying the majority are "forcing their beliefs" on me.

P_1 wrote: »

I dunno about anyone else but generally I like to choose when I'd like to take a day off rather than have the day chosen for me.

Well if its an additional day off on top of your holiday entitlement (which it is for a lot of people) then you would one day less holidays.

Personally though I like the holidays that are decided for everyone as it means everyone is off at the sometime which I like. Obviously I also want an allocation of holidays for my own use too though.

Femme_Fatale · 09-03-2014 06:09PM

Knight who says Meh wrote: »

Me to. So I know what Im talking about. Took me ages to shed catholic guilt and accept my lack of belief even when fully aware of biblical contradictions, all the evil in The OT and the pure barking mad stuff what with the talking snakes, possessed pigs, water to wine, rising from the dead.
There was a nagging fear there all the time and it would have been so very easy to not think about if and stay in the snuggly Catholic bubble wrap.

I don't know whether your experience is universal though; my catholic upbringing didn't have any effect on me (that I'm aware of anyway).

catallus wrote: »

I don't think anyone is "getting ass-hurt merely over other people not being religious" and nothing more; it is when that irreligiousness turns to intolerance that most people in their right minds would look awry at it.

I agree, but I've seen you objecting to people simply being atheist full stop. E.g. below (contradicting what you've said above):

catallus wrote: »

It is a sad state of affairs when godless fiends can openly demand that any country should be secular.

Knight who says Meh · 09-03-2014 06:11PM

Ace2007 wrote: »

So you do think it is right to be bashed as per your last comment -
Do you believe in talking snakes, magical pregnancy etc? If so (you should as it is integral to your belief system) then tell me have you ever witnessed any of this first hand or expect to do so or ever met anyone who has? If the answer is no then fire ahead and continue to believe it but tell me. Do i really have to respect such cobblers?

Are people allow believe if they want to Yup. And i am very reasonably entitled to think daft things are daft.

without having the defend explain themselves just like a non believe can think what he wants

If I as a non believer believe that there is a magical duck in my sock drawer which grants wishes then you can think Im a gob sh1te if you like. If I and a billion magic duck believers band together and try to change how non duck believers live then Im gonna have some explaining to do!

So. Do you believe in talking snakes?

Choochtown · 09-03-2014 06:17PM

The Census question was loaded and flawed.

It asked "what is your religion?" which implies that you needed to tick a religion. Many people filling it in would blindly tick the Catholic box without too much thought.

A more valid question would have been "Do you practise a religion?" Yes/no
If yes tick from options below. If no move on to next question.

Does anyone in their right mind actually think that over 80% of our population believe that someone can change a wafer into a dead person's body?
I don't type that to belittle the Catholic faith but to be a practising Catholic you have to actually believe that. How many RCC supporters on this thread actually truthfully believe that?

Jamsiek · 09-03-2014 07:00PM

Jeremias Tender Cheese wrote: »

If they are in the majority (which they are) then that's the way it works in every walk of life, majority rules. Anytime there is a vote on something and you are in the minority do you go around saying the majority are "forcing their beliefs" on me.

Yes but why not let people decide for themselves if they want to go for a pint on Good Friday?

Nobody is forcing Catholics to go to the pub if they don't want to.
Can they not just decide not to drink?
Are they that weak willed that they need the government to decide for them?

shruikan2553 · 09-03-2014 07:14PM

I Heart Internet wrote: »

You remember the story you were told maybe. The truth is somewhat different:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebecca_Kadaga

Fair enough, still didnt seem to be against idea. Maybe he convinced them to drop the death penalty and just have the punishment be life in prison.

Choochtown wrote: »

The Census question was loaded and flawed.

It asked "what is your religion?" which implies that you needed to tick a religion. Many people filling it in would blindly tick the Catholic box without too much thought.

A more valid question would have been "Do you practise a religion?" Yes/no
If yes tick from options below. If no move on to next question.

Does anyone in their right mind actually think that over 80% of our population believe that someone can change a wafer into a dead person's body?
I don't type that to belittle the Catholic faith but to be a practising Catholic you have to actually believe that. How many RCC supporters on this thread actually truthfully believe that?

In the link I put up earlier 10% of Catholics dont believe in god, never mind transmutation.

Rough Sleeper · 09-03-2014 08:25PM

Jeremias Tender Cheese wrote: »

If they are in the majority (which they are) then that's the way it works in every walk of life, majority rules. Anytime there is a vote on something and you are in the minority do you go around saying the majority are "forcing their beliefs" on me.

You seem to go on quite a bit about how much you like getting hammered. If you bothered to read your supposed religion's rulebook you'd see that drunkeness is considered sinful:

2290 The virtue of temperance disposes us to avoid every kind of excess: the abuse of food, alcohol, tobacco, or medicine.

How would you feel if better Catholics than yourself decided to impose a rule whereby you could't purchase more than, say, 3 cans or equivalent, to ensure that everyone abides by their Church's moral code?

And why do you go out of the way to avoid eating meat or drinking on Good Friday, then happily go about damning your soul - or at least increasing the time you'll spend being tortured in purgatory - every weekend of the year?

P_1 · 09-03-2014 08:42PM

Jeremias Tender Cheese wrote: »

If they are in the majority (which they are) then that's the way it works in every walk of life, majority rules. Anytime there is a vote on something and you are in the minority do you go around saying the majority are "forcing their beliefs" on me.

Well if its an additional day off on top of your holiday entitlement (which it is for a lot of people) then you would one day less holidays.

Personally though I like the holidays that are decided for everyone as it means everyone is off at the sometime which I like. Obviously I also want an allocation of holidays for my own use too though.

Was never the case in any job I've worked. You either worked it or it was subtracted from your allocated holiday days.

mrsbyrne · 09-03-2014 08:49PM

efb wrote: »

I can't marry who I want, and the Bishops have come out against that already.

Efb the bishops are not stopping you from marrying who you want.
The law of the land currently says you can't marry who you want.
Its likely that law will soon be changed.
You are saying that you don't think the RCC should be allowed to have an opinion and express that opi ion.
Why ?

mrsbyrne · 09-03-2014 08:56PM

Choochtown wrote: »

The Census question was loaded and flawed.

It asked "what is your religion?" which implies that you needed to tick a religion. Many people filling it in would blindly tick the Catholic box without too much thought.

A more valid question would have been "Do you practise a religion?" Yes/no
If yes tick from options below. If no move on to next question.

Does anyone in their right mind actually think that over 80% of our population believe that someone can change a wafer into a dead person's body?
I don't type that to belittle the Catholic faith but to be a practising Catholic you have to actually believe that. How many RCC supporters on this thread actually truthfully believe that?

I believe it.

Will you eat meat tomorrow

Comments