J C wrote: » Of course, we don't know who did this or what their motivation might have been ... but the fact that the people on the A & A seem to be publicly supporting it is both shocking and surprising.
J C wrote: » You are now adding insult to injury, by comparing a Christian Cross to a 'giant Mickey' ... and if this is the kind of blasphemous stuff that people like you want to say to our Christian children, when ye take over the schools of Ireland, then ye must be joking.
obplayer wrote: » And the crucifix? The symbol of the worst punishment the Roman Empire could devise? Nope, I think we are celebrating Roman / Pagan things here.:D
katydid wrote: » Nope, we celebrate Christmas and Easter, which are based on pagan festivals. But they are Christian festivals.
J C wrote: » The people of Ireland are tolerant respectful people who believe in true pluralism including the public expression of all religions and none.
Dades wrote: » Ah now J C, to suggest that people here support the vandalism is simply not true. There's support for not having big crosses on mountains but that's not the same thing. I've seen some banter but nothing more.
Dades wrote: » Your usual sense of humour has deserted you. That wasn't even the suggestion.
Dades wrote: » Also, we'd like the dept of eduction to take over the schools. No religious or non religious organisation should have anything to do there.
challengemaster wrote: » You keep saying this, yet somehow it seems to be going way over your head that erecting crosses in public places is neither tolerant nor respectful towards people who do not share the same belief.
Turtwig wrote: » Mod: I) after hours charter is not a and a. Your link is pointless. ii) This is back seat moderation. Something you've been warned about before. Given the context I'm letting it slide but be advised I have no obligation to do so. To borrow from your own hyperlink that would mean your post warranted a card. iii) I do feel you have a legitimate grievance. Not the way to go about resolving it and you're here long enough to know that. So how bout Rob apologies to you? You apologies to me. We both share our biscuits and express our anger at the removal of the jelly star? As a side note, I'm not in favour of considering every correction of grammar, grammar Nazism. Otherwise I'd still be saying intensive purposes. (Thanks bluey!)
Turtwig wrote: » Mod: JC, do NOT post in this thread again!
recedite wrote: » katydid wrote: » I don't care if it was a cross or a giant Mickey Mouse; what I object to is the wanton vandalism. Do you not think putting up a giant Mickey in a scenic area would be vandalism?
katydid wrote: » I don't care if it was a cross or a giant Mickey Mouse; what I object to is the wanton vandalism.
kylith wrote: » I'd even argue with the claim that Ireland is a mainly Christian country. 80% might have put Catholic on the census, but 10% of them don't even believe in god, and only 34% go to mass. Which works out at (forgive me if my maths is wrong, it's 1am) 27% of the country being practising Catholics. Not a majority by any stretch of the imagination. The census question should really be 'What religion are you a practising member of'.
Religion means different things to different people. It can have to do with beliefs (such as belief in God) and practices (like church attendance and prayer) but also with religious orthodoxy, that is, whether people follow church teachings or not. Let’s begin with beliefs. The three measures include – a belief in God, hell, and life after death. These relate to generic Christian beliefs rather than distinctly Catholic precepts. The survey in the 1970s, showed that 95 per cent of respondents said they believed in God. Move on to more recent times, and looking internationally, how does this compare. In the International Social Survey Programme (ISSP) 2008, it was found that 90 per cent believed in God, representing just a 5 per cent drop. With regard to a belief in hell, 51 per cent of respondents in the 1973–74 survey said they believed in it, compared to 50 per cent in 2008. Whereas in the 1970s, 65 per cent of respondents said they believed in life after death, in 2008, 75 per cent believed in this.
weisses wrote: » I have to disagree ... Being christian does not automatically mean being Catholic /[/url]
weisses wrote: » Can you describe how this is In-tolerant and disrespectful ?
J Mysterio wrote: » Why can't people live and let live.
kandoola wrote: » Im athiest. I dont bother myself worrying about other peoples beliefs and let them believe what they like. They really dont have any effect on me at all in my daily life. They cause me no harm, i cause them no harm. Live and let live.
Cabaal wrote: » Yeah, yeah you're right those Catholics don't have an affect on daily life It's not like none Catholics can be refused entry to state funded schools because they are not Catholic, gay nurses can be fired from state funded hospitals for being gay or certain medical treatment can be denied being made available because it goes against religious ethos in state funded hospitals. All these things are on religious grounds, You think it's live and let live? If you do then you're fooling yourself as Catholic ethos is used to deny equal rights and treatment. They don't believe in live and let live, which is ironic as they preach peace and love,
fisgon wrote: » The fact is that erecting a religious symbol in any place is an attempt to claim ownership.
fisgon wrote: » We put religious symbols on religious places, if you place a religious symbol in a non-religious setting, what you are clearly saying is "this is ours". Especially putting it on top of a mountain, so it can be seen from a long distance, it is an attempt in some way to claim ownership of the mountain, and the surrounding area for one particular belief system.
lazybones32 wrote: » It has been established that the Mountain is owned by 4 farmers. This wasn't a decision by the RCC. It was the initiative of the people of M. Reeks and Beaufort, using steel donated by Liebherr. The 15ft cross isn't visible from the base of the 3,400ft Mountain or from any approach.
kandoola wrote: » My child is in a state funded school. There was no problem at all. I know at least two gay nurses. One male and one female. Both working in public hospitals. They havent been fired and everyone they know, knows they are gay. I think you are looking for problems where there arent any.
kylith wrote: » Not everyone does. I don't, for a start. I would be unlikely to celebrate them regardless of what they were called. I'd even argue with the claim that Ireland is a mainly Christian country. 80% might have put Catholic on the census, but 10% of them don't even believe in god, and only 34% go to mass. Which works out at (forgive me if my maths is wrong, it's 1am) 27% of the country being practising Catholics. Not a majority by any stretch of the imagination. The census question should really be 'What religion are you a practising member of'.
Pro Hoc Vice wrote: » So you have never seen or heard anything so therefore it must not happen. In Ireland religious ethos business are exempt from equality law that's plan and simply wrong. The argument you use is the same as up to the 90's we know it's criminal but sure no one ever charged. To keep a situation that allows discrimination is plain and simply wrong it does not matter if it has not effected you and yours.
Cabaal wrote: » Ok so, but clearly these people identify themselves as Catholic on the census... Not Christian.
Cabaal wrote: » Yet many don't believe a god exists, don't believe the eating Jesus bit and certainly have no interest in listening or reading any sort of scriptures. I doubt they even own bibles.
Cabaal wrote: » Not everyone sees crosses as wholesome icons. To many it represents a history obsession, death, oppression and rape. It's a icon used by a deeply backward organisation that continuous to cause needless deaths throughout the world, allowed criminals to go unpunished and is happy to openly advertise that they see half the world's population as simply inferior. Not to mention that they are happy to deny many equal rights. The oppression of the religion that uses the cross as its icon in ireland continuous to this day in ireland towards children in this country and our health case system. It's not an icon of hope to everyone, Most of these ugly mountain crosses were put up in the catholuc religious year in the 1950s, they represent the Catholic Church.
kandoola wrote: » Feel free to point out where ANY gay nurses are getting fired for being gay and where ANY child will not being allowed to go to school based on their religion. If we can keep the examples to this century that would be good too. And please post example of it actually happening instead of it could happen. Sure they good become astronauts and walk on the moon some day too, but its as unlikely.
Brian Shanahan wrote: » Actually those figures are wrong. First of all 80% don't identify as catholics, because it is a census figure, and censuses in Ireland are fraught with errors and biases (for example mostmammies fill out the census as if their student and working children are still living at home, and tick catlick even when they know the kids are not. The same inflation can be seen with Irish, supposedly half the country speak it. Second the 10% non-belief is not in the 80% but in the core weekly mass going demographic, which is about 10%, lower than the already low 34% of occasional mass goer you are quoting. The true figure for non belief is going to be higher, especially if you factorin the true agnostics who don't know and frankly don't care. I'd put the proper catholic figure at about 25%, non-believers at about 30%, and a seperste cultural catholic group (don't actually believe but are afraid to lose the comfort of group belonging) at another 30%, out of the census "figure" of 85%.
weisses wrote: » That was not the point I was making I even gave an example being christian doesn't automatically means being catholic
