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
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

In response to Philip Boucher-Hayes' documentary

2456

Comments

  • #32
    fritzelly
    Registered Users Posts: 17,230 ✭✭✭✭fritzelly


    gozunda wrote: »
    As in a religous belief? In Europe? I really would love to see the definitive European Convention directive on that.

    The law doesn't exclusively say religion
    Can't post link, google
    article 9 european convention on human rights vegan

    PDF from the ECHR should be a few links down


  • #33
    SinSim
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23 ✭SinSim


    brendane wrote: »

    This original post really highlights the bubble that university's (students and obviously lecturers) live in.

    1. An idiot lecturer sending an ill thought out complaint from her work email.

    2. Immediately highlighting in the email that she is a law lecturer in NUIG so she must be the oracle of all knowledge and must be taken seriously.

    3. Publicly displaying her real name (another idiot move).

    4. Thinking that people were going to be so interested that they would want to be kept updated.

    It also appears the "facts" that the original poster refers to seems to be complete figments of her imagination.

    OP. You are employed to lecture in law. NUIG is not paying you tax payers money so you can become some environmental warrior. I assume from this whole thread, you have very little real world experiences. Educational qualifications coming out your ears but i bet you have never been out of the bubble where you had to work in the real world. You can go to work, spout some crap as fact and some impressionable teenagers will believe every word and you go home believing in your own hype

    When I asked that people refrain from ad hominem I was referring to the above. I'm new here so I'm learning how to post, quote etc.


  • #34
    banie01
    Registered Users Posts: 16,438 ✭✭✭✭banie01


    gozunda wrote: »
    As in a religous belief? In Europe? I really would love to see the definitive European Convention directive on that.

    I feel it may be protected as a "freedom of conscience" however as I alluded to earlier, freedom of conscience does not equate to freedom from criticism or dissent.
    It solely means that the person is free to practice their belief system.
    It does not allow carte blanche to claim discrimination when alternative beliefs or opinions are expressed.


  • #35
    gozunda
    Registered Users Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    fritzelly wrote: »
    The law doesn't exclusively say religion
    Can't post link, google
    article 9 european convention on human rights vegan

    PDF from the ECHR should be a few links down


    I did - no can't find the reference to what the OP specifically posted ref. to other religion / religous belief and the European Convention on Human Rights...

    I may believe the earth is flat however I would never expect that 'belief' to be protect by national or even European legislation ....

    I fail to see how any such tv programme could
    violate "Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights which relates to freedom of conscience protects beliefs such as vegetarianism, veganism and environmentalism on an equal footing to Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Jainism, Hinduism, Buddhism".. ????


  • #36
    fritzelly
    Registered Users Posts: 17,230 ✭✭✭✭fritzelly


    gozunda wrote: »
    I did - no can't find the reference to what the OP specifically posted ref. Religous belief/ religion

    I may believe the earth is flat however I would never expect that 'belief to be protect by national or even European legislation ....

    Not arguing with you, it was used totally out of context or rather certain select aspects were used that are unrelated


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    SinSim
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23 ✭SinSim


    banie01 wrote: »
    SinSim wrote: »
    Please show respect and leave out ad hominems. It's one of the lowest forms of argument. If you have issue with what is written, writing your own cogent thesis would be of great help..

    When someone goes sofar as to include their Job title in their sign off, in an effort to add weight to a poorly constructed complaint, there is no ad-hominem.It is perfectly reasonable to query their qualification to express such a definite view as they sought to reinforce the original complaint by including those details
    The only reason it is even raised is because the complainant included it.
    brendane wrote: »
    OP. If you are so concerned on how the animals were killed, why don't you contact your colleagues in UCD (a fellow NUI) as it was part of their research that the animals were killed.

    This original post really highlights the bubble that university's (students and obviously lecturers) live in.

    1. An idiot lecturer sending an ill thought out complaint from her work email.

    2. Immediately highlighting in the email that she is a law lecturer in NUIG so she must be the oracle of all knowledge and must be taken seriously.

    3. Publicly displaying her real name (another idiot move).

    4. Thinking that people were going to be so interested that they would want to be kept updated.

    It also appears the "facts" that the original poster refers to seems to be complete figments of her imagination.

    OP. You are employed to lecture in law. NUIG is not paying you tax payers money so you can become some environmental warrior. I assume from this whole thread, you have very little real world experiences. Educational qualifications coming out your ears but i bet you have never been out of the bubble where you had to work in the real world. You can go to work, spout some crap as fact and some impressionable teenagers will believe every word and you go home believing in your own hype

    I was referring to the above. I'm learning how to reply and quote, etc.


  • #38
    ahnowbrowncow
    Registered Users Posts: 2,562 ✭✭✭ahnowbrowncow


    SinSim wrote: »
    I was referring to the above. I'm learning how to reply and quote, etc.

    You'll have to learn faster, animals are dying while you tarry.


  • #39
    gozunda
    Registered Users Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    fritzelly wrote: »
    Not arguing with you, it was used totally out of context or rather certain select aspects were used that are unrelated

    Ah ok. It is sill completely inexcusable for a poster posting as an an academic law lecturer to use something like the convention of human rights without reference and in that context and no that is not an ad hominem attack - that is direct criticism.


  • #40
    beefburrito
    Closed Accounts Posts: 695 ✭✭✭beefburrito


    I hope im not intterupting the flow of this thread.
    I think the Op didn't realise that posting up her letter was not a very professional way to go about her business.

    She's passionate about her convictions, but boards isn't the place for this, she had bigger balls than a lot of people, I respect her for that.
    Because not many would be as brave.

    I think there's a section of society who are getting tired and pissed off with people demanding freedom of speech and recognition, but at the same time not wanting people to upset them or slag them off.

    Yes I have grown a fairly thick skin over the year's and I tell ye life is easier when I can laugh at myself and my beliefs or lack of.

    I have no problem with getting a bit of stick because I love a good debate with, Christian's, Muslim's, especially femminists because I'm gone MGTOW myself, I get told I'm bitter and resentful towards women.
    On the contrary I've loads of female friend's some people question my sexuality and say who's your faghag today at times I question it myself.
    Do I care no, do I get upset or feel like my masculinity is being questioned no...

    Anyhow I wish the OP luck with her letter and hope she lightens up and other people who can't take an opinion and feel ridiculed get to where some of us are and calm down.

    Life is hard enough without feeling down about what's outside rather than what's happening at the moment.

    I went through an unhealthy obsession with new age spiritualism, it nearly drove me to a mental hospital.

    Now I just have a simple approach to life, I no longer want to save the world and make people understand life on my terms....

    Have a nice day


  • #41
    cursai
    Registered Users Posts: 2,915 ✭✭✭cursai


    Troll


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    Nekarsulm
    Registered Users Posts: 11,191 ✭✭✭✭Nekarsulm


    Well her letter might satisfy her own ego and sense of injury, but it's going nowhere in the RTE complaints process.
    RTE will consider it, and find no basis to her complaint.

    She can appeal this result, and RTE will review it's decision, and find no basis to her appeal.

    She will be advised by RTE that she can now complain to the BAI.

    The BAI will examine RTE's handling of the complaint and the process used, and confirm the decision made by RTE.

    This result will confirm to the good Professor (Above the Bar) that she is being unfairly judged, and that there is an organised campaign against Veganism.

    Result!


  • #43
    SinSim
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23 ✭SinSim


    gozunda wrote: »
    SinSim wrote: »
    Please show respect and leave out ad hominems. It's one of the lowest forms of argument. If you have issue with what is written, writing your own cogent thesis would be of great help. We need to work together on these issues, not against each other. If you were a vegan or concerned with the life of animals that are exploited, I think you too would find it difficult when writing such a letter. I myself am not a lawyer but as far as I am aware the sentiment and core arguments she makes are correct and should be taken seriously by RTÉ, and that is the important issue at hand - not who wrote the complaint .

    Just to clarify - are you are saying that you are unhappy with the both the TV programme and Maureen O'Sullivans letter of complaint? I somewhat confused to your first and second email on boards.ie tbh

    From my own point of view I found that the programm had a fairly balanced and fair approach with regard to looking at people's perception of veganism and not just the viewpoints of a relatively small minority of dogmatic vegans would describe / equate as their vision of 'veganism'

    I believe the lady describing her approach to veganism (ie "I'm afraid if I call myself vegan a lot of vegans would get mad") would be more representative of the majority vegans that I know - compared to the rather small but vocal minority of extreme vegans who would describe their lifestyle as a de facto 'religion / religous belief.'

    It remains that animals have been eating other animals since the first protozoa crawled out of the primordial ooze. The eating of meat is a part of the flow of energy or entropy of our planet. We may now be the dominant species on that planet but that does not change our part in the planets ecological impetus.

    I'm not too concerned with the letter. If you want to boil it down to happy and unhappy, I'll choose happy. And I'll let the university and RTÉ deal with the rest. But it's right to call in to question the university being implicated.

    I'm unhappy with the program.

    With regards to it being fair, I don't agree but that should have been evident in my post. But let it be said, there were no vegans on the program. Just a somewhat confused flexitarian. It just confused matters.

    In response to primordial ooze and ecological ooze - it's just not what I base my ethics on.


  • #44
    gozunda
    Registered Users Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    SinSim wrote: »
    I'm not too concerned with the letter. If you want to boil it down to happy and unhappy, I'll choose happy. And I'll let the university and RTÉ deal with the rest. But it's right to call in to question the university being implicated.

    I'm unhappy with the program.

    With regards to it being fair, I don't agree but that should have been evident in my post. But let it be said, there were no vegans on the program. Just a somewhat confused flexitarian. It just confused matters.

    In response to primordial ooze and ecological ooze - it's just not what I base my ethics on.

    I do not agree with veganism as an inflexible othodoxy. The lady interviewed is perfectly representative of many vegans imo.

    You may find you quoted "ecological ooze etc" incorrectly and out of the full context. I don't belive there was any mention of ethics (ie the branch of knowledge that deals with human based moral principles). More so inherent ecological processes which ultimatly humans remain part of regardless of any belief system.


  • #45
    Phibsboro
    Registered Users Posts: 1,349 ✭✭✭Phibsboro


    Mentalmiss wrote: »
    ____________________________
    Dr. Maureen O’Sullivan,
    Lecturer (Above the Bar) in Law,

    Including your payscale in your job title really is waving a very big crank red flag.


  • #46
    markodaly
    Registered Users Posts: 13,925 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    Mentalmiss wrote: »

    Dear Sir/Madam,

    I wish to make a complaint about the above programme which violates the European Convention on Human Rights...

    Stopped reading here...

    Perhaps the Vegan movement would be taken with more credibility if they were not so sensitive?


  • #47
    tayto lover
    Registered Users Posts: 51,431 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    When did being a vegan become a movement?
    I thought it was just a dietary choice.

    I might start a movement myself like crispism. I like crisps.


  • #48
    UsedToWait
    Registered Users Posts: 2,273 ✭✭✭UsedToWait


    Could the op please point to the exact wording of the legislation and any relevant cases to justify the claim that RTE have breached the ECHR and 'equality legislation' here?

    Could they also clarify whether they are speaking on their employer's behalf in this complaint?


  • #49
    jh79
    Registered Users Posts: 8,215 ✭✭✭jh79


    UsedToWait wrote: »
    Could the op please point to the exact wording of the legislation and any relevant cases to justify the claim that RTE have breached human rights law here?

    Could they also clarify whether they are speaking on their employer's behalf in this complaint?

    The OP isn't the person who wrote the email. I don't think it was meant to be made public


  • #50
    UsedToWait
    Registered Users Posts: 2,273 ✭✭✭UsedToWait


    jh79 wrote: »
    The OP isn't the person who wrote the email. I don't think it was meant to be made public

    I see..
    Could the op please pass the question on to the esteemed Dr., now that it is in the public domain?

    As someone who doesn't eat meat personally, I find the complaint frankly hysterical and almost certainly counter-productive, much like those 'baby cow stealing' billboards that have recently emerged..


  • #51
    Mancomb Seepgood
    Closed Accounts Posts: 417 ✭✭Mancomb Seepgood


    I haven't seen the documentary yet.There are a number of valid points in this mail. However, the notion that the European Convention on Human Rights would require that a documentary on food be taken down is so far-fetched as to be ridiculous.

    Article 9 covers "the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion". One could debate whether vegetarianism or veganism would fall into those categories (although it certainly isn't a religion). Even if it was a religion, the Convention doesn't appear to protect a religious belief from criticism or indeed mockery. It simply protects the right to hold and practice one's religion freely. Does the documentary prevent anyone from following a vegan diet?

    I'm a card-carrying Vegetarian Society member (although my membership may have lapsed - they aren't the best at keeping in touch with members). I'm a supporter of vegetarian and vegan causes, but it is ludicrous to suggest that there is a human rights issue at stake here, particularly at a time when human rights abuses (including religious persecution) are so widespread.


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    SinSim
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23 ✭SinSim


    markodaly wrote: »
    Mentalmiss wrote: »

    Dear Sir/Madam,

    I wish to make a complaint about the above programme which violates the European Convention on Human Rights...

    Stopped reading here...

    Perhaps the Vegan movement would be taken with more credibility if they were not so sensitive?

    How much credibility do they have now? Less sensitive how exactly? Is the woman who wrote the letter a good representation of vegans in Ireland?


  • #53
    SinSim
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23 ✭SinSim


    Mancomb Seepgood wrote: »
    I haven't seen the documentary yet.There are a number of valid points in this mail. However, the notion that the European Convention on Human Rights would require that a documentary on food be taken down is so far-fetched as to be ridiculous.

    Article 9 covers "the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion". One could debate whether vegetarianism or veganism would fall into those categories (although it certainly isn't a religion). Even if it was a religion, the Convention doesn't appear to protect a religious belief from criticism or indeed mockery. It simply protects the right to hold and practice one's religion freely. Does the documentary prevent anyone from following a vegan diet?

    I'm a card-carrying Vegetarian Society member (although my membership may have lapsed - they aren't the best at keeping in touch with members). I'm a supporter of vegetarian and vegan causes, but it is ludicrous to suggest that there is a human rights issue at stake here, particularly at a time when human rights abuses (including religious persecution) are so widespread.

    What's veganism?


  • #54
    SinSim
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23 ✭SinSim


    UsedToWait wrote: »
    jh79 wrote: »
    The OP isn't the person who wrote the email. I don't think it was meant to be made public

    I see..
    Could the op please pass the question on to the esteemed Dr., now that it is in the public domain?

    As someone who doesn't eat meat personally, I find the complaint frankly hysterical and almost certainly counter-productive, much like those 'baby cow stealing' billboards that have recently emerged..

    Why don't you eat meat?


  • #55
    SinSim
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23 ✭SinSim


    tayto lover wrote: »
    When did being a vegan become a movement?
    I thought it was just a dietary choice.

    I might start a movement myself like crispism. I like crisps.

    What's veganism?


  • #56
    SinSim
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23 ✭SinSim


    tayto lover wrote: »
    When did being a vegan become a movement?
    I thought it was just a dietary choice.

    I might start a movement myself like crispism. I like crisps.

    What's veganism?


  • #57
    banie01
    Registered Users Posts: 16,438 ✭✭✭✭banie01


    SinSim wrote: »
    How much credibility do they have now? Less sensitive how exactly? Is the woman who wrote the letter a good representation of vegans in Ireland?

    Regarding whether the woman who wrote the letter is representative of vegans in Ireland,
    In the opening paragraph of her complaint she confirms that
    I am Chairperson of the Vegetarian Society of Ireland
    This would strongly imply that she has a mandate to speak for a significant cohort of Vegetarians and Vegans.

    The effect of the letter on their and by extension their organisations credibility as a result of the letter?
    I would suppose each person would answer differently, but from a purely professional stand point, if I came across the mode of hysterical, reactionary and poorly grounded argument presented in the letter, in any pleading or missive that came my way...
    Credible would not be a word that sprang to mind.


  • #58
    UsedToWait
    Registered Users Posts: 2,273 ✭✭✭UsedToWait


    SinSim wrote: »
    Why don't you eat meat?

    Personal choice really..


  • #59
    banie01
    Registered Users Posts: 16,438 ✭✭✭✭banie01


    The original Email has been posted publicly on the Vegetarian Society's Facebook page.

    After browsing the comments there, it really is an eye opener to dangers of Echo Chambers and the effect that continuous confirmation bias can have.

    The author of the letter also confirms that her stance regarding the EHRC breech is "the law" and that she is writing to RTE as a lawyer!


  • #60
    UsedToWait
    Registered Users Posts: 2,273 ✭✭✭UsedToWait


    banie01 wrote: »
    The original Email has been posted publicly on the Vegetarian Society's Facebook page.

    After browsing the comments there, it really is an eye opener to dangers of Echo Chambers and the effect that continuous confirmation bias can have.

    The author of the letter also confirms that her stance regarding the EHRC breech is "the law" and that she is writing to RTE as a lawyer!


    I wonder if anyone would care to email Dr O'Sullivan, and ask her to join the discussion here, and enlighten us on the finer points of the ECHR and equality legislation pertaining to dietary choices?


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭[Deleted User]


    banie01 wrote: »
    The original Email has been posted publicly on the Vegetarian Society's Facebook page.

    A warning to all,vegetarian, vegan or otherwise, reading the comments section on that facebook post will probably kill brain cells.


Advertisement