Separation of Church and state?

leeroybrown

I'm a baptised and confirmed Catholic but otherwise I'm agnostic. I only have an issue with religion when it's influence interfeers with the law (One of the events that angered me most this year was when the government made their dodgy deal with the Catholic church to cover their liabilities). I've no problem with out majority Catholic Dáil saying a morning prayer.

Similarly, the Angelus (I think it's called "Time For Reflection" on RTE now) is a case of the national broadcaster providing a traditional service to the majority Catholic audience. I'm very confident that the majority of viewers (license payers) have no problem with a 1 minute break in programming (that costs them nothing extra) to facilitate a very large percentage of the population.

Church weddings are also fine. I like the French system where the legal state wedding is held at the town Mayor's office (the local legal center in every french town) but so long as our system is legally binding and all groups allowed to perform state marriages do so properly then theres no problem.

Schools are increasingly becoming secular. I went to a school run by a Mercy convent. You would have trouble finding a group of people more respectful of the beliefs of others. While I far from enjoyed the religious education I recieved it was based on respect for others, not on forcing people to be Catholic. The amalgamation of schools in areas has also moved many towards a more secular model. Yes, I believe that a secular educational model would be better but this will happen naturally, not by forcing education from the hands of those who managed and funded it so well (in the majority of cases) over the years.

EDIT: Oh, and I had Protestants in my catholic run school who had no issues getting into the school or participating in the schools activities.

The Corinthian

Originally posted by Bond-James Bond
I am aware that there was a consitutional ammendant in 1973 to separate church and state. Some 30 years down the road I feel there has been very little separation of the church from state affairs.

There’s been a gigantic move in the last thirty years in fairness. Picture the situation in 1980 (and this is just off the top of my head):

• Contraception of any description was illegal.
• The clergy was completely untouchable and endemic abuse was hidden.
• To have your identity validated for a passport you could go to a priest.
• You required permission from your local bishop to go to Trinity College Dublin.
• Divorce was illegal.
• Any form of abortion was illegal or refused, regardless of the medical circumstances.
• The Roman Catholic clergy were openly directing their congregations to vote in specific ways in referenda.
• RTE’s logo was a cross

I think you’ll agree that the above situation has changed (RTE’s official logo may not have though).

1. There is a prayer said every day in the Dail. If we are a secular state then god has no place in the running of the state's affairs. If I was a TD I would object to the saying of prayers parliament.

I would agree that this is inappropriate in a parliament that claims to separate State from religion.

2. Our national broadcaster RTE still carries the angleous which is a catholic call for prayer. Another example of the church's invovemnt in state affairs.

Actually, for some bizarre reason, there’s significant popular demand for the Angelus as well as other religious programming. While RTE is a state owned television station, it is also in competition now for viewers, against privately owned TV3, and has a responsibility to supply the programming that is demanded of it, if it so chooses.

Personally, I would not broadcast the Angelus, but then again I would not do so for reasons of quality rather than separation of State and religion, and would treat most reality TV programs in a similar fashion for the same reason.

3. The church's function of registering marraiges which is not their job. This is probably where they inferfere the most. I think it's time to strip them of this function and allow the state to be the only body that can register marraiges. Make it compulsory for a civil marraige before any church functions are carried out.

I would agree that this is inappropriate in a nation that claims to separate State from religion.

4. Their involvement in education. I would summise that 99% of schools in this country are run by the church. I don't think that the church should own schools and impose their ethos on us. I am currently looking for a secular school and can't find one. Is it not time for the state to establish and run secular schools?

Market forces. You will find that religiously run schools are popular because they have good reputations. Secular or State-run schools have consistently had poor reputations.

As a kid, I could have easily been sent to the local State-run school, fifteen minutes down the road. Of course, it had a poor academic record, and so my (very non-religious) family made every effort to send me to schools that would have good academic records - all religiously run.

Of course, much of this is to do with bad policy and funding, leading to an underwhelming State school sector. But that’s not a question of division of State and religion, but one of fiscal rectitude - don’t confuse the two.

Trebor

Originally posted by leeroybrown

not by forcing education from the hands of those who managed and funded it so well (in the majority of cases) over the years.

the church haven't funded schools in decades. the taxpayer fund it the church run it.
What i want to know though is that are the religious order who teach qualified to teach the subjects they do. (I don't mean religion alone)

Originally posted by leeroybrown


EDIT: Oh, and I had Protestants in my catholic run school who had no issues getting into the school or participating in the schools activities.

I stand corrected, but i believe that the majority of people think they need to baptise their children and so do just in case.

yankinlk

Originally posted by Earthman
I simply counted up, the numbers declaring themselves for any of the christian religions and subtracted the rest.
The rest came to about 200,000.
I have no way of knowing how many non practising catholics, still believe in God, except that anecdotally there are many.
So thats where I am getting, my assumption that the prayers said in the Dáil reflect the beliefs of the vast majority of the country.
Incidently I was in the most popular take-away in town last night and do you know what nine out of ten orders were?
Fresh cod and chips regardless of age...I thought that was kind of sweet as it's a Roman Catholic edict for Good Friday isn't it?

Okay, is this guy for real? Please don't post your statistics. I was at a barbecue last night (good friday)- there were 100% meateating non-church going drunks - does that mean the whole country is the same?

Vorbis said: Most church run schools are now fairly secular.

MOST church run schools? are you another fakey statistic poster? what constitutes most in your opinion - as if i cared.

ARE NOW SECULAR? What were they before they prayed in the morning, and at lunch and before they let the kids go home? what were they before they asked for money to give to the new priest starting/old priest finishing up? What about all the other religous crap like the same boring play year after year after year at christmas - for fsake don't the realise some poor parents have three children and have to suffer through 3 versions per year of the same stoopid play about jesus. And they havent enough brains to come up with a new idea next year?

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Trebor

how can a church run school be secular?

Sparks

Originally posted by daveirl
Surely statistics from the census are more accurate than your anecdotal evidence.

To be fair daveirl, the statistic given beforehand was the number of people ordering fish'n'chips in a chipper on good friday - apart from the fact that the census doesn't measure that interesting metric, there's the fact that it may simply be the standard for that chipper, seeing as how "fish'n'chips" is the standard chipper meal in some cases...

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

ronano

Originally posted by Trebor
how can a church run school be secular?

Obviously it cannot but i'm assuming what he mean't was that the churches influence over how the school is run has greatly dwindled over the last few decades.

Originally posted by yankinlk
Okay, is this guy for real? Please don't post your statistics. I was at a barbecue last night (good friday)- there were 100% meateating non-church going drunks - does that mean the whole country is the same?

I said I thought it was sweet,I didn't represent it as being a valid statistic

Originally posted by sparks
To be fair daveirl, the statistic given beforehand was the number of people ordering fish'n'chips in a chipper on good friday - apart from the fact that the census doesn't measure that interesting metric, there's the fact that it may simply be the standard for that chipper, seeing as how "fish'n'chips" is the standard chipper meal in some cases...

Actually, the more normal order in that chipper would be, a snack box,quarter pounder with cheese or a chicken burger...
I'd hazzard a guess that the clientele would be a better random sample though than those at the drunken Barbie yaninlk was at, by virtue of the fact that they walked in off the street and were of all different ages.
/ Still not very scientific though, but sweet nonetheless.

pork99

Originally posted by Earthman
you cannot become either head of state or Prime minister ( as far as I'm aware ) if you are catholic.

You are half right. Under the Act of Settlement of 1701 the Prime Minister may be of any religion, even a Catholic!

But Prime Ministers have more freedoms. They may profess any faith they wish, or none, and remain in office. The current Prime Minister Tony Blair, while notionally a Protestant, is married to a Catholic and has shown an interest in possibly converting to Catholicism himself. This would put him in the curious position of having responsibility for making decisions about the spiritual leadership of a church in which he not only does not believe, but with which the church to which he has so publicly turned has profound doctrinal differences on matters such as apostolic succession and transsubstantiation. Interestingly, were the Queen hypothetically to convert to Catholicism, this would render her instantly ineligible to remain Queen and she would be deemed to have abdicated. So, she must remain in communion with the Church of England in order be in the position of having no choice but to formally approve, in her capacity as Supreme Governor of that Church, major church-related decisions that are made by a person whose links with the same church may be non-existent and who achieved his or her own office as Prime Minister by amongst other things promising to uphold the law, including the law that provides heavy penalties for inappropriate religious discrimination in all other circumstances including the circumstance of his own election, and the law under which the person who is being advised to approve such decisions formally is denied the very religious freedoms that all other citizens including the Prime Minister would fight and in some cases die for.

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

How ridiculous is that? It's a pretty good argument for the complete seperation of church and state.

pork99

Originally posted by vorbis
have some of ye lost the plot? They're not all perverts. ...

...The fact is most of ye are carrying a chip on your shoulders about the church.

I agree. It's a shame that the activities of a few thousand child molestors are ruining things for the other 5 or 6 guys

MeatProduct

Originally posted by vorbis
have some of ye lost the plot? They're not all perverts. ...

...The fact is most of ye are carrying a chip on your shoulders about the church.

Being abused by a priest wouldn't be the most liberating experience for a child. I am utterly disgusted that children have been put in this position. It is revolting. That some people have a "chip" on their shoulders regarding this is not a mystery.

Could you quote someone here who said all priests are perverts?

Nick

The Corinthian

Originally posted by MeatProduct
Could you quote someone here who said all priests are perverts?

Originally posted by pork99
I agree. It's a shame that the activities of a few thousand child molestors are ruining things for the other 5 or 6 guys

Not quite all, but pretty much all according to pork99.

Debating the Roman Catholic Church is an emotive subject at best. I’ve observed that people have had chips on their shoulders about the Church since long before the child abuse cases came to the surface, so it's really not as a result of them.

In addition, it appears to me that in recent years, the Church has replaced the British as the whipping boy of the Irish psyche. Where once we would point to 700 years of oppression as the cause for all of Irelands ills, we now point to our famously priest-ridden culture.

After all, it couldn’t be our own fault...

MeatProduct

Originally posted by The Corinthian
Not quite all, but pretty much all according to pork99.

I was of course referring to Vorbis and asking him to quote from someone who had posted before him on this thread. That's rather obvious.

Nick

pork99

and I was just making a joke

The Corinthian

Originally posted by MeatProduct
I was of course referring to Vorbis and asking him to quote from someone who had posted before him on this thread. That's rather obvious.

Of course you were. Doesn’t change the fact that pork99 made the comment, and did so before you posted.

Originally posted by pork99
and I was just making a joke

I know, but as with a lot of humour the implication is quite earnest.

MeatProduct

Originally posted by The Corinthian
Of course you were. Doesn’t change the fact that pork99 made the comment, and did so before you posted.

That has no merit since it's not the point. Regardless, this is going no where so let's stop it now.

Nick

Bosco

Originally posted by vorbis
...The vast majority have made an immeasurable contribution to education in this country. Most church run schools are now fairly secular.
...Indocintration simply doesn't occur in church schools nowadays.

On these points I have to disaggree with you in the strongest possible terms. The 'immeasurable contribution' the church has made to education in Ireland has come at an unacceptably high price.

The vast majority of Irish primary schools require a certificate of Baptism for each child enrolled, except where the school is multi-denomonational and another major religion is declared. To my knowledge it is not possible to enroll a child in a Christian-owned school in Ireland without labeling your child as belonging to one church or another. It is therefore near impossible in most parts of the counrty to avail of free education and at the same time bring up a child in a secular tradition.

Indoctrination is still taking place on a massive scale in Irish primary schools. The existence of God is taught as fact, and Catholic primary schools play a central role in preparing children for Communion and Confirmation, ceremonies designed in my opinion for the sole purpose of re-enforcing Catholic dogma. To say Irish schools don't play any role in indoctrinating children is undeniably false.

The Corinthian

Originally posted by MeatProduct
That has no merit since it's not the point. Regardless, this is going no where so let's stop it now.

While no one can deny that there has been, and may still be, a serious problem of clerical abuse in the Church in Ireland, the pendulum has apparently swung the opposite way.

pork99’s comment underlines that there is at even a satirical level a fundamental prejudice in people that would tend to believe that abuse and clergy are inseparable.

So the point has merit, even if you choose not to see it.

AngelofFire

i kno ive brought this up several times but many of the problems with church and state seem to stem from devaleras article allowing the catholic church a special position althought the article has been subsequently ommited ireland is still in a number of ways considered to be a roman popery only state.

the way i see it is if rte want to show the angeles or show a catholic mass service on a sunday they can if they want. but they should also show a church of ireland, presbterian and methodist service. for the 160 odd thousand christians in ireland who are not catholic. there should also be a mosque service on firday for the growing number of muslims. and a synagogue service in respect of our jewish community. ive no problem with religious schools as long as the state has the ultimate authority and that all schools run by their respective religious orders are given equal treatment.

pork99

Originally posted by The Corinthian

pork99’s comment underlines that there is at even a satirical level a fundamental prejudice in people that would tend to believe that abuse and clergy are inseparable.

So the point has merit, even if you choose not to see it.

Like most people in this country I went to a Catholic school. It was run by an order of friars. From my memories of that I would say that it was almost a 50-50 thing; 50% of priests were "dodgy" they seemed to get inordinate pleasure out of touching & fondling boys or seemed to get some sort of gratification from beating you. The other 50% were fairly sound, just ordinary guys trying to make the best of things. I noticed the latter type seemed a bit depressed most of the time and the "creepy" type seemed to be enjoying themselves :dunno:

vorbis

pork99 sorry to hear that. Sick bastards like that should be put down.
I went to a Christian Brothers secondary school and found all the brothers to be ok. One of them was nearly senile. Still a better teacher than some of the others
The teaching of pupils for Holy Communion is a bit inappropiate but I think its done mainly for convenience. A non believing child would have the option of skipping that though.

As for needing to belong to a faith in the first place to get into such a school, i think its dependent on the school. Personally, i would have little problems with such criteria given it is a church owned school (as long as there's choice in the area).

Bosco use of the word indoctrination has got to stop. You came through a far more church controlled education yet are an atheist (only guessing). Today, church teachings account for a tiny amount of the information a child hears and sees. In your case, your child will invariably be an atheist given that it the parent's leaning. I get slightly irritated at this false notion that the church is now even capable of indocrinating students.

MeatProduct

Originally posted by vorbis
I get slightly irritated at this false notion that the church is now even capable of indocrinating students.

Why do you think the church wants children to be baptised before they can come to their school? To become Muslim extremists?

Nick

Trebor

Originally posted by vorbis
Personally, i would have little problems with such criteria given it is a church owned school (as long as there's choice in the area).

my problem with that is that all public schools are funded by the taxpayer and as such they should be run in a secular fashion. if the churchs still want to run the schools then they should provide a secular envoirnment and only teach their beliefs in voluntary classes

vorbis

Originally posted by MeatProduct
Why do you think the church wants children to be baptised before they can come to their school? To become Muslim extremists?

Nick

I don't really understand what you're saying. My point was that no one today is going to grow up without hearing negative things about the church. Furthermore the foundation of the church (beliefs etc.) are questioned far more today. In such an environment indoctrination is impossible.

MeatProduct

Originally posted by vorbis
I don't really understand what you're saying. My point was that no one today is going to grow up without hearing negative things about the church. Furthermore the foundation of the church (beliefs etc.) are questioned far more today. In such an environment indoctrination is impossible.

Indoctrination is alive and well Vorbis. A system that requires you to sign up to their beliefs so you can get educated seems odd at best. The child is then educated by people in authority. The child looks up to or fears these people. Either way, the child will take on board some of what this teacher tells them.

This is reinforced by seeing the christian-promoting minute before the 6-1 news on RTE, prayers in the Dail and mass on the TV. All this exposure leads to indoctrination aplenty.

As Terbor stated, there should be an optional class. The child should decide if they want to attend that class. Not the teachers and I would suggest not the parents but that is another issue. There should also be an optional class that teaches about other religions as well as spirituality. Naturally that will never happen as it is too empowering.

Nick

TomF

Just like I love these kind of posts Tom. It lets me know who I should be watching for the next ban. If you have an opinion on this topic post it but please don't post another response like this again or I will take action

Gandalf.

Say no more, say no more. But it is hard to resist the occasional zinger when I read a board that attracts so many village atheists.

sceptre

Originally posted by TomF
Say no more, say no more. But it is hard to resist the occasional zinger when I read a board that attracts so many village atheists.

I rather doubt that boards.ie qualifies as a location for village atheists as it has usually been defined - as an admittedly small community boards might meet the classification but fails to meet the classification of a community made up of devoted and unquestioning believers. You've noticed the orthodox upbringing but missed the key part of the theory. You didn't mean the redefinition from Vern and Bonnie Bullough did you? (the one that implies it's a genetic thing) Even if you did, it's still a poor insult.

Our man in Havana

Originally posted by Bosco

The vast majority of Irish primary schools require a certificate of Baptism for each child enrolled, except where the school is multi-denomonational and another major religion is declared. To my knowledge it is not possible to enroll a child in a Christian-owned school in Ireland without labeling your child as belonging to one church or another. It is therefore near impossible in most parts of the counrty to avail of free education and at the same time bring up a child in a secular tradition.

In that case if a parent took the government to court to force them to provide free education, what would the chances of sucess be?

I suppose you would have a nice case for discrimination on religous grounds at the equality tribunal.