The Hazards of Belief

bnt

Michael OBrien wrote: »

I read that segment by Sam. The overarching motives of ISIS match very closely to the literal Islamic doctrines indeed. None of it is surprising. They have been telling the west their motives from the beginning. The west have been lying to themselves about it, at least in public.

One thing that folks don't seem to get about Islam is that it's not just a religion. It's a complete way of life. Just as there are "Cafeteria Christians", there are Muslims who don't do "all Islam, all the time", sure - but those Muslims are also on ISIS' radar. It's a Salafist view of the Islamic world: skip the last 1,400 years, take the world back to the first days of Islam, when the world was simpler: be a Muslim, be a dhimmi subservient to Islam (pay jizya, be officially worth less as a person), or be dead.

Hotblack Desiato

This is downright crazy.

Religion, nursing and teacher training - what's the connection?

This year students who have accepted primary teaching places at DCU through the CAO will study together in what is essentially one primary teaching course at the college’s new Faculty of Education.

However, in order to protect those religious ethos', DCU is maintaining two separate entry routes, with separate CAO codes.

The pathway for Protestant applicants is through CAO code DC004. They need 435 points. This is a "Restricted Entry" route, reserved for Protestants. All applicants must "attend and pass a qualifying interview".

All other Primary Teaching applicants applied this year using a different CAO code; DC001. This is the former Catholic St Patrick's College route. There was no interview, but these applicants needed a higher score - 465 points.

There is another difference too. Applicants through the main DC001 route have to have Honours Leaving Certificate Irish. But Protestant applicants using the DR004 route do not.

The DCU prospectus states that "applicants with a D3 on Higher Level or C3 on Ordinary Level Irish may be offered places [if] there are insufficient candidates with the Honours Irish requirement".

I have spoken to the parent of a student who has been accepted for Primary Teaching this year. This parent points out that you could have two applicants to the same course; one rejected with Honours Irish and 460 points, and the other accepted with 435 points and Ordinary Level Irish "simply because they are Protestant".

As in education, it is the Catholic church that is dominant. This has led to another unusual situation, this time related to Nursing, and at Trinity College Dublin.

The college has two separate CAO entry routes for Nursing, again depending on a student's religious background. TR091 General Nursing (Meath and St James), and TR093 General Nursing (Adelaide School of Nursing).

The former Protestant Adelaide Hospital is one of three that were brought together a number of years ago to form the new hospital at Tallaght.

Applicants to TR093 (Adelaide) undergo a separate vetting process. According to the Trinity College website, "in selecting applicants the [Adelaide Hospital] Society has regard to its particular obligation to appoint from the Protestant community and also to members of inter-church families".

Applicants must fill out an additional application form to measure eligibility. But the points required of them are lower; 400 as opposed to 425.

In both of these cases - Trinity and DCU - the Protestant participants in the amalgamations appear to have adopted extraordinary measures to protect their religious ethos in the face of the dominant Catholic one.

One would be forgiven for asking - what's wrong with training just 'teachers', and 'nurses'?

But in Ireland that's a complicated question.

The parent who contacted me is asking it though, "We're going to have to stop this nonsense", she says.

Hotblack Desiato

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/education/stem-steams-ahead-as-students-abandon-the-arts-ship-1.2763784

In the wake of the scandal at Maynooth’s Catholic seminary, meanwhile, interest in theology has dropped. Catholic theological studies at Trinity’s least popular and lowest points course. Despite a drop in the number of places available, points have nonetheless tumbled, from 360 to 330. Trinity’s world religions and theology course is Trinity’s second least popular course, with points steady at 360. Theology at the Pontifical University, which has been beset by scandal over the summer, drops by 65 points to 360.

What is the benefit to the taxpayer of funding these at all?

Absolam

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/education/stem-steams-ahead-as-students-abandon-the-arts-ship-1.2763784What is the benefit to the taxpayer of funding these at all?

Probably about the same as the benefit of funding those eponymous 'Arts' degrees (being humanities / liberal arts etc)? In theory, universities aren't just supposed to churn out highly skilled workers, they're supposed to provide us with our next generation of thinkers and artists with a broad-based understanding of society, culture, literature, history, fine art, and philosophy.
The necessary Sorchas to our Ross's? Or maybe the necessary John Humes & Brian Friels to our Dermot Desmonds & Michael O'Learys.

looksee

What an exasperating and depressing load of nonsense! Does this entry requirement mean that you get different certification at the end? What has happened to the 'RC teaching cert' or whatever it was called, required to enable people to teach in Catholic schools? Can the churches not see that this is further encouraging rot from within by insisting that potential teachers undertake to teach something that they quite likely actively do not believe in?

And further to Absolam's strawman argument about Arts degrees, what kind of a 'broad based understanding' is engendered by teaching in a narrow, religion based environment?

Peregrinus

looksee wrote: »

And further to Absolam's strawman argument about Arts degrees, what kind of a 'broad based understanding' is engendered by teaching in a narrow, religion based environment?

Absolam's point was a response Hotblack's query about public funding for theology degrees at Trinity and NUI Maynooth, which hardly offer a "narrow, religion-based environment". Keep up, looksee!

Absolam

looksee wrote: »

What an exasperating and depressing load of nonsense! Does this entry requirement mean that you get different certification at the end? What has happened to the 'RC teaching cert' or whatever it was called, required to enable people to teach in Catholic schools? Can the churches not see that this is further encouraging rot from within by insisting that potential teachers undertake to teach something that they quite likely actively do not believe in?

And further to Absolam's strawman argument about Arts degrees, what kind of a 'broad based understanding' is engendered by teaching in a narrow, religion based environment?

Are you by any chance referring to the other story about the differing points requirements for CoI & RC primary teacher courses?

It's just, this particular article is actually about Arts degrees.

"Stem steams ahead as students abandon the arts ship
Points for arts courses fall to a new low as students question value of such degrees"

As strawman arguments go.... you have to admit it's not one

looksee

Sorry, mea culpa, I got mixed up

silverharp

The Hindus have been quiet for a while....

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/702844/Muslim-migrant-workers-sit-up-Hindu-gang

Muslim migrants humiliated and forced to do sit-ups by Hindu council workers

ELEVEN young Muslim workers were forced to do sit-ups as punishment after refusing to pay for a Hindu festival in India.

recedite

Peregrinus wrote: »

Absolam's point was a response Hotblack's query about public funding for theology degrees at Trinity and NUI Maynooth, which hardly offer a "narrow, religion-based environment". Keep up, looksee!

Theology is certainly a religion based subject. Anyway if they are reducing the number of places available due to a drop in demand, then that indicates a decreasing public expense. Which is good.

silverharp

Saudi Arabian man is jailed for 10 years and given 2,000 lashes for tweeting that he is an atheist and criticising religion

Saudi Arabian man is jailed for 10 years and given 2,000 lashes for tweeting that he is an atheist and criticising religion
The unnamed 28-year-old posted more than 600 tweets before his arrest
He stated that he had the right to express his beliefs
Under Saudi law, professing atheist views is considered terrorism
The man was also fined the equivalent of £4,000


Read more: Saudi man jailed for 10 years and given 2,000 lashes for tweeting atheist beliefs | Daily Mail Online

Michael OBrien

silverharp wrote: »

Saudi Arabian man is jailed for 10 years and given 2,000 lashes for tweeting that he is an atheist and criticising religion

"The only reward of those who make war upon Allah and His messenger and strive after corruption in the land will be that they will be killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet on alternate sides cut off, or will be expelled out of the land. Such will be their degradation in the world, and in the Hereafter theirs will be an awful doom;" Surah 5:33.

"They long that ye should disbelieve even as they disbelieve, that ye may be upon a level (with them). So choose not friends from them till they forsake their homes in the way of Allah; if they turn back (to enmity) then take them and kill them wherever ye find them, and choose no friend nor helper from among them," Surah 4:89

"You will find others who wish to obtain security from you and [to] obtain security from their people. Every time they are returned to [the influence of] disbelief, they fall back into it. So if they do not withdraw from you or offer you peace or restrain their hands, then seize them and kill them wherever you overtake them. And those - We have made for you against them a clear authorization." Surah 4.91

This is why we should stop thinking S.A. rulers are our friends or even possibly our friends.

silverharp

Michael OBrien wrote: »

"The only reward of those who make war upon Allah and His messenger and strive after corruption in the land will be that they will be killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet on alternate sides cut off, or will be expelled out of the land. Such will be their degradation in the world, and in the Hereafter theirs will be an awful doom;" Surah 5:33.

"They long that ye should disbelieve even as they disbelieve, that ye may be upon a level (with them). So choose not friends from them till they forsake their homes in the way of Allah; if they turn back (to enmity) then take them and kill them wherever ye find them, and choose no friend nor helper from among them," Surah 4:89

"You will find others who wish to obtain security from you and [to] obtain security from their people. Every time they are returned to [the influence of] disbelief, they fall back into it. So if they do not withdraw from you or offer you peace or restrain their hands, then seize them and kill them wherever you overtake them. And those - We have made for you against them a clear authorization." Surah 4.91

This is why we should stop thinking S.A. rulers are our friends or even possibly our friends.

Is any Muslim majority country safe for an Atheist?

Michael OBrien

silverharp wrote: »

Is any Muslim majority country safe for an Atheist?

A secular Muslim majority country can be safe for atheists, but the issue is how that works. Basically atheists are viewed as treasonous, especially if they are raised muslim and leave Islam. There is a term for that "murtad fitri". I advise anyone interested in understanding the subtle difference to research that and how muslims view it. Basically the view is that even if you apologise, you should still be killed.

Also I would feel safer with Ahmadiyya or Sufis than standard Shiites and Sunnis.

nozzferrahhtoo

silverharp wrote: »

Is any Muslim majority country safe for an Atheist?

I felt myself quite happy and safe in Morocco I must say. Aside from the numerous attempts to part me amicably from my money that is. Usually by walking 10 paces in front of me wherever I went and then claiming to have guided me there, at a generously low price.

recedite

Unless you had ATHEIST written on the back of your tee-shirt, it would probably be assumed you were a Christian. And Christians, being People of the Book (and not being Jews) are the next best thing to Muslims.

silverharp

recedite wrote: »

Unless you had ATHEIST written on the back of your tee-shirt, it would probably be assumed you were a Christian. And Christians, being People of the Book (and not being Jews) are the next best thing to Muslims.

I assume even Muslims have a certain say nothing and you don't rock the boat, but the test has to be can you (as a native) have a safe online or offline presence as an atheist without fake names etc. and be critical of Islam? Without checking I'd guess Albania might be ok but I think you would run out of example fairly quickly.

PopePalpatine

What's in Nearly Dead Alive! this week?

looksee

I know Alive is in the habit of publishing garbage, but reading that article it was hard to know what they wanted.

I know a lot of family men of the younger generation (ie younger than me!) who make amazingly good fathers and family men. They have lost the assumption that there will be a woman at home to wait on them, and they take at least an equal share of responsibilities in the home and with their children. What is wrong with that? Instead of father being a distant figure who is used to threaten bold children, he is a carer and nurturer and involved with their upbringing.

silverharp

looksee wrote: »

I know Alive is in the habit of publishing garbage, but reading that article it was hard to know what they wanted.

I know a lot of family men of the younger generation (ie younger than me!) who make amazingly good fathers and family men. They have lost the assumption that there will be a woman at home to wait on them, and they take at least an equal share of responsibilities in the home and with their children. What is wrong with that? Instead of father being a distant figure who is used to threaten bold children, he is a carer and nurturer and involved with their upbringing.

its a vague article for sure. On your point things change due to how the economy works, technology etc. thinking that the "1950's" was some kind of permanent model for the future is not a sustainable idea. Raising 5 or 6 kids with no technology demanded that a family worked a particular way. 1 or 2 kids with every time saving gadget means its going to be different.
As for the title of the article you could find any number of variants in the press under various guises

Peregrinus

The article is so vague that it's hard to find anything specific to disagree with. There are the usual dog-whistles thrown in - "strong family life" (= "no divorce"); "marriage as the most solid foundation for the family" (= "no gay marriage"). But the writer doesn't actually pick up these ideas and run with them. The only concrete affirmative thing the article says is that "a strong family life is the best support, protection and source of happiness" and therefore there are "serious responsibilities for all members, especially parents, to defend and foster love, care and support". Well, gee. Isn't that exactly what looksee's male friends "of the younger generation" are doing?

So, yeah, much as you might like to find "hazards of belief" in this article, it's actually quite hard to find any. Not only is nothing especially hazardous manifested in the article, but nothing at all in the article invokes or depends on any kind of religious belief. In fact, the one indirect reference to religion in the article is criticism of the church (along with politicians, scholars and the media) for paying "little attention" to the supposed crisis in masculinity.

I've no doubt you could pick up on some of the themes in the article and work them up into something fairly hazardous. Because it's in Alive we kind of assume that it will be a hazard of belief rather than, say, a Donald Trumpish kind of hazard, though it could go either way. But until it does, there isn't much to criticise.

silverharp

Peregrinus wrote: »

The article is so vague that it's hard to find anything specific to disagree with. There are the usual dog-whistles thrown in - "strong family life" (= "no divorce"); "marriage as the most solid foundation for the family" (= "no gay marriage"). But the writer doesn't actually pick up these ideas and run with them. The only concrete affirmative thing the article says is that "a strong family life is the best support, protection and source of happiness" and therefore there are "serious responsibilities for all members, especially parents, to defend and foster love, care and support". Well, gee. Isn't that exactly what looksee's male friends "of the younger generation" are doing?

So, yeah, much as you might like to find "hazards of belief" in this article, it's actually quite hard to find any. Not only is nothing especially hazardous manifested in the article, but nothing at all in the article invokes or depends on any kind of religious belief. In fact, the one indirect reference to religion in the article is criticism of the church (along with politicians, scholars and the media) for paying "little attention" to the supposed crisis in masculinity.

I've no doubt you could pick up on some of the themes in the article and work them up into something fairly hazardous. Because it's in Alive we kind of assume that it will be a hazard of belief rather than, say, a Donald Trumpish kind of hazard, though it could go either way. But until it does, there isn't much to criticise.

Its a big question but the title has has a certain shaming edge to it. there is no female equivalent of "man up". the article starts with some joke about women running the country so Ill take it its a take on what are men's role in society which is topic that is being discussed elsewhere. I wouldn't describe it as a hazard of belief as its not a religiously owned topic.

Peregrinus

I don't doubt that the article underpins - for the writer, anyway - a distinctly non-egalitarian view of "proper" gender roles. But he never actually says so.

recedite

I think the author may be harking back to a certain kind of "family equality" that may have existed when when gender roles were more fixed.
That is, if the general model was one man working and one woman at home, 50% of people worked outside the home. So although each gender was boxed into a role, in theory at least they both had access to the comforts of a stable home family life and a shared salary.

Whereas now, roughly one third of society still functions like that. But the other 2/3 is split into families where both parents have jobs, and families where neither parents have a job. So these situations can give rise to different sets of problems within the families.

Overall though, net "freedom" has increased, which is a good thing.

silverharp

recedite wrote: »

I think the author may be harking back to a certain kind of "family equality" that may have existed when when gender roles were more fixed.
That is, if the general model was one man working and one woman at home, 50% of people worked outside the home. So although each gender was boxed into a role, in theory at least they both had access to the comforts of a stable home family life and a shared salary.

Whereas now, roughly one third of society still functions like that. But the other 2/3 is split into families where both parents have jobs, and families where neither parents have a job. So these situations can give rise to different sets of problems within the families.

Overall though, net "freedom" has increased, which is a good thing.

it creates a different set of winners and losers. Certainly more potential choice at the individual level however in reality its arguably more difficult today to achieve some of the things that would have been taken as the done thing in the past. If you look at somewhere like Japan "the cost" of having a family has gone up and the economy isn't facilitating the choices people would like to make. I'd imagine the same kind of pressures are creeping in to western countries too.
Its pretty clear that some social indicators are worse now than in the past and that will have negative consequences for some people

robindch

looksee wrote: »

I know a lot of family men of the younger generation (ie younger than me!) who make amazingly good fathers and family men. They have lost the assumption that there will be a woman at home to wait on them, and they take at least an equal share of responsibilities in the home and with their children. What is wrong with that?

I believe the church wants the men to be like it - out there oppressing women and generally restricting what they can do.

recedite

We don't know what society will be like in 50 years time, but you can be sure of one thing, there will be some people looking back with nostalgia at the current era, and others looking back with disdain.

I'd say there will be more part-time workers. Currently job-share arrangements are common enough in female dominated professions such as primary school teaching, but in most jobs it would be frowned upon and seen as a lack of commitment not to put in 40 -50 hours per week.

Also some right wing policies are likely, such as less social welfare for unproductive people, and greater selectivity of immigrants for potentially productive people.

And some left wing policies too, such as universal state education and healthcare, free at the point of use.

Possibly the elimination of social welfare payments altogether and replacement by a state "living wage" arrangement allocated to all citizens, whereby they are free to earn whatever they can in addition to receiving that.

silverharp

recedite wrote: »

We don't know what society will be like in 50 years time, but you can be sure of one thing, there will be some people looking back with nostalgia at the current era, and others looking back with disdain.

I'd say there will be more part-time workers. Currently job-share arrangements are common enough in female dominated professions such as primary school teaching, but in most jobs it would be frowned upon and seen as a lack of commitment not to put in 40 -50 hours per week.

Also some right wing policies are likely, such as less social welfare for unproductive people, and greater selectivity of immigrants for potentially productive people.

And some left wing policies too, such as universal state education and healthcare, free at the point of use.

Possibly the elimination of social welfare payments altogether and replacement by a state "living wage" arrangement allocated to all citizens, whereby they are free to earn whatever they can in addition to receiving that.

there is going to be more of the "gig" economy. Im not sure what the answer is, I tend to distrust a policy that encourages dysfunctional behaviour or encourages a misallocation of resources though.
I'd normally dismiss a universal wage as just another attempt to introduce communism but I did listen to a talk by 2 neutrals on it but still not sure about it. You would certainly need to close down migration from the third world for starters Also the "state" wouldn't be funding this, taxpayers and companies would so if taxes went up just so that people could work on their "music" or run their loss making "farmers market stand" would the productive people just shoot off somewhere else?
Its the paradox of comfort and safety maybe? Our evolution and genes are based on us wanting to survive the challenge of living in a difficult environment. Yet the relative comfort of the modern age is turning some of us into the neurotic off spring of a failing family of aristocrats.

recedite

silverharp wrote: »

You would certainly need to close down migration from the third world for starters Also the "state" wouldn't be funding this, taxpayers and companies would..

Some of the funding would come from corporate tax and revenues from natural resources; both are areas where tax evasion/avoidance are rampant in the Irish situation currently.
But I agree most would have to come from personal taxation. If people feel they are all pulling together in society, they will accept higher taxes, but only as long as everyone gets access to good public services. The Scandinavian countries have been tending towards this kind of model from the 1960's to the 1990's. Unfortunately that economic model is over now for societies such as Sweden, because they have allowed in too many people who have no intention of contributing to the state's kitty.

silverharp

recedite wrote: »

Some of the funding would come from corporate tax and revenues from natural resources; both are areas where tax evasion/avoidance are rampant in the Irish situation currently.
But I agree most would have to come from personal taxation. If people feel they are all pulling together in society, they will accept higher taxes, but only as long as everyone gets access to good public services. The Scandinavian countries have been tending towards this kind of model from the 1960's to the 1990's. Unfortunately that economic model is over now for societies such as Sweden, because they have allowed in too many people who have no intention of contributing to the state's kitty.

good question about Sweden in particular as it doesn't have a free windfall like its neighbour, is it blowing it by a poor migration strategy ? definitely speeding it up for sure. the other question, is the Swedish economy staying as productive in terms of what built it up in the first place? Every Western country has had big productivity gains since the 70's because of technology and while some of the "service economy" increase is natural you cant end up in a situation where the numbers of gov. workers or Education and Health just keeps growing faster than the real economy.

recedite

You have to look at what happens when you pour unskilled migrants into an advanced economy. In the case of a US style economy they provide cheap labour, thus increasing profits for a few wealthy capitalists but depressing wages for ordinary workers. Its dog eat dog, and every man/woman for themselves. These same capitalists will fight tooth and nail to cut back on public services and the likes of public health services (or "obamacare" as they like to call it) They have the money to pay for private hospitals, Yale, Harvard etc.. for themselves.

But in the case of a Swedish style economy the migrants can exist very well on state benefits; free housing education and healthcare. Hence they don't bother working, integrating, or even learning the language. Sooner or later taxes rise and social services become overburdened. The remaining taxpayers resent the fact that not everyone is pulling their weight. Social capital and social cohesion have been lost. The economy is forced then to switch to a more right wing US style economy, which is exactly what some people want.
Why would Sweden allow this to happen? One possible clue is that a few bankster families own a disproportionate number of the businesses in Sweden. For example the Wallenberg family. These are in league with the likes of Peter Sutherland and George Soros. In effect, Sweden up till now consisted of a very socialist minded public, but whose employers were not far off being feudal overlords. Which is a precarious political situation to be in.

So in Europe we are actually moving further away from the more utopian future I described earlier. But 50 years is a long time, so plenty of time for unforeseen "events" to cause a U-turn. Stuff like Brexit, but on a much larger scale.

Hotblack Desiato

PopePalpatine wrote: »

What's in Nearly Dead Alive! this week?

This is from the front cover, they're plugging a book too:



"Show Yourself A Man", should be popular enough in Maynooth

silverharp

^^^
no reviews on Amazon , so we will never know



Canadian story about Muslims upset that their kids have to do music classes in school. Personally not a fan of the schools bending to this pressure

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/mandatory-music-classes-strike-sour-note-with-muslim-parents/article31716832/?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=Referrer:+Social+Network+/+Media&utm_campaign=Shared+Web+Article+Links

When music class begins this week at Toronto’s Donwood Park elementary school, Mohammad Nouman Dasu will send a family member to collect his three young children. They will go home for an hour rather than sing and play instruments – a mandatory part of the Ontario curriculum he believes violates his Muslim faith.

The Scarborough school and the Toronto District School Board originally had offered an accommodation – suggesting students could just clap their hands in place of playing instruments or listen to acapella versions of O Canada – but not a full exemption from the class.

After a bitter three-year fight, however, Mr. Dasu felt he had no other opton but to bring his kids home.



According to documents ob-tained by The Globe and Mail, some parents insist they cannot allow their children to be in the same room where musical instruments are being played. Mr. Dasu, a Koran teacher who sometimes leads prayers at Scarborough’s Jame Abu Bakr Siddique mosque, says he has led the fight on behalf of parents. He has consulted with national Islamic bodies, and requested a letter from the leader of his mosque.

“We here believe that music is haram [forbidden]. We can neither listen to it, nor can we play a role in it,” said the mosque’s imam, Kasim Ingar.

Conceding that Muslims have to adjust when they send their kids to public school, he suggested that some matters, such as teaching music, are beyond debate.

“We do not compromise with anyone on the clear-cut orders and principles conveyed by the Prophet,” said Mr. Ingar, who also leads the Scarborough Muslim Association.

Within Islam, the question of whether Muslims are banned from music is divisive and nuanced. Similar to questions about whether women should wear veils, there is no consensus on the issue.

But Ontario’s primary-school curriculum is unambiguous on music class: It must be taught, without exception, to all primary-school-aged children. Officials at the TDSB say they can only bend the rules to accommodate religious students, but not exempt them.

The Globe used freedom of information laws to access TDSB e-mails on how the issue evolved at Donwood Park, where it first surfaced in 2013.

The released records redact the names of students for privacy reasons, and very few families appear to have been adamant over pulling children from music classes. Early internal e-mails show administrators wanted to find “some common ground.”

robindch

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

"Show Yourself A Man", should be popular enough in Maynooth

I'm gonna have to find me a copy of that edition and leave it around at home with that bit marker-circled for the next time Popette visits

kylith

“We here believe that music is haram [forbidden]. We can neither listen to it, nor can we play a role in it,”

How very sad. Even the most primitive cultures have music and song, it's one of the things that makes us human. I feel sorry for them.

Hotblack Desiato

Sucking the joy out of life, one fatwa at at time.

Hotblack Desiato

Trouble at mill in Athy:

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/religion-and-beliefs/lesbian-couple-to-retake-church-roles-they-were-forced-to-leave-1.2785746

Lesbian couple to retake church roles they were ‘forced’ to leave

Athy activist who asked women to resign ‘will not be intimidated out of the parish’


A married lesbian couple who felt pressured to stand down from choir and Minister of the Eucharist roles in the Catholic parish of Athy, Co Kildare, are to return to those roles at 6pm Mass there on Saturday evening.

Jacinta O’Donnell and Geraldine Flanagan married last July and stepped down from leadership positions in the St Michael’s church choirs due to what they described as pressure by local Catholic activist and editor of the conservative Catholic Voice newspaper Anthony Murphy. He had also conveyed his views to parish priest Canon Frank McEvoy who, the couple said, had been supportive of them.

...

Mr Murphy told The Irish Times he believed their decision to return was as a result of “a campaign of hate and threats of physical violence” against him which the Garda was investigating. He said gardaí had advised him “not to attend Sunday Mass this Sunday [at St Michael’s] for my own personal safety”.

He and his family “will not be intimidated out of the parish or out of the town”. He accused the Catholic Church and Sinn Féin locally of having entered into “a bizarre alliance” against him.

Speaking to Kildare FM on Thursday, Ms O’Donnell said they had stepped down “when we were made aware of Anthony Murphy’s feelings and when we saw some of the very negative and I suppose hateful stuff, really, that was on his Facebook page etc and then when I got the personal text message from him.”

...

“The choir is on the altar, almost centre stage with the priest. It’s a very public contradiction [with church teaching banning same-sex marriage]. The church has to decide whether it believes what it teaches,” he said.

He emphasised it was not a case of gay people not being welcome in the church. “Of course they are welcome in church and to sing in the choir, but they could not assume leadership roles because of the contradiction,” he said.

He instanced what it could lead to; how a young girl on the choir had come home to her mother in Athy when she heard Ms Flanagan and Ms O’Donnell were married and announced she was going to marry her girlfriend too when she grew up.

“If Tesco had a sign saying ‘don’t buy here, go to Dunnes’ or if someone at a Sinn Féin Ardfheis said ‘Vote Fine Gael’, they’d do something,” he said. The email he sent the couple on July 23rd, three days after they married, emphasised that he did not wish to judge them or fall out with them.

It said, he recalled, that they “should have the decency to resign from the choirs and as Eucharistic minister, in the same way as you had the decency to resign from Lay Dominicans. Anything else would be a contradiction and hypocrisy.”

He accused local Athy Sinn Féin councillor Thomas Redmond of launching “a campaign of social media terrorism” against him, “Sinn Féin who oppose almost everything the church stands for, supports the parish priest [in this case]. It’s a bizarre alliance,” he said.

recedite

Its a bizarre story alright, full of contradictions. This Murphy guy is like somebody who finds a field full of ostriches, all with their heads in the sand. So he goes around kicking them all in the ar$e. One of the ostriches turns out to be the Gardai, who had previously been enjoying the peace and quiet.

silverharp

Im not up to date on fatwas concerning vegetarianism and veganism but obviously someone didn't think its kosher

Sonam Mahajan ‏@AsYouNotWish · 2h2 hours ago

This young Indian Muslim woman urged fellow Muslims to celebrate a bloodless Eid. We all can see what happened next.

Michael OBrien

silverharp wrote: »

Im not up to date on fatwas concerning vegetarianism and veganism but obviously someone didn't think its kosher

Here is a video about it.

looksee

Apparently she was killed a few days later.

Michael OBrien

looksee wrote: »

Apparently she was killed a few days later.

First instinct for fundies is death. 7th century thinking.

silverharp

looksee wrote: »

Apparently she was killed a few days later.

thanks for the context, thats shocking

Peregrinus

looksee wrote: »

Apparently she was killed a few days later.

Well, it's not that apparent. Google doesn't seem to know anything about it. LinkedIn reports that she completed an MBA two years after being killed. And PETA India seem to think she's still working for them even today; she's named as the go-to person on their current press releases like this one. She tweeted last month, and posted on her Instagram account yesterday.

There is life after death, it seems!

silverharp

Peregrinus wrote: »

Well, it's not that apparent. Google doesn't seem to know anything about it. LinkedIn reports that she completed an MBA two years after being killed. And PETA India seem to think she's still working for them even today; she's named as the go-to person on their current press releases like this one. She tweeted last month, and posted on her Instagram account yesterday.

There is life after death, it seems!

good to know!, 2000 years ago she'd have been the the founder of a religion :pac:

looksee

Thats good, I was going on a fairly definitive statement at the end of the video.

Peregrinus

There’s a striking contrast, is there not, between the attitudes displayed when someone is threatened with mob violence for dressing in a way that Muslims in Bhopal find provocative, and the attitudes displayed when a Muslim is threatened with mob violence for dressing in a way that French people find provocative? In the first case, the incident is considered shocking, those who threaten her with violence are criticised as fundies displaying seventh-century thinking, and people uncritically accept scurrilous lies being circulated about them. In the latter case, those who threaten violence are backed up by the force of the state, and this meets with, if not unanimous, then certainly quite widespread approval.

A curious double standard, no? In the “hazards of belief” thread, should we be considering the beliefs which underpin this obviously dangerous double standard?

silverharp

Peregrinus wrote: »

There’s a striking contrast, is there not, between the attitudes displayed when someone is threatened with mob violence for dressing in a way that Muslims in Bhopal find provocative, and the attitudes displayed when a Muslim is threatened with mob violence for dressing in a way that French people find provocative? In the first case, the incident is considered shocking, those who threaten her with violence are criticised as fundies displaying seventh-century thinking, and people uncritically accept scurrilous lies being circulated about them. In the latter case, those who threaten violence are backed up by the force of the state, and this meets with, if not unanimous, then certainly quite widespread approval.

A curious double standard, no? In the “hazards of belief” thread, should we be considering the beliefs which underpin this obviously dangerous double standard?

I dont see a huge connection, nobody forced this woman to do this, there isnt a religion which coerces girls and women go around covered in lettuce

Peregrinus

silverharp wrote: »

I dont see a huge connection, nobody forced this woman to do this, there isnt a religion which coerces girls and women go around covered in lettuce

Huh? What has that got to do with anything?

You seem to be saying that if somebody is forced to dress in a way that others find provocative, or if you just assume that they have been forced, then threatening them with mob violence is just fine, and should be reinforced with the threat of state-sanctioned violence. But if they choose to dress provocatively, then the threat of mob violence is objectionable, fundamentalist, etc.

You reinforce my point. Should we not be scrutinising the beliefs which not only underpin dangerous double standards, but lead people to advance transparent nonsense by way of rationalisations for them?

silverharp

Peregrinus wrote: »

Huh? What has that got to do with anything?

You seem to be saying that if somebody is forced to dress in a way that others find provocative, or if you just assume that they have been forced, then threatening them with mob violence is just fine, and should be reinforced with the threat of state-sanctioned violence. But if they choose to dress provocatively, then the threat of mob violence is objectionable, fundamentalist, etc.

You reinforce my point. Should we not be scrutinising the beliefs which not only underpin dangerous double standards, but lead people to advance transparent nonsense by way of rationalisations for them?

what? let me clarify, what happened in that photo was wrong because it was a small mob deciding what do, on that basis alone I don't see a huge connection. nobody should ever be attacked by the public for what they wear