You are not a f*cking DJ. You’re an overpaid, untalented, cake-throwing c*nt.

Scubadevils

I see The Orb are reading this thread...

19 (12 members & 7 guests) Moderators : 3

Scubadevils, jtsuited, barryd09, ianuss, EarlERizer, Zascar+, The Orb, Leif_Erikson, KEN.G, BaZmO*, Liachta Cultaca

joker77

I think this about sums it all up

jtsuited

On the practical side, and this is something that comes up quite a bit in the life of me and the missus, is what we would do for a wedding or a baptism (bear with me I'll explain).

The wedding bit is easy apparently as they now actually let you sign the register anywhere for about 200 euro (or something like that). Then we make up our own little ceremony which will be great craic (or at least I think it will).
Baptism rituals or 'welcome to the world' parties, again like weddings, pretty much exist in all cultures for good reason, so I've been trying to figure out what would be the best way of getting all our friends and family round for a bit of fun to say 'wahoo, a child, brilliant, this is fun'.
And so ya see this is the problem with religion nowadays, the stuff it has hijacked is difficult to reclaim. Life, death, etc. are pretty big things and unfortunately they've still got that market locked down.

The fact that you can't even leave the church and be taken off their books winds me up no end. I was at a christening in Roscommon last year and the priest actually boasted about how somebody wanted to defect and he wouldn't let them because 'you're a Catholic from baptism'. That's fcuked up. No matter what way you look at it, that is seriously wrong.

Scubadevils

For our wedding we decided to just get the fck out of Ireland altogether - we got married back in 2005 and when we were adding it all up in terms of cost and it being suggested that we borrow 25k (thats what it was adding up to) from equity (well, apparent) in our house, I was a bit of a killjoy and said fck that... no way was I borrowing 25k to pay for one day for the next 25 years where people get pissed, give out about the food and get sick on the dance floor. We also had to consider where we got married, i.e. the fact that some people on both sides of the family would have issue with it not being in a church - so again, fck that, out of the country. Went to Cyprus and brought who we wanted around us with us... got married in a quiet Cypriot village by a registrar and then registered the legal documents in Ireland with the registry office. Cost a lot less, amazing setting, no priests, all happy!

joker77

jtsuited wrote: »

On the practical side, and this is something that comes up quite a bit in the life of me and the missus, is what we would do for a wedding or a baptism (bear with me I'll explain).

The wedding bit is easy apparently as they now actually let you sign the register anywhere for about 200 euro (or something like that). Then we make up our own little ceremony which will be great craic (or at least I think it will).
Baptism rituals or 'welcome to the world' parties, again like weddings, pretty much exist in all cultures for good reason, so I've been trying to figure out what would be the best way of getting all our friends and family round for a bit of fun to say 'wahoo, a child, brilliant, this is fun'.
And so ya see this is the problem with religion nowadays, the stuff it has hijacked is difficult to reclaim. Life, death, etc. are pretty big things and unfortunately they've still got that market locked down.

The fact that you can't even leave the church and be taken off their books winds me up no end. I was at a christening in Roscommon last year and the priest actually boasted about how somebody wanted to defect and he wouldn't let them because 'you're a Catholic from baptism'. That's fcuked up. No matter what way you look at it, that is seriously wrong.

For baptisms - 'Naming Ceremonies' are becoming more and more common. Sounds a bit airy fairy to me though, and just compensating for not having a Christening. Unfortunately it's a Christening or nothing in our culture.

Wedding is easy - civil ceremony. The church bit is only a prelude to the meal and drinking in this country anyway.

Funerals is a tough one. For me - I don't really care what happens to my body after I die - once I'm gone, that's it. Funerals are more for the people who are left behind. If I die within my parents life time, even though they know my views I wouldn't hold it against them for having a Catholic funeral - if it made it easier for them that's all that matters, I'd be gone. What my preference would be, would be a proper old school wake - the coffin with me in it gets laid out in a room at home. People come there to pay their respects, and get mightily drunk recanting tales of what a great old sod I was (once can hope right?). Then they'd burn the body. Simples.

joker77

Both of my siblings (older sister and younger brother) got married at civil ceremonies. Neither was in Ireland because neither live here any more. Been to maybe 10 weddings in the last couple of years, I'd say half in churches / half not. Doesn't affect the day in the slightest if it's in a Church or not.

jtsuited

joker77 wrote: »

For baptisms - 'Naming Ceremonies' are becoming more and more common. Sounds a bit airy fairy to me though.

sounds fcukin ghey tbh.

BaZmO*

Just seen on the news there that the US government have issued Twitter with a subpoena and want them to hand over the personal records of those associated with WikiLeaks (and anybody that follows them)

All this so the US government can, wait for this...."Charge Assange with 'something'"

Skype have also been issued with a subpoena.

Plus they told Twitter to keep the court order secret. The US are making a mess of this.

Android 666

Naming ceremonies sound like something to do with crystals and chakras tbh...

I think we should rename the thread the 'Jeff's a God Botherer Thread'!

Zascar

Anyone else feel that Marriage is becoming a whole lot less popular overall these days? I know so many guys (and a girl or two) who say they have no intention of ever getting married. I know an astonishing amount of people who at my age are already separated or divorced. Marriage seems to be a lot less of a pre requisite for having kids these days too.

g5fd6ow0hseima

Zascar wrote: »

Anyone else feel that Marriage is becoming a whole lot less popular overall these days? I know so many guys (and a girl or two) who say they have no intention of ever getting married. I know an astonishing amount of people who at my age are already separated or divorced. Marriage seems to be a lot less of a pre requisite for having kids these days too.

From my young perspective, I've thought of marriage as mainly something carried out due the wishes of the bride, as in.... every girl wanting to walk up the isle and all that bollox - as it beats me as to why any man would want to get married. I see it as outdated, and totally irrelevant in any secular / advanced society.

Traditionally the woman takes the man's name in marriage [I dont agree with this] but less and less women now take their husbands name, which I see as hypocrisy. They want to have a lovely catholic marriage yet choose not to adhere to one of it's fundamental undertakings.

Zascar

only thing is that as a man, if u have kids and u are not married , you have almost no rights ovet your kids , the laws are totally on the mother's side

BaZmO*

Zascar wrote: »

only thing is that as a man, if u have kids and u are not married , you have almost no rights ovet your kids , the laws are totally on the mother's side

I think you've just as many rights whether you're married or not.

I reckon the only real benefits of marriage are tax related and so that your kids will have the same surname as both parents. Oh, and love.

jtsuited

BaZmO* wrote: »

I think you've just as many rights whether you're married or not.
.

At least if you get divorced you can sort out visitation rights. If you're not married and you split with your missus and she decides you're never seeing your kids again, well there's a good chance you won't.

BaZmO*

jtsuited wrote: »

At least if you get divorced you can sort out visitation rights. If you're not married and you split with your missus and she decides you're never seeing your kids again, well there's a good chance you won't.

Tbh, I'm not sure of the ins and outs of rights of the father, but I was always under the impression that fathers didn't really have any whether married or not. Sure wasn't that the whole point of the Fathers For Justice movement?

BaZmO*

Also forget to mention, Joker that picture is mental. Didn't realise it was a gif. Thought I was going crazy.

ianuss

BaZmO* wrote: »

I reckon the only real benefits of marriage are tax related and so that your kids will have the same surname as both parents. Oh, and love.

There's no real tax benefits AFAIK, apart from the widows credit, which is worth something like €5k in the 3 or so years after death. There are different tax bands for married couples but it would totally depend on your individual circumstances whether you would be better off married vrs two singles. I'm not sure you could say to somebody that it is categorically better for people to be married in terms of taxation.

http://www.revenue.ie/en/tax/it/leaflets/it40.html

Android 666

ianuss wrote: »

There's no real tax benefits AFAIK, apart from the widows credit, which is worth something like €5k in the 3 or so years after death. There are different tax bands for married couples but it would totally depend on your individual circumstances whether you would be better off married vrs two singles. I'm not sure you could say to somebody that it is categorically better for people to be married in terms of taxation.

There is no benefit really at all to being married tax wise. I've one is working and the other isn't the person working can take on all the tax credits but it still won't be as much as the tax credits of two people working. Its to do with Tax equalisation that Charlie McCreevy brought in in the 90s along with lower taxes to encourage both partners to work afaik.

I think the state always leans more heavily on the side of the mother in terms of custody for the children. The mother would have to be a complete junkie waste of space for them to award custody to the father.

I remember there was the children of one of the guys who dressed up as a superhero and climbed up onto the houses of parliment as part of the Fathers for Justice campaign complaining that he never say his dad because he was always off campaign about his lack of rights as a father. C'est la vie.

Android 666

BaZmO* wrote: »

Also forget to mention, Joker that picture is mental. Didn't realise it was a gif. Thought I was going crazy.

It's totally brilliant.

seannash

Lads do any of ye live in a house that is over 100 years old?
if you do can you tell me who you have your insurance with.

having major hassle finding someone to insure my gaff:(

electrogrimey

seannash wrote: »

Lads do any of ye live in a house that is over 100 years old?
if you do can you tell me who you have your insurance with.

having major hassle finding someone to insure my gaff:(

Think ours is 1910, and I think we're on MBMA, or else AXA. No idea really.

seannash

electrogrimey wrote: »

Think ours is 1910, and I think we're on MBMA, or else AXA. No idea really.

tried axa but they basically told me to feck off

ill give mbma a try.thanks man

ianuss

That widows tax credit actually will save you thousands if you're married btw. If you're married and jointly assessed by the RC, one person is nominated as the assessable spouse. In most cases in Ireland, I would guess this is the husband.

Now, the thing with tax credits is, when you die, your tax credits die with you. So if the husband dies, the widow will not be entitled to widows tax credit as the tax credits given, are attached to the assessable spouse only. So in order to avail of the credit, you would have to contact the RC and nominate the wife as the assessable spouse. If it was the case that you knew your assessable spouse was dying, it's imperative that you contact the RC before death to switch the nomination.

Eddie Ere

Me nan out enjoying herself.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTvE0Z5HjkI

Android 666

Eddie Ere wrote: »

Me nan out enjoying herself.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTvE0Z5HjkI

Anytime I watch that clip I always think the old dear's got Alzheimer's or something and I can never really laugh at it...

Eddie Ere

She looks out of it. I'm very bored, anyone got any video recommendations to watch? Non porn related, have that sorted for later.

electrogrimey

Eddie Ere wrote: »

She looks out of it. I'm very bored, anyone got any video recommendations to watch? Non porn related, have that sorted for later.

ianuss

Watched this last night after someone here had recommended it. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1559549/

joker77

Android 666 wrote: »

There is no benefit really at all to being married tax wise. I've one is working and the other isn't the person working can take on all the tax credits but it still won't be as much as the tax credits of two people working. Its to do with Tax equalisation that Charlie McCreevy brought in in the 90s along with lower taxes to encourage both partners to work afaik.

I think the state always leans more heavily on the side of the mother in terms of custody for the children. The mother would have to be a complete junkie waste of space for them to award custody to the father.

I remember there was the children of one of the guys who dressed up as a superhero and climbed up onto the houses of parliment as part of the Fathers for Justice campaign complaining that he never say his dad because he was always off campaign about his lack of rights as a father. C'est la vie.

I've a question on single/married tax credits

At the moment I'm single (Revenue view me this way, Social Welfare view us as co-habitating), we're engaged, she's unemployed and not receiving anything from the State because we're 'co-habitating', and it's lookinng unlikely she'll get the Maternity Benefit (in our fúcked up system they won't even give her that).

How much better off would we be if we were married, tax wise? We were planning on getting married this year, but with the pregnancy we've postponed it. At this stage, if it meant a serious improvement in income, I'd be prepared to do a registry office job for the paperwork, and have a party later in the year or next year for the celebration.

ianuss

joker77 wrote: »

I've a question on single/married tax credits

At the moment I'm single (Revenue view me this way, Social Welfare view us as co-habitating), we're engaged, she's unemployed and not receiving anything from the State because we're 'co-habitating', and it's lookinng unlikely she'll get the Maternity Benefit (in our fúcked up system they won't even give her that).

How much better off would we be if we were married, tax wise? We were planning on getting married this year, but with the pregnancy we've postponed it. At this stage, if it meant a serious improvement in income, I'd be prepared to do a registry office job for the paperwork, and have a party later in the year or next year for the celebration.

Well your tax band would increase from €32,800, to €41,800 in the tax year after marriage. Which means, using 2011 figures, you would have an extra €9,000 taxed at the standard rate of 20%, as opposed to the marginal rate of 41%. The net effect is a saving if €1,800 in 2011 if you're earning over €41,800.

http://www.revenue.ie/en/tax/it/leaflets/it2.html

http://www.revenue.ie/en/tax/it/credits/index.html

http://www.revenue.ie/en/tax/it/leaflets/it1.html

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/money_and_tax/tax/income_tax/how_your_tax_is_calculated.html