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 there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

State spending €3million on communion rituals

1456810

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,736 ✭✭✭✭kylith


    And if beauty is truth, and truth beauty, does that mean that a really beautiful poem is true, and therefore fact?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,746 ✭✭✭✭Galvasean


    kylith wrote: »
    And if beauty is truth, and truth beauty, does that mean that a really beautiful poem is true, and therefore fact?

    Beauty is deceptive and therefore can't be trusted..
    Like dolphins. Cute but assholes.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 50,430 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    Galvasean wrote: »
    Facts > poems
    one fact that will beat any poem; aged 12, andre the giant was driven to school by a neighbour, because he was too big to fit on the school bus.
    that neighbour was samuel beckett.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 32,865 ✭✭✭✭MagicMarker


    one fact that will beat any poem; aged 12, andre the giant was driven to school by a neighbour, because he was too big to fit on the school bus.
    that neighbour was samuel beckett.

    Deadly, I love that guy from Quantum Leap...What episode was that? Did he just have to give him a lift to leap again?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,736 ✭✭✭✭kylith


    Galvasean wrote: »
    Beauty is deceptive and therefore can't be trusted..
    Like dolphins. Cute but assholes.
    Never trust a species that smiles all the time; it's up to something - Douglas Adams


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,746 ✭✭✭✭Galvasean


    kylith wrote: »
    Never trust a species that smiles all the time; it's up to something - Douglas Adams

    Cats, dolphins, politicians... even the slow loris is venomous!
    slow-loris.jpg


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,788 ✭✭✭MrPudding


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    I can't read them.
    Not too bad on the laptop, still fairly irritating. Horrific reading it on the phone. I am seriously considering putting him / her on ignore as they are simply too difficult to read.

    MrP


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,736 ✭✭✭✭kylith


    Galvasean wrote: »
    Cats, dolphins, politicians... even the slow loris is venomous!
    slow-loris.jpg
    OMG, is it wearing nail polish?!?!?!?? Squeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,734 ✭✭✭Newaglish


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    I can't read them.

    However, it is ironically quite a suitable style for posting poetry.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,849 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    one fact that will beat any poem; aged 12, andre the giant was driven to school by a neighbour, because he was too big to fit on the school bus.
    that neighbour was samuel beckett.

    Nah, it wasn't that he was too big to fit on the bus... he just couldn't stand waiting...





    ...I'll get me coat...

    In Cavan there was a great fire / Judge McCarthy was sent to inquire / It would be a shame / If the nuns were to blame / So it had to be caused by a wire.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,980 ✭✭✭Lucy8080


    havent read through all since ive been gone. but im still seeing some tired arguments. ill address them and show how they are tired and lazy.

    but im also picking up on a bit of shared humour...cant be bad for all sides...


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,980 ✭✭✭Lucy8080


    ickle,

    i disagree that its stealing. i disagree also with the "daily mail" headline grabbing arguments here.

    such as

    "the 200 euro dress"..oh pulease

    "i saved why cant they" ...exceptional circumstances...plus those who saved had a little generousity of spirit in their s.w. payment to give them that choice. thats why i asked dades to tot up with the same spirit.

    " weddings,parties etc" we dont pay for them....oh pulease

    entirely missing the point here.

    but the implicit message to those who genuinely need this payment is ...nothing short of collective shaming of those in need.

    the dept. of education is up to its neck in this....they are responsible for what goes on in the classroom...and preparing children for communion in school is something i accept as part of the make up of this nation.

    i also accept on that basis that we have a responsibility to those children.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,980 ✭✭✭Lucy8080


    galvasean,

    " how are they coming over to my nonsensical position?" you ask.

    hazards of belief i guess sean,

    maybe u have missed it in this thread ...but...

    the folks here..in the main...have said

    they are not against communion.

    they are not against a payment for those who are in exceptional circumstances.

    they have not questioned how someone on the dole can save for weddings...but will use every low argument to assess a struggling family trying to kit out a kid for a day everyones family here has probably partaken in.

    we dont suggest how people on the dole should only spend their cash in charity shops...or all the other lazy ...play to the crowd arguments here...

    i believe in trusting folks. i believe we can give space in a payment to people like those who saved for weddings...

    i believe it would be crass to start telling that person were to shop /how to spend/ and infer they are stealing /sponging draws on the taxpayer.

    as we have seen...there are folks out there who manage their payment.

    they also need that payment.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 17,485 ✭✭✭✭Ickle Magoo


    I disagree - I view it as robbing from those who genuinely have exceptional needs. If it isn't a case of completely over-indulging one particular sect of a multi-cultural society based on bygone celtic tiger-esque priorities - oh purlease tell me what it is?

    Also, if you can give me a break down on why €300+ euro is required for a communion service then I'm willing to listen...as far as I'm aware, that's the only part that could possibly be argued as being necessitated by the equally antiquated school system.

    Hysterical appeals to emotion and historical generosity are just that, btw.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,980 ✭✭✭Lucy8080


    robin,

    i get the feeling u understand my txt spk as u call it

    aint that enough for a chat?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,980 ✭✭✭Lucy8080


    dades,

    the payment is for something that is acknowledged to be an integral part of family life in ireland. so intgral the preparation happens within state schools.

    there is a difference between where we are at ...and where some here want to get to.

    that difference is not being accomodated.

    one solution might be to give a seven year period of grace...so state and church can part amicably.

    kids already born ...if their parents are struggling come communion day....are covered.

    in the meantime the church and parishoners can plan ahead for the coming change...with a period of grace .

    this payment is a reflection of the makeup of this state.

    that makeup is changing...

    im glad my kids are raised.....i would hate to be a parent in ireland in these circumstances and reading some of the comments here.

    it would feel like shame heaped upon shame.

    some parents need this payment....because the mix of religion/state/history in this country meant they were born into to circumstances of fate.

    that should be acknowledged......

    its not their fault that the social pressure/cultural habits they are born into do not fit an educated secularists view of life.

    life is not so complicated for some.

    its just communion day...and they are broke..

    maybe they had savings when the gov. was still reassuring all of a soft landing.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,558 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dades


    Lucy8080 wrote: »
    the dept. of education is up to its neck in this....they are responsible for what goes on in the classroom...and preparing children for communion in school is something i accept as part of the make up of this nation.
    What you fail to grasp here is that most of us here feel that it is entirely inappropriate that schools are used to prepare children for religious sacraments. In basic terms - not everyone is catholic anymore.
    Lucy8080 wrote: »
    i also accept on that basis that we have a responsibility to those children.
    To do what? Perpetrate a tradition that has been allowed turn into a materialistic farce? The children are mere pawns here.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,980 ✭✭✭Lucy8080


    ickle,

    i think its already been pointed out here that this payment is not for all catholics...just those who are in need.

    catholics are taxpayers too...according to the census they still make up the majority.if we had a democratic vote...u might have to accept it.

    but....ive asked dades to make up the numbers here as dades has a family.

    ive argued for 200 euro...not ur 300...

    as for the argument being emotional...im sorry ickle...this cut came from a department of state...a department of state that still sees it as a nesscessary safety net to its citizens...

    i agree with them....im just questioning the cut.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 17,485 ✭✭✭✭Ickle Magoo


    Wow, you're just full of assumptions aren't you - not only am I not male, I also have a family.

    I find the idea of an emotive term like "safety net" being used regarding what is essentially a post-communion party fund, frankly absurd.

    You haven't answered my questions...or given a break-down.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,980 ✭✭✭Lucy8080


    dades,

    i havent failed to grasp it.

    ive acknowledged it...you must have missed it.

    what people here are failing to grasp is that u are still in the minority...and even though u are being accomodated...and ur opinions...

    u offer no accomodation for were we are. and people who need this payment are being smeared...as scroungers...wasters...and a sore on society.

    u want ur way...and u want it now.

    but life aint like that.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,980 ✭✭✭Lucy8080


    ickle,
    i did not make any assumptions about u in that post u just replied to.

    what made u assume i did?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 17,485 ✭✭✭✭Ickle Magoo


    Yeah, repeatedly demanding hundreds of euro to cover a religious service which costs nothing to partake in and a new outfit that can be purchased for less than €50 in a time when funding for vital services is being slashed...why would that look greedy?! :rolleyes:
    Lucy8080 wrote:
    ickle,
    ....
    but....ive asked dades to make up the numbers here as dades has a family.

    :confused::confused::confused:

    Still no break-down I see, that's telling...


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Lucy8080 wrote: »
    dades,

    i havent failed to grasp it.

    ive acknowledged it...you must have missed it.

    what people here are failing to grasp is that u are still in the minority...and even though u are being accomodated...and ur opinions...

    u offer no accomodation for were we are. and people who need this payment are being smeared...as scroungers...wasters...and a sore on society.

    u want ur way...and u want it now.

    but life aint like that.

    We are being accommodated???

    Have a read of the Constitution - in particular Article 44:
    Religion

    Article 44


    2. 1° Freedom of conscience and the free profession and practice of religion are, subject to public order and morality, guaranteed to every citizen.

    The State guarantees not to endow any religion.

    In making this grant to pay for people - even if they are in the majority - to enable their children to participate in the rituals of a specific religion is the State endowing a religion by helping to fund its rituals.

    So, in fact, it is Catholics who are being accommodated despite the fact that the Constitution expressly guarantees this will not happen.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,237 ✭✭✭mcmoustache


    For the love of God, Lucy, please stop writing in txtspk. You might have good arguments but your posts look like they were written by a 13 year old and I can't take them seriously.

    Sorry, mods, but I just can't take it anymore.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,980 ✭✭✭Lucy8080


    ickle,

    i wont be breaking the payment down in here. i can build it up...but thats not on my plate here.

    i dont have to explain...ask ur local t.d. how they came to the original payment...or why...

    this is a cut . if u think vital services will be funded ...they wont.

    more cuts ...more taxes.

    but when u need someone to work for u to pay ur state pension...or tend u in hospital in old age..

    remember these kids.

    and how much u demand of them....and how little u will give.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,980 ✭✭✭Lucy8080


    bana,

    u should read the constitution...

    the amount of religious acknowledgement in it might shock ya.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,980 ✭✭✭Lucy8080


    mc,

    i wont be changing my writing style .

    ur acknowledgement of good arguments...well cheers....defeats ur argument.

    see you next tuesday...or next weekend...who knows.:)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 17,485 ✭✭✭✭Ickle Magoo


    Well you do have to explain, if you want me to accept that this is a necessary payment and should be considered an "exceptional need" then you very much do have to explain. Not unsurprisingly, chanting "Won't someone please think of the childers!!!" just isn't going to cut it.

    In fact, ironically, it's exactly because of those who only have a miserly and ever decreasing state pension to heat their home and put food on the table despite often having paid into state coffers a life-time of tax and those hospital units that are struggling with staff cuts & no fund to update life-saving equipment that makes this payment look so grotesque.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Lucy8080 wrote: »
    bana,

    u should read the constitution...

    the amount of religious acknowledgement in it might shock ya.

    Please stop with the 'pet' names, it is very condescending. If I wanted my user name to be bana I would have made it that.

    I have read the Constitution. I have lectured on both Irish Constitutions. I am well aware of the number references to a deity in both documents.

    The fact remains that the State guarantees it will not endow any religion - yet it patiently is by paying for clothes which are used only for the purpose of participating in a ritual of membership of one particular religion.

    No other religion in Ireland has an equivalent ritual subsidised by the State. Why should Anglicans, Jews, Muslim, Methodists, Presbyterians, Quakers, Mormons, Hindus and Buddhists have to subsidise participation in a Catholic ritual when they are not able to avail of similar largess?


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,237 ✭✭✭mcmoustache


    Lucy8080 wrote: »

    see you next tuesday.

    What's so special about tuesday? Why will you see me then? Why not sunday or monday? Is Tuesday, like, your day off?

    I can't for the life of me figure out why you'd like to see me next tuesday.

    I'm even more confused by your decision to spell out "see" and "you". Why not abbreviate them to "c" and "u"? That's four saved keystrokes right there.

    I'm very confused but it's late and I should go to bed. cul8r


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,490 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Lucy8080 wrote: »
    ickle,

    i wont be breaking the payment down in here. i can build it up...but thats not on my plate here.

    i dont have to explain...ask ur local t.d. how they came to the original payment...or why...

    this is a cut . if u think vital services will be funded ...they wont.

    more cuts ...more taxes.

    but when u need someone to work for u to pay ur state pension...or tend u in hospital in old age..

    remember these kids.

    and how much u demand of them....and how little u will give.
    If only there were some sort of large, very wealthy organisation that the government could start taxing, or even perhaps provide the money themselves for people's communions...

    But they'd have to actually want people to get communions but also care about helping the less fortunate...


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,980 ✭✭✭Lucy8080


    ickle,

    i have actually explained on many levels. read back through the thread.

    try reading sponsoredwalk too.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,980 ✭✭✭Lucy8080


    bannasidhe,

    u should read back thru the thread too. and acknowledge how many times ive been pulled for unimportant issues like calling u bana...with no intent on my part to offend...im just trying to get thru replies.

    it basically sums up the spitirt of this thread. find any reason to dig me out...or defend a weakening position.

    no other religion in ireland had an over 90% call on the census either so recently.

    join up the dots...and stop quoting the constitution to me....its symptomatic of how of far some will reach rather than soften a little to acknowledge were this country is and came from.

    im not trying to dictate the future here....but ignoring the past and present is something u guys have to explain....

    not all taxpayers are athiest.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,980 ✭✭✭Lucy8080


    hi mc,

    just wanted u to acknowledge that txt speak was not such a reach for u.

    thx m8. no more complaints i hope.

    it seems u read something quite rude into that!

    cant understand why u complained to the mods...

    i reckon u are way ahead of me on txt speak.

    bless u.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,980 ✭✭✭Lucy8080


    kingmob,

    the members of that large org . pay their taxes too.

    this is not the u.s.a.

    but if we go that way...be prepared for the catholic voice influencing the government. because of the weight of members.

    bit like george bush and john hagee. or the house of lords v the house of commons. a nightmare for athiests.

    be careful what u wish for. we might have a way we will miss some day.

    an irish understanding of were the boundaries lie....and also of who our neighbours are.

    and quietly accomodating it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,237 ✭✭✭mcmoustache


    Lucy8080 wrote: »
    it seems u read something quite rude into that!

    cant understand why u complained to the mods...

    I'm even more confused now:confused:. I didn't complain or report anything to mods tonight. I prefer sarcasm to reporting posts.

    And I don't see anything rude about you seeing me next Tuesday. I just didn't know what was wrong with Monday or Wednesday. I don't get what's so special about Tuesday. It's late. I think that's what has me all confused.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,490 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Lucy8080 wrote: »
    kingmob,

    the members of that large org . pay their taxes too.

    this is not the u.s.a.

    but if we go that way...be prepared for the catholic voice influencing the government. because of the weight of members.

    bit like george bush and john hagee. or the house of lords v the house of commons. a nightmare for athiests.

    be careful what u wish for. we might have a way we will miss some day.

    an irish understanding of were the boundaries lie....and also of who our neighbours are.

    and quietly accomodating it.
    Your post makes no sense, beyond the childish writing style.
    First the Catholic church also does not pay taxes in the US.
    Second, an organisation paying taxes does not entitle it to influence the government in any way.
    Third, other membership financed organisations also pay tax even though their members pay tax and membership fees/donations.

    And most importantly, the Catholic church does not actually have the weight of numbers, it only pretends to.

    But none of this addresses the question, if the catholic church cares about thier members and that people somehow desperately need this money to buy material things for a religious ceremony, why doesn't the church offer to help them out?
    It's only €3 million. Does the church have more important things to spend the money on?
    And if it does, is what they have to spend the money on more important than what our government needs to spend money on: for example, hospitals or providing actual essentials for people on the dole?


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,980 ✭✭✭Lucy8080


    ah mc,

    cmon,

    " sorry mods i cant take it (txt spk)anymore." and yet u seem to have a mighty grasp of it.

    ur not the worst offender for pettiness here....just one of many.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,980 ✭✭✭Lucy8080


    king mob,

    first...calling my writing style childish...more pettiness despite the fact u can clearly understand the points in it. no probs ...im getting used to it.

    second...the members in the catholic church pay taxes in the u.s.

    third.....the weight of those numbers influences ....are u serious asserting it does not?

    fourth...it has more weight of numbers than any other demographic in this country

    fifth....ive answered more than once why the savings u think u will make are an illusion.

    blame the gov.

    not struggling families and the culture they inherited.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,746 ✭✭✭✭Galvasean


    Seriously, learn to type like an adult. You will get more respect in the long run.
    It's really not that hard to put a few capital letters into your posts.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,490 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Lucy8080 wrote: »
    king mob,

    first...calling my writing style childish...more pettiness despite the fact u can clearly understand the points in it. no probs ...im getting used to it.
    Well I also addressed your points.
    The fact that you continue to post in such a silly manner makes you seem either like you don't actual know how to engage in a discussion, are 13 or are a troll. (Or all three.)
    If you don't like people pointing out that posting in text speak is silly and childish and undermines your credibility, then stop.
    Lucy8080 wrote: »
    second...the members in the catholic church pay taxes in the u.s.
    And the Church does not pay tax.

    Members of a Golf Club pay tax. The Golf club pays tax based on the membership fees they receive.

    Pulling in tax from the Church from the money they make in this country would pay for the benefit you think is so important and then some.
    So why exactly shouldn't they tax the Church?
    Lucy8080 wrote: »
    third.....the weight of those numbers influences ....are u serious asserting it does not?
    And the supposed weight of numbers doesn't actually factor in about a discussion of whether or not the Church should pay tax.
    Lucy8080 wrote: »
    fourth...it has more weight of numbers than any other demographic in this country
    But this number is over inflated. The number of practising catholics is much lower than 90%. The number of those who agree with the church's policies is much lower still.
    And I'd wager the number of people in Ireland who would vote in favour of taxing the church would be enough to be the majority.
    Lucy8080 wrote: »
    fifth....ive answered more than once why the savings u think u will make are an illusion.

    blame the gov.

    not struggling families and the culture they inherited.
    But this does not answer the question I asked you.
    Why doesn't the church pay if it's so important?
    Whether or not you think that the money is going somewhere useful is irrelevant to this question.

    And if they are to cut benefits, it's better that than cutting into weekly allowances by any amount.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,038 ✭✭✭sponsoredwalk


    I'm drunk off my face & I can spot all that I've written below:
    that's telling...
    Galvasean wrote: »
    Seriously, learn to type like an adult. You will get more respect in the long run.
    It's really not that hard to put a few capital letters into your posts.


    How can people just accept posts like this? I mean the rankest hypocrisy
    can be exemplified by just examining Galvasean's own posts in this
    thread. I mean more than one poster brags about their love for rational
    thinking yet they totally ignore such craziness - why don't at least one of
    those who brag about their love of rationality on this forum even just
    examine this latest post in comparison with your earlier ones & apply
    that critical thought process they'd apparently die for. You may dislike
    &/or disagree with everything I'm saying as regards the argument but
    you can't deny the hypocrisy of this latest comment or the others that
    deserve equally confrontational responses.
    King Mob wrote: »
    Your post makes no sense, beyond the childish writing style.

    The childish writing style is the only thing that makes sense?
    What a superfluous comment, I don't consider the post's in any way
    childish & quite frankly I consider it extremely childish & petty to make
    comments like this that betray all the cynical ignorance of bigots who
    just don't like to accept anybody who looks different, who has long hair,
    who like to read, who likes science etc... But of course who am I to
    speak considering I'm just one of those others who posts different as
    well so I'm obviously biased.
    King Mob wrote: »
    The fact that you continue to post in such a silly manner makes you seem either like you don't actual know how to engage in a discussion, are 13 or are a troll. (Or all three.)

    Such a scientific conclusion that just follows, as if by logic, from such
    iron-clad premises. I see the truth table of possibilities you've drawn up
    for us is just impeccably laid out & absolutely no other possibilities could
    arise. People just accept these kinds of comments without question?
    King Mob wrote: »
    But none of this addresses the question, if the catholic church cares about thier members and that people somehow desperately need this money to buy material things for a religious ceremony, why doesn't the church offer to help them out?

    As fantastic a question as this is, it's entirely irrelevant to the thread &
    I'm surprised such a trivial question could be offered as some form of
    counterexample to the topic. Why should those greedy fcukers pay
    for this? They don't care, in fact priests encourage emphasis on not
    spending money on the day as it distracts from the event (as a quick
    google can convince you of). It's the recognition of the non-religious
    aspects of this event coupled with the historical societal importance
    that fuels the government in providing for this, hence the rank ignorance
    in the argument that religion has anything more than a coincidental
    relationship to this issue.
    kylith wrote: »
    There are contradictory interpretations because it's a fecking poem, not a treatise on public spending.

    As much as I want to respond entirely to your post I think this bit of
    your response sums the rest up entirely in that you ignore what I say
    & respond to something you've said in a manner to justify your previous
    claim. Note that I called your charlatanism out & you respond with more
    of it, I can't argue with nonsense like this, it's a total waste of time.

    I disagree - I view it as robbing from those who genuinely have exceptional needs. If it isn't a case of completely over-indulging one particular sect of a multi-cultural society based on bygone celtic tiger-esque priorities - oh purlease tell me what it is?

    Also, if you can give me a break down on why €300+ euro is required for a communion service then I'm willing to listen...as far as I'm aware, that's the only part that could possibly be argued as being necessitated by the equally antiquated school system.

    Hysterical appeals to emotion and historical generosity are just that, btw.
    Cuts to communion allowance mean spirited– Seán Crowe TD
    Dublin South West Sinn Féin TD Seán Crowe has described as “mean spirited” the government plans to cut discretionary payments for special occasions, like a child’s first communion, for low income families.
    The Tallaght-based Deputy was speaking after the announcement that the regular discretionary payment of up to €305 was to be cut to €105.
    Deputy Seán Crowe said:
    “For Christians the communion and confirmation, for Judaism the bar mitzvah or the Muslim khatme quran are significant days in the life of a child.
    “They are particularly important events for many low income families and this cut will impact severely on all of them.
    “Suggestions that some families should consider clothing their children in hand-me-downs or cheap outfits shows a lack of understanding of just how big a milestone this is for families.
    “The government ministers and the media pundits that are supporting these cuts are very unlikely to do the same for their own children.
    “This outspoken support for cutting this discretionary allowance is in stark contrast to their silence when it comes to paying billions to faceless gamblers and speculators in the bond markets.
    “The Fine Gael /Labour Government’s latest attack on low income families is mean spirited and cruel.
    “Here is yet another example of the poor and the least well off being unfairly hit by another cruel austerity measure.”
    http://seancrowe.ie/latest-news/1-news/190-cuts-to-communion-allowance-mean-spirited-sean-crowe-td
    I'm not appealing to your emotions, whether you think I'm hysterical
    or not, as I know that would never work. I'm just telling you that you
    are entirely ignorant, willingfully ignorant, of how much a part of our
    culture this event is - whether you like it or not, whether you want to
    deny reality or not (because that's what you are doing, sugar coat it
    all you like). You can tell us it's not an exceptional need because your
    biases tell you that it's not an exceptional need but if we enter the
    world of reality, one in which mothers are whoring themselves out to
    deal with this event, one which people really care about, we see that
    plenty of people understand that this is an exceptional need - in the
    same way a poor Jewish person could apply for their exceptional need
    to fund a bar mitzvah (which I'd presume they'd get, as I doubt the
    government would be that hypocritical, though if there's evidence of
    this please show it).

    Also, don't think I don't notice the dishonesty in yours (and everybody
    else's) argument in focusing on this payment as if it's entirely for the
    dress. Just mimicking the standards all you guys (in the gender neutral
    use of that term as I know how petty things like this tend to get emphasized by those
    with an axe to grind
    ) accept without question when it furthers your agenda's
    I should be calling you all children for making such a childish argument.
    That subtle point, one consistently emphasized by those for whom
    5 seconds of research is too much when raw anger takes control,
    seems to be lost on all those who bang on about their rationality...
    Though to be fair to you you've only focused on the dress when it
    was convenient for you to do so & the latest post at least mentions
    the entire communion so we're learning something as we go along,
    though I still think it's dishonestly ignoring reality:

    Still no break-down I see, that's telling...

    When we focus on communion dresses as if that's the entire issue &
    then shift our argument & chastise others for not being insanely pedantic,
    I think that's telling. Surely there's a word to describe that...

    Do we really need to break it down? Do you really think I couldn't do
    that? Deeper question - can you really, truly & honestly not envision
    how someone could easily blow 300 euro on an event like this?
    This day that (only if we're willing not to deny reality, of course - which you evidentially
    just flat out refuse to do)
    represents "a milestone" "for families". Note I'm
    not asking for your personal opinion on the morality of poor people
    blowing 300 on a day like this, I've just asked a question about the
    mechanics of the situation (as I know anything deeper than that is
    simply incomprehensible). I find it very sad that I'd have to paint a
    picture of a realistic day to convince you of why people need this
    kind of money for that "milestone" day "for families". Surely you'll
    fess up & admit you don't need such a pedantic breakdown, note
    that it will be done if requested with the assumption of your cheap
    as fcuk 2nd hand dress.

    Furthermore don't think I don't notice the extremely cynical dishonesty
    in this argument (which is, of course, a cover) that we should be
    devoting this money instead to hospitals etc... I mean your own logic
    defunds the sciences & anything we care to mention - an argument
    I've already mentioned & one that was totally ignored. Logically this
    argument is impeccable, do you think we should be spending money
    on the arts when spending money on the arts means we are basically
    murdering people by not providing that money to them in the form of
    a hospital bed? I mean a civics class should have caused this question
    to never have been posed in the first place, people just forget what it
    means to live in a society all of a sudden... As I already mentioned, there
    are plenty of things I don't feel good about funding yet that's just part
    of living in society. Note also that civics class can never answer this
    question in a positive way because as a society that's what we do when
    we devote money to physics or the arts etc... and don't devote it to
    hospital beds etc... - I just consider it either ignorance to argue from
    some moral high ground all of a sudden to take money from poor
    people because of reason X while giving money to rich people ignoring
    that reason X we cared so much about when poor people were involved
    or just plain dishonesty.

    Though of course nothing I say matters because of the shape/size of my
    posts. How do people miss all (any???) of this? :confused: I'll try to be even
    more systematic, more direct & more all-encompassing if I have the
    time as this issue is just so insane that it needs to be done so I apologize
    if I haven't gotten to addressing every miniscule issue at this precise
    moment but please try to view this from my perspective in that I have
    to chase down easy quotes nobody else cares to mention & it's a lot
    for a person pissed off their skull (well, soberer now) to do.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,388 ✭✭✭gbee


    I love long posts, and especially long posts with multiple quote. I fly through the thread without even reading them.

    It says so much about the character of the poster that one you've read them in their very FIRST post, you can put them on ignore and you'll miss nothing. :)


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 32,865 ✭✭✭✭MagicMarker


    Lucy8080 wrote: »
    see you next tuesday

    I'm really struggling to understand what made you write this, and your intentions in doing so.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,788 ✭✭✭MrPudding


    I'm really struggling to understand what made you write this, and your intentions in doing so.
    It is a polite way of calling someone a cünt. See for C u next Tuesday.

    MrP


  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 32,865 ✭✭✭✭MagicMarker


    MrPudding wrote: »
    It is a polite way of calling someone a cünt. See for C u next Tuesday.

    MrP
    I know that! Which only adds to the confusion.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,388 ✭✭✭gbee


    I know that! Which only adds to the confusion.
    I did not know that, so I've learnt something today.

    I was out walking this morning and I could not find my magic mushrooms, :)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,788 ✭✭✭MrPudding


    I know that! Which only adds to the confusion.
    Apologies for teaching my grandmother to suck eggs. There was me thinking I was dead smart.

    MrP


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    MrPudding wrote: »
    Apologies for teaching my grandmother to suck eggs. There was me thinking I was dead smart.

    MrP

    Well thanks to you this grandmother learned something. I am already down with the egg sucking.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,490 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    The childish writing style is the only thing that makes sense?
    What a superfluous comment, I don't consider the post's in any way childish & quite frankly I consider it extremely childish & petty to make comments like this that betray all the cynical ignorance of bigots who just don't like to accept anybody who looks different, who has long hair, who like to read, who likes science etc... But of course who am I to speak considering I'm just one of those others who posts different as well so I'm obviously biased.
    Typing out a response in text speak is childish and it makes it seem that Lucy is not interested in putting the time in to discuss her points.
    I have no idea why you post the way you do, but at least you are using spelling and grammar.
    Such a scientific conclusion that just follows, as if by logic, from such iron-clad premises. I see the truth table of possibilities you've drawn up for us is just impeccably laid out & absolutely no other possibilities could arise. People just accept these kinds of comments without question?
    What other possibilities are there?
    That she is too lazy to write properly?
    That writing in textspeak is cool or something?
    As fantastic a question as this is, it's entirely irrelevant to the thread & I'm surprised such a trivial question could be offered as some form of counterexample to the topic. Why should those greedy fcukers pay for this? They don't care, in fact priests encourage emphasis on not spending money on the day as it distracts from the event (as a quick google can convince you of). It's the recognition of the non-religious aspects of this event coupled with the historical societal importance that fuels the government in providing for this, hence the rank ignorance in the argument that religion has anything more than a coincidental relationship to this issue.
    Because it is to highlight the hypocrisy in Lucy's position. No doubt this vital and important service will suddenly become not as vital if the onus to pay it shifts to the people who are pushing this event in the schools and who claim to be charitable.
    And again, it's much preferable that they cut this payment than ones that actually are vital.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement