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
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
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
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:
“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.
What's wrong with hand me downs
Or better still school uniforms on the day
Nothing like a politician to hop on a story and try to score points out of it
But I know if Sinn Féin were in power then another opposition TD would be saying the exact same thing. A Labour or Fine Gael TD would not hesitate to attack these cuts if Brian Cowan did it a few years ago
They don't care, just trying to make some headlines and get their name noticed0 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
As much as I want to chase the latest posts up, & I really do, I just don't
have the time because the detail involved in such posts, in chasing up the
details glossed over, gets far too big. Furthermore the majority of what
I write is ignored & not responded to (obviously because it's all just
nonsense I'm sure) & really not worth putting up with continually...
Though ignoring the substantive issues that the main topic of the thread
involve I think the incessant insults, the group-thought perspective of just
accepting some horrible comments aimed at the outsider, is fcuking
sickening.
Actually, I'll just respond to the one person who actually embraced the
entirety of my post & is someone I'd generally expect would continue to
do so if this conversation persisted: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.
As we have evidence of in this thread, your complimenting my spelling
& grammar is something unique to you, others prefer to ignore such
glorious aspects of my posts & instead focus on other aspects of the
posts & use these as a means to completely ignore me. Both your
compliments to me, your insults to Lucy & others insults to me & Lucy
illustrate the pathetically unconstructive & highly subjective nature of
focusing on trivial things like these.
Notice also that this response doesn't deny the comparison to those
whose cynical ignorance permits them to judge others who don't
conform to a way of life that they just demand others to conform to -
why in this case it's because "it seems" that (s)he's not interested in putting the time in to
discuss his/her points - and as atheists people in here just know how stellar
that logic is...What other possibilities are there?
That she is too lazy to write properly?
That writing in textspeak is cool or something?
A) She wants to?
She has dyslexia or some other writing-related abnormality?
C) She thinks it adds some form of definitiveness to separate sentences?
D) She does it as a means to ensure nobody skips a sentence as is
__ natural (especially in this thread unfortunately) when confronted with
__ a big blob of text?
E) She does it to intentionally force people to "ignore" her as a means to
__ weed out the similar nonsense so commonly posted with those who
__ laugh at others for the way their posts look (or their writing style, or
__ their choice of words etc... etc...)
There are plenty of reasons, & I haven't the time to get creative. Notice
none of them is a joke nor trivial.
I just can't fathom the urge to throw in some hateful comments aimed
at beating another person into expressing themselves in a manner you
expect them to, you might not like the way they express themselves but
I mean that by no means implies that others similarly feel that way &
even if they do that by no means implies, by any stretch of logic, that
you're right. You might have been right, but I mean look at the flaws
I've found, I think that in general you'll always find such flaws because
the idea is flawed to begin with. All of this nonsense can be avoided by
accepting others for who they choose to be (though of course I'm not
forcing you to do that, but the above logical insanity is generally
encountered & we will most likely continue down these avenues of
exposing how such ignorance forces a person to ignore trivially obvious
details, something I continue to find without exemption).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.
I know you were aiming for some sort of counterexample as a means to
highlight hypocrisy but notice the question in my post (pre-empting this
response) that asked the question "why" those greedy fcukers should be
forced to pay for this. Not to tout my own horn but I even went into the
specifics of why they shouldn't be paying for this as a further means to
highlight how much of a non-counterexample your question was. They
have their own justifications for not paying for this (which I've already
mentioned, & can easily be checked).
Notice why I bothered to mention this:
Because even if we assume that they should be forced to pay for this
(i.e. if we indulge you in your attempt at highlighting hypocrisy) they
have their own iron-clad reasons not to pay for it because it goes against
the spirit of what they are aiming for on the day which implies, again if
logic has anything to do with this conversation, that the religious aspects
of the day are nothing more than coincidental in this milestone social
event. There's a reason why another poster in another thread recently
offered up Alton Towers as a means to satiate a child from worrying
about not partaking in their communion rituals & I think we all know it
wasn't offered as a means to lull the child into forgetting the sense of
spiritual loss they'll feel for not having been in church that day...
Thus the example fails on two grounds, A) indicating how it's even
relevant, when examined it just illustrates the very point you all
are arguing against in the first place.And again, it's much preferable that they cut this payment than ones that actually are vital.
3 million, in the scope of things, in no way interferes with anything vital. If
it did then I think you'd be right. Portraying this as something that is
interfering with vital services is insane.
If a penny was taken from the SW of each person in the country this
could be paid for multiple times over, I'd wager a majority of people on
the SW would agree to that. I only mention this to highlight how we're
nowhere near questions of this being some form of payment that would
interfere with vital services.
If people are concerned about wasted money, I mean uncontroversially
wasted money, there are far, far, better examples.
Trying to take money from poor people based on absolutely flawed
premises is pure evil, nobody has bothered to explain how religion has
anything to do with this issue as anything more than a coincidental,
notice I've posted this fact multiple times so ignorance can't be argued.
So even pretending that this payment is wrong for reason X, none of
the reasons people argued for so vehemently in the thread thus far
stand up to scrutiny which implies a lot of things anybody can easily
deduce if they want to go down that avenue of thought..0 -
Advertisement
-
-
<verbose irrelevance snipped>If 3 million is such a trifling sum, why doesn't the Catholic Church offer to pay it?sponsoredwalk wrote: »
I know you were aiming for some sort of counterexample as a means toBecause 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.
highlight hypocrisy but notice the question in my post (pre-empting this
response) that asked the question "why" those greedy fcukers should be
forced to pay for this. Not to tout my own horn but I even went into the
specifics of why they shouldn't be paying for this as a further means to
highlight how much of a non-counterexample your question was. They
have their own justifications for not paying for this (which I've already
mentioned, & can easily be checked).
Notice why I bothered to mention this:
Because even if we assume that they should be forced to pay for this
(i.e. if we indulge you in your attempt at highlighting hypocrisy) they
have their own iron-clad reasons not to pay for it because it goes against
the spirit of what they are aiming for on the day which implies, again if
logic has anything to do with this conversation, that the religious aspects
of the day are nothing more than coincidental in this milestone social
event. There's a reason why another poster in another thread recently
offered up Alton Towers as a means to satiate a child from worrying
about not partaking in their communion rituals & I think we all know it
wasn't offered as a means to lull the child into forgetting the sense of
spiritual loss they'll feel for not having been in church that day...
Thus the example fails on two grounds, A) indicating how it's even
relevant, when examined it just illustrates the very point you all
are arguing against in the first place.<verbose irrelevance snipped>If 3 million is such a trifling sum, why doesn't the Catholic Church offer to pay it?sponsoredwalk wrote: »
I know you were aiming for some sort of counterexample as a means toBecause 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.
highlight hypocrisy but notice the question in my post (pre-empting this
response) that asked the question "why" those greedy fcukers should be
forced to pay for this. Not to tout my own horn but I even went into the
specifics of why they shouldn't be paying for this as a further means to
highlight how much of a non-counterexample your question was. They
have their own justifications for not paying for this (which I've already
mentioned, & can easily be checked).
Notice why I bothered to mention this:
Because even if we assume that they should be forced to pay for this
(i.e. if we indulge you in your attempt at highlighting hypocrisy) they
have their own iron-clad reasons not to pay for it because it goes against
the spirit of what they are aiming for on the day which implies, again if
logic has anything to do with this conversation, that the religious aspects
of the day are nothing more than coincidental in this milestone social
event. There's a reason why another poster in another thread recently
offered up Alton Towers as a means to satiate a child from worrying
about not partaking in their communion rituals & I think we all know it
wasn't offered as a means to lull the child into forgetting the sense of
spiritual loss they'll feel for not having been in church that day...
Thus the example fails on two grounds, A) indicating how it's even
relevant, when examined it just illustrates the very point you all
are arguing against in the first place.
Now I can't paint any clearer evidence of the insanity of this thread than
this, posting insults that refer to my post as irrelevant despite the fact
that the very portion of the post he referred to as "verbose irrelevance"
specifically responded, & I mean specifically, to the question (s)he asks
me. Just pick up a shovel and fling as much mud as possible as quick
as possible with deft regard to logic...Here's an idea - why not take it out of your church collection?
My church collection? Oh the assumptions keep coming...0 -
-
-
sponsoredwalk wrote: »Except for the fact that it precisely answers your question in considerable
detail...
OK. I'll indulge. There was a lot of spelling and grammar lames. Then this:I know you were aiming for some sort of counterexample as a means to
highlight hypocrisy but notice the question in my post (pre-empting this
response) that asked the question "why" those greedy fcukers should be
forced to pay for this. Not to tout my own horn but I even went into the
specifics of why they shouldn't be paying for this as a further means to
highlight how much of a non-counterexample your question was. They
have their own justifications for not paying for this (which I've already
mentioned, & can easily be checked).
Notice why I bothered to mention this:
Because even if we assume that they should be forced to pay for this
(i.e. if we indulge you in your attempt at highlighting hypocrisy) they
have their own iron-clad reasons not to pay for it because it goes against
the spirit of what they are aiming for on the day which implies, again if
logic has anything to do with this conversation, that the religious aspects
of the day are nothing more than coincidental in this milestone social
event. There's a reason why another poster in another thread recently
offered up Alton Towers as a means to satiate a child from worrying
about not partaking in their communion rituals & I think we all know it
wasn't offered as a means to lull the child into forgetting the sense of
spiritual loss they'll feel for not having been in church that day...
Thus the example fails on two grounds, A) indicating how it's even
relevant, when examined it just illustrates the very point you all
are arguing against in the first place.
I've seen Scientologists make more sense than that.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.
0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
This is what it looks like on iPhone:magicbastarder wrote: »do people who find sponsoredwalk's formatting style difficult to read also have trouble with newspaper columns?
0 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
This is what it looks like on iPhone:This shows that you (a) have no interest in the readability of your posts (b) don't understand how text wraps depending on screen/window size.
I had no idea that this would happen...
I apologise but you'll have to forgive me, due to the fact that the focus shifts onto the shape of my posts AFTER I've gotten into an argument with someone on here & AFTER the moment they've lost all credibility I just naturally assumed it was the last refuge of the scoundrel to start off on my posts accompanied with no further explanation than "it's really annoying" or something like that. Judging by the size & detail of some of the responses I've been offered (from those making such comments) I thought they could hardly have even been posted on a mobile phone, let alone not being posted on a phone that couldn't handle such text (in which case I'd think you shouldn't be on the internet with such a junk phone) & really saw no other alternative than a means to divert attention from the topic being discussed. Furthermore this happens, again, in a thread in which all of you just pass over the many insults aimed at Lucy for the way (s)he posts, I think it's not too shocking to assume it's just more of that childish nonsense to then go for me.
So I just had no idea phones did that. However if phones with small screens automatically adjust text based on hard returns then I can understand. Personally I thought writing text in this way would only be better for small screens like phones, but actually seeing that it's reformatted due to hard returns then I can understand & will stop. I really do mean that, it's always been after I've called out some nonsense on here that there's such an interest in the shape, rather than the content, of my posts...
Surely you can understand how ridiculous it seems to focus so intensely on the shape of posts for no apparent reason (when you're unaware of the fact that it's reformatted automatically) other than that they are half the size of the other posts, especially considering the fact that every third page of a magazine will have different column styles (including ones whose lines are not linearly starting and ending (yes, even including nature...)).
With all of this said it's still pretty bad form that the posting frequency goes up when it's my posts that are the topic of discussion but it goes down when insults against those with the opposing perspective are bandied about... Since we've logically found a way to stop me posting the way I did (:() I just ask you all to similarly analyze the posts by those on your own side of the argument with as equal a scrutiny as that devoted to my posts, & I'm not talking about the posts relevant to the topic of the thread I'm merely talking about the insults...
That's your problem right there.sponsoredwalk wrote:this is getting insanely boring trying to teach people acceptance 101
Everything I've said still stands, we're still waiting for somebody to even apologise for the insults to Lucy, let alone even call out the fact that other posters cheerily post insults that themselves carry major flaws, let alone mention the fact that it's just basically wrong to post insults, let alone even explain how the church is more than coincidental to the topic of the thread, let alone explain how even if the church was more than a coincidental this would not be nothing more than taking money from poor people even if it is the result of the middle class being forced to tighten up it's belt after the gluttonous excesses we all orgiastically indulged in during the late 90's, now feeling that good ol' catholic shame for losing ourselves to it all momentarily (quite a long moment)... All of this is the antithesis of acceptance.i like sponsoredwalks posts.
If i miss the screen name when scrolling thru ...i can always tell its him by his style. And i always find his posts worth a read.
Thanks Lucy, same to you too. You can have the priceless gift
(worthless things are also technically priceless
) of being the last one
I'll respond to in the way I'd rather respond to someone. Hmm... What
to say when a miniscule part of ones soul is about to die? I know:
Like the eagle arising out of the ashes in Harry Potter I'll similarly pull
from the embers of my former posting style life renewed in the sense
that new experiences await :cool:0 -
-
the parents are spending money on clothes and celebrations because of the communion. The communion event maybe free, but the parents wouldn't be looking for the money if the communion was happening at all.
And because it has nothing to do with the religious aspects of the day, it's all the more reason why the payment should be cut. The day can still go ahead without it.
As to your criticism of the use of the term "people who really need it", hate to break it to you but that's how a social payment system works. I can't go and get the dole because the government says due to me having a job that I don't need it. Should I now protest this as being unfair? If you can read this, you're too close!
0 -
-
-
-
-
-
Threads have a sell by date, which, once past, are more or less allow to drift about.Since there is apparently no chance that I will be accused of going off topic, can I ask why all the garbage in this thread has been allowed? Is there some sort of in-joke that I am missing?
The sell by date usually passes when everybody is just starting to repeat themselves. I blame the mods.
0 -
Advertisement
-
. 
Advertisement