Still Waters No Longer Running, Derp.

Hotblack Desiato

Yeah, even though he's dead wrong.

The government has a Dail majority, and almost always has a Seanad majority as well (Taoiseach's nominees help a lot here. Dev was no eejit.) So it's quite easy for a simple majority of both houses to be achieved to remove a judge - this could be on totally bogus grounds like declaring a government bill unconstitutional, or having been appointed by the 'wrong' party in a previous government.

So, not much of a safeguard at present. Although this is a power that hasn't yet been abused, it's easy to see how it could be.

Anyway, if the Seanad goes, a simple Dail majority to remove a judge is easier still. Making it a two-thirds majority of the Dail is an improvement on what we have now. The executive should not be able to interfere with the judiciary on political grounds, it's banana republic stuff, so there should be a reasonably high barrier to the removal of judges, so they can act without fear or favour.

At least we're lucky that the Constitution can only be amended by popular vote. Look what happens in a country like Hungary where a nationalist party gets a two-thirds parliamentary majority and basically has no checks and balances on what it can do.

robindch

ninja900 wrote: »

Making it a two-thirds majority of the Dail is an improvement on what we have now.

Yes, but that seems to have escaped the brave man's notice. He even seems to have twigged it, albeit briefly, when he suddenly realizes that a judge can be removed by taking the time "to operate the whip". Whereas, if the amendment were passed, a two-thirds majority would be required, thereby permitting "a judge [...] to contest his impeachment (using) political influence to [...] mount a campaign ".

I'm not quite sure if Dear John fully understands the difference between big and near, and small and far away, but I'd certainly be interested to hear how one could persuade a ruling party to "operate the whip" without using "political influence".

Perhaps John will enlighten us in next week's exciting installment.

The Black Oil

If you've been in the cinema recently, you may have seen an add for City Colleges. Our friend John teaches there.

http://www.citycolleges.ie/wp/course/diploma-in-journalism-with-john-waters/

Turtwig

The Black Oil wrote: »

If you've been in the cinema recently, you may have seen an add for City Colleges. Our friend John teaches there.

http://www.citycolleges.ie/wp/course/diploma-in-journalism-with-john-waters/

Yep, if you listen to a couple of radio stations too you'll hear the ads. He even speaks in one of them.

Dave!

Oh dear. I'd say my skin would crawl if I heard him on one of those ads.

PopePalpatine

Well, it could be worse: David [REDACTED] could fill in for him. :pac:

robindch

John makes Eamon Dunphy weep:

http://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/people/when-john-waters-met-eamon-dunphy-1.1554145

porsche959

This is a very good article from John IMO.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/inability-to-hold-hse-to-account-exposes-chronic-failure-of-journalists-1.1564497

Nodin

porsche959 wrote: »

This is a very good article from John IMO.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/inability-to-hold-hse-to-account-exposes-chronic-failure-of-journalists-1.1564497

.....he's throwing up two unrelated cases in relation to a point that has nothing to do with either....

porsche959

Nodin wrote: »

.....he's throwing up two unrelated cases in relation to a point that has nothing to do with either....

Maybe but you'd have to concede the "but think of the children" spiel put up to counter any arguments made against the childrens' rights referendum is a mite sinister.

Nodin

porsche959 wrote: »

Maybe but you'd have to concede the "but think of the children" spiel put up to counter any arguments made against the childrens' rights referendum is a mite sinister.

...one could argue that the flaw of that referendum was lack of a coherent opposition. However (a) there may well be no reasonable grounds to oppose it and (b) JW was part of the incoherent opposition.

"but think of the children" is a staple of politics that's grabbed onto on any available grounds. Thus when it came to a referendum regarding children, it was obvious that was going to happen.

And of course, support for that referendum was support for the principles, not the flaws of the HSE.

porsche959

Nodin wrote: »

...one could argue that the flaw of that referendum was lack of a coherent opposition. However (a) there may well be no reasonable grounds to oppose it and (b) JW was part of the incoherent opposition.

"but think of the children" is a staple of politics that's grabbed onto on any available grounds. Thus when it came to a referendum regarding children, it was obvious that was going to happen.

And of course, support for that referendum was support for the principles, not the flaws of the HSE.

Given the institutional cover up of child abuse for decades, it's difficult to take seriously a point of that there may well have been no reasonable grounds to have opposed the referendum.

Nodin

porsche959 wrote: »

Given the institutional cover up of child abuse for decades, it's difficult to take seriously a point of that there may well have been no reasonable grounds to have opposed the referendum.

Presuming that institutional abuse was an inherent part of any institution doesn't strike me as a reasonable stance.

robindch

Breda reckons that things are bright and rosy for the future of the church in Ireland:

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/religion-and-beliefs/green-shoots-of-renewed-faith-a-sign-that-the-church-is-coming-back-from-the-brink-1.1565783

Mr. CooL ICE

From what I read, JW is gay for Eamon Dunphy. What else is there? My attention span can't handle much of that

recedite

robindch wrote: »

Breda reckons that things are bright and rosy for the future of the church in Ireland:
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/religion-and-beliefs/green-shoots-of-renewed-faith-a-sign-that-the-church-is-coming-back-from-the-brink-1.1565783

Meh.. the article is a bit wishy washy, but I do like the big mural shown on the wall in the accompanying photo.

In it, one guy holds up his new design for church collection envelopes bearing the catchphrase "Ego Sum, Pastor bonus", to much adulation and applause from his colleagues.

TwoShedsJackson

However, in the past 18 months I have been all around the country at different Catholic gatherings, everything from parish novenas to international events. A quiet momentum is building.

So Breda goes to a few events, such as parish novenas, where you might reasonably expect pretty much everyone there to be a practicing Catholic, and thinks that's evidence of the Church 'bouncing back'?

Is everything in the garden rosy? Of course not. The age profile at these gatherings tends to be older, with a strong but small presence of much younger people. There is still a missing middle: the thirty- to fifty-somethings who are most alienated from the church.

Have to give her credit for pointing out the obvious, that it's mostly the 60+ generation that are still actually attending these things. Wonder how the green shoots will look in twenty years when most of them are dead?

PopePalpatine

"Much younger people"? Let me guess, she thinks Mass for primary students counts. :rolleyes:

lazygal

What's a strong but small presence? What makes it strong, exactly?

Brian Shanahan

TwoShedsJackson wrote: »

Have to give her credit for pointing out the obvious, that it's mostly the 60+ generation that are still actually attending these things. Wonder how the green shoots will look in twenty years when most of them are dead?

You know of all the players in my GAA club playing u-21s and higher (in a rural parish), I know of one who goes to mass regularly. Most of the rest only do the weddings, christenings, communions, comfirmations and funerals round of the "catholics" who don't believe but are not yet ready to shed the comfort blanket.

Under 18 is a different matter, mass attendance is dependant on how observant the parents are, with small children being increasingly rare locally.

Obliq

Brian Shanahan wrote: »

You know of all the players in my GAA club playing u-21s and higher (in a rural parish), I know of one who goes to mass regularly. Most of the rest only do the weddings, christenings, communions, comfirmations and funerals round of the "catholics" who don't believe but are not yet ready to shed the comfort blanket.

Under 18 is a different matter, mass attendance is dependant on how observant the parents are, with small children being increasingly rare locally.

Totally with you there - it's exactly the same in my locality. Attendance drops off right after confirmation and the general mass is a reserve of the over 50's who still like the opportunity to dress up (in an area where your grown up son's/daughter's battered club shirts, discarded fleeces and trainers are the order of the day). Sunday morning is high shtyle - otherwise where would you be going in it?!

Sulla Felix

My local church recently announced they were cutting back on masses. Only one on a Sunday down from two, none on a Saturday.
Yeah, church revival alright.

Hotblack Desiato

When there are no longer any children attending RCC services, we can finally be assured that priestly paedophilia will be eradicated...

recedite

Another child snatched by Gardai, but this time JW is strangely silent.
If there is a custody dispute between the State and parents, the childrens rights referendum/legislation established that whoever acted in the best interests of the child should take precedence. Nothing more sinister than that.

porsche959

This is another decent article by Waters. A nice counterbalance to the over-emotional canonisation of JFK in most of the Irish media. I agree with his assessment, JFK was a fairly pedestrian president.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/us/oswald-s-act-in-dallas-gave-us-a-myth-that-shaped-our-understanding-of-the-60s-1.1602870

Zillah

Not actually John Waters, but it may as well have been. Recent review of Tony Philpott's new book, and instead of actually reviewing the book he launches into a raft of smug Catholic apologetics and reactionary defensiveness. How on Earth does this get past an editor, masquerading as a "review"? There's some wonderful turn of phrase in the book it seems:

"the claim that the Catholic Church always “had a visceral mistrust of human intelligence”, lest any inquiry lead to the conclusion that “Papal pronouncements were as valid as the ravings of an elk-skinned Shaman ranting to this Neanderthal congregation in a prehistoric cave”, is an insult to all theologians."

God forbid that theologians should be insulted!

There's also this laughable claim:
"Irish politicians are accused of “lying through their teeth” or “talking through their arses”, which is a populist but fundamentally untrue view."

Anyway, what it is with The Irish Times and conservative, obtuse-headed contributors?

robindch

Zillah wrote: »

Anyway, what it is with The Irish Times and conservative, obtuse-headed contributors?

Uh, got something to do with something called "balance", I think.

Zillah

robindch wrote: »

Uh, got something to do with something called "balance", I think.

We must now turn to Barry - who believes the sky is a carpet painted by God.

Brian Shanahan

robindch wrote: »

Uh, got something to do with something called "balance", I think.

Problem is, they've sacked all their left-wing and centrist contributors with the sole exception of Fintan O'Toole.

But then again, when right wingers talk about balance they mean censoring any and all dissenting viewpoints.

Lorna Grady

Interesting that such a book would get such a review. It’s a mean-spirited attack on everything that many people hold dear – their Faith. And what’s even worse, it attack our very Irishness, our very history and it maliciously derides those who led us to freedom. I have read it, and if the reviewer found it beautifully written, he may very well be right. But blasphemy is still a crime here – and if such an attack were to be made on Muslims I have no doubt that there would be a prosecution. I don’t favour banning books, but when the Blessed Virgin Mary is equated to an Iron age peasant I feel matters have gone too far.