Why do we accept bullying in society??

eyescreamcone

Why do we allow bullying in our modern society???

For instance we don't allow same sex marriages. A large group, who can marry or not as they wish, refuse to allow homosexuals this same right. It is no business of the larger group. This bullying is unacceptable today.

Another large(?) group who would not want an abortion for themselves refuse to accept that a small group may want this right. At present the larger(?) group is bullying the smaller group into accepting their view.

The school system where we bully non catholics into catholic classrooms is another example.

Also, when one is getting married one can either get married in a registry office or make your own arrangement to get a registered solemniser to do the job.
All the religions have their priests, rabbis, reverends and mullahs registered. However, those of 'no religion' are not allowed to be registered as solemnisers - go figure
This in spite of the fact that the "no religion" group were the second largest group in the recent census.
More bullying - especially where it should be of no concern to anyone except the couple involved if the minor legalities are adhered to.

Why do we continue to poke our noses into other peoples business???
Why do we allow this bullying to continue to happen???

McQuaid is dead and buried but his (holy?) ghost is alive and kicking it seems, bullying his own AND those who want no piece of his views.

It wasn't me!

Bullying is an incredibly useless word for most of what you've described there.

foxyboxer

Same sex marriage! - Abortion! - Religion!

Yikes, hang on till i've had a coffee.

eyescreamcone

It wasn't me! wrote: »

Bullying is an incredibly useless word for most of what you've described there.

What word/s would you use instead??

Rabies

Not really bullying.
More needing to change the psyche of the nation.
It is something that happens over time. Sudden change can have shock factor and repercussions.

FatherLen

This thread is going to implode and create a black hole, killing us all!

im invisible

So, we should not allow bullying in the same way as we do not allow same-sex marriges?

mathie

eyescreamcone wrote: »

What word/s would you use instead??

5hitehawking.

foxyboxer

FatherLen wrote: »

This thread is going to implode and create a black hole, killing us all!

All it needs is travellers, scumbags, the civil service and the recession for the full set.

eyescreamcone

Rabies wrote: »

Not really bullying.
More needing to change the psyche of the nation.
It is something that happens over time. Sudden change can have shock factor and repercussions.

Of course it's bullying
If I insist how you should live your life - and you say no way! - and I say "f*** you, you'll do it and you'll like it"
That's bullying!

mathie

eyescreamcone wrote: »

Of course it's bullying
If I insist how you should live your life - and you say no way! - and I say "f*** you, you'll do it and you'll like it"
That's bullying!

Oxford English Dictionary is that you?

ch750536

I want less bullying of stark bollocks naked people. I myself am stark bollocks naked and frequently get strange looks, arrested or even talked about behind my back.

Ellis Dee

I don't think the kind of actions you describe actually fall into the category of "bullying" as most people understand the word. It's more a matter of holy joes and holy biddies and similar wannabe dictators sticking their noses into other people's business. If they did it directly, for example told me how I should lead my life, I'd do the same as probably most other people and tell them to fcuk off and mind their own business, for which reason they join movements and groups and in that way satisfy their need to interfere in matters that actually don't concern them.:):):)

davet82

OP most of what you describe here are YOUR opinions on various issues and you are bullying the rest of us into agreeing with you,

ya big fcukin bully

saa

So this is a thread about religion in schools or children in schools experiencing bullying..ihni. Bullying is about power but my experience as a person who does not want to follow a religion but was made to by parents and teachers was a lot harder than the child whose parents told the school their child was not religious was not bullied by students or teachers it was the majority of us who were only religious on paper who got such a hard time.
School reforms is for another thread as well.

Bullying.. I was bullied as a child by teachers and students, learned how to stand up to students but now finishing college I cannot stand up for myself in front of a tutor as they all work in the industry I do so If I report any of them then I get talked about. A good code of conduct helps with bullying issues in schools or workplaces so that a teacher cannot say they didn't mean to hurt the person. It wasnt an issue going to a religious school for me it was those few actual catholic teachers who did not know how to deal with the fact people dont pretend they believe anymore, gosh I remember pretending to be sick so I wouldnt have to go into confession and I was told you have to go in everyone else is but that was not bullying If I made arrangements beforehand to say I will not participate or stay in study that would be fine so it is more about education, tolerance and attitudes.

Rabies

eyescreamcone wrote: »

Of course it's bullying
If I insist how you should live your life - and you say no way! - and I say "f*** you, you'll do it and you'll like it"
That's bullying!

Normal law of any country could then be called bullying by it's people.

Seachmall

I agree that it's bullying, but it's also a democracy.

The majority (or largest minority) make the rules. Unfortunately they're entitled to make rules that have no relevance or impact on themselves. It's stupid, but those are the rules the majority decided on.

tfitzgerald

Majority rules . I see nothing wrong with that

Riddle101

I don't see any of the stuff you described as bullying OP. It's just a part of the way life is. Most of those things you listed at based off of different beliefs or opinons, I.E People being against gay marriage, some people are just against it, but I don't feel those particular people are bullying anyone into accepting their views. It's up to the government or whoever is in charge of laws, to put it to a vote and allow people to vote on it. Maybe it would be better if that was the case, but it's no bullying really.

As for bullying non catholics into catholic classrooms. The majority of classes in primary schools are made up of students from catholic backrounds. I've only ever seen a small minority who aren't catholics. But I don't believe they're being bullied in anyway. At the end of the day they're still being thought the lessons they would learn in any school system regardless of religon. The only exception is religon class and maybe saying prayers, but those students can be exempt from that stuff if they wan't to, they don't have to take part in it, or aren't forced into doing anything. It would be bullying in my opinion, if the teacher forces a kid from a non catholic backround E.G Muslim to take part in prayers or something that might be catholic orientated.

Why do we allow this bullying to continue to happen???

It's unforunte but unless we actively tackle the issue, then bullying will always continue. But as far as your points goes OP, I don't believe that the bullying we need to deal with. I'm more concerned for the bullying that goes from other EU nations, blackmailing us into accepting their treaties for instance. Or the bullying that goes on in the workplace from a superior or in school froms tudents. That's the type of bulling I won't accept.

Logical Fallacy

It's called Democracy dummy.

eyescreamcone

tfitzgerald wrote: »

Majority rules . I see nothing wrong with that

WTF
What about the issue regarding solemnisers with no religion?
Are you in favour of the status quo?
If you are then YOU are a bully!!!
End of!!!

Anyone who prevents a person "living their life in a manner that should not bother anyone" is a bully.
If the cap fits wear it!!!

Rabies

eyescreamcone wrote: »

Anyone who prevents a person "living their life in a manner that should not bother anyone" is a bully.
If the cap fits wear it!!!

Some rules and laws are out dated and definitely need to altered. Don't disagree with you on that.

To say you should be allowed to anything you want and live life how you choose is childish.

Please read Lord of the Flies for a good example of how it can go, or watch Mad Max for some fun

girl2

If you're gonna call it anything, I think the word discrimination is better to be honest.

People are not being bullied as such, but there are differences made.

biko

Bullying is the new buzzword.
Fo' shizzle.

Logical Fallacy

girl2 wrote: »

If you're gonna call it anything, I think the word discrimination is better to be honest.

People are not being bullied as such, but there are differences made.

The OP has committed to calling it bullying. He'll never back down.

xsiborg

you make a whole series of different points here so im not quite sure what your main point is, but here we go, i'll try and tackle each one and give you a serious answer from my own point of view:

eyescreamcone wrote: »

Why do we allow bullying in our modern society???

society does NOT "allow" bullying, certain sections of society deem it acceptable, but they are not the norm, would you suggest we change society so that this minority are allowed bully who and when they please?

eyescreamcone wrote: »

For instance we don't allow same sex marriages. A large group, who can marry or not as they wish, refuse to allow homosexuals this same right. It is no business of the larger group. This bullying is unacceptable today.

this is not bullying, that is only your perception. you live in a democracy, i presume you are talking about the legislative system in ireland here. the fact is that we live in a democracy where majority rules. if you want to change the legislation, then there has to be a referendum, again majority rules.

there is nothing though that prevents you from moving to a country where same sex marriages are legal, but then you would have to abide by their legislation in their democracy, and these countries too are not infallible from not listening to other minorities.

eyescreamcone wrote: »

Another large(?) group who would not want an abortion for themselves refuse to accept that a small group may want this right. At present the larger(?) group is bullying the smaller group into accepting their view.

nobody is bullying anyone in this regard either. you're making sweeping generalisations, but we'll run with that. nobody is bullying you into accepting their view, that is just the way a democracy works. if the majority wanted to change the legislation to make abortion legal in ireland, then a change would be made to the legislation. again, you can move to another country if you want to live in a democracy where abortion is legal, but then again, you will have to live by their other rules.

eyescreamcone wrote: »

The school system where we bully non catholics into catholic classrooms is another example.

you are WAY off base with this one, completely incorrect. accomodations have been made for non-catholics in catholic schools for many years now, hell when i was in a christian brothers school 20 years ago, the guy in the desk beside me was a jehovah witness, and he was neither forced to sit in on religion class nor irish.

my own son now attends a catholic primary school and there are children of every denomination in his class, they are not forced to be there either. they are placed in the school by their parents who believe it is in the child's best interests to attend the school. i see nothing wrong with someone who wants the best for their children.

an interesting OT bit of info for you too- primary schools are no longer allowed discriminate against a child with a disability attending a mainstream school, in fact they are not even obliged to be informed that the child is disabled. this can cause a whole host of problems in underfunded primary schools that are unprepared or have not made suitable accomodations to have adequate SNA's in place to help with these children.

eyescreamcone wrote: »

Also, when one is getting married one can either get married in a registry office or make your own arrangement to get a registered solemniser to do the job.
All the religions have their priests, rabbis, reverends and mullahs registered. However, those of 'no religion' are not allowed to be registered as solemnisers - go figure
This in spite of the fact that the "no religion" group were the second largest group in the recent census.
More bullying - especially where it should be of no concern to anyone except the couple involved if the minor legalities are adhered to.

why does it confuse you that people of no religion have no solemnisers?

no religion- no solemniser.

they are still allowed to have a civil marriage in a registry office, provided by a non-religious civil servant.

eyescreamcone wrote: »

Why do we continue to poke our noses into other peoples business???

it's human nature, you're the OP, unless you did not want anyone to comment? you are more than entitled to keep your opinions to yourself, but if you put them out there, then you are efectively inviting people to question and comment.

eyescreamcone wrote: »

Why do we allow this bullying to continue to happen???

as i have already stated, most people do NOT "allow" bullying to happen, much less tolerate it. you may perceive majority rule democracy as bullying, or even persecution, but that's not what it is.

eyescreamcone wrote: »

McQuaid is dead and buried but his (holy?) ghost is alive and kicking it seems, bullying his own AND those who want no piece of his views.

i am unfamiliar with this McQuaid you speak of unfortunately, so i cannot comment on this one.

.

Iwasfrozen

eyescreamcone wrote: »

Anyone who prevents a person "living their life in a manner that should not bother anyone" is a bully.
If the cap fits wear it!!!

Interesting that you think abortion doesn't hurt anyone.....

eyescreamcone

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Interesting that you think abortion doesn't hurt anyone.....

As far as I'm aware in the early weeks of pregnancy the 'unborn' can feel no pain which to me implies no hurt. I believe that this is a fact.
The time period for abortions is set so that the foetus feels no pain.
This is fair.

Anyway I would support people who disagree with abortion in their right to not have an abortion.
Likewise I would support those who want/need an abortion in their right to have one (for whatever reason).
In other words I would not poke my nose into peoples' private affairs and use whatever power I possess to bully them into acting according to my views!

bb1234567

foxyboxer wrote: »

All it needs is travellers, scumbags, the civil service and the recession for the full set.

Dont forget about the household/water charges! Then youll have the full set.:)

Galwayguy35

eyescreamcone wrote: »

As far as I'm aware in the early weeks of pregnancy the 'unborn' can feel no pain which to me implies no hurt. I believe that this is a fact.
The time period for abortions is set so that the foetus feels no pain.
This is fair.

Anyway I would support people who disagree with abortion in their right to not have an abortion.
Likewise I would support those who want/need an abortion in their right to have one (for whatever reason).
In other words I would not poke my nose into peoples' private affairs and use whatever power I possess to bully them into acting according to my views!

Its the Government you should be writing your concerns to then, they make the laws.

eyescreamcone

bb1234567 wrote: »

Dont forget about the household/water charges! Then youll have the full set.:)

You should be on Live at the Apollo
You're hilarious - NOT!

mikemac1

foxyboxer wrote: »

All it needs is travellers, scumbags, the civil service and the recession for the full set.

bb1234567 wrote: »

Dont forget about the household/water charges! Then youll have the full set.:)

You don't achieve AH bingo until you include single mothers, free houses and welfare

I am pie

mikemac1 wrote: »

You don't achieve AH bingo until you include single mothers, free houses and welfare

Ridiculous statement.

Leaving out the junkies and the easter friday pub conundrum like that....you should be ashamed !

xsiborg

eyescreamcone wrote: »

As far as I'm aware in the early weeks of pregnancy the 'unborn' can feel no pain which to me implies no hurt. I believe that this is a fact.
The time period for abortions is set so that the foetus feels no pain.
This is fair.

i wont get into an abortion debate with you, but as far as you're aware, you would be wrong, and what you believe as fact you have unfortunately been misled.

but leaving aside the semantics of "the right to life" debate, im sure you are also aware that a woman's choice to have an abortion also has effects on the father of the child, who also under current irish legislation has no right to prevent a woman travelling abroad to have an abortion. therefore to extrapolate your point, her choice to have an abortion interferes with his choice to want to have the child. bit of a complex conundrum you've got yourself into really.

eyescreamcone wrote: »

Anyway I would support people who disagree with abortion in their right to not have an abortion.
Likewise I would support those who want/need an abortion in their right to have one (for whatever reason).

with that logic, you really should run for office as a politician. you seem quite adept at sitting on the fence and whispering whatever suits your audience into their collective ears.

eyescreamcone wrote: »

In other words I would not poke my nose into peoples' private affairs and use whatever power I possess to bully them into acting according to my views!

again- the majority do not poke their noses into people's private affairs, they reach a consensus, they do not have any powers to bully anyone into doing anything, nor will the majority care how an individual chooses how to live their life.

foxyboxer

foxyboxer wrote: »

All it needs is travellers, scumbags, the civil service and the recession for the full set.

The ultimate AH thread.

"Gay scumbag/traveller couple bullied by catholic bishop for abortion and 'wedding' ceremony cancelled by city council due to budget cuts" :pac:

BlimpyBoy

eyescreamcone wrote: »

Anyway I would support people who disagree with abortion in their right to not have an abortion.
Likewise I would support those who want/need an abortion in their right to have one (for whatever reason).
In other words I would not poke my nose into peoples' private affairs and use whatever power I possess to bully them into acting according to my views!

Abortions for some! Miniature American flags for others!

hooradiation

FatherLen wrote: »

This thread is going to implode and create a black hole, killing us all!

I never thought I'd see a resonance cascade, let alone cause one.

davet82

xsiborg boards slapped the OP

well done

Pherekydes

eyescreamcone wrote: »

A large group, who can marry or not as they wish, refuse to allow homosexuals this same right.

Another large(?) group who would not want an abortion for themselves refuse to accept that a small group may want this right.

All the religions have their priests, rabbis, reverends and mullahs registered. However, those of 'no religion' are not allowed to be registered as solemnisers - go figure.

What large groups are you talking about?

I was married in a RO. The religion of the solemniser was irrelevant. Have you any proof that those of no religion can't be solemnisers?

Rabies

eyescreamcone wrote: »

You should be on Live at the Apollo
You're hilarious - NOT!

Now we can't take you seriously.

Iwasfrozen

eyescreamcone wrote: »

As far as I'm aware in the early weeks of pregnancy the 'unborn' can feel no pain which to me implies no hurt. I believe that this is a fact.
The time period for abortions is set so that the foetus feels no pain.
This is fair.

Anyway I would support people who disagree with abortion in their right to not have an abortion.
Likewise I would support those who want/need an abortion in their right to have one (for whatever reason).
In other words I would not poke my nose into peoples' private affairs and use whatever power I possess to bully them into acting according to my views!

Whether or not the unborn can feel pain isn't an issue. The fact remains that you are ending a life. How you see this as not hurting anyone is amazing. And no I don't accept that it is a woman's "right" to have an abortion. Nobody should have that right. Society can and should step in to prevent a mother who wants to kill her own child. That's not a private affair.

You suport people's right not to have an abortion? How very generous of you. :rolleyes:

eyescreamcone

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Whether or not the unborn can feel pain isn't an issue. The fact remains that you are ending a life. How you see this as not hurting anyone is amazing. And no I don't accept that it is a woman's "right" to have an abortion. Nobody should have that right. Society can and should step in to prevent a mother who wants to kill her own child. That's not a private affair.

I don't agree with any of the above!

eyescreamcone

Pherekydes wrote: »

What large groups are you talking about?

I was married in a RO. The religion of the solemniser was irrelevant. Have you any proof that those of no religion can't be solemnisers?

If you wanted to get married outside a registry office you would need a solemniser from a church, or get an HSE official (not at weekends or outside though)to do the necessary.

The rules at present preclude the non religious groups like humanists from having a representative registered to officiate at weddings (and for these weddings to be legal).

For the second largest group (the non religious) at the last census to be excluded because they have no religion is ...bullying and discriminatory!!!

Pherekydes

eyescreamcone wrote: »

If you wanted to get married outside a registry office you would need a solemniser from a church, or get an HSE official (not at weekends or outside though)to do the necessary.

The rules at present preclude the non religious groups like humanists from having a representative registered to officiate at weddings (and for these weddings to be legal).

For the second largest group (the non religious) at the last census to be excluded because they have no religion is ...bullying and discriminatory!!!

You seem to be evading the issue. Religion never comes into a Registry office wedding. No one is excluded.

Also, what "large groups" are you referring to in your first post?

eyescreamcone

Pherekydes wrote: »

You seem to be evading the issue. Religion never comes into a Registry office wedding. No one is excluded.

I'm talking about non registry office weddings. Jeez

eyescreamcone

As for the large group.
For instance I'm assuming that there are more people in favour of not having same sex marriages than are for this choice. (I don't have figures to back this up)

If this group that are against same sex marriages is smaller than the group that want it..then the situation is even more bizarre.

Pherekydes

eyescreamcone wrote: »

As for the large group.
For instance I'm assuming that there are more people in favour of not having same sex marriages than are for this choice. (I don't have figures to back this up)

Well then stop jumping to conclusions.

Pherekydes

eyescreamcone wrote: »

I'm talking about non registry office weddings. Jeez

I'm getting confused. How are non religious people being bullied? They can get married in a registry office, or these days nearly anywhere, with the agreement of the solemniser of their choice. Religion doesn't come into these weddings.

eyescreamcone

Pherekydes wrote: »

Well then stop jumping to conclusions.

Whether the group preventing the same sex marriage is larger or smaller than those who are pro same sex marriages is irrelevant.
To prevent it when it makes no odds to your life ...is bullying and discriminatory!!!

Next!

eyescreamcone

Pherekydes wrote: »

I'm getting confused. How are non religious people being bullied? They can get married in a registry office, or these days nearly anywhere, with the agreement of the solemniser of their choice. Religion doesn't come into these weddings.

In a battle of wits you, my friend, are half armed!!!
Lets simplify!

Religious people can get married in a registry office or in another place by a solemniser. For RCC dudes this would be done in a church by a priest. (the priest would be the registered solemniser for RCC)

For non religious people who don't like registry office weddings they have a problem.
The state won't allow groups such as the humanists to have registered solemnisers. Crazy but true!

This is bullying and discriminatory!!!

davet82

eyescreamcone wrote: »

In a battle of wits you, my friend, are half armed!!!

now thats bullying :cool: