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
School patronage
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
Don't worry... You don't have to talk about it if you don't want to. You can just not post in the threadHuntergonzo wrote: »we shouldn't still be wasting time talking about it.
0 -
-
-
it wasn't my choice of analogy so you'll have to pick someone else up on the obfuscatory nature I'm afraid. However I will point out that you didn't fix my point, you just wrote your own to suit your point of view; I'd appreciate it if you didn't try to make it look like you're quoting me when in fact you're just making your own little story upThe situation you provide there is a wee bit obfuscative, you seem to imply 'people' means just a random bunch of people. Here I'll fix your post to reflect the reality I know of..
if your story includes that fact that people aren't being treated because there aren't enough resources to treat them, then yes, it's a resourcing issue.Still a resourcing issue is it? But of course if you are of the right creed then the resource issue magically disappears doesn't it?
.
Sounds like you have a plan... Are you intending on bidding to take over hospitals?I find it unusual where on one hand 3 schools are being amalgamated into 1 to save costs.. but yet other schools are being split out into 2 to 'provide choice'.
Maybe we should be providing choice to sick children too! Hey maybe build the new childrens' hospital in St James',Beaumount, the Coombe and the Mater site to cater for 3 denominations and 1 non-denomination. At least the kids then can get their health combined with the appropriate ethos.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
it wasn't my choice of analogy so you'll have to pick someone else up on the obfuscatory nature I'm afraid.
Well yes, it wasn't your analogy (that bit is true), but what you did do is to try and weaken the analogy by hiding detail. And by doing so you've shown your hand.
Let me simplify.
If there are 100 people and 50 places to be handed out this is a resources issue. You have identified that part.. .great.
Now the bit your omitting is that if you have 100 people with 50 places to be handed out, but 50 of the people with a baptism cert get first dibs. Do you maintain that this is still fair and ONLY a resourcing issue?However I will point out that you didn't fix my point, you just wrote your own to suit your point of view;
Your point of view on that analogy omitted the little fact that religion was being used to exclude.I'd appreciate it if you didn't try to make it look like you're quoting me
No it's doesn't 'look like' I'm quoting you .... I am 'actually' quoting you HERE from HERE. That is a direct quote. Then I pointed out your omission.
Ahh now, the little story on educational exclusion isn't that little is it. But I suppose if it doesn't affect you then it's more of an annoyance than an issue.when in fact you're just making your own little story upif your story includes that fact that people aren't being treated because there aren't enough resources to treat them, then yes, it's a resourcing issue.
No that's the 'little story' that's taking place in your head, you're omitting the minor detail (also known as the thread title) that people get priority because of religion.
I would be interesting to see what you'd do if it were scrambling for lifeboats on the titanic. You'd be pushing your way past women and children to get on the lifeboat replying ...."it's a resourcing issue, deal with it".
No the plan to split out state institutions such as hospitals according to religious beliefs is absurd.... I'm sure you'll agree.Sounds like you have a plan... Are you intending on bidding to take over hospitals?0 -
That certainly doesn't look like simpflying; that looks entirely like changing the proposition (again, oddly enough). But it remains the cases, that if there are more candidates than places, there is a resourcing issue. The methodology used to discriminate between them for the places is simply a matter of preference; you would prefer one other than the one many schools use. It remains the case that if there were enough places, no discrimination would be required.Well yes, it wasn't your analogy (that bit is true), but what you did do is to try and weaken the analogy by hiding detail. And by doing so you've shown your hand. Let me simplify. If there are 100 people and 50 places to be handed out this is a resources issue. You have identified that part.. .great. Now the bit your omitting is that if you have 100 people with 50 places to be handed out, but 50 of the people with a baptism cert get first dibs. Do you maintain that this is still fair and ONLY a resourcing issue?
So you added what you wanted to what I said; that's not quoting me, that's writing your own point and attributing it to me.Your point of view on that analogy omitted the little fact that religion was being used to exclude.
Nope, a direct quote would be what I said. You didn't quote what I said, you rewrote it to include what you wanted, then placed it in quotes as if I said it. Not 'actually' quoting me, 'actually' deliberately misrepresenting me. And then trying to pretend you're not!
Well... The little one you showed is little enough I think. I suppose if you want to present a bigger one you might try to do it without fibbing about your quotesAhh now, the little story on educational exclusion isn't that little is it. But I suppose if it doesn't affect you then it's more of an annoyance than an issue.
Not in hospitals they don't... Are you loosing track of the stories?No that's the 'little story' that's taking place in your head, you're omitting the minor detail (also known as the thread title) that people get priority because of religion.
Well, thanks for telling me what I'd do. I imagine I'd have nothing at all to say if you weren't around to write it down for me!I would be interesting to see what you'd do if it were scrambling for lifeboats on the titanic. You'd be pushing your way past women and children to get on the lifeboat replying ...."it's a resourcing issue, deal with it".
Theres a plan to 'split out' hospitals according to religious beliefs? Is this another one of those things that you're 'not' making up?No the plan to split out state institutions such as hospitals according to religious beliefs is absurd.... I'm sure you'll agree.0 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
Why not? Apparently there wouldn't be enough 'real' adherents of the religion, so they should be fine, shouldn't they? It seems it may be the people pretending to be religious rather than the people who are religious at the root of the problem you think exists.No, if they didn't lie they wouldn't get a place in their local state funded school.
Do you think so? Seems you have a lower opinion of them than I do so. I thought they were simply trying to gain advantage for their children regardless of their own religious outlook.... Via a strategy they wouldn't need to adopt if their co-irreligionists weren't doing the same, surely?Gosh, really? Perhaps these people are just having a bit of a laugh by subscribing their children to a religion they have no interest in or respect for? Or why exactly do you think this shameful behaviour is taking place in the first place?
Well, that's not exactly surprising, is itThe only shameful behaviour I see is state funded religious discrimination in our education system. 0 -
-
-
-
So those parents are shameful liars, but being the good christian you 'have to' forgive them... but only just 'a little' mind?
Please, do go on...
Ah, leave him alone, he's having to, kinda, slither uphill. Its not easy to keep stretching for more and more fragile arguments. (I think that's pretty much a complete metaphor mix there
.) 0 -
-
Advertisement
-
Advertisement