No more SW communion/confirmation payments

Zebra3

Odysseus wrote: »

To be fair there is a lot of pressure to give money. Now if someone is really low on cash I wouldn't judge them personally. However, I remember a uncle of mine gave me an empty card, stating he hadn't time to get change and that he would sort me out later, never did.

Anyway my Mam took this as a personal insult as that particular was very well off. Two years later his son was being brought out to our house for his confirmation and I remember my Mam insisting that he get an empty card too.

Thankfully my Dad wouldn't have it, sasid he wasn't taking it out on the kid and I agree. However, my Mam didn't speak to that Uncle her brother for over a decade because of it.

OTT I agree but I think it says something about the pressure put on people to cough up at these occasions.

You gotta love religion. :rolleyes:

Antar Bolaeisk

McLoughlin wrote: »

Now make it compulsory to make it in school uniforms.

Now to get them out of the schools altogether.

Thwip!

Zebra3 wrote: »

You gotta love religion. :rolleyes:

Bringing people together...to wage war on each other

wolfpawnat

Thwip! wrote: »

Bringing people together...to wage war on each other

Since the dawn of faith! Seriously, has anything else caused as many wars?

AK333

Just for the poor little orish childers, I have a slightly used Communion Dress, beautiful dress I must say, and veil if you need to borrow one

Why can't Britney borrows Shakira's who borrowed Rihannon's etc (you get my drift) Thats what we all did in the good old days :rolleyes:

flutterflye

It actually makes me so fcuking angry that for the past few years they have been taking more and more money from basic things like health and schools, and the most vulnerable like special needs, the elderly, the sick.

But yet they have been paying out 100/200 for fcuking farcical religious nonsense - And by that I do not mean the actual religion is a farce (although that is infact what I think), but the actual ceremonies and what they have become - All about the money, money, money, and the tans and limos of course.

Well they've finally copped on now at least. Better late than never I guess.
Still angers me though - My son who has special needs was out of school for nearly a year a while back because they had to let a bunch of special needs assistants go due to budget cuts, and hadn't the resources to keep him there.

Thwip!

wolfpawnat wrote: »

Since the dawn of faith! Seriously, has anything else caused as many wars?

Probably fandoms

Steve O

Thwip! wrote: »

Bringing people together...to wage war on each other

A war on who has the fakest tan and pinkest nails.

wolfpawnat

Thwip! wrote: »

Probably fandoms

Don't recall Whovian's and Supernatural fans ever killing each other though! Could be wrong.

Thwip!

wolfpawnat wrote: »

Don't recall Whovian's and Supernatural fans ever killing each other though! Could be wrong.

I'm talking Sherlocks and Whovians.... Sherlockians are very good at covering it up

Kenny Gofuk

I couldn't believe that there is an allowance for this! I would love to get it backdated?

I do not have a problem with any genuine person claiming for unemployed or social welfare, but its ridiculous to think that the government is subsidising this.

It's no wonder we see such carry on as little kids going on sunbeds and the like and hotel gatherings that look like mini gypsy weddings and don't forget the afterparty the next day ( because apparently the communion day was the childs day ? )

Little Amy now looks more like a mini Beyonce ( the only similarity really being that she is now the same skin tone as her )

I believe this should be stopped because it's abused, unfortunatly the persons that really needed a hand now have to suffer.

Zebra3

They interviewed some people on TV3 5.30 news about it who were disgusted at the cutback as "ya need the money for..." among other things "make up".

:rolleyes:

Gatling

Zebra3 wrote: »

They interviewed some people on TV3 5.30 news about it who were disgusted at the cutback as "ya need the money for..." among other things "make up".

:rolleyes:

But single parents you know , they gave it 3 years ago I cant see why they still can't ,where do they find these numtys

Kenny Gofuk

Jimmy Savile fixed it for me !

A little boy asked the priest, "Father, is it a sin to have sex before receiving communion?

He replied, "Only if you block the aisle."

dangerus06

kylith wrote: »

If they can't do it on the cheap, they can do it for free. There is no charge to make your Communion; it is a free service provided by the RCC. If they are truly Catholic then it is the sacrament that should be important, not the dress or the party.

wrong it costs 5 euro

meoklmrk91

I the Celtic tiger years things went crazy, especially for communion days, everyone was trying to one up each other. I remember watching a show about communions when I was around the age of making my confirmation and some sick twisted person got their daughters leg waxed for her communion, the kid was crying and her mother made her lie there and have it done :mad:

It was all fake tans, the bigger the dress the better, horse drawn carriages and limos. I think it's all a bit sick to be honest, just a way for people to one up each other. I've heard of people taking 30+people out for dinner, it's just crazy! Here I don't mind anyone dressing their kid up nice and having a party for them with their friends or whatever but it was out of hand.

Also I noticed that while some people will say to you "it's the kids day" they still use it as an excuse to get plastered, but apparently it's acceptable to get **** faced while your kids are around because "their day"

I think the whole thing has become exceptionally inappropriate, when I got my communion I got to wear a pretty dress and my aunty plaited my hair so it was curly, now it's almost a given that they have to get tans, make up, nails and hair done, making them look like baby prostitutes or those pageant kids.

If people want to do this on their own dime fine, we shouldn't be paying for frivolous things with our taxes, we don't do it for kids of any other religion, and meanwhile people with disabilities were hiving services cut, our healthcare system is in tatters and countless other services were cut while this stayed in place until dec 2012.

And for those that say that this will widen the gap between the have and the have nots, in fairness people need a wake up call, they are living in dreamland and spending money that they do not have, getting in debt up to their eyeballs to keep up with the joneses.

kingofslaves

The government wasted 3.4 million on this nonsense last year! How many teachers salaries or books would this have paid for? Things that would have contributed to the real education of the nations children. Or how many warm jumpers and shoes that those poor kids could wear every day, not just silly frilly fake mini wedding dresses to be worn once. Does not one cut the cloth to suit ones pocket? Is this payment exclusive to one faith or is it payable to all faiths for broadly comparable events. If not payable to all faiths then is it legal, morally right and non discriminatory?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Then they simply should not do it if they can not afford it.

If someone can not afford to engage in their hobbies then they should not engage in their hobbies.

A religious ceremony is not a requirement or a need or a right. It is essentially part of the hobby of the people concerned.

If you can not afford a new golf ball at the end of each week then do not play golf.

In fairness, I wouldn't class a religion as a "hobby".

That said, if financial assistance is needed to help practcise said religion,

1 - why? Why do you need to dress up a kid to the 9s in order to make a communion in the first place?

2 - if it needs to be a financial burden on the family, why can the church not subsidise it themselves? Why in the hell does the State need to be involved?

DEFTLEFTHAND

The Church discourages the practice, it's the parents who go overboard with the dresses, fake tans etc. Maybe this timely measure will call a halt to the fashion parade.

nozzferrahhtoo

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

In fairness, I wouldn't class a religion as a "hobby".

To each their own. You class it whatever way you like. Functionally it is little more than a hobby as far as I can see. It is certainly not a necessity or a basic need like food, shelter or clothing. It is a hobby/club with clubhouses and internal rules and the like.

If someone can not afford their hobby or club then that is not our problem.

oldyouth

The fact that there is no longer a grant for Communions will not stop parents engaging in this display of one-upmanship. It won't matter if they can or can't afford it, the tan will be done, the dress will be bought and the hotel will be booked for 30 guests to get fed and watered for the day. All this will be followed by a boozy debate on how they can't afford the property tax and do the Government not realise that people are broke?

Absolute muppets, but fun to watch in an eerie way

kylith

dangerus06 wrote: »

wrong it costs 5 euro

Oh well, that would totally necessitate a SW handout for more than 20 times that amount.

SeventySix

What do the parents of boys spend it on?

wolfpawnat

SeventySix wrote: »

What do the parents of boys spend it on?

Suits. They seemingly make them as expensive or more expensive than the dresses to ensure their hefty profits from what I have seen.

SeventySix

wolfpawnat wrote: »

Suits. They seemingly make them as expensive or more expensive than the dresses to ensure their hefty profits from what I have seen.

Well that makes a twisted kind of sense. I was thinking that parents of boys must have it made.

I have no problem with Communions and Confirmations. We all managed to have them in the 80's without it costing a fortune and it was a nice day for the family. For us it was a special occasion to look forward to. Things were generally hard, so that is not something to be sniffed at. Hopefully this will just let the scale of celebration go back to normal.

Ilik Urgee

They should go one further and tax communion money.
Revenue could recover some of these payments since they were brought in,and in the process educate the kids as to what lies ahead in later years.

VinLieger

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

The Church discourages the practice, it's the parents who go overboard with the dresses, fake tans etc. Maybe this timely measure will call a halt to the fashion parade.

Discourage isnt anywhere near enough they need to take back control of it and stop it being the farcical event it has become.
The church should be insisting on uniforms with no exceptions and then if the parents still want to dress the kids up like a barbie doll they can do it after the ceremony.

wolfpawnat

SeventySix wrote: »

Well that makes a twisted kind of sense. I was thinking that parents of boys must have it made.

I have no problem with Communions and Confirmations. We all managed to have them in the 80's without it costing a fortune and it was a nice day for the family. For us it was a special occasion to look forward to. Things were generally hard, so that is not something to be sniffed at. Hopefully this will just let the scale of celebration go back to normal.

Indeed. My communion dress cost a mini fortune in the early 90's. Bout £60, with shoes and a head piece. These days the conversion rate barely covers the shoes!!!!

The thing is those who go for extravagance (if you can call it that, I personally think it tacky) won't be bothered by 100e-200e cuts, they were already forking out several hundred to a few thousand for the day, so that isn't even drinking money to them.

Dan_Solo

paddy147 wrote: »

Well in some cases (Credit Union and SVP case studies)...YES-starving and NO-none or hardly any heat leccy,schoolbooks...due to lack of money at the end of each week.

110-120 euro is not a huge amount of money (well it is to alot of people nowadays) and will get you the entire kit in quite a good few of the communion shops.

Well in that case they should take the money and spend it on food and heating.
Hell, even spend it on some proper clothes you might use again.
You're saying parents in Ireland can't feed their kids but are willing to fork out for princess dresses? Sounds like an ISPCC case!

Dan_Solo

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

In fairness, I wouldn't class a religion as a "hobby".

In that case you won't mind if I class my hobbies as equally important as your religion?
(internet porn and home made weed, if you're asking.)

Gatling

wolfpawnat wrote: »

Suits. They seemingly make them as expensive or more expensive than the dresses to ensure their hefty profits from what I have seen.

My sister in law is forking out 700e on a tailored suit alone for her son , just because most of his friends have got off the rail suits ,
And yet she thinks welfare should be paying part of the money,
Disgrace in my eyes

wolfpawnat

Gatling wrote: »

My sister in law is forking out 700e on a tailored suit alone for her son , just because most of his friends have got off the rail suits ,
And yet she thinks welfare should be paying part of the money,
Disgrace in my eyes

My ENTIRE wardrobe isn't worth 700e!!!!!!

My 4 year old son hasn't gone through that much clothing in 2 years and his nana is a bit of a brand buyer!!!!!

Gatling

wolfpawnat wrote: »

My ENTIRE wardrobe isn't worth 700e!!!!!!

My 4 year old son hasn't gone through that much clothing in 2 years and his nana is a bit of a brand buyer!!!!!

Same here we've two kids and we haven't spent that ,

El Inho

bleg wrote: »

Good.

seeing this post get so many likes makes me happy

MurdyWurdy

Gatling wrote: »

My sister in law is forking out 700e on a tailored suit alone for her son , just because most of his friends have got off the rail suits ,
And yet she thinks welfare should be paying part of the money,
Disgrace in my eyes

My wedding dress cost a lot less than that. That's crazy!!

mrsbyrne

Akrasia wrote: »

I went to a confirmation 2 weeks ago, my wife's niece, and they forced me to sit through a boring mass and pay the child for the priviledge of doing so.

I'm an atheist, when my first born child is 7 years old, I'm going to force all his cousins to stand in a field in the dark for 2 hours looking through a telescope and they'll have to give my kid an envelope stuffed with cash.

I hate communions and confirmations. the one two weeks ago in a small village near limerick, they booked out the local pubs. All of them for the 'children's' party. The kids were fed as much coke cake and crisps as they could fit in them, while the adults drank their weight in booze.

It was an absolute disgrace, some of the children didn't leave the pub until almost 1am. At 8 or 9pm they put on a kareoke 'for the children' and the MC, a middle aged woman croaking into the microphone, on more than a few occasions made comments to the crowd to the effect of 'Get that drink into you, the drunker you are, the better you'll sound'
This was at a party allegedly put on for primary school children.

Why did you go to something you didnt want to go to?!?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Dan_Solo wrote: »

In that case you won't mind if I class my hobbies as equally important as your religion?
(internet porn and home made weed, if you're asking.)

Up to you.

I'm not religious, by the way - I just stated that "a" religion is a bit different from a hobby in that the reasons for participating in a hobby are different to those for participating in a religion. At least to the person participating.

Bajingo

McLoughlin wrote: »

Now make it compulsory to make it in school uniforms.

So are you of the mind that education should go hand in hand with religion?

nozzferrahhtoo

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

I'm not religious, by the way - I just stated that "a" religion is a bit different from a hobby in that the reasons for participating in a hobby are different to those for participating in a religion. At least to the person participating.

That seemingly is not a useful distinction to attempt given it is also true WITHIN the "set" of hobbies you would define in such a way. In other words the reasons for participating in any one hobby likely also differ... from hobby-to-hobby.... as well as from participant-to-participant.

As such if one were to apply your distinction not only would "Religion" fail to qualify as a "hobby" but so would any other "hobby" one could name.

I fail to see much useful distinction.... most certainly not in the context of the point I was originally making when this side conversation sprouted..... between the Catholic Religion and it's churches.... and any other "club" with "clubhouses" that one might be a member of.

meoklmrk91

Gatling wrote: »

My sister in law is forking out 700e on a tailored suit alone for her son , just because most of his friends have got off the rail suits ,
And yet she thinks welfare should be paying part of the money,
Disgrace in my eyes

No offense to you or anything but your SIL is a serious ****ing idiot.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

That seemingly is not a useful distinction to attempt given it is also true WITHIN the "set" of hobbies you would define in such a way. In other words the reasons for participating in any one hobby likely also differ... from hobby-to-hobby.... as well as from participant-to-participant.

Definte "set" of hobbies? Most peopel participate in a hobby because they find it interesting and as a form of leisure and recreation. With religion, it's more out of habit and tradition.

As such if one were to apply your distinction not only would "Religion" fail to qualify as a "hobby" but so would any other "hobby" one could name.

A hobby would fail to qualify as a hoby because of the person participating in it...??

I fail to see much useful distinction.... most certainly not in the context of the point I was originally making when this side conversation sprouted..... between the Catholic Religion and it's churches.... and any other "club" with "clubhouses" that one might be a member of.

You refered to state funding of a hobby. The state actually funds lots of hobbies. Religious people see it as more of a vocation than a hobby.

nozzferrahhtoo

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

Definte "set" of hobbies?

I was talking about the set of hobbies that would be defined by YOUR criteria.

In other words if you are going to define things as being (or not being) a "hobby" solely on the basis of the fact the reasons for engaging in it differ.... then nothing would end up in your "set" because reasons differ across both each hobby... and each participant.

As such the distinction you attempt to make is useless, unless you simply cherry pick when to apply it.

starskey77

school uniform thats your answer more money for parents to lush with

swimming in a sea

Maybe been said already, But i would not agree with children having communion in school uniform, Keep religion out of schools.

paddy147

I wonder will they chop/stop the Bereavement Grant of 850 euro at the next budget??

Sure they may aswell target dead peoples families too at this stage.:pac:


http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/social_welfare/social_welfare_payments/death_related_benefits/bereavement_grant.html

Dan_Solo

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

Up to you.

I'm not religious, by the way - I just stated that "a" religion is a bit different from a hobby in that the reasons for participating in a hobby are different to those for participating in a religion. At least to the person participating.

Well I'm telling you they're not. I spend far more time on internet porn than any bible basher does praying.
That's the problem with religions. You just have to say you have one and you do. And precisely why they are no business of the state.

Dan_Solo

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

Definte "set" of hobbies? Most peopel participate in a hobby because they find it interesting and as a form of leisure and recreation. With religion, it's more out of habit and tradition.

In that case I honestly think my internet porn hobby is more important than religion.

wolfpawnat

paddy147 wrote: »

I wonder will they chop/stop the Bereavement Grant of 850 euro at the next budget??

Sure they may aswell target dead peoples families too at this stage.:pac:


http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/social_welfare/social_welfare_payments/death_related_benefits/bereavement_grant.html

I would see that as different, funerals cost a fortune even on the cheap! And we all die, that is something that we have to accept that. And we have to have something resembling a funeral. A grave can cost anything from 350-1500 pending where you live, then casket, headstone. Not sure what a cremation costs! Communions and Confirmations are elective ceremonies.

Tiddlypeeps

paddy147 wrote: »

I wonder will they chop/stop the Bereavement Grant of 850 euro at the next budget??

Sure they may aswell target dead peoples families too at this stage.:pac:


http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/social_welfare/social_welfare_payments/death_related_benefits/bereavement_grant.html

I don't disagree with this grant existing. If someone in your family dies they need to be buried/cremated and the cost of that falls on the family. If they can't afford it then they are put in an awful situation. Doesn't matter if there are religious affiliations with the ceremony or not, it still needs to be done.

No idea if 850 is a reasonable amount tho as thankfully I've never been in a situation to know the costs involved. If that is excessive then obviously it should be cut, if not then it should probably be left alone.

A grant for a communion dress on the other hand is just stupid and I'm glad it's been abolished.

kylith

paddy147 wrote: »

I wonder will they chop/stop the Bereavement Grant of 850 euro at the next budget??

Sure they may aswell target dead peoples families too at this stage.:pac:


http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/social_welfare/social_welfare_payments/death_related_benefits/bereavement_grant.html

I would presume not, for various reasons such as it's available to everyone, not just people of a certain religion, unlike religious sacraments disposing of corpses appropriately is essential, unlike sacraments grave plots, funeral homes, coffins, and cremations cost a lot of money.