Please do this Today to help Separate Church and State in Ireland

wretcheddomain

Looks like they're already putting up the new submissions; surely they can't ignore this massive quantity of submissions on the same topic?

robindch

Wife of corrupt politician, Pee Flynn explains that "God knows best" after corrupt policitian, Pee Flynn, did a religious reading or two from the pulpit in Castlebar. TD Michelle Mulherin (of "fornication [...] is probably the single most likely cause of unwanted pregnancies in this country" fame) explained that she was fine with it, matter for himself and all that, and that the church is a "place where you find mercy, not condemnation".

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/why-the-fuss-now-asks-padraig-flynns-wife-on-mass-row-29726461.html

Independent wrote:

THE wife of former politician Padraig 'Pee' Flynn has defended him after he gave a reading to Mass-goers, saying: "Sure he's been reading at Mass there for the last 40 years." Dorothy Flynn was responding to reports that parishioners in Castlebar, Co Mayo, complained about her husband speaking from the pulpit.

Asked if she thought criticism of her husband was unfair, Mrs Flynn replied: "I think God knows best." She said that Mr Flynn, a former Fianna Fail minister and European Commissioner, wasn't available when the Irish Independent phoned and he did not return our call last night.

The controversial former politician gave two readings during Mass in the Church of the Holy Rosary on October 27, and one of the readings stated: "I have fought the good fight."

Last year, the Mahon Tribunal found that Mr Flynn accepted a corrupt payment of IR£50,000 from developer Tom Gilmartin. The tribunal found he used the money to buy a farm for his wife, although it was intended for Fianna Fail coffers. He was never reprimanded in court.

Reports yesterday said parishioners felt "disgust" after Mr Flynn gave the readings. The Tuam archdiocese is investigating complaints. An archdiocese spokesman said they would be "very reluctant to comment publicly".

But Mayo Fine Gael TD Michelle Mulherin backed Mr Flynn, saying: "I think it's really a matter for himself and his faith. I personally don't have a problem with it. This is the church we're talking about. It's a place where you find mercy, not condemnation."

Hotblack Desiato

^ Hmm, couldn't decide if it was scandals, hazards or funny, so posted it here :pac:

robindch

ninja900 wrote: »

^ Hmm, couldn't decide if it was scandals, hazards or funny, so posted it here :pac:

These days, a lot of religious output is.

wretcheddomain

Hundreds of thousands of new submissions are now available.

Michael Nugent

Please continue to make submissions about Secularism / Separation of Church and State to the Constitutional Convention.

There has been a huge surge in Church and State submissions in recent weeks. However, the Convention members seemed to show little interest in adding it to the final item on their agenda when they met last weekend.

When we started asking for submissions two weeks ago, there were about 25 Church and State submissions, Now there are about 110. Church and State is now closing in on the top two topics, Environment and ESC Rights, with about 140 each. But these were at about 130 each two weeks ago.

And the Convention secretariat told us on Saturday that it was noticeable that the Church and State submissions were individually written and expressing nuanced opinions, rather than being merely petition-style submissions to which people had simply added their names.

The Convention now seems likely to discuss only one or maybe two items under the final item on its agenda. It or they will be selected from this list:

Environment
ESC Rights
Church and State
Political and Institutional Reform
Family and Morality
Bill of Rights

Feedback from the Convention’s discussions on Sunday suggested support for ESC Rights, and possibly for Environment or Political Reform, but there was almost no feedback supporting the inclusion of Church and State.

To be honest, we have a dilemma at the moment. The Convention voted to replace the blasphemy clause on Saturday, but 38% of them wanted to keep the 1937 blasphemy reference, and 49% wanted a law against blasphemy on the statute books.

So it may be a double-edged sword in that, if we do get Church and State onto the agenda, this particular group of people might not recommend a very positive outcome after their discussions, if they do end up discussing it.

However, on principle, we should still try to demonstrate that people want to see Constitutional Separation of Church and State.

The decision as to what they discuss won't be made simply by counting the number of submissions, but it will help to influence the decision, so it is really important that we continue to get as many submissions as we can onto their website.

If you have already made a submission, thank you. If you haven't already made a submission, please do so today. Either way, please ask others to do so also.

Also, if you live near Waterford, please attend the Convention's public meeting in Waterford City Hall at 7 pm this Thursday, November 7th.

Atheist Ireland’s Regional Officer, Kevin Sheehan will be there at 6.30 pm if you would like to meet him beforehand to discuss the meeting. Also, you can email Kevin at info at atheist dot ie.

Mark Hamill

I just uploaded mine:

Submission to Constitutional Convention on Separation of Church and State

1.1 Lets ignore everything we have seen and heard about all the despicable things that religious organisations have done (moving around paedophile priests while hampering police investigations) or not done (offer to pay anything even remotely reasonable towards reparations to the victims of the Magdalene laundries while moving assets into trusts to hide them from prosecution) in this country.
1.2 Lets ignore how religious control of our healthcare system has cost the lives of vulnerable women, driven many abroad for necessary treatment and even interfered in the testing of novel anti-cancer drugs because their use would break religious doctrine (by requiring contraception to be used in parallel).
1.3 Lets ignore how our highest positions of office - Uachtarán na hÉireann, Dail Eireann, Council of State, judges - all involve oaths and prayers to a specific god thereby discouraging, disregarding or discriminating against non/alternative believers from interacting with or taking part in them.


1.4 Separation of Church and State boils down to one thing: We should not evoke a god to do the things we are supposed to do to have the best and most effective state we can achieve, a state that best cares for and supports all of its citizens. By evoking a specific god we alienate those that worship another, by evoking any god we alienate those who worship none. By evoking a god we encourage subjective viewpoints to influence decisions in state level institutions and allow the unscrupulous to twist religious interpretation and take advantage of religious insecurities of the public to damage the country for personal gain. By evoking god we allow "I believe" to become an argument in and of itself.


1.5 We can do better than evoking god. From any and all points of view, we are supposed to do better than evoking god - from the theist who believes in objective morality, to the non-theist who simply manages to exist without ethically imploding.

1.6 It is long past time that this country fully welcomes and accommodates those of other religious beliefs and of none, especially those who have been born and raised here. And we cannot do that by tolerating their existence while emphasising one religion over all others and none, in every aspect of life from schooling, to healthcare, to the legal system, to the very politic institutions that are supposedly in service of all citizens equally. Anyone with any degree of compassion, religious or otherwise, would not want such an environment inflicted on their fellow Irish citizen when they know they would not want it inflicted on themselves in any other country they may go.

Hotblack Desiato

Michael Nugent wrote: »

Feedback from the Convention’s discussions on Sunday suggested support for ESC Rights, and possibly for Environment or Political Reform, but there was almost no feedback supporting the inclusion of Church and State.

Well that's probably because these measures would be easier to implement and meet less opposition.

To gut the 1937 Constitution of the explicitly religious, christian and roman catholic provisions running through much of the document would involve a large number of changes and there would be substantial opposition (not, I believe, a majority, but enough to be very politically troublesome.)

Honestly I think we should be scrapping it and starting with a blank sheet, and do little other in it than guarantee fundamental rights and set out the basic structures of government and the courts. But that won't happen.

To be honest, we have a dilemma at the moment. The Convention voted to replace the blasphemy clause on Saturday, but 38% of them wanted to keep the 1937 blasphemy reference, and 49% wanted a law against blasphemy on the statute books.

This is so aggravating. But we've never really embraced the concept of personal freedom in Ireland. We are used to an authoritarian state and/or church so the idea of people being allowed to do or say whatever they want is seen by a lot of people as threatening.

An incitement to religious hatred law would be bad enough, but putting that into the constitution would be disastrous, and probably far more restrictive on speech than what we have now. And we'd be stuck with it - at least laws can be much more easily changed when it's clear the people don't support them or they are deeply flawed.

Banbh

An incitement to religious hatred law would be bad enough, but putting that into the constitution would be disastrous, and probably far more restrictive on speech than what we have now. And we'd be stuck with it - at least laws can be much more easily changed when it's clear the people don't support them or they are deeply flawed.

I fear we are going to lose this, in light of the Chairman's summary and that's even before the pro-god people have started publicly campaigning.

recedite

ninja900 wrote: »

An incitement to religious hatred law would be bad enough, but putting that into the constitution would be disastrous, and probably far more restrictive on speech than what we have now.

I agree this would be a very bad outcome. It could be worse than the blasphemy laws in the sense that it could be more defined, and therefore more usable.
I don't know who came up with the idea of having "incitement to religious hatred" as a separate category to more general incitement to hatred but this proposition is now being bandied about as a viable alternative to the blasphemy laws.

wretcheddomain

recedite wrote: »

I agree this would be a very bad outcome. It could be worse than the blasphemy laws in the sense that it could be more defined, and therefore more usable.
I don't know who came up with the idea of having "incitement to religious hatred" as a separate category to more general incitement to hatred but this proposition is now being bandied about as a viable alternative to the blasphemy laws.

It's only fair that we have the corollary law of "incitement to hatred from religion", if this is to go ahead. I wonder if the same religious folk would be equally up for this?

Michael Nugent

Public meeting today 7.30pm DCU

Just a reminder that the first Dublin regional public meeting is today at 7.30 pm in Dublin City University. It is in HG20, Nursing Building, which is just inside the Collins Avenue Extension entrance to DCU.

The more people who stand up and say that you want Secularism / Separation of Church and State included on the Convention’s agenda, the better.

Also, please keep making written submissions, if you haven’t already done so, and please also ask others to do so.

Church and State is now very close to the two topics with most submissions to date, which are ESC Rights and the Environment.

The Convention members will be voting in early December as to what they will discuss for their final item, so we have two to three weeks to let them know that there is public support for them discussing Church and State.

Michael Nugent

There are another fifteen submissions on Church and State published on the Convention website today.

Please make a submission if you haven't already done so, and please ask others to do do so if you have.

You can make your submission here