Accords budget cut by goverment....why are they being given money??

Frank Lee Midere

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I assume you are referring to those 'history' books that have since been removed from the school curriculum on the grounds that they were inaccurate (or lies to be blunt about it).

The 'Royal Govt.' as you call it - do you mean Westminster or Dublin pre Act of Union? Either way the 'Royals' haven't had any power since the 18th century so I wonder what your agenda is there.

If you read a history book worth the paper it is written on - or *gasp* the actual documents from the time - you would learn that the RCC made a deal with Westminster as the RCC objected to the existing State funded schools as they lacked a 'Catholic ethos' so in return for complete support for the Act of Union Westminster agreed that private Catholic schools could be founded. Seems the RCC was concerned with educating those who could pay - the poor, not so much.

No one had any issues with educating the 'native' Irish as you call them, no more than they objected to educating the 'native' Scottish or the 'native' Welsh and to claim they did shows you need to stop reading Catholic Nationalist B.S. pseudo-history and start reading actual history.

Rubbish on three counts. Firstly the Catholic Church did teach the poor, certainly it did so before the British State chose to - mostly via the CBS. Secondly the penal laws did ban Catholic education at all levels up to 3rd level ( second statute in 1695). Thirdly there are native Scots, Irish and Welsh not 'native'. There is no need for scare quotes.

Sarky

Yay, another argument on history with a professional historian!

lazygal

Sarky wrote: »

Yay, another argument on history with a professional historian!

Now all we need is oldrnwisr to weigh in for a slam dunk!

Brian Shanahan

lazybones32 wrote: »

The majority of the Irish population identify themselves as Catholic and people here get uber-offended when the State subsidises a service for Catholic citizens.

A) The majority of the population say they can speak some Irish. They can speak Irish in the same way they are catholic, i.e. not.
Even if the majority were truly catholic Ireland still passes itself off as a secular republic. If Ireland were secular, then it wouldn't be allowing a religious group to perform the guidance counselling important to the secular act of marriage (you're not married until you both sign the civil state register).

So that's your argument blown out of the water. Stop complaining when we hold the state up to the standard it says it holds.

Brian Shanahan

Frank Lee Midere wrote: »

Rubbish on three counts.

You, who couldn't wipe your behind but for the map tattooed to your forhead is arguing with one of the most erudite posters on the site?

Yeah, this isn't going to end well Frank.

Nodin

Frank Lee Midere wrote: »

Rubbish on three counts. Firstly the Catholic Church did teach the poor, certainly it did so before the British State chose to - mostly via the CBS. Secondly the penal laws did ban Catholic education at all levels up to 3rd level ( second statute in 1695). Thirdly there are native Scots, Irish and Welsh not 'native'. There is no need for scare quotes.

The act of Union was in 1800.....

Bannasidhe

Frank Lee Midere wrote: »

Rubbish on three counts. Firstly the Catholic Church did teach the poor, certainly it did so before the British State chose to - mostly via the CBS. Secondly the penal laws did ban Catholic education at all levels up to 3rd level ( second statute in 1695). Thirdly there are native Scots, Irish and Welsh not 'native'. There is no need for scare quotes.

Oh not this crap again.

Christian Brothers - First established in Ireland 1802 - Act of Union was 1801 = coinkydinks...No.

1831 A National School System was introduced - its main object was to ‘unite in one system children of different creeds’, however pressure from the various churches - mainly the RCC resulted in 96% of the schools coming under the management of one denomination or another - amazingly enough this is exactly the same percentage as today - by the mid- 19th century.

The Penal Laws were aimed at all person not members of the Established Church - i.e. Not Anglicans - so Methodists, Quakers, Presbyterians etc etc were discriminated against just as much as Catholics - the Penal Laws were also in place in England, Scotland and Wales so only in the fevered imaginations of Catholic nationalists can they be described as specifically either anti-Irish or Anti- Catholic.

No 3rd level for Catholics? Explain the establishment of the Queens Colleges in the 1850s so....

Define 'native' - does a (Cambro-Norman) Fitzgerald count? How about a (Galloglass) MacSweeney? Maybe a (Norse) McAuliffe? Perhaps a (Hiberno-Norman) Burke is but a (Anglo-Norman) de Burgh isn't - who exactly are these native Irish you assure me exist.

At what point in time were there only Native Irish on this island?

Did these native Irish conceive of themselves as 'Irish' living in 'Ireland' - why yes they did - but only after the (Welsh) Tudors had violently imposed the concept on them and the (Scottish) Stuarts finished off the job so by the time of the RCC supported Act of Union the (German) Hanoverians had many 'native' Irish subjects in their new United Kingdom who had been so thoroughly Anglicised they didn't even know their ancestors of a mere two hundred years earlier would have been astounded at the thought of identifying as 'Irish'.

Prior to the introduction of centralisation by the Tudors the term 'Irish' was akin to us today calling ourselves 'European' - technically, it is correct but not in a national identity sense.

There was no racially based impediment at any time whatsoever to gaining whatever educational qualifications one wished - however, for a period of time if one was not an Anglican one would need to go abroad for further education - ones ethnicity did not factor into it. One's religion did.

Bit like now - if one is not a Roman Catholic - good luck getting your 'native' Irish child into a so-called 'National' school.

Bannasidhe

Nodin wrote: »

The act of Union was in 1800.....

Enacted in 1801.

Nodin

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Enacted in 1801.

...you're off the clock now. And don't try writing on the screen with a red pen either.

Bannasidhe

Nodin wrote: »

...you're off the clock now. And don't try writing on the screen with a red pen either.

I use Green.

Sarky

That must seriously mess with students' heads.

Nodin

Sarky wrote: »

That must seriously mess with students' heads.

...only if she now and again changes to red.

Nodin

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I use Green.

Hippy.

Bannasidhe

Nodin wrote: »

...only if she now and again changes to red.

Burgundy. :cool:

silverharp

I hope this particular resurrection of a thread wont clash with anyone's beliefs. Listening to the News I thought it was been cut completely but still means they will be getting 1.5 million per year. How exactly will thy be allowed to deal with a gay couple from next month?

http://www.thejournal.ie/accord-2099185-May2015/

CATHOLIC MARRIAGE COUNSELLING organisation Accord is to lose some of its state funding – but Tusla claims it has nothing to do with the upcoming marriage referendum.
The organisation, which received €1.9 million from Tusla last year, is to lose €378,000 of that this year.
Speaking to the Irish Catholic, Bishop of Elphin Dr Kevin Doran questioned whether the move is “part of a wider policy of the Government” to withdraw funding from Catholic agencies, something Tusla denies strongly.
The Irish Catholic linked the withdrawal of funding with the upcoming referendum on marriage, claiming that the move “gives weight to fears” that agencies which do not support the “government agenda on the redefinition of marriage will be starved of funding”.
‘Curious timing’
Speaking on Newstalk Breakfast Accord President Bishop Denis Nulty also said he thought the timing of the cuts was “curious”. He said he received a letter about the funding decision on 7 May.

oldrnwisr

silverharp wrote: »

I hope this particular resurrection of a thread wont clash with anyone's beliefs. Listening to the News I thought it was been cut completely but still means they will be getting 1.5 million per year. How exactly will thy be allowed to deal with a gay couple from next month?

http://www.thejournal.ie/accord-2099185-May2015/

This is a bit of a non-story really. Barnardos, which is advocating a Yes vote has also had their funding cut by Tusla. So it's really just a case of Kevin Doran and The Irish Catholic talking out through their collective arses. As usual.

Hotblack Desiato

If they want 'catholic services for a catholic people' they could campaign for a church tax, or just, y'know, have a collection...

Brian Shanahan

silverharp wrote: »

I hope this particular resurrection of a thread wont clash with anyone's beliefs. Listening to the News I thought it was been cut completely but still means they will be getting 1.5 million per year. How exactly will thy be allowed to deal with a gay couple from next month?

http://www.thejournal.ie/accord-2099185-May2015/

I was listening to the head of Tusla on Morning Ireland the other day defending the decision, and aside from one early mess up he got his point across brilliantly. Essentially the body is €18m in the hole from last year and needs to prioritise their resources carefully. He came out and said that while Tusla would love to be able to finance marriage preparation courses, doing stuff like funding fostering and services for troubled families ranked far higher.

Made Accord look like the bunch of money grabbing ****s they are, really.

Hotblack Desiato

When my future wife and I applied for permission to arrange our civil marriage, nobody offered us a taxpayer subsidised preparation or counselling service. How is that fair?