Abortion Discussion, Part Trois

Absolam

recedite wrote: »

Not even close.

No? Can you explain why you imagine a random sample of individuals represents the people in any way similarly to the individuals chosen by the people as their representatives? Other than the fact that the word represent is used differently when describing both, obviously.

aloyisious

expectationlost wrote: »

I may generally support similar things he supports but I hate to think that the money (earned through a business based on tax avoidance) and the wishes of one man has so much influence over a government and a nation through his other (at one time secret) grants and the lobbying for the use of citizens assemblies.

Would you rather that the CA did not exist at all?

Absolam

aloyisious wrote: »

Would you rather that the CA did not exist at all?

If the CA recommends we don't have a referendum on the 8th and leave all current provisions in place, will you rather it did not exist at all?

Cabaal

http://www.thejournal.ie/rogue-abortion-clinics-ireland-3033842-Oct2016/

Fully support this move

Labour bill aims to clamp down on rogue crisis pregnancy agencies operating in Ireland
The issue of these clinics operating in Ireland was highlighted in an undercover report last month.

Also, while they are at it, perhaps they should deal with misleading name used by Lolek Ltd and other name used by Youth Defense?

First comment is spot on

can we also ensure that organisations who use the term “institute” offer programmes of study and research is peer reviewed, like in other countries. We don’t want charlatans setting up private lobbying clubs and classing themselves as educational institutions.

Absolam

Regulating healthcare professionals certainly makes sense... attempting to limit the meaning of the word institute, maybe not so much.

recedite

Absolam wrote: »

No? Can you explain why you imagine a random sample of individuals represents the people in any way similarly to the individuals chosen by the people as their representatives? Other than the fact that the word represent is used differently when describing both, obviously.

They are two different ways of representing the public.
The former method is used in selecting a jury, and is less open to corruption.
The latter is used in selecting politicians. Career politicians are then targeted by lobbyists, whom they often serve instead of the public. Its only towards the end of their career that they feel cocky enough to give two fingers to the electorate. Barroso is a topical example of this.

robindch

Absolam wrote: »

attempting to limit the meaning of the word institute, maybe not so much.

The usage of many words is restricted - David Quinn has simply found one which isn't restricted in Ireland, purely so that he can sound like the high-falutin' well-respected academic institution he so dreadfully wishes that he and his dinner-party friends could be.

expectationlost

Cabaal wrote: »

http://www.thejournal.ie/rogue-abortion-clinics-ireland-3033842-Oct2016/

Fully support this move




Also, while they are at it, perhaps they should deal with misleading name used by Lolek Ltd and other name used by Youth Defense?

First comment is spot on

it would been great had they done this while they were in government

expectationlost

aloyisious wrote: »

Would you rather that the CA did not exist at all?

probably yes, Im a little more sympathetic to it then many, I think there is a place of deliberative democracy discussions but the way they've created here has been just too controlled from the top.

aloyisious

expectationlost wrote: »

probably yes, Im a little more sympathetic to it then many, I think there is a place of deliberative democracy discussions but the way they've created here has been just too controlled from the top.

You think the way the names of the people randomly picked by a polling company has been controlled by the powers that be (whomever they are) to ensure they are selected to suit a purpose other than the CA was publicly set up to do, that the CA is a rigged assembly? I see the Polling Co also picked out 99 other persons as stand-ins in case any of the original 99 drop out or are de-selected.

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjZ7sr-6ufPAhUHK8AKHbjzCSMQFggvMAM&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishtimes.com%2Fnews%2Fpolitics%2Fpolling-firm-to-choose-members-of-citizens-assembly-1.2749600&usg=AFQjCNGExUJ3YXYY48mspDTK9htzKOzKyw

expectationlost

aloyisious wrote: »

You think the way the names of the people randomly picked by a polling company has been controlled by the powers that be (whomever they are) to ensure they are selected to suit a purpose other than the CA was publicly set up to do, that the CA is a rigged assembly? I see the Polling Co also picked out 99 other persons as stand-ins in case any of the original 99 drop out or are de-selected.

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjZ7sr-6ufPAhUHK8AKHbjzCSMQFggvMAM&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishtimes.com%2Fnews%2Fpolitics%2Fpolling-firm-to-choose-members-of-citizens-assembly-1.2749600&usg=AFQjCNGExUJ3YXYY48mspDTK9htzKOzKyw

I didn't suggest any particular part of it was rigged (although I think the selection process isn't perfect), I said its a controlled process in favour of the government I think just as most people think that its delaying tactic by the them.

Absolam

recedite wrote: »

They are two different ways of representing the public. The former method is used in selecting a jury, and is less open to corruption. The latter is used in selecting politicians. Career politicians are then targeted by lobbyists, whom they often serve instead of the public. Its only towards the end of their career that they feel cocky enough to give two fingers to the electorate. Barroso is a topical example of this.

So, other than including the word represent like I said, not similar at all? That's what I was saying..... there is no reason to imagine the Citizens Assembly duplicates the functions of the Oireachtas in any respects, or that it could ever demand or wield real power.

Hotblack Desiato

expectationlost wrote: »

it would been great had they done this while they were in government

Didn't have the guts to force a referendum on the 8th, or even do away with the horrifying 14 years penalty in POLDPA when they had the chance. Didn't have the guts to do anything meaningful about church domination of education when they had the chance. They could have pushed FG much, much harder on non-economic issues but chose not to.

Absolam

robindch wrote: »

The usage of many words is restricted - David Quinn has simply found one which isn't restricted in Ireland, purely so that he can sound like the high-falutin' well-respected academic institution he so dreadfully wishes that he and his dinner-party friends could be.

I have a sneaking suspicion the reasoning goes a little further than kudos at dinner parties, but still, it's not unreasonable that there are Institutes which neither offer programmes of study or research, is it? After all an Institute need only be an organization having a particular purpose, even if they are usually involved with science, education, or a specific profession. And you can't really say the Iona Institute or the Life Institute lack organisation or a purpose.

aloyisious

expectationlost wrote: »

I didn't sugest any particular part of it was rigged (although I think the selection process isn't perfect), I said its a controlled process in favour of the government I think just as most people think that its delaying tactic by the them.

So what you mean is it's the way the CA report can be controlled after the CA fulfils it's task and hands one to the Govt rather than the assembly process itself? Does your opinion include whatever ground rules within which the CA has to work, any limitations on what the CA can recommend in the report? Do you think there is any chance (pun) the other ministers you referred to are willing and aware partners in this Govt duplicity?

robindch

Absolam wrote: »

I have a sneaking suspicion the reasoning goes a little further than kudos at dinner parties,

Not sure if you had time to read my post. I'm saying that David Quinn and the other five or six people who make up the totality of the world's Ionanists are better thought of as a dinner party rant which has got a little out of hand.

Absolam wrote: »

but still, it's not unreasonable that there are Institutes which neither offer programmes of study or research, is it?

There are plenty of people running around with doctorates which they bought from diploma mills. Doesn't make them PhD-level people any more than calling yourself and your dinner-party friends an "institute" makes you an institute of learning.

smacl

robindch wrote: »

There are plenty of people running around with doctorates which they bought from diploma mills. Doesn't make them PhD-level people any more than calling yourself and your dinner-party friends an "institute" makes you an institute of learning.

Maybe we could start a petition to get them institutionalised...

Absolam

robindch wrote: »

Not sure if you had time to read my post. I'm saying that David Quinn and the other five or six people who make up the totality of the world's Ionanists are better thought of as a dinner party rant which has got a little out of hand.

Weren't you saying that you thought David Quinn is using the term Institute purely so that he can sound like something you imagine he dreadfully wishes that he and his dinner-party friends could be? Maybe I read it wrong. Still, it seems the members of Iona have formed an Institute all the same, so I guess if that's what he was wishing for he got what he wanted.

robindch wrote: »

There are plenty of people running around with doctorates which they bought from diploma mills. Doesn't make them PhD-level people any more than calling yourself and your dinner-party friends an "institute" makes you an institute of learning.

And... is anyone trying to make out that these particular Institutes are institutes of learning? Don't the Iona Institute style themselves as an advocacy group, an Institute for religion and society?

robindch

Absolam wrote: »

And... is anyone trying to make out that these particular Institutes are institutes of learning? Don't the Iona Institute style themselves as an advocacy group, an Institute for religion and society?

Ah, I see we've joined the Absolam merry-go-round

You might not have had time to read or understand my last few posts on the topic which provide an answer to your queries.

Nonetheless, it does need to be said that David Quinn and his grim, gray and cheerless dinner-party friends describes their curious outfit, not really in terms of what it is - a CRO-registered company named Lolek Limited, registered here in Ireland and which also happens to be a registered charity. No, little of that, and certainly not balanced by its own pious description of itself terms of what it believes. This is perhaps, after all, appropriate to a company whose main business is in the selling not of products or services, but of the sale of beliefs.

Ionanist wrote:

The Iona Institute promotes the place of marriage and religion in society. Out starting point in debates about the family is that children deserve the love of their own mother and father whenever possible. We believe in publicily-funded denominational schools. We also promote freedom of conscience and religion.

In the second (misspelled) sentence of this pious declaration, one can't help but hear the faintest echo of Animal Farm and the changes wrought by the pigs to the Seven Commandments, and wonder whether this unhappy echo might be related to any of the personal circumstances of the people involved in drafting it.

In any case, the term "Institute" appears almost as an afterthought to Quinn's self-inflated, weighty deliberations. Who can tell for sure, but perhaps he enjoys the sound of the term as it rolls off the tongue. And who am I to dispute that it is a weighty-sounding word, redolent of the corridors of academe, marmalade and toast over tea at ten, perhaps a whiff or two of pipe-smoke and the unmistakable sense of people dressed in brown tweed, or perhaps orange, or some admixture of the two.

expectationlost

aloyisious wrote: »

So what you mean is it's the way the CA report can be controlled after the CA fulfils it's task and hands one to the Govt rather than the assembly process itself? Does your opinion include whatever ground rules within which the CA has to work, any limitations on what the CA can recommend in the report? Do you think there is any chance (pun) the other ministers you referred to are willing and aware partners in this Govt duplicity?

the whole thing is managed process, of course Zappone etc is going along with it, here's a peculiar thing when asked by Burton what the possible outcomes of the assembly might be the Taoiseach said there was atleast 6 options, which Burton and others found intriguing she asked what these options were

EK: There are not just six options. There are at least six options that could be considered. I am not going into that because it is not my remit. This is a function of the Citizens' Assembly.

https://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2016-10-19a.156&s=options#g162 now he could have simply saying there were multiples or several options open to them but he didn't, he said atleast 6, so has Kenny and his advisors been spitballing about what possible outcomes from the CA could occur, he seeemd to have some 6 options in mind but he won't say now.

Absolam

robindch wrote: »

Ah, I see we've joined the Absolam merry-go-round You might not have had time to read or understand my last few posts on the topic which provide an answer to your queries. Nonetheless, it does need to be said that David Quinn and his grim, gray and cheerless dinner-party friends describes their curious outfit, not really in terms of what it is - a CRO-registered company named Lolek Limited, registered here in Ireland and which also happens to be a registered charity. No, little of that, and certainly not balanced by its own pious description of itself terms of what it believes. This is perhaps, after all, appropriate to a company whose main business is in the selling not of products or services, but of the sale of beliefs.In the second (misspelled) sentence of this pious declaration, one can't help but hear the faintest echo of Animal Farm and the changes wrought by the pigs to the Seven Commandments, and wonder whether this unhappy echo might be related to any of the personal circumstances of the people involved in drafting it. In any case, the term "Institute" appears almost as an afterthought to Quinn's self-inflated, weighty deliberations. Who can tell for sure, but perhaps he enjoys the sound of the term as it rolls off the tongue. And who am I to dispute that it is a weighty-sounding word, redolent of the corridors of academe, marmalade and toast over tea at ten, perhaps a whiff or two of pipe-smoke and the unmistakable sense of people dressed in brown tweed, or perhaps orange, or some admixture of the two.

So, setting aside your prose which seems to be for entertainment purposes only, the short version would be, no, they're not trying to make out that these particular Institutes are institutes of learning?

It seems your desire to to limit the meaning of the word institute is based more on your opinion (and given your imaginative characterisations above that opinion seems to say more about you than them) of the people involved with a particular Institute, rather than any honest objection to the actual use of the word. You're now saying you think it's 'an afterthought' rather than the previous comparisons to an Institute of learning or a means for self congratulation at dinner parties. It's fair to say your objection to their name Institute seems to waver from post to post, whereas your disdain for the motivations you've imagined for the characters involved is what is really occupying you.

Hotblack Desiato

Ionanists wrote:

We believe in publicily-funded denominational schools. We also promote freedom of conscience and religion.

Denominational schooling is the opposite of freedom of conscience and religion. It is enforced conformity to enforced (outward) belief.

Getting the taxpayer to fund these abuses just makes it worse.

aloyisious

Originally Posted by Absolam View Post
And... is anyone trying to make out that these particular Institutes are institutes of learning? Don't the Iona Institute style themselves as an advocacy group, an Institute for religion and society?

Posted by aloyisious......

Does what you wrote above mean you believe that the Iona Institute is not there to advance society in general, that it's purpose has absolutely nothing to do with societal advancement? How can an institute styling itself as an advocacy group for society fulfil that role if it does NOT assist the society it is a part of to advance in knowledge?

Absolam

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Denominational schooling is the opposite of freedom of conscience and religion. It is enforced conformity to enforced (outward) belief. Getting the taxpayer to fund these abuses just makes it worse.

That would certainly be an opinion, though an equally valid opinion would be that only allowing wholly secular schools curtails freedom of conscience and religion. In fact, allowing denominational and non denomination schools would certainly seem to give greater freedom of conscience and religion than enforcing secular only schools, on balance.

Both would be opinions for a different thread though, to be fair.

Absolam

aloyisious wrote: »

Does what you wrote above mean you believe that the Iona Institute is not there to advance society in general, that it's purpose has absolutely nothing to do with societal advancement? How can an institute styling itself as an advocacy group for society fulfil that role if it does NOT assist the society it is a part of to advance in knowledge?

I've no idea why you would imagine I'd believe such a thing, can you explain? What I wrote above was that the Iona Institute aren't making out that they are an institute of learning, as Robindch has put it, but that they are saying they are an Institute for religion and society. You may believe that an Institute for society should assist society to advance in knowledge, but I don't think you've any basis in fact for that belief, do you? It's more sort of wishful thinking; wishful thinking that doesn't necessarily (or even apparently) align with the wishful thinking of the Iona Institute.

By the way, you never did say; if the CA recommends we don't have a referendum on the 8th and leave all current provisions in place, will you rather it did not exist at all?

aloyisious

Just seen this in today's online issue of the Irish Times...... An honest gent.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/citizens-assembly-member-replaced-over-role-with-pro-choice-group-1.2838626

Hotblack Desiato

Why should someone be excluded for that though? On either side of the argument.

Is it going to end up like US jury selection, where anyone informed enough to have an opinion on an issue, or even knowledge of a newsworthy event having occurred, is liable to be deselected?

There is a very wide scope that can be covered by the word "activist", you could say that anyone posting in this thread is a "pro/anti choice online activist" :rolleyes:

I've been on several Marches for Choice, promoted them on boards, donated to ARC and worn their "Free Safe and Legal" t-shirt. Does that make me an "activist" ? Or just a citizen who has informed themselves about an important issue and come to a viewpoint on it.

This is getting more and more fücking ridiculous by the day.

Cabaal

aloyisious wrote: »

Just seen this in today's online issue of the Irish Times...... An honest gent.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/citizens-assembly-member-replaced-over-role-with-pro-choice-group-1.2838626

Independent TD Mattie McGrath said the incident raised a number of issues around the process used to select members of the assembly.

Indeed it does,
One could try and argue that any self described catholic should be exempt given the Catholic church's "pro-life" agenda :pac:

Hotblack Desiato

One side gets 94% of kids to endure 14 years of its daily propaganda in schools, but gets a free pass with that, the other has a delegate withdrawing for daring to express an opinion BEFORE THE ASSEMBLY EVEN BEGINS not during it!

Fair?

Cabaal

If a Catholic goes to mass and the priest ever mentions anything about abortion then surely in the interest of fairness this should be classed as a pro life meeting.

After all, no Catholic believes the church's stance is anything but prolife, that's why they are happy to allow pro life material to be handed out at churches.