Baz the lost Muslim

yabbav

Billy86 wrote: »

I'll take that as a no, then.

I take it you are no market follower. Right we'll do this the easy way in which you can be all leftie, ill-informed and smug while displaying zero understanding.

Do you feel the published surveys on Islamic opinion in the UK are in any way at all credible. Do you think the intelligence of the UK authorities is in any way at all credible. Do you believe there is such things as leftie apologists

Billy86

yabbav wrote: »

I take it you are no market follower. Right we'll do this the easy way in which you can be all leftie, ill-informed and smug while displaying zero understanding.

Do you feel the published surveys on Islamic opinion in the UK are in any way at all credible. Do you think the intelligence of the UK authorities is in any way at all credible. Do you believe there is such things as leftie apologists

All the paranoid tangential ranting in the world doesn't answer what I asked you. It seems pretty clear that you cannot provide instances of Breitbart leftist equivalents being frequently used on AH.

yabbav

Billy86 wrote: »

All the paranoid tangential ranting in the world doesn't answer what I asked you. It seems pretty clear that you cannot provide instances of Breitbart leftist equivalents being frequently used on AH.

Sorry i'm new to AH, i've a working life and a social one.

Billy86

yabbav wrote: »

Sorry i'm new to AH, i've a working life and a social one.

Good to hear you have a job and know people. Still doesn't stop from you making claims you seem pretty uninterested in backing up.

Mahogany Gaspipe

Billy86 wrote: »

Good to hear you have a job and know people. Still doesn't stop from you making claims you seem pretty uninterested in backing up.

To be fair, they pre-faced that statement by saying they didn't know the name of the site and AH's wasn't referenced by them either, so maybe its time that you let it go.

yabbav

Mahogany Gaspipe wrote: »

To be fair, they pre-faced that statement by saying they didn't know the name of the site and AH's wasn't referenced by them either, so maybe its time that you let it go.

It's all he has until the next water protest. let him have it.

Billy86

Mahogany Gaspipe wrote: »

To be fair, they pre-faced that statement by saying they didn't know the name of the site and AH's wasn't referenced by them either, so maybe its time that you let it go.

Which is funny, because they were replying to a post mentioning how often Breitbart is being linked to on AH lately by claiming "lefties always link ill-informed piffle too"

After being asked a few times, they were unable to back up that statement. Basically, they were speaking out of their arse.

yabbav

Billy86 wrote: »

Which is funny, because they were replying to a post mentioning how often Breitbart is being linked to on AH lately by claiming "lefties always link ill-informed piffle too"

After being asked a few times, they were unable to back up that statement. Basically, they were speaking out of their arse.

I don't follow the goings-on here. My statement on lefties is a general one and is a well known fact.

Billy86

yabbav wrote: »

It's all he has until the next water protest. let him have it.

And again you go making assumptions with nothing to back it up. You do know I'm one probably of the most anti-AAA/Paul Murphy/water protest antics posters on here?

No you don't. But hey, don't let ignorance get in the way of a good old rant!

yabbav

Billy86 wrote: »

And again you go making assumptions with nothing to back it up. You do know I'm one probably of the most anti-AAA/Paul Murphy/water protest antics posters on here?

No you don't. But hey, don't let ignorance get in the way of a good old rant!

so are you saying you are one of these moderates

Mahogany Gaspipe

Billy86 wrote: »

And again you go making assumptions with nothing to back it up. You do know I'm one probably of the most anti-AAA/Paul Murphy/water protest antics posters on here?

Well great that a start at least!

Now tell me, how wide is your letter box I want to send you my copy of Atlas Shrugged.

Billy86

yabbav wrote: »

so are you saying you are one of these moderates

I'm saying I tend to weigh up the facts with the information available to me, so I can make an informed opinion of it. I find it works better than jumping to wild conclusions about issues and individuals based on little to nothing.

Billy86

Mahogany Gaspipe wrote: »

Well great that a start at least!

Now tell me, how wide is your letter box I want to send you my copy of Atlas Shrugged.

Just make sure to send it to me shortly before October 31st! :pac:

yabbav

Billy86 wrote: »

I'm saying I tend to weigh up the facts with the information available to me, so I can make an informed opinion of it. I find it works better than jumping to wild conclusions about issues and individuals based on little to nothing.

Yes and your information is solid fact. Please show us these peer reviewed sources which formed your opinion. Maybe it is personal experience, that is always good, maybe we can exchange stories.
I've no doubt you did two tours on operation Herrick, maybe even lost friends but are a maverick of opinion .
This will be good. Go ahead

Kev W

kettlehead wrote: »

A minute ago you said that you were open minded and tolerant. Make up your mind. The article is written by Milo Yiannopoulos. It's worth a read.

Come on, make up your mind. Is it written by Milo Yiannopolous or is it worth a read?

Because it's utterly inconceivable that it could be both.

Billy86

yabbav wrote: »

Yes and your information is solid fact. Please show us these peer reviewed sources which formed your opinion. Maybe it is personal experience, that is always good, maybe we can exchange stories.
I've no doubt you did two tours on operation Herrick, maybe even lost friends but are a maverick of opinion .
This will be good. Go ahead

My opinion on... what exactly?

yabbav

Billy86 wrote: »

My opinion on... what exactly?

the ones that make such informed opinions on Islam is so dismissive of the source of the link previously posted. The opinion that is so informed it is in no way stolen from the guardian and passed off as fact. The opinion you have learned all the facts for. that one

yabbav

didn't think so.

Freak Midget

Let's be real about something, even the most liberal, open minded, tolerant, progressive member of boards.ie would not want to live in a muslim country.

Corpus Twisty

Freak Midget wrote: »

Let's be real about something, even the most liberal, open minded, tolerant, progressive member of boards.ie would not want to live in a muslim country.

Oh stop, you and your reality. This is boards ffs. We'd all love to be under sharia and wearing a burka, even the lads. Sure no one on Boards even drinks, they all have beards, and none of the women drive anyway.

super_furry

kettlehead wrote: »

A minute ago you said that you were open minded and tolerant. Make up your mind. The article is written by Milo Yiannopoulos. It's worth a read.

Nothing by Milo Yiannopoulos is worth a read. He's a media hungry troll who makes Katie Hopkins look good.

topmanamillion

Freak Midget wrote: »

Let's be real about something, even the most liberal, open minded, tolerant, progressive member of boards.ie would not want to live in a muslim country.

Ireland is rather late to the liberal party. She's spent the majority of her 93years as a theocracy. Instead of looking down our noses at sharia law it's far more interesting to compare it's many similarities to Ireland only about 30 years ago.

Women wearing head scarves - check (not a burka but this was encouraged)
Women not allowed to work when married - check
Segregation of sexs in public areas (church, pubs etc) - check
Word of religious leaders infallible - check
Women having to obey husbands - check
Religious civil war - check
Harsh punishments for those who disobeyed the church (magdalen laundries, social ostracism etc) - check

The role of the EU in dragging Ireland out of the middle ages can't be underestimated. It opened us up not only to economic benefits but also to new ideas. We were the last country in western Europe to give up this stuff, look at some of the videos of GAA matches from the 70s and early 80s where the match ball could only be thrown in by a bishop. Literally a game of football couldn't be started without the churches input.

I have no doubt a similar process is achievable in the middle east but the bombs will have to be swapped for trade deals. If you don't believe me take a look at the UAE or Jordan who are "Muslim countries" but very peaceful and prosperous with a relatively liberal attitude.

Billy86

yabbav wrote: »

the ones that make such informed opinions on Islam is so dismissive of the source of the link previously posted.

First of all, let's go on personal experience. I live in Toronto where there is a much higher percentage of the population that are Muslim than in Ireland, and a higher percentage population than if I recall, any EU country bar Bulgaria. It also happens to be a very, very gay friendly city. A higher percentage Muslim population somehow has not made Toronto into a hotbed of homophobia. Weird, that.

Added into that I've been in relationships with two Muslim women, both of whom were very gay friendly as was their family. One of them, whose father is Libyan and who lived there until she was about 10, had considerably more gay friends than she did straight.

But this is anecdotal evidence, and to be honest, anecdotal evidence is often a waste of time.

The writer (who does not exactly have a stellar reputation, to be kind) immediately draws a comparison with Riyadh and Tehran. One of these is the capital of a country with a 99.7% Muslim population, while the other is from a nation with a 97.1% Muslim population. Both follow very hard line religious practices, and are poor, lazy examples to draw comparison with. You could just as easily point toward Lusaka or Kampala, two highly Christian capitals, where you can get years and years behind bars for being gay, as reasons Christianity is bad too.

You could just as easily also point to the likes of Mali, Indonesia, Jordan, Bosnia, Turkey or Albania as Muslim countries where it is fully legal. It's been legal in Turkey since 1858, as did all of the Ottoman Empire - so frequently pointed to as a bogeyman in reference to ISIS by scaremongers. I'm not sure, but maybe there is a reason that the likes of Breitbart never seem to point this out?

Second, while trying to pass off that he is worried for women in the same opening sentence, he dismisses them as not being able to drive. This might be intended as a joke, but it flies entirely in the face of the point he is trying to make, playing to the crowd that typically read sites like Breitbart. And, to be fair, he knows his crowd. The guy has a bit of a history when it comes to the subject of women.

After this he mentions that women and children are sold in Muslim countries, but conveniently forgets that the worst offenders for people trafficking, as per the US State Department are:

Muslim: Syria, Iran, Qatar, Mauritania, Libya, Algeria, Somalia, Yemen, Senegal
Non Muslim: Russia, Belarus, Denmark, China, Thailand, Denmark, Venezuela, Belize, Equatorial Guinea, Zimbabwe, Eritrea, Burundi

This type of thinly veiled insinuation that human trafficking, slavery, etc are "a Muslim thing" is absolutely pathetic, but to be expected by the likes of Breitbart and Milo. After all, they do know their crowd very well.

After harping on about Riyadh, Tehran, IS and Raqqa he then attempts to ascribe it to all Muslims with "it’s not just the jihadis, but the attitudes of ordinary Muslims that are a grave cause for concern". He's not even trying to justify that comment with evidence at any point. Why? Because he knows his audience, and he knows the power of confirmation bias.

Then he moves on to talking about homophobia in Islamic countries (and in some it is rife) but again completely forgets to mention that this is not a uniquely Muslim issue. As a matter of fact, only in the summer was he harping on that discrimination against gays is a good thing.

Milo Yiannopoulos, Gay Rights Have Made Us Dumber, It&#8217 wrote: »

The good news is that gay rights are in the minority, globally speaking. China, India and most of all Russia proudly celebrate the importance of the nuclear family.

You can hardly blame them. Online photo blogs from San Francisco’s notorious Folsom Street Fair will do nothing to dispel Vladimir Putin’s hunch that the west has become a decadent mess. Frankly, I would have been less ashamed to be gay in the days when being gay was something to be ashamed of. Gays were classier when they were worried about being queer-bashed.

In this he calls for gay men to live their lives in secret, to force themselves into marriage and children, leading double lives. Milo Yiannopolous is not married. Milo Yiannopolous is not involved in relations with women. Milo Yiannopolous does not have children. Milo Yiannopolous does not make any secrets about his homosexuality. But Milo Yiannopolous does know his audience. He even gets a shot at Muslims in at the end for good measure, because who would ever visit Breitbart without the expectation of some good old Muslim bashing!?

It's difficult to believe that he even believes most of what he writes, but the guy does know how to sell a product to a market.

This is followed by a ramble about "Oppression League Tables" formed inside his head, again with nothing meaningful to back any of it up.

Some rambling about wearing a veil to be a terrorist, again just a matter of knowing his audience, and exploiting their ignorance by referring to Muslim women as "beefy, hirsute". This is all related to a rant about considering moving to the US, which would have absolutely nothing to do with him working for an American outlet where he could find a much larger audience and make a lot more money. None whatsoever.

Next we are on to talking about the left's "suicidal ignorance about Muslim culture" - because he himself, his Breitbart cohorts, and the right at large are always at pains to explain the differences between the different sects of Islam, right?

There's talk about seemingly ignoring mass murders occurring over regional, tribal and sectarian differences, as if that's not an issue that occurs all over the world across many different religions, and yes, at times on very large scales. Islamphobes never want to talk about the Lords Resistance Army, why is that?

Carrying on, he brings up the gay rights parade that was cancelled in Sweden because they targeted a strongly Muslim area, asking "What am I missing here?". Well unless he is incompetent at his job, which I highly doubt to be the case, what is "missing" from his article is that it was planned by the far right Swedish Democrats, who have prominent members that have made comments comparing homosexuality with bestiality and pedophilia, and blaming the Pride Parade for societal ills. Milo also never once mentioned that the official Pride organisers themselves condemned this planned march. Funny that.

He then comments that he refuses to say not all Muslims are bad people, implying that he does believe all Muslims are bad, and no Muslim will ever assimilate into Western culture. Someone better tell that to old Baz that this thread is about, so. I'll also need to get in touch with those two ex's to find out their plan was, pretending to be all Westernised and that. Christ, if it weren't for this crippling hangover I'd get myself out on the streets to tell the hundreds of thousands of young Muslims in Toronto to put the basketball down, turn down the rap music, stop chewing on the poutine, fish taco, cheeseburger, or whatever that is in their mouth, because I've got news for them - they cannot assimilate! A classy touch from a man very finely in tune with his target audience.

And on the subject of knowing his audience, he finishes off with the right wing's favourite trick: finish off your discriminatory, abusive tirade with a good dose of self-pity and playing the victim: "Perhaps this is the Left’s plan all along. Banning me from campuses hasn’t dented my popularity, so perhaps murder is the only way the Left can get rid of me."







And that is why pretty much nobody without an inherent bias and hatred of Muslims (or women) takes him seriously. But my hat goes off to him, he is a smart guy, and clearly knows his audience. He plays suckers like you for a fiddle, and makes a very good living off it too, I would be sure.

The opinion that is so informed it is in no way stolen from the guardian and passed off as fact. The opinion you have learned all the facts for. that one

yabbav wrote: »

didn't think so.

All these sad, pathetic, and hilariously off-base assumptions you continue to try making about me in an effort to 'other' me from yourself continue to be entirely off base, serve no purpose other than to make you look foolish. It would be appreciated if you gave them a rest.

yabbav

So you are basing your "knowledge" on living in Toronto and not the middle east or any Muslim country. You also seem to imply that others are all Irish and only lived in Ireland. You sir, don't have a clue what you are on about, not in the slightest. Oh, and I take it you are gay as you've done nothing but bang on about gays in your rant there. I don't care if you are gay and I respect your right to be gay. I respect the right of people to not give a rats ass about gay rights too. I told you my libertarian ideals believe that people have the right to think what they like and that includes things that may offend you, me or anyone.

yabbav

btw London is more Islamic than Toronto...less of the "me me me" centric crap. I would say thousands of members here have had far closer contact with a number of Muslim societies with me being included. Stop making stupid presumptions about people and being so widely wrong. Thankfully despite what you like to think the world just pays people with your opinions on how things work just lip service and you have zero influence in it. Thank will remain. So keep your little lefty crusade going, you'll keep getting meaningless victories that let's you think you are being noticed while the rest of the grown-ups keep you little lefty types away from the reality of life. It's a scary place out there and you would be about as useful as an ashtry on a motorbike in an operational theatre. You should try thanking the grown ups for giving you a world where you can be so freely misguided because if left to you then we'd all be screwed.

Billy86

yabbav wrote: »

So you are basing your "knowledge" on living in Toronto and not the middle east or any Muslim country.

He is talking about more Muslims moving to the west. Not Westerners moving to the Middle East. Toronto is a large Western city with a larger Muslim population than anywhere in the US. You're not as good as he is at being disingenuous.

You also seem to imply that others are all Irish and only lived in Ireland. You sir, don't have a clue what you are on about, not in the slightest.

I never said anything of the sort, nor intentionally inferred it. Point me to where I did... or was this just another misled assumption on your part?

Oh, and I take it you are gay as you've done nothing but bang on about gays in your rant there.

Yeah, hence the two Muslim ex girlfriends mentioned. You and these assumptions... you're beginning to resemble a Simpsons joke with them.

You clearly didn't even read the Breitbart post though. :pac:

I don't care if you are gay and I respect your right to be gay. I respect the right of people to not give a rats ass about gay rights too.

You really didn't read Milo Yiannapolous' article it at all did you? You were willing to defend it without so much as knowing what it was about (hint's in the title by the way).

I told you my libertarian ideals believe that people have the right to think what they like and that includes things that may offend you, me or anyone.

I don't mind people having differing opinions, I just like when they are genuine and honest with them, and can back them up with something to justify them. Which clearly isn't the case here.

Billy86

yabbav wrote: »

btw London is more Islamic than Toronto...less of the "me me me" centric crap. I would say thousands of members here have had far closer contact with a number of Muslim societies with me being included. Stop making stupid presumptions about people and being so widely wrong. Thankfully despite what you like to think the world just pays people with your opinions on how things work just lip service and you have zero influence in it. Thank will remain. So keep your little lefty crusade going, you'll keep getting meaningless victories that let's you think you are being noticed while the rest of the grown-ups keep you little lefty types away from the reality of life. It's a scary place out there and you would be about as useful as an ashtry on a motorbike in an operational theatre. You should try thanking the grown ups for giving you a world where you can be so freely misguided because if left to you then we'd all be screwed.

You asked for a breakdown of what was wrong with Yiannopolous' article and why his and Breitbart's pieces are rarely taken seriously outside of those who like to hear about how evil Muslims are, how silly women are, and how the rest of the world is involved in a big conspiracy against them because most importantly, they are the victims.

You asked the question, it's not my fault that you didn't like the answer.

yabbav

I don't care about the article. I care about your naive view of the world and keeps the likes of you in a position to continue to be self righteous fools with your opinion. I told who does, grown-ups who shelter you from the real world.

yabbav

Your answer is irrelevant. It means something to you and it means something for you to project. It is meaningless, your views are. Wishy washy lefties have no input into the world that is of any significance. It couldn't be risked.

Junkyard Tom

yabbav wrote: »

It's a scary place out there

Why are you so frightened? What happened? Did someone hurt you?

The Randy Riverbeast

yabbav wrote: »

Your answer is irrelevant. It means something to you and it means something for you to project. It is meaningless, your views are. Wishy washy lefties have no input into the world that is of any significance. It couldn't be risked.

Aren't they destroying the world and hiding the truth about Jedi?

They can't have no input one minute and be the problem of all the worlds ills the next.

GardeningGirl

Frank Grimes wrote:

I don't understand what you're trying to say here.

Sorry, I don't know how to explain it anyway better! Anyway, no harm done. All the best

Billy86

yabbav wrote: »

I don't care about the article. I care about your naive view of the world and keeps the likes of you in a position to continue to be self righteous fools with your opinion. I told who does, grown-ups who shelter you from the real world.

You keep typing words without actually saying anything. You explicitly requested that I give a breakdown of why people do not take Breitbart or Yiannopolous as valid sources, so I gave you a break down of pretty much every single thing mentioned in the dismissed article. You clearly had not read it, but were willing to jump to it's defense because it was anti-Islam. That's all that mattered to you. It was against Muslims, and that was enough - you had not even read the title of the thing!

Every post of yours just keeps proving that breakdown of the Breitbart article more and more. People like you are the audience Yiannopolous feeds off of that I kept referring to. He's good at what he does (hate mongering) but he doesn't even need to be when people will literally defend his article without having even read the title of it (fair play to you by the way, I think that's a first that I've come across).

Billy86

yabbav wrote: »

Your answer is irrelevant. It means something to you and it means something for you to project. It is meaningless, your views are. Wishy washy lefties have no input into the world that is of any significance. It couldn't be risked.

You see, my answer was backed up with hard facts. But I guess the facts and reality tend to have a bit of a 'liberal bias'. And by 'liberal bias' I mean 'not right wing nutjob bias'.

topmanamillion

topmanamillion wrote: »

Ireland is rather late to the liberal party. She's spent the majority of her 93years as a theocracy. Instead of looking down our noses at sharia law it's far more interesting to compare it's many similarities to Ireland only about 30 years ago.

Women wearing head scarves - check (not a burka but this was encouraged)
Women not allowed to work when married - check
Segregation of sexs in public areas (church, pubs etc) - check
Word of religious leaders infallible - check
Women having to obey husbands - check
Religious civil war - check
Harsh punishments for those who disobeyed the church (magdalen laundries, social ostracism etc) - check

The role of the EU in dragging Ireland out of the middle ages can't be underestimated. It opened us up not only to economic benefits but also to new ideas. We were the last country in western Europe to give up this stuff, look at some of the videos of GAA matches from the 70s and early 80s where the match ball could only be thrown in by a bishop. Literally a game of football couldn't be started without the churches input.

I have no doubt a similar process is achievable in the middle east but the bombs will have to be swapped for trade deals. If you don't believe me take a look at the UAE or Jordan who are "Muslim countries" but very peaceful and prosperous with a relatively liberal attitude.

There's a lot if nonsense in that post. I agree with the premise that we should be wary about criticising other countries given our own track record, but some of the stuff you list is a bit odd. Like wearing head scarves (huh?), segregation in Church (common to many countries and faiths, long since gone here), word of religious leaders infallible (very different from being law), religious civil war (if you are referring to NI, neither side was exactly trying to convert the other, religion was only used to determine national affiliation), the Bishop throwing in the ball (a ceremonial role in very few matches, discontinued almost 40 years ago) etc.

DEFTLEFTHAND

I'm not sure does he fully understand Islam but he comes across as a nice pleasant chap.

Mr. CooL ICE

Mod:

Drop the leftie, mass-immigration conspiracy nonsense. The last few pages have been completely derailed because of this.

yabbav wrote: »

Sorry i'm new to AH, i've a working life and a social one.

No more of this kind of crap

Ash.J.Williams

[Deleted User] wrote: »

There's a lot if nonsense in that post. I agree with the premise that we should be wary about criticising other countries given our own track record, but some of the stuff you list is a bit odd. Like wearing head scarves (huh?), segregation in Church (common to many countries and faiths, long since gone here), word of religious leaders infallible (very different from being law), religious civil war (if you are referring to NI, neither side was exactly trying to convert the other, religion was only used to determine national affiliation), the Bishop throwing in the ball (a ceremonial role in very few matches, discontinued almost 40 years ago) etc.

Our women wore head scarves

Ash.J.Williams

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

Our women wore head scarves

I don't think I said otherwise.

Just not sure what he's referring to. In many countries, mantillas were worn in Church. It's not especially Irish. In Ireland, headscarves were also worn outside church. It's cold and wet here.

Jim Bob Scratcher

Ally Dick wrote: »

He's a condescending, patronising unfunny @rsehole. Unfortunately he has an Emmy award for his patronising, condescending show with his mother. I would hope that in the not too distant future, a stunt goes horribly wrong, similar to the Late Late Breakfast show, and the show is cancelled following the funerals

Anyone who calls themselves Bazz should be shot on sight, such a chavy name.

Nodin

Jim Bob Scratcher wrote: »

Anyone who calls themselves Bazz should be shot on sight, such a chavy name.

Sorry. In future everybody will be called 'Brion Ohh Driscoll' to stop this happening again.

Collie D

Jim Bob Scratcher wrote: »

Anyone who calls themselves Bazz should be shot on sight, such a chavy name.

What about with just one Z? This place gets more right wing loonies every day.

Wibbs

Nodin wrote: »

Sorry. In future everybody will be called 'Brion Ohh Driscoll' to stop this happening again.

:pac:

kettlehead

Billy86 wrote: »

You see, my answer was backed up with hard facts. But I guess the facts and reality tend to have a bit of a 'liberal bias'. And by 'liberal bias' I mean 'not right wing nutjob bias'.

Here's some facts on Islam for you.

http://i.imgur.com/TZR5I61.png

yabbav

No point talking to these lefty liberal apologists. They will make excuses for anything or spout the "it's a tiny minority" line.

yabbav

kettlehead wrote: »

Here's some facts on Islam for you.

http://i.imgur.com/TZR5I61.png

But but but "Islam means peace" or is it submission.

Junkyard Tom

yabbav wrote: »

these lefty liberal apologists.

This is the 21st century equivalent of 'damn commies'.

Don't be frightened homie.

topmanamillion

[Deleted User] wrote: »

There's a lot if nonsense in that post. I agree with the premise that we should be wary about criticising other countries given our own track record, but some of the stuff you list is a bit odd. Like wearing head scarves (huh?), segregation in Church (common to many countries and faiths, long since gone here), word of religious leaders infallible (very different from being law), religious civil war (if you are referring to NI, neither side was exactly trying to convert the other, religion was only used to determine national affiliation), the Bishop throwing in the ball (a ceremonial role in very few matches, discontinued almost 40 years ago) etc.

Wearing of head Scarves is very true, I'd say not equal to a burka but comparable. Covering of a Women's hair was encouraged particularly in church.
There was segregation in pubs too with many pubs still retaining a "snug" which originally was segregated from the main pub. Women could knock on a window and have glasses of sherry or whatever passed through.
Yes The church were the law in this country for a very very long time. There wasn't a community Council or political party which wasn't heavily influenced by the church and most if not all had a local high raking clergy man on its board. "God wouldn't like that" was enough to have any talk of women's rights shot down. As I said joining the EU forced this stuff out.
What's the difference? Still a religious civil war .
It was ceremonial but that it had to be the bishop shows the level of input the church had. Why not a local musician? Ex player? Etc.
There is no doubt had this country not gotten out from under the thumb of the RCC and not joined the EU well for a start divorce and equality referenda wouldn't have even made it to the ballot paper.

kettlehead

Where did my post with the video go? It seems to have disappeared. It was from the NYT and the narrator gives a graphic warning. Most odd.

Nodin

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

This is the 21st century equivalent of 'damn commies'.

Don't be frightened homie.

'Noo.....noooooooo'
'Calm down now, its just a sun tanned hipster with a beard'