Complaint about haunted bread on Late Late Show

realdanbreen

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Ok , one last time to try and get through to you and Nozz.
Blinboy has been asked umpteen times as to why he pretends to be from the rough side of Limerick and not the North Circular Road(an affluent area of Limerick. He always refuses to answer.

realdanbreen

kylith wrote: »

OK. Now answer my other two questions.

You're a teacher right?

nozzferrahhtoo

realdanbreen wrote: »

Ok , one last time to try and get through to you and Nozz.

Hah lets see how "last" it is.

But repeating the same thing we are asking about, does nto answer the things you are being asked about. You are talking about a MEDIA personality with a STAGE persona. Of course he pretends to be someone he is not. Thats what a stage persona is!

The question is, what has that got to do with the validity of any given point he makes? Unless a point he makes is actually predicated on where he is actually from, then where he is actually from, or what accent he speaks with, is entirely irrelevant.

So can you discuss the thread, the topic, or the point he actually made? Or is comments on his accent, and class history, all we are likely to get from you?

realdanbreen

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Hah lets see how "last" it is.

But repeating the same thing we are asking about, does nto answer the things you are being asked about. You are talking about a MEDIA personality with a STAGE persona. Of course he pretends to be someone he is not. Thats what a stage persona is!

The question is, what has that got to do with the validity of any given point he makes? Unless a point he makes is actually predicated on where he is actually from, then where he is actually from, or what accent he speaks with, is entirely irrelevant.

So can you discuss the thread, the topic, or the point he actually made? Or is comments on his accent, and class history, all we are likely to get from you?

It is NOT his stage persona that he is evasive about, it is the fact that he has said he is real 'hows's it going kid' Limerick whereas both he and his sidekick Mr Chrome are from well to do areas. Therefore most people round Limerick take what he says with a grain of salt.

.......

This post has been deleted.

realdanbreen

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

In that same interview blindboy said that 'most people attending midnight mass are half cut anyway' Now maybe blindboy and his well heeled pals who appear to attend mass to please Mom & Pop are half cut but 'most people'?
As for the haunted bread, I saw where another 'Oirish top o the mornin character' Michael Harding used the same expression. The one thing that they have in common is their credibility.

.......

This post has been deleted.

nozzferrahhtoo

So it was not the "last" then was it? I so called it

realdanbreen wrote: »

It is NOT his stage persona that he is evasive about

And yet that is EXACTLY what was being viewed when he made this comment that the thread is about (Remember what the thread is about???) which you are working so hard not to comment on directly

I get it, you personally do not like him or his persona. But what has that got to do with anything here?

realdanbreen

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

No I don't, childish but not blasphemous.

realdanbreen

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

No I don't, childish but not blasphemous.

realdanbreen

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

So it was not the "last" then was it? I so called it

Boring someone into submission is a Pyrrhic victory.

.......

This post has been deleted.

nozzferrahhtoo

realdanbreen wrote: »

Boring someone into submission is a Pyrrhic victory.

Not sure what that has to do with anything I just wrote? You are simply dodging and getting personal now so unless you have any significant to add I think I will just refer this one to the mods and leave it there.

realdanbreen

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

I think I will just refer this one to the mods and leave it there.

That's something that I have never actually done. I guess it is just another difference between you and me.

nozzferrahhtoo

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I somewhat suspect that the user you are replying to AND the person who made the complaint do not see anything offensive about it either. It was a knee jerk emotional response that I doubt the original complainant can put into words and actually explain.

Often "offense" is emotional and nothing else. When you sit down someone claiming offense and ask them to actually verbalize the reasoning behind what exactly they think is offensive.... they simply can not do it. They themselves do not know. They just know THAT they were offended.

Which is what made the earlier link to a poster about abortion so comical. It simply is not a comparable example. While the complainant in that case was over ruled, at least they are able to sit down and explain EXACTLY what their issue with the billboard actually was.

Not so much here, which is why we get dodge deflections of desperation into non-sequiturs about what accent the person making the "offensive" statement used, or how the background of his onstage persona at the time differs from his real world one.

Hand waving dodge tactics that avoid the actual (non)issue in play here.

But I also suspect I can verbalize the source of his "offence" better than he can. It is not that the description of the crackers was offensive at all. Rather it was a description that did not show enough reverence for said tasteless crackers in the first place. He was not offended by derision, but by lack of enough reverence. And that, alas for him, says more about him than it does about the original speaker or his comments.

looksee

Mod: enough already. I can't be bothered switching my brain on to figure out who was at fault in the last two pages, but I get the impression realdanbreen was being evasive for the sake of it. Anyways, cease with the nit picking and move on with the discussion.

mikhail

magicbastarder wrote: »

i just had to pullquote that.

A few people have commented on it. None of them have had the balls to actually address the point.

magicbastarder

what point? that women are more religious than men, or that the majority of the board are women?

Hotblack Desiato

Samaris wrote: »

Not come across that, but that is a ridiculous phrase. Let us go back to making balls of things as God and Wikitionary intended!

This is Ireland. We will make a bollix of things.

realdanbreen

looksee wrote: »

Mod: enough already. I can't be bothered switching my brain on to figure out who was at fault in the last two pages, but I get the impression realdanbreen was being evasive for the sake of it. Anyways, cease with the nit picking and move on with the discussion.

I take my hat off to you mod. Too often some mods are itching to dish out warnings & bans usually under the catchall 'arguementative style of posting'. As a result you find that very few A&A threads have many opinions from non atheists. When the mod on a thread has fixated opinions it is difficult for them to be fair and even handed.

Samaris

Can see arguments for both sides - there are a lot of Catholics still in Ireland and it's offensive to hear on the national broadcast station jokes about what is one of the most holy tenets of their belief, the transubstantion of the wafer into the body of Christ (arguments about cannibalism aside, personally, I can recognise a metaphor when it's used, even in the Bible). On the other hand, shut up already Catholics, you're still dominant, others are a lot more impacted by your belief via the law than you are by other peoples' beliefs, and if your faith is challenged by a joke which looks perfectly accurate from the outside that may be more your issue than anyone else's.

In summation - it's like watching a fight between a nettle and a wasp. Someone's going to get stung and I really can't care enough which it is.

robindch

realdanbreen wrote: »

Too often some mods are itching to dish out warnings & bans usually under the catchall 'arguementative style of posting'. As a result you find that very few A&A threads have many opinions from non atheists.

On the contrary, most religious posters seem too nervous about posting here in A+A where their views are likely to be questioned and sometimes even ridiculed - or "attacked" or "persecuted" as the terminology goes.

Posters who appear to be protestant - the vast majority of whom seem to be evangelical - appear a little less nervous about discussing their religious views than posters who appear to be catholic, possibly because evangelical protestants can be more familiar than catholics in discussing the religious beliefs they've acquired.

Nonetheless, most religious posters tend to depart quickly, if they post at all, because they're simply not comfortable taking questions about their irrational beliefs.

Nowt to do with moderators at all.

RabbleRouser2k

I'm probably one of the few believers who do post here-I think yes, people don't like asking questions, but then too often I see similar/ have similar experiences-with religious and so on. Like, as someone who is spiritual, I discuss my beliefs openly, because I don't conform to any religion. Just as happy/ unhappy in a church or temple... most comfortable standing in a field or amongst nature. Feel more connected there.

I find too many religious folks are blinkered and fearful of others be it their beliefs or non-belief. There are a few exceptions, but there are also a few stereotypes.

realdanbreen

robindch wrote: »

Nonetheless, most religious posters tend to depart quickly, if they post at all, because they're simply not comfortable taking questions about their irrational beliefs.

Nowt to do with moderators at all.

When a very active mod like yourself regards other posters on the thread as having 'irrational beliefs' then it's no wonder so many believers steer well clear of the A&A threads.

robindch

realdanbreen wrote: »

When a very active mod like yourself regards other posters on the thread as having 'irrational beliefs' then it's no wonder so many believers steer well clear of the A&A threads.

It's hardly an issue for A+A and its members if religious posters are frightened of exposure to the kind of rational inquiry which they're unlikely ever to experience in their chosen religious outlet.

robindch

George. is. upset. And. when. George. is. upset. let. no. man. Let. no. woman. Let. no. child. in. this. holy. island. of. Ireland. be. in. any. doubt. For. one. minute. For. one. second. For. one. millisecond! That. George. is. upset. And. rightly. so. And. that. this. selfsame. George. has. two. hours. of. airtime. to. fill. each. weekday. from. twelve. until. two. in. the. afternoon. which. is. a. long. two. hours. away. and. that. George. has. bugger. all. to. fill. it. with.

http://www.newstalk.com/podcasts/High_Noon/Highlights_from_High_Noon/200620/Ireland_is_a_cold_place_for_Christians

nuac

It is a long two hours to fill. I doubt if Hooke has a very large staff of researchers. More hard actual news would be nice

I find that Graham guy annoying.

Hook's own style is a hard listen. Wall to wall outrage, the affected drawl.

btw I think the priest who complained about the "haunted bread" was fully entitled to do so. This still a mainly Christian country. I am not a very fervent Catholic; I considered it offensive.

If a joke or remark were made insulting other faiths in countries where other faiths predominate there would be riots and blood on the streets - imho

looksee

nuac wrote: »

btw I think the priest who complained about the "haunted bread" was fully entitled to do so. This still a mainly Christian country. I am not a very fervent Catholic; I considered it offensive.

If a joke or remark were made insulting other faiths in countries where other faiths predominate there would be riots and blood on the streets - imho

Yes, the priest was entitled to complain, in the same way that the rest of us are entitled to consider it mildly amusing. In this case, given references to the Holy Ghost and the host (host being bread that is host of the Body of Christ?) and its ability to change its substance and so on, describing it as haunted bread seems perfectly accurate. How is it not?

Would you like to see riots and blood in the streets in protest?

magicbastarder

nuac wrote: »

If a joke or remark were made insulting other faiths in countries where other faiths predominate there would be riots and blood on the streets - imho

i'm not sure what point you are trying to make here - we consider riots and bloodshed to be bad, so it in no way informs what our reaction should be.

nuac

looksee wrote: »

Yes, the priest was entitled to complain, in the same way that the rest of us are entitled to consider it mildly amusing. In this case, given references to the Holy Ghost and the host (host being bread that is host of the Body of Christ?) and its ability to change its substance and so on, describing it as haunted bread seems perfectly accurate. How is it not?

Would you like to see riots and blood in the streets in protest?

Of course not. I am merely pointing out that a similar remark in some other countries about the beliefs of another religion would not be well received. People have been killed elsewhere for such remarks.

nuac

magicbastarder wrote: »

i'm not sure what point you are trying to make here - we consider riots and bloodshed to be bad, so it in no way informs what our reaction should be.

See my reply to Looksee.

magicbastarder

again, any decent person would utterly condemn such action. it has no bearing on the discussion at hand.

Dyr

nuac wrote: »

Of course not. I am merely pointing out that a similar remark in some other countries about the beliefs of another religion would not be well received. People have been killed elsewhere for such remarks.

Good enough reason to make sure that all religion is run out out of town on a rail

Anyway holy bread is not haunted, it is the actual flesh of the undead


I'm outraged at the inaccuracy

robindch

nuac wrote: »

I am merely pointing out that a similar remark in some other countries about the beliefs of another religion would not be well received. People have been killed elsewhere for such remarks.

By using that fact as you have, you seem to be suggesting that you think this is a good idea - though when this is pointed out, you thankfully row back and say that you don't think it's a good idea.

Sometimes it's useful to recall that beliefs can't get offended and don't have rights while humans do have rights.

.......

This post has been deleted.

robindch

Fr Kevin McNamara says that he lost the battle, but won the war:

https://www.killarneytoday.com/fr-kevin-lost-case-won-war/

Killarney Today wrote:

THE Kerry priest who complained the Late Late Show to the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland over the Eucharist being described as “haunted bread” during a panel discussion said he may have lost the case but he feels he “won the war”.

Fr Kevin McNamara had objected to the content of the chat show last January following controversial remarks made by a Rubberbandits satirist who calls himself Blindboy Boatclub.

The Moyvane PP, who was based in Killarney for several years, complained that the incident was blasphemous and anti-Catholic and he was upset that show host, Ryan Tubridy said he thought the haunted bread phrase was “a great expression”.

While RTlater accepted it caused offence to some viewers and apologised, the Broadcasting Authority rejected Fr McNamara’s complaint.

Fr McNamara told the congregation at Mass in Moyvane this weekend that while the case was lost, he was delighted that the Authority found that Ryan Tubridy misjudged the offence likely to have been caused and suggested that he might have shown greater sensitivity.

“I am delighted now that the case is closed and also I am looking forward to RTand, in particular, its presenters taking on board what the BAI has suggested,” Fr McNamara said.

“I feel, as a result of this deliberation, the Catholic faith and indeed all faiths will be more respected in RTprogrammes from here on,” he added.

looksee

Can anyone explain why faiths should be more respected? We are not obliged to respect political parties or sports clubs or or anything else that people get passionately involved with. As a general rule they are treated with normal courtesy but they do not demand respect.

robindch

looksee wrote: »

Can anyone explain why faiths should be more respected?

There's a social convention in place which demands that people try to avoid criticizing/joking about each other's religion, as religion is often understood to be part of somebody's identity, an understanding which the religions frequently encourage - eg, people say that "I'm catholic" rather than "I hold catholic beliefs" or "I believe the catholic religion".

This blurring of belief and identity encourages the common, and sometimes intentional, miscomprehension that criticism of/joking about the religion is the same as criticism of/joking about the person who believes that religion. And consequently, encourages the expectation that religion should not be criticized or joked about.

Also, some religious believers believe that criticism of or joking about their religion might bring down the endless wrath of their (boundlessly loving) deity - and who would want that?

magicbastarder

Priest claims to have ‘won the war’ in ‘haunted bread’ row
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/priest-claims-to-have-won-the-war-in-haunted-bread-row-1.3179224

in the same way they've been winning the hearts of the irish people over the last few decades, no doubt.

Hotblack Desiato

robindch wrote: »

Fr Kevin McNamara says that he lost the battle, but won the war

As he looks out each week on his ageing shrinking congregation, I'm sure that'll be a great source of comfort to him

But if you're into the old self-delusion, you might as well 'go large'

nozzferrahhtoo

realdanbreen wrote: »

When a very active mod like yourself regards other posters on the thread as having 'irrational beliefs' then it's no wonder so many believers steer well clear of the A&A threads.

Or, more likely, they realize WHY we call them irrational beliefs......... because they are in every way unsubstantiated........... and that coming to a forum like this they will be expected to do what THEY know can not be done..... which is to substantiate the things that they claim.

This forum is not hostile to people with beliefs different to our own. We ARE generally more hostile to people asserting and espousing unsubstantiated nonsense by declaration or fiat.

If you think the explanation for our universe, or life within our universe, is related to the machinations of a non-human intelligent and intentional agency and you can offer any level of substantiation at all for such a claim.......... then you will find people here quite welcoming to discuss it with you.

If you want to tell us that haunted crackers contain some aspect of the soul of a long dead unemployed carpenters son however "just because" and we should respect your "faith" in the matter........... then you will find people generally less welcoming. And rightfully so.

kylith

nuac wrote: »

btw I think the priest who complained about the "haunted bread" was fully entitled to do so. This still a mainly Christian country. I am not a very fervent Catholic; I considered it offensive.

Do you know what's offensive? Being told that I deserve to burn in torment for eternity because I don't believe the same thing as Christians.

I think that if one side is condoning eternal torture and the other side is making flippant remarks about second-rate wafers then it's clear which side is more objectionable.

nuac

PopePalpatine wrote: »

I know, it must be like finding intelligence at a Healy-Rae/Lowry fundraiser.

Those guys are extremely intelligent. They could buy and sell most of us, and probably have already done so.

nuac

MrPudding wrote: »

Hmmm. This might explain why I am having so much trouble getting my non-stamp collectors club up and running...

MrP

Filthy philatelists:)

gctest50

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

As he looks out each week on his ageing shrinking congregation, I'm sure that'll be a great source of comfort to him

But if you're into the old self-delusion, you might as well 'go large'

Some of them can make all sorts of claims and still go to bed at night and sleep like their god during the Holocaust

Da Boss

Those comments were destructive,insulting and ridiculed all us catholic and our beliefs,should he disagree fine but show some respect lad. I've my names for atheists too but I've enough respect 4 them not to say any remarks, certainly inappropriate in national tv

smokingman

Da Boss wrote: »

Those comments were destructive,insulting and ridiculed all us catholic and our beliefs,should he disagree fine but show some respect lad. I've my names for atheists too but I've enough respect 4 them not to say any remarks, certainly inappropriate in national tv

You peak my curiosity fine sir; what are these names you have for atheists?

nozzferrahhtoo

Da Boss wrote: »

Those comments were destructive,insulting and ridiculed all us catholic and our beliefs

Ridiculing a belief is not the same thing as ridiculing the holder of the belief. In fact some very intelligent and admirable minds have been infected with some ridiculous and unsubstantiated nonsense ideas.

Newton for example was one of the, if not arguably the, brightest and most admirable minds our species has produced. And some of the ideas he believed in were ridiculous nonsense.

I understand some people wishing to play the "I am so offended" card like to be offended on behalf of their ideas, but that is not something anyone here, or on TV, should be expected to pander to. If you are offended or insulted by the words or ideas of another person, then realize the problem is yours not theirs.

That deals with the "insult" and "ridicule" of which you speak but with "destructive" I think you were just giving in to pure hyperbole and exaggeration there. What is "destructive" about such comments exactly?

But when it comes to bad and ridiculous claims and ideas, they SHOULD be ridiculed. People should be shown respect, but ideas should not. We are a species with the gift of the faculty of humor and I see no reason to shine the light of that gift on patently ridiculous and wholly unsubstantiated nonsense.

I did write a passage on your precious cracker bread before. I wonder if you find it equally "destructive" or you are equally triggered by it.

Da Boss wrote: »

I've my names for atheists too but I've enough respect 4 them not to say any remarks, certainly inappropriate in national tv

Ah but notice the interesting difference here. The comments the person on TV made were mostly about crackers and the beliefs about the crackers. Here however you claim to have "names" about "atheists".

So he was making his comments about objects and beliefs. You are name calling actual people. That is not a small difference, and that you think they are equivalent is very telling. He had "names" for "haunted bread" but you escalate it by having (presumably derogatory given your description) names for actual PEOPLE.

But do not hold back at all. You will find the people here are not offended or triggered by mere words and beliefs in the same way you demonstrably are. Trot out your list of words and names and I think you will find the majority of users here will not rush to plead offence but will in fact instead merely engage with you as to whether they thing your labels are accurate or applicable or not. The users here will not shrilly cry "I am so offended by your words" but will attempt to reason with you as to whether your selected words and name calling are linguistically valid or not.

Samaris

Given how clear fundamental Christians make themselves on the topic of people not agreeing with them, I think many atheists are fairly inured to religion-based insults.


I have a lot more time for the Christians that quietly get on with trying to live as Jesus (who was a pretty good man with some good ideas) than the rabid OT wavers that get a lot more interest out of the bits of the Bible that allow them to be awful human beings to others. I wish there were more of the former about. Unfortunately, it has always been more difficult to rouse a rabble to the banner of "Let's all try to get along!" over "Kill the heretics!"

Peregrinus

Samaris wrote: »

I have a lot more time for the Christians that quietly get on with trying to live as Jesus (who was a pretty good man with some good ideas) than the rabid OT wavers that get a lot more interest out of the bits of the Bible that allow them to be awful human beings to others. I wish there were more of the former about.

There could be. Precisely because they go about it quietly, you're less likely to notice them.