Civil "communion" for 8 year old girl

robindch

infogiver wrote: »

Didn't mean to offend anyone at all.

I'm not sure you offended anybody - you just don't seem familiar or very interested in honest, open discussion. Please feel free to stick around and learn though

robindch

jobbridge4life wrote: »

I attended an RCC primary school with members of several different religions. While obviously these children didn't participate in communion they were not 'out-grouped'.

Am very happy to see that you had a good experience. However, that's not the case in many schools and there are plenty of accounts, here in A+A and elsewhere, in which people were out-grouped.

The different approaches and the problems caused by each could be addressed, at least in part, by the Department of Education issuing public guidelines on how schools which are controlled by religious organizations or religious people should deal with children and parents who are not part of their religious club.

However, it seems unlikely that the DofE will do anything in this area for the forseeable future.

eviltwin

infogiver wrote: »

I'm just perplexed that posters assume that their children are only coming under the influence of other children in the school environment?
My own daughter (an only child) has and always had a big group of friends, from all sections of society, at school, clubs and organisations she was in and out with, out playing on the estate as a kid, sleepovers, socialising etc.
I can't imagine having to apologise to her and explain because she felt left out when other kids got to have 2 Christmas Days and 2 birthdays and 2 bedrooms because their parents lived in 2 different homes.
Right now in this estate we have at least 12 different "traditions" and it's great to see them all mucking around together.

I suppose it depends on who your child plays with. My lad is 7 and he is not in a religious school. We don't have anyone in the family who is religious and his friends are either from school so non religious or of other faiths. There are no children in the area that I know of who are doing communion. We were in the shopping centre last weekend and he saw a few girls in their full dress, veil etc and he genuinely didn't know why they were in fancy dress as he described it. Things like FHC just aren't on his radar and if someone is to mention it in the future that they or a sibling are doing it I'm sure he'll be like "so what".

jobbridge4life

robindch wrote: »

Am very happy to see that you had a good experience. However, that's not the case in many schools and there are plenty of accounts, here in A+A and elsewhere, in which people were out-grouped.

The different approaches and the problems caused by each could be addressed, at least in part, by the Department of Education issuing public guidelines on how schools which are controlled by religious organizations or religious people should deal with children and parents who are not part of their religious club.

However, it seems unlikely that the DofE will do anything in this area for the forseeable future.

Guidance would be a good step forward, both from the Department and the Church. I don't think it is a fair reflection to state that the RCC actively seeks to out-group children however, at least on a policy level.

infogiver

robindch wrote: »

I'm not sure you offended anybody - you just don't seem familiar or very interested in honest, open discussion. Please feel free to stick around and learn though

This is the kind of condescending patronising remark that Irish Atheists are becoming quite famous for.
It seems to be the default position if anyone offers a different perspective which is quite ironic when you consider that your main complaint appears to be that you feel marginalised and discrimated against because you chose to plough a different furrow.
I'd love if you could point out where I was dishonest, I'm posting from my own experience which doesn't seem to fit in with the narrative here so it seems I should expect to be the butt of this kind of sarcastic put down.
Don't worry I'm off and let you get back to your never ending discussion about how the RCCs only objective is to persecute non believers.
I genuinely didn't mean to offend.

nhunter100

infogiver wrote:

Don't worry I'm off and let you get back to your never ending discussion about how the RCCs only objective is to persecute non believers. I genuinely didn't mean to offend.

Thank 'god' for that. :-)

infogiver

nhunter100 wrote: »

Thank 'god' for that. :-)

Ahh... my stalker...I thought you'd disappeared!

nhunter100

infogiver wrote:

Ahh... my stalker...I thought you'd disappeared!

I see your comments are as delightful as ever. I'm allowed to wander into any thread I wish. Some I just read, some I offer an opinion. Stalking is such a nasty accusation, but I 'm not surprised. Feel free to report if you.
OP/mod apologies for an off topic comment.
OP your idea for you child is great and I hope your child has a great time. Let them decide when they are of proper age if they want to subscribe to a belief system.

robindch

jobbridge4life wrote: »

I don't think it is a fair reflection to state that the RCC actively seeks to out-group children however, at least on a policy level.

I agree that the RCC generally doesn't actively seek to out-group people. However, discrimination and out-grouping - to endlessly varying degrees across the country - is what does result from their multi-generational control of schools and their general expectation that exposition of their religion and its integration into the curriculum should come at the top, or close to the top, of the overall focus of the school.

Many schools are simply either uninterested or even incapable of dealing with kids and parents who don't want to be part of that and the poor level of public debate on the topic isn't doing much to help.

robindch

infogiver wrote: »

I'd love if you could point out where I was dishonest, I'm posting from my own experience which doesn't seem to fit in with the narrative here so it seems I should expect to be the butt of this kind of sarcastic put down.

Not sarcastic.

In this post, I showed you where you specifically misrepresented an earlier post I made. You have posted other misrepresentations or troll-level comments in this thread.

infogiver wrote: »

I genuinely didn't mean to offend.

And I repeat - you haven't offended anybody. You have, however, shown that you're not very good at discussing topics honestly and fairly. If you want to improve, please feel free to stay around and watch how it happens.

infogiver

robindch wrote: »

Not sarcastic.

In this post, I showed you where you specifically misrepresented an earlier post I made. You have posted other misrepresentations or troll-level comments in this thread.And I repeat - you haven't offended anybody. You have, however, shown that you're not very good at discussing topics honestly and fairly. If you want to improve, please feel free to stay around and watch how it happens.

I made a huge mistake and started contributing in this thread forgetting that this level of arrogance and condescension towards posters who don't agree that the RCC only exists to persecute non believers is totally acceptable here.
If you want to only post in an echo chamber of indignation and blinkered thinking then that's up to you, but you'll excuse me if I decline to take up your contemptuous offer to "stay around and watch how it happens ", thanks all the same.:-)

robindch

infogiver wrote: »

I made a huge mistake and started contributing in this thread forgetting that this level of arrogance and condescension towards posters who don't agree that the RCC only exists to persecute non believers is totally acceptable here.
If you want to only post in an echo chamber of indignation and blinkered thinking then that's up to you [...]

For the third and final time, you misrepresent posters and their intentions in this forum - rather grandly just now :rolleyes:

It really is best avoided.

One eyed Jack

robindch wrote: »

It's not the wrong word - it's a direct misrepresentation of what's happening - there's a Commandment about that you know! :rolleyes:It really is much simpler -

I have always engaged honestly and openly in this forum, and I've learned a lot from it (if oldrnwisr ever closes their account, we're... well, I won't use unparliamentary language, but hopefully you get the idea, they're a wealth of knowledge and invaluable resources for anyone willing and wanting to to learn). However, if I may for a minute, just to comment on the idea of honest discussion and misrepresentation of intentions (I was going to comment in the feedback thread, but it would look out of context).

a child sees some of his/her friends going off and earning upwards of EUR500 and he/she doesn't because their parents aren't members of the social club which thinks this is an appropriate thing for kids of seven and eight years old, to say nothing of the unbelievable inappropriateness of dressing young girls up as child brides.

Firstly, no child actually earns money from any of the sacraments. They are given money as a gift, from well-meaning relatives, neighbours and friends of the family. I personally don't encourage the practice as I would rather they gave a contribution to charity instead. Anyone whom I've asked to do this, has found the idea strange, but they agreed it was probably a better idea. This is a cultural phenomenon and not solely the preserve of religions. We give people gifts on their birthday and at times of the year where it's tradition. I personally am a fan of the Dutch culture of giving handmade gifts, but until I can fashion a PlayStation from a 3D printer, I find myself in a bit of a bind. As a child in modern Ireland, I find his appreciation of altruism and humility will only stretch so far.

As for the "inappropriateness of dressing young girls up as child brides" (I have to give you the benefit of the doubt that that's your genuinely held interpretation, and not intended to be a deliberately provocative statement), well again, I think you'll find again that the attire a cultural phenomenon, again not at all the preserve of religion. I'm reminded of the objections to child beauty pageants "because paedophilia". Isn't the issue then paedophiles and their perception? I mean this respectfully when I say that if someone were to view the the attire of young girls and boys at these occasions as inappropriate, then the issue is with them, and not with the children or their parents.

While it would be better not to be put into this difficult situation in the first place, it's good that parents find some way that the kids can enjoy a similar day out so that they don't feel left out.

Nobody puts parents in these situations, but the parents themselves. I certainly don't feel like my child is being left out of anything when he is invited to participate in many events and celebrations. If I ever didn't want him to participate in an event, I'd forbid him from participating. He may or may not feel he is being excluded, but that's not the fault of people who invited him to participate. Having said that - I also know from experience that children, generally, are incredibly resilient. They don't bear grudges and resentment nearly as long as some adults I've had the misfortune to encounter.

The RCC, of course, openly encourages this kind of out-grouping so that the majority of compliant parents and families will just shut up and go along with it - to the benefit of the RCC which claims, improbably, that this indicates that their collapsing membership is remaining solid.

I'm beginning to waver on giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're not engaging in deliberate misrepresentation in an attempt to provoke a reaction of currying favour from those who already agree with your take on the RCC, and facepalms from those who don't. However, courtesy and rules of engagement dictate I must entertain the above nonsense as genuinely held belief. I'll give you one thing rob - you don't make it easy!

To address the point - the RCC isn't just the Hierarchy, it is also the Congregation. If you want to separate yourself from that congregation (or club, if you like), then of course you shouldn't enjoy the benefits of it's membership. Anyone who would suggest that they wouldn't want to participate in an event which they consider inappropriate in some way, shouldn't then be expecting to be taken seriously when they complain that they aren't being treated equally inappropriately!

That level of martyrdom makes de baby jesus weep for humanity!

(tongue firmly in cheek... my own of course! :pac:)

As I said above, as an introduction to the way the RCC co-opts social ritual for its own benefit and regardless of what anything really means, this exercise is an excellent introduction indeed to the cynical realpolitik of the RCC.

So you wouldn't want to participate equally then, or you would?

I'm genuinely confused because you point out all the inequalities of a club that would willingly have you as a member, yet if I'm given to understanding you correctly, you wouldn't want to be a member of that club anyway because of the inequality and inappropriate attire. What have I missed?

magicbastarder

well, i'd say the OP has well and truly fled the village by now.

BoatMad

I personally see no issue in throwing a slap up party and convincing the relatives to shower the child with money , after all its would seem to this disbeliever, any sacrament has long left the stage.

smacl

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Firstly, no child actually earns money from any of the sacraments. They are given money as a gift, from well-meaning relatives, neighbours and friends of the family. I personally don't encourage the practice as I would rather they gave a contribution to charity instead. Anyone whom I've asked to do this, has found the idea strange, but they agreed it was probably a better idea. This is a cultural phenomenon and not solely the preserve of religions. We give people gifts on their birthday and at times of the year where it's tradition. I personally am a fan of the Dutch culture of giving handmade gifts, but until I can fashion a PlayStation from a 3D printer, I find myself in a bit of a bind. As a child in modern Ireland, I find his appreciation of altruism and humility will only stretch so far.

While its a fair point, the bottom line in that 'Lord of the Flies' set that is pretty much every school playground is that kids who've been through the ceremony arrive back comparing notes about how much loot they've scored. For those who've scored no loot whatsoever, things may seem rather bleak. My approach to this has been to do something fun and a bit grown up for the kids at this time, and for our lot that has involved a meal in town and a gig. This has become something we do with the kids a couple of times a year now regardless of whether there's a religious festival / ceremony on or not as its fun for us too.

Interesting the different gift ideas and charity. My wife has a sister in-law she quietly despises so got her a toilet for the people of a village in Sudan for a wedding present. Following her lead, I got her mother a goat for the same village the following Christmas and a chicken each for the kids. Since then we've always got random charity items for any minor gifts for most occasions, more out of habit than anything. Odd as it seems, these go down really well. And you're getting off lightly with the Playstation, youngest has decided she wants to be a vet when she grows up and has requested for this years birthday a rat in formaldehyde and a disection kit. Her mum is less than chuffed

recedite

smacl wrote: »

My wife has a sister in-law she quietly despises so got her a toilet for the people of a village in Sudan for a wedding present. Following her lead, I got her mother a goat for the same village the following Christmas and a chicken each for the kids. Since then we've always got random charity items for any minor gifts for most occasions, more out of habit than anything. Odd as it seems, these go down really well.

Sometimes gifts that appear to go down really well, are in fact quietly despised :pac:
But yeah, its an interesting gift idea for certain people.

Sofiztikated

Could you not just explain to them that it's not something you do?

I was brought up Presbyterian, in a predominately catholic town, and simply told we don't do that.

There may be a piss and a moan, but you're their parents. And they might miss out? Tough. Life's like that.

smacl

recedite wrote: »

Sometimes gifts that appear to go down really well, are in fact quietly despised :pac:

Yep, which was the intention in this case. All in a good cause :pac:

recedite

smacl wrote: »

All in a good cause :pac:

I have my doubts. I consider those kind of aid programs somewhat patronising towards the Africans.
Give them a village toilet, a pair of goats, and a cow.
Then come back in a few years time, there are cows and goats everywhere, and they all have bountiful milk, beef and goat kebabs, and nobody needs to $hit on the ground any more.
Do you think they have never heard of farming or toilets before?

smacl

recedite wrote: »

Do you think they have never heard of farming or toilets before?

Your logic seems a bit sketchy there. Seems a bit like asking a homeless person have they never heard of a house or suggesting that an offer of emergency accommodation is patronising as it is a home they really want. My best guess is that those with a desperate need will accept and appreciate whatever offer of help is forthcoming even if falls short of what they need long-term. In recent years my charities of choice tend to be closer to home, notably the Simon community and the life-boats.

recedite

I'm just saying that Africans already have goats and cows suited to their climate, and cheaply available.
If you think people over there are short of capital, then a charity that loans or donates cash might be better. The beneficiaries might still buy the goat, but they might choose to start some other business instead.

looksee

I don't think the charities actually put goats and cattle and hives of bees in a container and send them!

You are putting money into a fund that (hopefully) the value of your contribution will allow for the donation of a goat etc to a family. They are saying 'you have given a goat' but then again contributions to charities are asked for and included in the 'charity' are all the overheads of advertising, salaries etc, so it might easily take several donations to actually be worth a goat. Costs them little to send everyone a card saying they have donated one though.

silverharp

ive no idea what you are discussing, Ill just add this in, continue on gentlemen

jimmycrackcorm

Sofiztikated wrote:

I was brought up Presbyterian, in a predominately catholic town, and simply told we don't do that.

I think this is the whole crux of this thread. One of my nieces had a communion a few years ago, After the ceremony there was a kids party at the house, bouncy castle and so on.

One of her classmates came to it, she was a Protestant who wasn't bothered by the while communion thing because she was very clear that this was something Catholics did and not Protestants.

Otherwise, excuses aside, it's just a keeping up with the Jones.

looksee

Ok, and sorry, I will get back on topic, the animals are for the most part sent to Africa. It is not generally a good idea, but yes, they are sent.

Hotblack Desiato

recedite wrote: »

Do you think they have never heard of farming or toilets before?

Sanitation is the greatest improvement to human health ever devised, vaccination is the second.

Do you expect dirt poor people in the developing world to come up with their own vaccines? Or perhaps out of a shared sense of humanity we should share our advances with them for the greater good.

Same goes for toilets and there are many cheap low-tech designs, many of which don't need a water supply, which can make a real difference to human health in the developing world.

I'm a bit wary of the send-an-Irish-animal-to-Africa programmes though, as Irish farm animals are well adapted to temperate climates with abundant water. I would hope that that's only a smokescreen for the dimmer members of the public and the animals they actually supply are adapted to the local conditions. I don't support these sort of charities anyway.

Sofiztikated wrote: »

I was brought up Presbyterian

My sympathies

infogiver wrote: »

This is the kind of condescending patronising remark that Irish Atheists are becoming quite famous for.

"Help! Help! I'm being oppressed!"

When you come here in good faith (see what I did there) and don't misquote and misrepresent posters and seek a genuine honest discussion then we can talk.

If you lie, twist words and call into question the parenting abilities of people you've never met, then a smelly middle finger will be extended in your direction

Up to you.

infogiver wrote: »

I made a huge mistake and started contributing in this thread forgetting that this level of arrogance and condescension towards posters who don't agree that the RCC only exists to persecute non believers is totally acceptable here.
If you want to only post in an echo chamber of indignation and blinkered thinking then that's up to you, but you'll excuse me if I decline to take up your contemptuous offer to "stay around and watch how it happens ", thanks all the same.:-)

I do laugh internally when followers of religion accuse others of 'blinkered thinking'.

You've been sold a lie all your life, open your eyes.

One eyed Jack

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

If you lie, twist words and call into question the parenting abilities of people you've never met, then a smelly middle finger will be extended in your direction

Up to you.

...

I do laugh internally when followers of religion accuse others of 'blinkered thinking'.

You've been sold a lie all your life, open your eyes.

This very thread is full of posters questioning the parenting abilities of people they've never met, but I wouldn't extend a smelly middle finger in anyones direction, seems a horridly immature thing to be doing. Cathartic as it may be I suppose, it certainly doesn't add anything to the discussion. That you cannot see that, is the very definition of blinkered thinking.

You'll laugh internally about that of course, and that is your choice, but then the obvious consequence of that behaviour is that people will choose for themselves that you aren't to be taken seriously, and so in any discussion where you might have had an interesting point, it's of no use whatsoever when the people you would want to listen to you have long stopped listening having been on the receiving end of your smelly middle finger.

Hotblack Desiato

For what it's worth OEJ, I've never taken you seriously. Whether you did me or not I simply do not care.

One eyed Jack

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

For what it's worth OEJ, I've never taken you seriously. Whether you did me or not I simply do not care.

Of course I take you seriously, otherwise what's the point in discussion?

What's the point of this forum then where people such as the OP come to look for advice on an issue which affects many people in Irish society, where many posters have voiced their objections to the influence of the RCC on Irish society?

What's it meant to achieve if not to provide support, advice, discussion, engagement? If you don't want to engage with people in good faith, then what you're left with is an echo chamber which achieves nothing except to serve as an outlet for a minority in society to vent at the injustice of it all.

Hotblack Desiato

Didn't you misrepresent yourself as an agnostic here for qutie a time?

If I've confused you with another poster then I do apologise.

One eyed Jack

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Didn't you misrepresent yourself as an agnostic here for qutie a time?

If I've confused you with another poster then I do apologise.

Nope, definitely wasn't me HD, though having mentioned before that my wife is non-religious has in the past caused some confusion. She has never identified as atheist either and none of her family have ever given a second thought to religion. That's why I always draw a distinction between people who are non-religious, people who are atheist, people who are theists, and people who are deists.

It didn't cause our child any confusion nor has he ever felt as though he has been brainwashed. He's experienced plenty of times when he was left out or excluded from activities but he understands that he participates in activities too where other children may feel as though they are excluded.

I understand that's where the OP may have been coming from in asking for advice about organising an activity where her child wouldn't feel as though they were missing out on something her friends had to talk about, and that's why I thought even though it's unnecessary, I'd heard of secular ceremonies like these before, so that's why I linked the OP to an example.

It's just me of course I understand but I think the whole idea of people trying to out-do one another in giving their children something to talk about is setting their children up with expectations that life will always be like that. When it isn't then, as adults they haven't developed the coping skills to deal with the reality of competing in our consumerism driven culture. They simply can't compete, and this breeds resentment of people whom they perceive to be better off than them in one way or another, so they strive to outdo them in one way or another.

I was always more about cooperation than competition.