Unpopular Opinions - OP Updated with Threadban List 4/5/21

Hamachi

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

yeah the morals and scruples of the catholic church are what we should be teaching kids.

So which is it? Anti-religious or anti-catholic?

Do you oppose Muslim parents having the right to an Islamic education in Clonskeagh?

ohnonotgmail

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

you seem to find my opinions painful to read for some reason and you have serious objections to me expressing them.

I just see someone discussing with you on the internet.

Most Irish Catholic schools are just holdovers. I don’t remember any religious in my school, nominally a CBS. No Christian brother to be found anywhere.

Religion and civics classes were about the same thing, time for discussions on political matters. In fact my religious classes would be pretty good on American imperialism in South America for instance. Worth keeping that, but just call it the history of religions.

Primary school is worse with the confirmation and communions alright. But I don’t think there is much desire to change that.

ohnonotgmail

Hamachi wrote: »

So which is it? Anti-religious or anti-catholic?

anti-church definitely. I'm sure you still support them despite everything but that is your issue.

Hamachi wrote: »

Do you oppose Muslim parents having the right to an Islamic education in Clonskeagh?

if the state is paying for it I do. It is not the gotcha you think it is.

walshb

The Raging Bile Duct wrote: »

This is one of the most idiotic comments I've read on here.

It’s an unpopular opinions thread..

Like everything in life. Things start out ok, and then everyone wants in

Same with whistleblowing...

Some proper and needed, but you can bet a lot is utter nonsense, attention seeking and just being a busybody snitch...

Jequ0n

Antares35 wrote: »

Religion is not a pre-requisite to good morals or scruples.

Unless you focus on the theory vs practice part and thereby on the atrocities committed in the name of religions.

Antares35

Jequ0n wrote: »

Unless you focus on the theory vs practice part and thereby on the atrocities committed in the name of religions.

Good morning children, here's a lesson in what not to do

walshb

Antares35 wrote: »

Religion is not a pre-requisite to good morals or scruples.

Who said it was?

Simple: there is good to be learned from religious teaching..

I learned plenty of good from it during my school days.

Came out just fine. Because of the era I was in

Today’s era is far more inclusive, gentle and accommodating compared to many years ago.

People need to stop comparing religion and religious teaching from years ago to today..

Different eras, different people, different attitudes....there is good to be had.

Hamachi

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

anti-church definitely. I'm sure you still support them despite everything but that is your issue.



if the state is paying for it I do. It is not the gotcha you think it is.

There’s no ‘gotcha’. I’m probing your argument, that’s all. I don’t know why you’re being so defensive and ascribing issues to me.

It’s good to see that you’re at least consistent across all religions.

Antares35

walshb wrote: »

Who said it was?

Er....you. Come on at least be able to stand over what you said.

If you continuosly compare religion now to religion in the 1950s of course it will come out looking ok - what wouldn't? Still not, in my opinion, a compelling argument to have it in schools as a mandatory element.

ohnonotgmail

Deleted User wrote: »

I just see someone discussing with you on the internet.

Most Irish Catholic schools are just holdovers. I don’t remember any religious in my school, nominally a CBS. No Christian brother to be found anywhere.

Religion and civics classes were about the same thing, time for discussions on political matters. In fact my religious classes would be pretty good on American imperialism in South America for instance. Worth keeping that, but just call it the history of religions.

Primary school is worse with the confirmation and communions alright. But I don’t think there is much desire to change that.

yeah

breathtaking arrogance

and

Do you struggle with reading comprehension?

are really conducive to a reasonable discussion.

ohnonotgmail

walshb wrote: »

Who said it was?

walshb wrote: »

There is absolutely is a place for religion in schools. Some standards and morals and scruples should be encouraged..

ahem! if you need a religious education to encourage standards, morals and scruples in your children then you have failed as a parent.

Jequ0n

walshb wrote: »

Who said it was?

Today’s era is far more inclusive, gentle and accommodating compared to many years ago.

People need to stop comparing religion and religious teaching from years ago to today..

Different eras, different people, different attitudes....there is good to be had.

Broad generalisation. Religious schools are still being used to teach radicalised materials and doctrines. It might not be widespread in Ireland now but chances are it will come back like it did in Europe

Hamachi

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

yeah
and

are really conducive to a reasonable discussion.

Both statements are apt for somebody who:

1. Claims to intuit the belief system of millions of people.

2. Cannot or will not comprehend that you can desire a catholic education for your own children, whilst supporting the rights of others to a non-religious schooling.

ohnonotgmail

Hamachi wrote: »

Both statements are apt for somebody who:

1. Claims to intuit the belief system of millions of people.

Not that difficult to do. Do 65-75% of the population attend mass on a regular basis? are they actually catholic or just catholic on paper?

Hamachi wrote: »

2. Cannot or will not comprehend that you can desire a catholic education for your own children, whilst supporting the rights of others to a non-religious schooling.

I support the rights of others to the religious education of their choosing, i dont support the state paying for it. What was that about reading comprehension?

Hamachi

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Not that difficult to do. Do 65-75% of the population attend mass on a regular basis? are they actually catholic or just catholic on paper?



I support the rights of others to the religious education of their choosing, i dont support the state paying for it. What was that about reading comprehension?

1. Does it matter if they go to mass weekly? If they see themselves as catholic, are happy for their children to receive the sacraments, and tick the box on the census, they are deemed as catholic in the eyes of the state.

2. Fine. I accept your argument that the state shouldn’t pay for it. That makes sense. I’m a high earner. I pay a fortune in taxes every year for services and programs that I neither like nor support. It annoys me, but I have to accept it because that’s the will of the majority. As another poster stated, if the bulk of parents were truly aggrieved by this, there would be an overwhelming clamoring for change. It simply doesn’t exist right now.

walshb

Antares35 wrote: »

Er....you. Come on at least be able to stand over what you said.

If you continuosly compare religion now to religion in the 1950s of course it will come out looking ok - what wouldn't? Still not, in my opinion, a compelling argument to have it in schools as a mandatory element.

I never said anything about religious teaching being a prerequisite. You brought this up.

I also never said it was essential or absolutely needed..

I simply said that good can be obtained from it. It can serve a very useful and good purpose for people.

ohnonotgmail

Hamachi wrote: »

1. Does it matter if they go to mass weekly? If they see themselves as catholic, are happy for their children to receive the sacraments, and tick the box on the census, they are deemed as catholic in the eyes of the state.

happy or just don't care if they do? going through the motions because the older generation expect it?

answer this for me. if the state banned all religious education in schools tomorrow do you think the 65-75% of the population who list themselves as catholic on the census would care?

ohnonotgmail

walshb wrote: »

I never said anything about religious teaching being a prerequisite. You brought this up.

I also never said it was essential or absolutely needed..

I simply said that good can be obtained from it. It can serve a very useful and good purpose for people.

There is absolutely is a place for religion in schools. Some standards and morals and scruples should be encouraged..

you certainly gave that impression.

Hamachi

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

answer this for me. if the state banned all religious education in schools tomorrow do you think the 65-75% of the population who list themselves as catholic on the census would care?

It’s 78% who identified themselves as catholic in the last census.

I have no idea, because I couldn’t possibly speak for 3.5 - 4.0 million people. I don’t know them. I don’t understand what motivates them or their belief systems.

Nor do you.

ohnonotgmail

Hamachi wrote: »

It’s 78% who identified themselves as catholic in the last census.

I have no idea, because I couldn’t possibly speak for 3.5 - 4.0 million people. I don’t know them. I don’t understand what motivates them or their belief systems.

Nor do you.

I think i have a pretty good idea. and so do you but you don't want to admit it.

walshb

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

answer this for me. if the state banned all religious education in schools tomorrow do you think the 65-75% of the population who list themselves as catholic on the census would care?

Plenty would care....

The may not be all boiling mad, but I am sure plenty would see religion being taught as a good thing for their children...

Of course, there would be people who would not care....such is life....

Main point here is this OTT zealous anti religion attitude today, that is mostly based off experiences from decades ago, as well as people thinking it "the in thing" to be so vocally critical of religion.

Hamachi

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I think i have a pretty good idea. and so do you but you don't want to admit it.

Ok. We’ve established that you think you know better than competent adults, who choose to self-identify in a particular manner.

There isn’t really anything else to discuss. Let’s examine the results of the next census to establish if it returns a sea change in demographics.

Until such time, I’ll trust the credibility of hard data over some anonymous persona on the internet.

Omackeral

Hamachi wrote: »

There isn’t really anything else to discuss. Let’s examine the results of the next census to establish if it returns a sea change in demographics.

Until such time, I’ll trust the credibility of hard data over some anonymous persona on the internet.

If you’re to go by the census, we’re nearly all able to speak Irish.

Hamachi

Omackeral wrote: »

If you’re to go by the census, we’re nearly all able to speak Irish.

Do you have a more authoritative dataset to understand demographic patterns?

Antares35

walshb wrote: »

I never said anything about religious teaching being a prerequisite. You brought this up.

I also never said it was essential or absolutely needed..

I simply said that good can be obtained from it. It can serve a very useful and good purpose for people.

You said this:

There is absolutely is a place for religion in schools. Some standards and morals and scruples should be encouraged..

Antares35

walshb wrote: »

Main point here is this OTT zealous anti religion attitude today, that is mostly based off experiences from decades ago, as well as people thinking it "the in thing" to be so vocally critical of religion.

Or maybe we don't want our children to have anything to do with an institution that protected and relocated paedophiles, told women that they were unclean after birth (many of which births arose because it was a sin to refuse your husband), we don't feel comfortable dressing our daughters up in little wedding gowns so we can invite all the family along to take nice pictures in the church and go for a nice meal and few pints after. You can argue all you like that it has changed but go out and ask any homosexual man if he feels hurt and betrayed by the church's insistence that he is living a life of sin - marriages still can't be blessed between two gay people.

Or, perhaps we would simply prefer religion to take its hands out of the states pockets and for people who genuinely want their kids to have a religious education to pay for it themselves - if it is important to them, they will. I'd rather my child spent her time learning a useful language.

Point is, there are a lot of reasons why people don't want their children to have to sit through religion in school - it doesn't make then anti religious or zealots, and your assertion that we take this position because it's fashionable? Well, there isn't really any response to that except to say it's ridiculous. I don't parent my child according to fads and trends - she means more to me than that

walshb

Antares35 wrote: »

You said this:

There is absolutely is a place for religion in schools. Some standards and morals and scruples should be encouraged..

Yes, there is a place for region in society.....

Prerequisite is nothing to do with what I said....

Antares35

walshb wrote: »

Yes, there is a place for region in society.....

Prerequisite is nothing to do with what I said....

In society...

Omackeral

Hamachi wrote: »

Do you have a more authoritative dataset to understand demographic patterns?

Never claimed to have, just giving a personal opinion. Many claim that they have a command of the Irish language or that they’re followers of the Roman Catholic faith but I’d certainly have my doubts. Nothing stopping anyone from doing it.

Antares35

Antares35 wrote: »

Or maybe we don't want our children to have anything to do with an institution that protected and relocated paedophiles, told women that they were unclean after birth (many of which births arose because it was a sin to refuse your husband), we don't feel comfortable dressing our daughters up in little wedding gowns so we can invite all the family along to take nice pictures in the church and go for a nice meal and few pints after. You can argue all you like that it has changed but go out and ask any homosexual man if he feels hurt and betrayed by the church's insistence that he is living a life of sin - marriages still can't be blessed between two gay people.

Or, perhaps we would simply prefer religion to take its hands out of the states pockets and for people who genuinely want their kids to have a religious education to pay for it themselves - if it is important to them, they will. I'd rather my child spent her time learning a useful language.

Point is, there are a lot of reasons why people don't want their children to have to sit through religion in school - it doesn't make then anti religious or zealots, and your assertion that we take this position because it's fashionable? Well, there isn't really any response to that except to say it's ridiculous. I don't parent my child according to fads and trends - she means more to me than that

But the schools aren’t that religious. As I said. To make the existing catholic schools religious would take a act that would change the vast majority of supposedly religious schools not at all on their day to day running, teaching staff, and/or curriculum. So let’s do it but the whole hysteria about “religious indoctrination” is just that. And children can opt out from religious classes.

I’d get rid of private schools before, or at the same time, defund them.