New Irish Political Party

AndyWarhol

Souless wrote:

Sorry is it just me or does the French state seem to work just fine even though the church and state affairs were seperated many years ago...Not sure of the exact date Im afriad but it was around the end of the 19th century and the begining of the 20th ie (1880-1905)

Anyway with that said im not against the church. I Believe that they certainly have the right to practice their beliefs with out being condemned or banned, even if I disagree with alot of them.

As for the comment you made about abortions this isnt a thread that has anything to do with that it is a politics thread.

Well France was France was "the first daughter of the church" and "The Most Christian King" (le roy tres chretien). There's no denying the fact that their laws today are based on a Christian moral framework. They can harp on about church state separation all they like, but there's no denying the history of their laws.

black_jack

AndyWarhol wrote:

Well if anything, they protect babies. Liberals like you would prefer to kill off the unborn if it suited.

Wow yes, We like the unborn foetus, lightly sauted, with a dry white wine sauce.

Yes liberals, we want to kill the unborn when it suits, liberals like
William Bennett, Education Secretary, to that famous liberal, Ronnie Regan who said recently

that aborting "every black baby in this country" would reduce the crime rate,

from cnn

The suggest that liberal "want" to kill children is a disgusting distortion of the truth. We don't. We just feel that a woman has a right to control her reproductive cycle and not some bloke in a dress.

One has to remember where 'the state' comes from; it has its basis in a christian moral framework that has very christian-like laws

Such as?

that are very unlike the states that have evolved in the middle east for example.

Facts links evidence, because the history of christian theocracys aren't happy joyous states, which promote religious, social and moral tolerance.

The relationship between church and state is a complex one and you can't just have the idealised utopia that is a clean church-state decoupling.

Yes you can and should, every year which gets us away from Sean "I'm a catholic first and a irishman second" Lemass years, is just fine by me.

These days we all seem to have our own moral set, but in general, these morals are all very similar to a 'Christian doctrine'.

You mean the stigmatisation of homosexuality?

Well France was France was "the first daughter of the church" and "The Most Christian King" (le roy tres chretien). There's no denying the fact that their laws today are based on a Christian moral framework. They can harp on about church state separation all they like, but there's no denying the history of their laws.

You mean like freedom of the press and free expression, two concepts mother church have an issue with.

AndyWarhol

black_jack wrote:

Wow yes, We like the unborn foetus, lightly sauted, with a dry white wine sauce.

Yes liberals, we want to kill the unborn when it suits, liberals like
William Bennett, Education Secretary, to that famous liberal, Ronnie Regan who said recently

from cnn

The suggest that liberal "want" to kill children is a disgusting distortion of the truth. We don't. We just feel that a woman has a right to control her reproductive cycle and not some bloke in a dress.

I don't know where you're coming from with that Ronal Reagan crap. Maybe he forgot that one of those black babies could one day grow up to be a surgeon who'll save thousands of lives throughout his life.

No woman has the right to take somebody else's life. What you're essentially suggesting with this 'right to control her reproductive cycle' lark is that abortion is form of birth control. Maybe the woman should think before she acts and not **** around with human life.

black_jack wrote:

Facts links evidence, because the history of christian theocracys aren't happy joyous states, which promote religious, social and moral tolerance.

Yes you can and should, every year which gets us away from Sean "I'm a catholic first and a irishman second" Lemass years, is just fine by me.

So where do we get the morals that one should not kill, one should not engage in adultery, one should not steal? These fundamental morals just come out of thin air? Don't try and deny that our laws are not derived from Christianty.

black_jack wrote:

You mean the stigmatisation of homosexuality?

Well I find the sexual act of sodomising another man quite vile actually. The church has explicit rules on homosexuals and no matter what sins they may have committed they will always be welcome. If anything, you're stigmatising followers of Christ with your outbursts.

black_jack wrote:

You mean like freedom of the press and free expression, two concepts mother church have an issue with.

Since when was the Church a democracy? Anyway I don't see why you're so annoyed by what the church has to say seeing as you're obviously not a member. Hopefully one day you'll see the light.

black_jack

AndyWarhol wrote:

I don't know where you're coming from with that Ronal Reagan crap. Maybe he forgot that one of those black babies could one day grow up to be a surgeon who'll save thousands of lives throughout his life.

You said liberal "like" to abort foetus, heres an example of a republican, conservative advocating abortion, I defy you to find a link to any liberal who "likes" to abort, they just see it as a right.

No woman has the right to take somebody else's life. What you're essentially suggesting with this 'right to control her reproductive cycle' lark is that abortion is form of birth control. Maybe the woman should think before she acts and not **** around with human life.

Yes, and logic like this is why we had the X case.

So where do we get the morals that one should not kill, one should not engage in adultery, one should not steal? These fundamental morals just come out of thin air? Don't try and deny that our laws are not derived from Christianty.

Hmm, the concepts of ethics morality and justice, and democracy doesn't come from, oh, the greeks.

Well I find the sexual act of sodomising another man quite vile actually. The church has explicit rules on homosexuals and no matter what sins they may have committed they will always be welcome. If anything, you're stigmatising followers of Christ with your outbursts.

Really, current drafted papal bull is rejecting homosexuals as priests, and by welcome, you mean, provided they renounce who they are.

Since when was the Church a democracy? Anyway I don't see why you're so annoyed by what the church has to say seeing as you're obviously not a member. Hopefully one day you'll see the light.

Oh lord the moral high ground, "I forgive you misguided fool" and now you're saying the church inspires democracy, just doesn't practice it.

Well do what I say, not what I do, yeah theres one of jesus's mottos in action.

AndyWarhol

black_jack wrote:

You said liberal "like" to abort foetus, heres an example of a republican, conservative advocating abortion, I defy you to find a link to any liberal who "likes" to abort, they just see it as a right.

I wonder why they don't like it now. I'll give you a hint: because they're murdering an innocent child.

black_jack wrote:

Yes, and logic like this is why we had the X case.

Well two putting wrongs against each other: the raping of an innocent girl and killing of another innocent unborn baby doesn't make a right. As far as the law of Ireland is concerned, the unborn child is a human being and whilst it may be traumatic for a girl who was raped to give birth, it's even worse to kill a child.

black_jack wrote:

Hmm, the concepts of ethics morality and justice, and democracy doesn't come from, oh, the greeks.

Western Europe is of Roman origin.

black_jack wrote:

Really, current drafted papal bull is rejecting homosexuals as priests, and by welcome, you mean, provided they renounce who they are.

I wonder why the Church is kicking out the gays now? Over 80% of all the child sex abuse cases involved homosexual persons. It's a scourge that needs to be gotten rid of and the sooner Pope Benedict publishes the better.

black_jack wrote:

Oh lord the moral high ground, "I forgive you misguided fool" and now you're saying the church inspires democracy, just doesn't practice it.

Well do what I say, not what I do, yeah theres one of jesus's mottos in action.

The Church is not a democracy. And from a moral point of view what I'm sayin is that the Church is perfectly clear about its moral stance and as far as it's concerned there is only one truth. Don't try and deny that modern democracy isn't inspired by such teachings.

rsynnott

Could we please, please have some sort of "No abortion No Northern Ireland No US Imperialism" tag for threads? Otherwise, all threads will degenerate into this same thing.

Diorraing

A Nationalist party that isn't full of Socialists!?! Sign me up!!!

black_jack

AndyWarhol wrote:

I wonder why they don't like it now. I'll give you a hint: because they're murdering an innocent child.

What? Seriously, you're contradicting yourself now, you claim liberals like to kill babies when it suits them, and then, when shown a christian republicans advocating widespread abortion, and I ask you to find a liberal who says the same, you start spluttering, about now we don't like.

No we don't but we don't want a mother bringing a child into the world who doesn't want or doesn't feel able to take care of, because of her emotional, financial or social stigma involved.

Remember mother church gave us the magedline laundries.

Well two putting wrongs against each other: the raping of an innocent girl and killing of another innocent unborn baby doesn't make a right. As far as the law of Ireland is concerned, the unborn child is a human being and whilst it may be traumatic for a girl who was raped to give birth, it's even worse to kill a child.

For starts you're defining life as conception thats a handy definition for you it doesn't work for me. I think exposing a child to the psycholgical trauma of pregancy due to rape and the bringing of an unwanted person into the world is a greater crime.

Western Europe is of Roman origin.

And rome was founded by the greeks and both existed before christianity and had a moral and ethical framework which had the founding principles of laws and democracy before christianity came along.

I wonder why the Church is kicking out the gays now? Over 80% of all the child sex abuse cases involved homosexual persons.

Thats a statistic, so I assume you'll provide us with a source. I'd love to see were you came up with that fact. Most paedophiles are generally hetrosexuals.

It's a scourge that needs to be gotten rid of and the sooner Pope Benedict publishes the better.

yes yes love your fellow man, unless you're a scourge on humanity. Andy mate you've changed since your studio 51 days.

The Church is not a democracy. And from a moral point of view what I'm sayin is that the Church is perfectly clear about its moral stance and as far as it's concerned there is only one truth. Don't try and deny that modern democracy isn't inspired by such teachings.

So modern democracy is inspired and is based on an absolute theocractic rule by a dictatorship that cannot be questioned. Yes, the parrallels are erie between that and a modern accountable democracy.

AndyWarhol

black_jack wrote:

What? Seriously, you're contradicting yourself now, you claim liberals like to kill babies when it suits them, and then, when shown a christian republicans advocating widespread abortion, and I ask you to find a liberal who says the same, you start spluttering, about now we don't like.

No we don't but we don't want a mother bringing a child into the world who doesn't want or doesn't feel able to take care of, because of her emotional, financial or social stigma involved.

Remember mother church gave us the magedline laundries.

You can go on about democrate/republican liberal/conservative all you want, one thing is for sure, abortion is baby-killing is murder.

black_jack wrote:

For starts you're defining life as conception thats a handy definition for you it doesn't work for me. I think exposing a child to the psycholgical trauma of pregancy due to rape and the bringing of an unwanted person into the world is a greater crime.

Conception is a 'handy' definition? You've probably got some arbitrary cut-off point where it's ok to kill a baby. Do you agree with third trimester abortions where they essentially pull the kid out with a metal claw?

black_jack wrote:

And rome was founded by the greeks and both existed before christianity and had a moral and ethical framework which had the founding principles of laws and democracy before christianity came along.

That doesn't mean they were right. Were the cavemen right?

black_jack wrote:

Thats a statistic, so I assume you'll provide us with a source. I'd love to see were you came up with that fact. Most paedophiles are generally hetrosexuals.

"More than 80 per cent of the 11,000 alleged victims of abuse by Catholic priests in the US were young males."
Daily Telegraph, 23rd Sept. 2005

black_jack wrote:

yes yes love your fellow man, unless you're a scourge on humanity. Andy mate you've changed since your studio 51 days.

You see that's where you completely misunderstand me. I admire AW for his artwork, yes he happened to be gay, you're not suggesting that I agree with absolutely every little detail of somebody's life are you? I know gay people and I love them like I would any other human being.

black_jack wrote:

So modern democracy is inspired and is based on an absolute theocractic rule by a dictatorship that cannot be questioned. Yes, the parrallels are erie between that and a modern accountable democracy.

Yes, Truth cannot be questioned.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

black_jack

AndyWarhol wrote:

You can go on about democrate/republican liberal/conservative all you want, one thing is for sure, abortion is baby-killing is murder.

Well thats a compelling argument I'm convinced.

Conception is a 'handy' definition? You've probably got some arbitrary cut-off point where it's ok to kill a baby. Do you agree with third trimester abortions where they essentially pull the kid out with a metal claw?

So are you opposed to condoms and the pill?

That doesn't mean they were right. Were the cavemen right?

What seriously? greeks and romans had voting, laws similar to our own such as penatlies for corruption and adultary and murder. These laws predate christian infulences on their society so your point is moot. The suggestion that the ten commandments and christian beliefs are the cornerstone of our legal and moral system ignores so many fundamental aspects of how our society developed it could only come from a christian ostrich.

"More than 80 per cent of the 11,000 alleged victims of abuse by Catholic priests in the US were young males."
Daily Telegraph, 23rd Sept. 2005

Possibly the most loathsome and ignorant lie perpuated by catholics is the link between paedophilia and homosexuality

Some individuals assert sexual attraction to children to be a sexual orientation in itself. This is at odds with the current acceptance that the term sexual orientation only subsumes attraction to one's own sex, the opposite sex, or both. The proponents of such a view point out that homosexuality, heterosexuality and bisexuality are not normally associated with attraction to children and that children are physically and mentally different enough from adults to warrant categorising attraction toward them as a completely different sexual orientation.

Strictly speaking, a person is not necessarily a pedophile simply because he or she is sexually aroused by children; rather, a pedophile is defined as someone whose primary sexual attraction is toward children. In most cases, however, pedophilia is used in a looser sense to describe anyone found to be sexually aroused by children and is often diagnosed solely in the presence of fantasies or sexual urges on the subject's part—it need not involve sexual acts with children. In this regard, there is evidence that at least a quarter of all adult men may have feelings of sexual arousal in connection with children[2].

from wikipedia

You see that's where you completely misunderstand me. I admire AW for his artwork, yes he happened to be gay, you're not suggesting that I agree with absolutely every little detail of somebody's life are you? I know gay people and I love them like I would any other human being.

A post ago they were a scourge. Now you admire their art. Do you really want me to start fwding some links to Andy Warhols film work? Cause this is going to get funny. Really funny. Fast.

Yes, Truth cannot be questioned.

There is no absolute truth, the church would have us believe at times the earth was flat, everything circled around and we came from adam and eve 4,004 years ago. These "truths" were questioned in the scopes trial and by men like Copernicus and they were vilified by your church. You've pre enlightenment mind my friend. but don't worry one day I hope you'll see the light.

See suggesting that the church's opinion on what is and what isn't true is definitive is just laughable. Remind me does this pope think he's infallible? because a number of popes over the past 500 years have declared themselves the infallible spokesperson of god and a number of popes have recanted this position. So "the truth" about whether the pope is infallible, has been called into question by the popes themselves. So the truth can't be in question?

tim3115

Most paedophiles are generally hetrosexuals

Source??

billy the squid

tim3115 wrote:

I wasn't the one who brought up Hitler and co, billy did. Are you trying to lay something on me here? What exactly are you trying to 'prove'? History says that the holocaust concerned Jews, what have Jews got to do with this thread?

actually you brought up the reich by saying that you seen documentaries that had Germans on them saying that they would rather the reich had stayed. The question I asked you was how many Jews were shown to be praising the Reich, to which you answered none, claiming that they were a minority.

So what i would like to know is, does the fact that they were a minority, disqualify them their entitlement to happiness.

I would believe that the lack of enthusiasm for fascism in Germany amongst the jewish community has more to do with the treatment of jews during the rule of hitler, and not to do with the fact that there were no jews availible to take part in the documentary.

Oh, and the reason hitler was dragged into this thread is that the OPs idea of a political party is modeled on the Brownshirts of hitlers time, and the redshirts of Franco's time.

What about them?

Homosexuals are humans too. they are just as entitled to human rights and freedoms as everyone else.

rsynnott

AndyWarhol wrote:

"More than 80 per cent of the 11,000 alleged victims of abuse by Catholic priests in the US were young males."
Daily Telegraph, 23rd Sept. 2005

You've made an amazing leap of faith here, by assuming that paedophilia has anything in particular to do with conventional sexual orientation. Most paedophiles who molest male children are heterosexuals molesting their relatives; very often their own children.

black_jack

tim3115 wrote:

Source??

The wikipedia article I quoted, contains several articles by among others the APA.

But hey, any chance you'd provide a link to those nice germans who thought the reich was only fantastic.

Just kinda cynical reading the a book on the warsaw rising in 44, theres a few million poles who'd object to fond memories of the reich.

tim3115

But hey, any chance you'd provide a link to those nice germans who thought the reich was only fantastic.

What do you think the Reich actually represented?

Once you figure that much out, then it'll all become clear.

rsynnott

tim3115 wrote:

What do you think the Reich actually represented?

Once you figure that much out, then it'll all become clear.

A route to power for a cynical dictator.

Did I win?

Or were you expecting some babble about the importance of the Fatherland?

tim3115

The nation flourished during his reign as Fuhrer.

Cynical? Don't know where you're going with that.

billy the squid

107,000 dutch jews sent to death camps tutt tutt

http://www.expatica.com/source/site_article.asp?subchannel_id=19&story_id=24084&name=Dutch+Rail+apologises+for+collaboration+with+Nazis

is this what the reich was about?

billy the squid

tim3115 wrote:

The nation flourished during his reign as Fuhrer.

Cynical? Don't know where you're going with that.

Flourished? he lead his country into a war that lasted 6 years, cost millions of lives, and left his country in ruins. I wouldnt exactly call that a roaring success to be honest. if he wanted his country to flourish he would have stayed out of other countries like franco. Franco might have been a bastard but at least he gained longevity for fascism by minding his own business and not invading countries who wanted no part in his world view.

rsynnott

tim3115 wrote:

The nation flourished during his reign as Fuhrer.

Cynical? Don't know where you're going with that.

Cynical, as in he probably didn't believe all that nationalist rubbish he spouted; people with an IQ in the triple figures rarely do.

And if you call "fought and lost a huge war based on slave labour, killed 6 million people, and then was divided into bits for the next 40 years" flourished, then yes, it did.

tim3115

And if you call "fought and lost a huge war based on slave labour, killed 6 million people, and then was divided into bits for the next 40 years" flourished, then yes, it did.

Slave labour? Do you know how well off the German people were in the build up to the beginning of the war?

Oh, and there's a report coming out soon about that 6 million figured you're mentioning. Think the Russian's are doing that one, not 100% on it. Something about the Red Cross getting a few figures mixed up.


Oh, and don't be foolish in thinking that Germans these days don't look back to the days of the reich. Of course a number of them do. It's natural. But of course it's okay to look back to the days of Stalin and no one says a word. Haha

professore

AndyWarhol wrote:

Well if anything, they protect babies. Liberals like you would prefer to kill off the unborn if it suited.

One has to remember where 'the state' comes from; it has its basis in a christian moral framework that has very christian-like laws that are very unlike the states that have evolved in the middle east for example. The relationship between church and state is a complex one and you can't just have the idealised utopia that is a clean church-state decoupling. These days we all seem to have our own moral set, but in general, these morals are all very similar to a 'Christian doctrine'.

It's the grim reaper. We're all going to die one day you know.

Let's see: The Crusades, The Inquisition, turning a blind eye to the Holocaust, institutionalised abuse, have more kids until you die in childbirth, but the I AM 100% RIGHT EVERYONE ELSE IS WRONG attitude really gets under my skin. Islam has been historically far more tolerant and enlightened than christian religions especially catholicism. By the way, people have already set up parties like the one in this thread in the past - NSDAP commonly known as the Nazi party is one example, who based their propoganda machine on the Catholic church model. Thank God there are reasonable people on here as well. Why do people feel they need some sort of justification to respect their fellow man? And by the way I am anti-abortion because I think it is murder, NOT because some church tells me it is, and was raised a catholic. Don't put people in boxes.

democrates

I've let farts with more merit than the post starting this thread.
Clearly nothing more than a troll.

professore

tim3115 wrote:

They probably set up some ATM scam.

The Irish have done it all in other countries before.


And that's where the problem lies. That's why Ireland is of more benefit to people thousands of miles away than our own blood here. You not think it should be the other way round?

The Irish have done it all in other countries before.

Oh and spare me your inaccuracies.

The Irish have done it all and worse in other countries before. Where were you in the 80's? Probably in some cushy job sitting on your arse because of someone your dad knew while the rest of us were abroad making something of ourselves because "old ireland" didn't want people prepared to work hard. Fair play to these immigrants - they deserve to succeed if they work for it.

billy the squid

tim3115 wrote:

Slave labour? Do you know how well off the German people were in the build up to the beginning of the war?

Oh, and there's a report coming out soon about that 6 million figured you're mentioning. Think the Russian's are doing that one, not 100% on it. Something about the Red Cross getting a few figures mixed up.


Oh, and don't be foolish in thinking that Germans these days don't look back to the days of the reich. Of course a number of them do. It's natural. But of course it's okay to look back to the days of Stalin and no one says a word. Haha

how many of these germans were Jews?

rsynnott

tim3115 wrote:

Slave labour? Do you know how well off the German people were in the build up to the beginning of the war?

I'm refering to the vast amounts of slave labour that went into building the Nazi war machine. And that kept the economy going. Did you know more people died from building V2s than from V2 explosions? And that's just a small example.

tim3115 wrote:

Oh, and there's a report coming out soon about that 6 million figured you're mentioning. Think the Russian's are doing that one, not 100% on it. Something about the Red Cross getting a few figures mixed up.

Look, maw; we done been got ourselves a Holocaust denier!

And even if it wasn't 6million, does that make it in any way acceptable? No.

tim3115 wrote:

Oh, and don't be foolish in thinking that Germans these days don't look back to the days of the reich. Of course a number of them do. It's natural. But of course it's okay to look back to the days of Stalin and no one says a word. Haha

I'm sure some Germans are nostalgic for the Nazis, just as some Irish people are nostalgic for the Era of Catholic Madness that this country endured, and some South African people are nostalgic for Apartheid. They are hopefully a small minority.

black_jack

tim3115 wrote:

What do you think the Reich actually represented?

Once you figure that much out, then it'll all become clear.

How's that an answer? It doesn't even make sense.

Why don't you tell me what the "reich" "actually" represented, I'm sure fascists get misrepresented all the time.

The nation flourished during his reign as Fuhrer.

Part of that national growth came from slave labour

1937 - Buchenwald was built by the Nazis as a camp for political prisoners like German Communists and Social Democrats. Between 1937-8, Jews were added as Germany's anti-Semitic campaign was set in motion. With a population of 15,000 prisoners, the camp was one of slave labor, with German Communists at the top.

http://history.acusd.edu/gen/WW2Timeline/camps.html

The rest came from the build of the nation on a war footing, the growth was unsustainable without going to war. Is that what you mean by good.

Oh, and there's a report coming out soon about that 6 million figured you're mentioning. Think the Russian's are doing that one, not 100% on it. Something about the Red Cross getting a few figures mixed up.

A report by whom? How are you privy to it. I sincerely doubt you work for the red cross, saying theres a report coming up is not making an argument. What evidence do you have?

Oh, and don't be foolish in thinking that Germans these days don't look back to the days of the reich.

What seriously? Any chance you'll provide links to that documentary you mentioned?

Of course a number of them do. It's natural. But of course it's okay to look back to the days of Stalin and no one says a word. Haha

Pithy and pointless anyone here defending stalin? Justifying or defending one regieme's brutality by pointing to the other guys worse record is the last resort of of a desperate argument.

DublinWriter

Nevada wrote:

Protecting irish jobs and offering our people a referendum on continuing with the EU.

Daz reeeaight. We've gotten all the EU structural funds - quick lads do a runner! Ooops, but all our farmers are subsidised up to the gills by EU CAP funds - so there goes the farming sector for starters.

Nevada wrote:

Financially encouraging irish families to have more children

Good idea, but I think Heinrich Himmler bet you to it some years ago.

Nevada wrote:

Controlling immigration from eastern Europe

Damn those hardworking cheap Polaks, showing us up for the lazy paddies that we are!

Nevada wrote:

Offer 3 candidates in each constituency 1,2,3. We would have such a victory of representation that would remove all trace of FF/FG/PD/SF/LAB from Dail Eireann.

Only if you were standing for election in la-la-land. Having 3 candidates in any constituancy seriously splits up a party's vote. Even under a PR system, most people rarely give all their preference votes to the same party.

Nevada wrote:

We retake our parliament and our country spreading wealth to all 5 our million citizens.

...and spreading lollipops and gumdrops too? What feckin' wealth? Do you propose drilling for oil under Leinster House?

Nevada wrote:

This New, rich and equitable Ireland might even turn the heads of our Unionist brothers and sisters, Comrades all

Yeah, we'll just fill in a few potholes, drive around in shiny new BMW's and the Unionists will suddenly realise the errors of their ways, chuck(y) in their heritage and culture and decide that they don't want to be British anymore.

*sigh*

bonkey

DublinWriter wrote:

Yeah, we'll just fill in a few potholes, drive around in shiny new BMW's

How dare you, sir.

We shall be driving around in the results of our own car design and production efforts.

(Well, it makes as much sense as some of the reasoning* I've seen presented here)

jc

* may be an overly-charitable description