Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

What are your views on Multiculturalism in Ireland? - Threadbanned User List in OP

Options
1572573575577578643

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 8,913 ✭✭✭Danno


    Good enough for a sizable proportion of them. Those who stir the sh*t in the pot should always be made lick the proverbial spoon.



  • Registered Users Posts: 23,695 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack



    Or just, y’know, use the other hand 😂


    Childish, I know, but your post reminded me of the first time I was invited to dinner by an Indian friend, it’s quite a ritual where all the food is laid out on a banana leaf instead of a plate. I think I put one or two of them off their dinner by trying to copy them with the whole eating with their fingers, but I was using my left hand. Bit of a no-no 😂

    Eating and the right-hand rule

    The biggest minefield of potential faux pas has to do with eating. This is usually done with the fingers, and requires practice to get absolutely right. Rule one is: eat with your right hand only. In India, as right across Asia, the left hand is for wiping your bottom, cleaning your feet and other unsavoury functions (you also put on and take off your shoes with your left hand), while the right hand is for eating, shaking hands and so on.

    https://www.roughguides.com/india/culture-etiquette/



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,201 ✭✭✭TomSweeney


    OK, ill tell you and save you the wait.

    It won't be.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,201 ✭✭✭TomSweeney


    Also let's not forget that the definition of "hate" here is quite loose...


    Hate crime could be something as trivial as calling someone fat...



  • Registered Users Posts: 23,695 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack



    No Tom it couldn’t. Did you not read in Strumms post which you quoted, what is required to constitute a hate crime? He listed the protected characteristics, and size, is not one of them.



  • Advertisement
  • Site Banned Posts: 12,341 ✭✭✭✭Faugheen


    Calling someone fat isn't a hate crime, ffs.

    Why are you lying?



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,574 ✭✭✭✭Snake Plisken


    Ireland is probably seen as an safe sanctuary for Islamic terrorists, I'd say tip of the iceberg.




  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Also let's not forget that the definition of "hate" here is quite loose...

    Eh, nope. Per the legislation its pretty clear as to what it is

    ... "hatred” means detestation, significant ill will or hostility, of a magnitude likely to lead to harm or unlawful discrimination against a person or group of people due to their association with a protected characteristic 

    And those characteristics are also clearly defined in the legislation

    The protected characteristics set out in the Hate Crime Bill are:

    • race
    • colour
    • nationality
    • religion
    • ethnic or national origin
    • sexual orientation
    • gender (including gender expression and identity)
    • disability


    https://www.justice.ie/en/JELR/Pages/Criminal_Justice_(Hate_Crime)_Bill_2021

    On the plus side its being improved to make the legislation more effective at securing prosecutions by replacing motivation tests with demonstration tests

    A motivation test for hate crime requires proof of someone’s subjective motivation for committing an offence - what was in their mind at that exact moment. However, the Minister has now concluded that motivation alone in proving hate crime offences can be difficult to establish and therefore might not result in a conviction.

    A demonstration test means simply that a perpetrator demonstrates hatred towards a member of a protected group/characteristic at the time of an offence being committed.

    This might involve, for example, the use of hostile or prejudiced slurs, gestures, other symbols or graffiti at the time of offending. In practice, it means that by using a demonstration test, the prosecution does not necessarily have to get inside the mind of a perpetrator to prove the crime but can use a demonstration test as an alternative method of proving a crime committed is a hate crime within the provisions of the legislation.

    I think you will agree that this is a good thing as we'll start to see a lot more convictions for hate crimes.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,144 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Hate speech is far too vague a term and far too easily swayed to the feelings of permanently offended, a particular court on the day, or a society of a given time. They're not far off blasphemy laws. They're also very much in the eye of the beholder.

    There are any number of contributors to this thread who would be only too happy to have it closed and any discourse silenced and are not happy campers that it even exists. They see it as "hate speech". Even more so because their arguments have turned out to be remarkably lacklustre. When Accepted Truths are so easily poked it does suggest they're not so easily defensible and maybe aren't the truths their believers like to believe, so silence is the answer. Like the religious and blasphemy. As George Bernard Shaw once said: All great truths begin as blasphemies. A society that seeks to control speech in ever more nebulous ways is not on a good path. Censorship is always a slippery slope.

    And the "Right On" love such laws but even here they may fall afoul of the same laws they clamour for. The same "Right On" usually have a bee in their bonnet about Israel and the Palestinians and are much more pro the latter. A few years back in France a couple of dozen pro Palestinian activists were arrested and fined 40k under the their hate speech laws for wearing tee shirts at a rally that had "Boycott Israel, long live Palestine" printed on them and handing out fliers that said buying Israeli goods was helping fund crimes against humanity. It was charged as being anti semitic and after appeals the highest court in the land upheld the sentences.

    If someone says that male circumcision for non medical reasons is genital mutilation and should be outlawed. Is that anti semitic, anti Islam? I guarantee there would be some Jews and Muslims and others where this bronze age nonsense is in play would consider it "hate speech" and would seek to gag it through the courts.

    In the US one side see BLM as hate speech towards the police and others, the other side see calling BLM hate speech as hate speech itself.

    Of course the happy clappy naive think it'll stop all those tewwible wacists and the damn near non existent boogyman of the Irish "alt right" but are too happy clappy and naive to consider that when all the tewwible wacists and the half dozen alt right types are silenced the machine keeps trundling along looking for offence.

    And Minister McEntee "considered" eh? I seriously doubt she's capable of much consideration at all, beyond empty posturing on social media. She got in on the back of the usual backward dynastic parish pump cute hoorism bollocks that has poisoned the Irish political landscape for far too long. Coveney another of the type. It was only resting in my ansbacher account yer honour.

    So no, I do not consider it a "good thing" as I look at the wider issues that can come in its wake.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Hmm, it's strange that you seem to be so triggered by hate crime legislation

    Oh well

    Personally I welcome this updated legislation as it allows less to get away with such crimes on what was something very difficult to ascertain.

    Now it will be the case that such crimes will be judged on the actions of the perpetrator rather than what they were thinking about.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,144 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Nope. Not "triggered", it's called cogent debate on the topic with reasoning and examples. Though I could see how you might be confused by such and just keep peddling your happy clappy mantra in response. It's akin to watching the three chord and he's out guitarist in a folk mass group. "Kumbayah my lord" and so forth.

    In any case being "triggered" is more the permanently offended's remit. And again you avoid points raised, either because you quite simply don't understand them, don't want to understand them because it questions your faith, or a little from column A and a little from column B.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Perhaps we'll see some cases resulting from this

    RTE news : Asylum seekers moved from facility over safety concerns





  • Registered Users Posts: 8,433 ✭✭✭jmreire


    Not to mention you take off your shoes on entering the house..



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,609 ✭✭✭Tonesjones


    "20 people" and "a group of asylum seekers " are some of the descriptions given to the group.

    Another more thorough description is 20 men from Sub Saharan Africa . Just what the doctor ordered.

    I say send 5 to Dalkey, 5 to Ranelagh 5 to Ballysbridge and the remaining 5 can go down to Michael Martins home town.

    Finglas has enough multiculturalism.


    Please support the official "Direct Provision for Dalkey " page.

    https://mobile.twitter.com/d4asylum



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,574 ✭✭✭✭Snake Plisken


    This clown trying to shame locals in Funglas any local concerns it's Far Right




  • Registered Users Posts: 1,116 ✭✭✭lmao10


    If it's the people I'm thinking about then I personally love nothing more than seeing them protesting. It's doing nothing other than getting sympathy for the people they are protesting against. Complete repellants to the public and the lack of awareness actually makes them an asset to the other side. You'd almost think they were paid off controlled opposition. A smooth, slimey, sharp, quick witted and intelligent Nigel Farage - they are not.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,372 ✭✭✭Higgins5473


    The new go to patronising put down when you are completely devoid of or incapable of making any type of decent counter argument or rebuttal…”you’re triggered”.

    “Triggered” would suggest someone is making a sudden strong emotional reaction which is somewhat irrational. There is none of that in the lengthy post you are responding to. As I say, replying by saying they are triggered is a cop out, but in your own reply it’s not even used correctly, it’s just a patronising insult. Try using it sparingly and accurately, it’s tired and overused these days.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,609 ✭✭✭Tonesjones


    House the Irish first! In Ireland of all players. That's shocking



  • Registered Users Posts: 41,062 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,609 ✭✭✭Tonesjones




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 34,088 ✭✭✭✭The_Kew_Tour


    It's so funny reading your posts.

    Your about as consistent in your arguments as Bertie Ahern was on Tax dodgers.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Rebuttal? Against what, the argument that a civil rights movement is hate speech?



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,616 ✭✭✭maninasia


    Supposedly it was 70 single men with plans to shove 220 in there.


    No consultation with the community. The community rightly told them to get fucked.


    Screw the HSE and the government and their social dumping on the Northside of Dublin.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Ahh you see, for some such as Anna, it's racist to place any higher priority on the Native white group as opposed to foreign groups. In spite that it's the norm throughout the remainder of the world, I don't see too many demands for them to change their policies.

    Calling out "racism" is the way to dismiss topics without engaging and countering them. The lazy way to dismiss your post, and little different from DaCors need to ask if posters are triggered.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,913 ✭✭✭Cordell


    In the civilised world there are things like soap and running water so you can wash both left and right hands. Not to mention extraordinary discoveries like eating utensils. They should go with the times and proper behaviour, this cultural traits belong in the past. Especially if they don't live in India anymore.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,609 ✭✭✭Tonesjones


    Well I don't know anything about that poster as i have never had any conversation with them but sometimes I find some of those who call for inviting in people from all over and placing them ahead of the natives are people who feel like they never fitted in themselves throughout their lives. No sense of community etc and maybe hold some resentment because of this. By inviting in others they hope they will find their place and at the same time ruin the sense of togetherness and community that they see others taking for granted.

    It's a destructive behaviour. They don't actually care about refugees or asylum seekers. At the back of it all its selfish.

    Most are just people who want to help others but there are definitely some with a twisted agenda



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,144 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Me. Earlier: And again you avoid points raised, either because you quite simply don't understand them, don't want to understand them because it questions your faith, or a little from column A and a little from column B. Yep, on the evidence so far seems pretty accurate alright.

    It's like the unquestioning evangelical Christian who when asked about the wider theological points of their faith, doesn't understand the question so has no answer, or chooses to ignore the question because they have no answer and comes back with the dead eyed smile and Jesus is love! and talk of heresy.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,144 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    As I've noted before, if you consider such posts and beliefs through the prism of the evangelical they start to make sense. If you're not a true blue believer you're not to be debated, because that could expose the holes in the evangelical's argument, so it's far easier to shout heresy and the like. Throwing racist! around achieves much the same purpose.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    In the US one side see BLM as hate speech towards the police and others, the other side see calling BLM hate speech as hate speech itself.

    Hmm



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,144 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Good Lord...

    Again. And you actually doubled down demonstrating it.

    Looks like I'm going to have to break out the crayons here. Forget what position one might take on the BLM movement* but it has been criticised by quite a few for some of the pronouncements of some of it's supporters and cheerleaders towards the White population, wider society and the police. Pronouncements that if they were aimed at Black people or organisations would almost certainly fall under the umbrella of "hate speech" depending on viewpoints and the court involved.

    "Hate speech" is too subjective and vague a framework to work within and definitions change over time and viewpoint and culture and politic. It also risks being very one sided. If a crime is commited against a Black person by a White and another crime is commited against a White person by a Black, which is more likely to be framed under "hate crime"? Which victim(or their legal team, or the media) is more likely to frame it as a "hate crime"?





    *I personally broadly support the sentiment as clearly in the US Black lives matter less in so many areas of that culture, the divisive tactics far less so.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



Advertisement