For Tuam The Bell Tolls

at | 29 Replies

Yesterday.

Griffith Avenue, Dublin 9.

Stan Erraught writes:

Fair comment like…

29 thoughts on “For Tuam The Bell Tolls

  1. Ron Dolan

    While it is a fair comment, its not a fair place to make it – its defacing someone else’s property.

    If you cannot respect this, then stay out of the debate, you bring nothing of value to it.

    Reply
      1. Pluto

        Exactly the place to make this statement. The NO side are outside Maternity wards with their disgusting pictures everyday.

        This question is simply stating the obvious: how can an organisation that put approx. 800 infants into a septic tank preach that ”life is sacred” and ”abortion is murder”?

        Reply
    1. Nilbert

      It’s exactly the place to make it. The church is still in complete denial about its responsibility and perpetuates the nasty misogyny that brought us to where we are.

      Reply
    2. Paul

      church shouldn’t be in the debate, charitable status and all. We’d have a ‘Repeal’ sign painted on the Project Arts Centre otherwise.

      the churches sign is vague enough though that it’s neatly sidestepping the rules, appropriate for who is putting up the sign really.

      Reply
  2. Diddles

    The church supporting pro lifers should have had more of this put to them over the past few weeks. Child protection – just ignore all the raping, deaths sales of children in the hands of the catholic church in Ireland over the past 100 years. Their argument bizarre when you think of it, maybe we’ve become so used to their behaviour that it’s normal?

    Reply
  3. Bruce_Wee

    It’s a fair comment and as Diddles points out, hasn’t been addressed at all in the argument. There are better ways to present it though then defacing a sign on private property. Having said that, it is any different from sides removing posters and “Pro-Livers” petitioning outside of Maternity hospitals when they were clearly informed this wasn’t allowed? Both sides are hell bent on their beliefs that rules have been broken and will be until the final tally is made.

    Spray painting on a sign with 4 letters is quite mild over all in the grand scheme of things.

    Reply
    1. Ron Dolan

      I am all for the debate as it is completely relevant but nobody takes your point seriously if you do it in such a way – what happens then is that the No side revert back to their usual victim/siege mentality with a genuine grievance.

      I am very proud of how civilised, honest and fair the Yes side have been in this debate. The No said should be ashamed of themselves. I know a few people who are No voters who are very much put out by the actions of the likes of McGuirk and the Sherlock clan and Waters as it they do not want to associated with that sort of rhetoric and likewise, I do not want associated with people who illegally graffiti peoples property.

      Reply
      1. Robert

        “the No side revert back to their usual victim/siege mentality with a genuine grievance.”

        Was it never thus?

        Reply
  4. newsjustin

    Say for a moment that the absolute worst things that the church and church bodies are accused of committing at Tuam are true. The very, very worst. All true. No mitigating factors at all. The very worst.

    How does that lend any support, credibility or justification for abortion of human foetuses, for any reason, up to 12 weeks?

    Reply
    1. Ron Dolan

      Hmmmmm……I am getting a word from the other side, its fuzzy but is coming into focus and that word is……

      ……………………………

      Sorry, couldn’t lock onto a clear signal, I guess we will just never know?

      *Shrugs shoulders and goes back dissecting Nokia 3250*

      Reply
    2. Repro-choice Bertie

      I think it’s more down to the hypocrisy of “stop going on about the babies in the septic tank and pay attention to our moral guidance” damaging their credibility rather than adding any extra credibility to the arguments for a Yes vote.

      Reply
    3. edalicious

      It doesn’t; it just highlights the Church’s complete lack of credibility in this debate. It highlights the absolute brass neck hypocrisy of an organisation that has repeatedly failed to protect real, living children and has repeatedly tried to hide it’s failings and repeatedly shirked its responsibilities to victims of members of the organisation.

      Reply
    4. Listrade

      I’d say it’s relevance is more on the nose.

      The 12 weeks is a mechanism for allowing for abortion in the case of rape and incest. A common message has been that we should love the child and not punish it for the sins of its father or for who it’s father is. Yet this is precisely what these places did.

      Even without the documented concerns about living conditions, health, mortality rate, abuse and selling babies while claiming they had died. These places were to punish the mother and child.

      “Illegitimate” “bastard” “rape baby” this was a whole industry set up on the basis that some people and some children actually are worth less than others. That was the USP of this place. Fallen women and bastards we can sell.

      So it’s not just the worst case scenario being relevant, it’s relevance is there no matter what.

      Reply
  5. TheRealJane

    This could well be associated with the referendum, but there’s a chance it isn’t. There are lots of secrets around and we just don’t know who knows what or has heard something.

    In any event, I don’t agree with defacing someone’s property but I think the church have been shockingly insulated from the consequences of their actions to the extent that they feel free to say that they don’t support mandatory reporting of child abuse.

    Reply
  6. Nigel

    It’s an oddly nightmarish and chilling image even though it’s also quite mundane. Not because of the referendum, it’s the anger at a monolithic institution, like something out of a dystopia

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *