Acting Taoiseach Enda Kenny and Father John Gilligan leaving St Andrew’s Church Westland Row, Dublin for the Dáil Mass last month
We either dismantle this inherited caliphate now or another generation will be kept on their knees with their heads bowed.
Frilly Keane writes:
This is how our Sean Comhairle starts his day’s work. All Rise (you too btw)
“Direct, we beseech Thee, O Lord,
Our actions by Thy holy inspirations and carry them on by Thy gracious assistance;
That every word and work of ours may always begin from Thee,
And by Thee be happily ended;
Through Christ our Lord. Amen.
I know this is not news to ye, so save yere month old horns. But Vinnie had a go at this the other night and I couldn’t stop myself from roaring at Damien English. Although, being a Meath man may have had sum’ting to do with the abuse heard from my front room. (There is a specially designated bile tank in reserves for that crowd.)
I’m dipping inta a’bitta paraphrasing now, so grab those girdles in case they tighten inta blistering wedges, anyway the gist of English’s answer to Vinnie’s poke about the prayer was ‘Sur I’m a Cat’alick, it doesn’t botter me.’ And that FFsaker dope Troy beside him said the same’ish.
Neither of them, and both probably in Junior Minsterials by this time next week, even shrugged. They were too thick to move outta the slow lane or even smell the toxic gases their daily prayer deposits in our Dáil Chambers.
Why shouldn’t removing this archaic backward nonsense be the first order of business of the next Dáil session?
And at this stage I don’t give a day old battered sausage about who’s sitting where since it’s potentially the only vote that can attract supporting yays from Independents, untangle the raggle taggle of lefties, and un-abstain the handful of Labour votes.
I know all this talk has been done and heard before. I know this has been hammered into a flat finish by others with far more cred and audience numbers than me. But I’m following this bandwagon now. And I’m not shifting.
By saying and doing nothing about it, makes us NO DIFFERENT to Ted Cruz supporters. We’re the very last ones that should be sniggering at his crowd. And Trump’s. And Palin’s. To anyone reading this, IS THAT WHERE YOU WANT TO BE?
Prayers, at any time of the day and night, and of all scriptures, hats, beads, crosses, cribs, statues, grottos, holy places and relics (and their associated bong bong bong call to prayers) have to be removed from all aspects of our working and public life, and that includes our national broadcaster.
Put that Sunday Mass on YouTube, and let me watch Dallas repeats instead. Control and design your own Sabbath. I think that’s a far better plan for us all.
It’s not like Ireland, of all places, doesn’t know the permanent damage religious divides have cratered across this island.
It’s not like we are unaware of the uselessness of it.
It’s not like we are still living ignorantly under the Catholic choke of abuse, secrecy, control and power.
It’s not like prayers are going to sort out the housing situation or get people off hospital trollies or put remedial teachers back into schools.
It’s not like prayers are going to get taxes out’ve the wining and dining Flannerys of our society or get even get them to do an honest day’s work.
So why would parliamentary rules insist that our politicians start their day’s work for us with a we beseech Thee, O Lord. Maintaining it automatically designates us as a Catholic Caliphate.
Was it for this? Was it really for this?
If Diarmuid Martin has any day’cency he should insist that a required devotion to his crowd is removed from Dáil Eireann.
It’s bad enough that some of our citizens are still denied access to their schools, so we either dismantle this inherited caliphate now or another generation will be kept on their knees with their heads bowed.
And unless Christ comes back and looks and talks like David Ginola he’s not my Lord.
I would propose sunrise and sunset email attacks on all your local recently electeds’ but here in Dublin South Central I’d only be wasting my time, so I can hardly expect anyone else to do what I say so.
This attempt to dismantle top down secularism has to be launched nationally.
There needs to be a national movement to remove the religion tick box from all public life, services, and application forms, qualifying conditions, criterias and data collections.
If we extract the requirements for declaring our religious observation and choice of faith publically, Ireland might finally be steering towards some sense.
The same applies to organisations with a religious ethos and mandate. Why should they continue to have favourable tax treatments while we bitch about Google and Facebook not paying theirs?
Please don’t talk about Blasphemy laws in yere comments and comebacks lads. Just tell me what I need to do to be actually charged with a Blasphemy crime; I would happily pay my own fines and legals if religion, prayers and whatever yere having yourselves were left to yourselves and not on my Census Form. (As for wanting to know my ethic origin, loud and proud baby, the answer they’re getting is REBEL!)
Until then, shove yere centenary celebrations, indulgent debates, book launches and speeches until we actually have an equal independent secular society where we are not obliged to bless ourselves because we’re told to.
Amen.
Frilly keane’s column appears here every Friday. Follow Frilly on Twitter: @frillykeane
Get a better writer to do this stuff instead of wasting an opportunity on this egocentric rambling nonsense.
Better or worse than Una Mulally?
close your mouth you person of limited intelligence.
:)
Seconded. She/He is the worst writer in Irish media, and I’ve read Barry Egan’s stuff. Please retire this person BS and recruit someone who writes in English.
I don’t give a poo what prayers are said.
I’m more interested in why TDs are getting paid for 6 weeks without having to go to work.
Also, I notice that the TD expenses for Feb 2016 haven’t been published yet, it can only be that they don’t want the taxpayer to see that they are claiming full expenses for 2 days in the Dail.
There’s an article worth writing broadsheet, not this unimportant religious crap.
You can care about two things at once.
(CATHOLIC) prayers said in a parliamentary chamber of a republic is bad enough, but the same chamber that indemnified the catholic church against damages for raping thousands of children and enslaving thousands of women puts it beyond the pale.
It sets a tone and belies an attitude.
Fair point Ahjayzis. I suspect that the protection of pedos extends way beyond the church in this country.
I read in today’s paper that the Gardai are excavating several dead deer somewhere in Ireland. Meanwhile there are hundreds of dead babies in a field in Galway and no action has been taken.
Absolutely. But the thing is if a swimming organisation were found guilty it’d be gone in the morning. And the state wouldn’t cap it’s contributions to redress. The church hangs on, and hangs on to our schools and hospitals while it does so while we pick up the tab for both the state and religious responsibilty.
The least we can do is make our state religion-neutral in response so it never happens again.
As Dan Savage says, if people were raped in McDonalds as frequently as they were raped in church, every McDs in the country would be in flames.
PREACH!
“That every word and work of ours may always begin from Thee”
Get. Fupped. The words and work of our parliament should begin from the people they represent, not the fairy in the sky some of them believe in or his civil service on earth – the government of a foreign state.
We had a Taoiseach in the past who pledged his first loyalty to the King of Rome or whatever the fupp, this has no place in a democracy.
Totes.
Get rid of the poxy angelus while you’re at it Fillzer, please.
no place for this in the Dail, whichever kirk ye howl wi
“By saying and doing nothing about it, makes us NO DIFFERENT to Ted Cruz supporters. We’re the very last ones that should be sniggering at his crowd. And Trump’s. And Palin’s. ”
Now, I agree with the premise that the Dail should be rid of such religious overtones and I agree with the separation of church and state.
But that quoted text is Bullpoo. Utter nonsense of the highest order.
Its not even close to reality and if you utter, write or think it in earnest you are an idiot.
Saying a prayer before proceedings is not the same as advocating or enacting policies of racism, xenophobia and religious intolerance and not acting to stop said prayer being said is even less so.
the truth is always hard to accept
especially for the slowest and most inbred among us
You’re not that inbred
I’m not the idiot here C
and to say that quote is nonsense is just ignorance on your part
Having our elected politicians stand for a prayer before a Dáil session is called to order is exactly what Cruz and Co would vote for.
Get a grip, Jesus. Oh maybe I shouldn’t say Jesus, I seen what your talking about and the answer he gave vinne, it was quick fire but honest answer. If gave a political answer and rambled on and basically lied you’d still moan. It’s like at 6pm and we hear the angelus, it’s now just tradition. I one i bloody like. And no I’m not some old bible basher.
its my tradition so I get to impose it on you using a public media utility
got it
Religion of any kind should have no place in the political arena.
I agree. get rid of all that crud.
However…Frilly, I get that you’ve an aesthetic or whatever going on but really, is it easier to type “day’cency” than just spell it correctly?
Yeah the whole colloquial thing is more annoying than anything, takes away from the the rest.
If it’s harder to read it’s not having the desired effect of making it chattier and less formal.
+1 I fully agree with Frilly’s points here, but that was painful to read.
I disagree with you all on this one
I can understand Frilly perfectly and feel she speaks the language of the common woman
I’m not really at all put out by the style she uses – look at the substance
this is her best column yet by a country mile
It’s not, it’s annoyingly written and egocentric to continue in this childish refrain.
so why do you keep doing it?
It’s like something out of Ireland’s Own. Sez Frilly.
oh bravo sir. Bravo. there’s few of us *get* your reference. I’ll have a half crown on Bertie having another memory rush though…
I don’t understand why people get so worked up about this? Does this personally affect you? What happened to religious tolerance? Typical hypocrisy from the raging atheist left.
Does it affect me, personally? Not in any material way that I can see. However, it pisses me off mightily that elected representatives (paid from my taxes), start their days work by chanting an invocation to an imaginary sky fairy. I’m all for religious tolerance. They can say their prayers in the morning while brushing their teeth.
It is not intolerant to object to a state religion.
When there is a state religion, the duty of tolerance lies most heavily on that state religion – minorities have no choice but to tolerate the majority, it falls on the majority to respect the minority’s right to exist alongside it with a parity of esteem.
Given our history you’d think it’d be uncontroversial to say stuff like this.
When the state is secular and separated from the church, everyone is on an equal playing field, nobody loses out. When one religion is established by the state, children jump queues to get into schools if they’ve been anointed by that religion.
So respectfully, I’m not going to tolerate being a second class citizen, thanks.
“children jump queues to get into schools ”
Surely your concern should be more about the fact that there are queues to get school places than the mechanism the school deploys to assign places.
My nephew is in 5th class, one of 38 pupils. Now there’s an issue worth writing about.
Surely I can be concerned about two or more things?
If it was on the basis of parents skin colour and not parents faith would the *real* problem be that there’s not enough schools for black kids but sure it’s grand whites get first pref?
Listen to yourself.
I said your concern should be MORE about lack of school places, not that you shouldn’t be concerned about admission rules.
Listen to me :-)
Sectarianism is a pretty big issue. School places can be built – to abolish sectarianism in public services is a much harder ask.
I’ll tolerate religious bullcrap outside of the corridors of power – thanks
Well, if we were to be really tolerant, why not have a Muslim prayer, a Jewish prayer, a Hindu prayer and a Buddhist prayer? That would probably end up taking up a lot of time but hey, if the point here is fairness, let’s be fair.
Or is it only intolerant when the opposition is directed against a religion you identify with?
It’s intolerant to object to one religion dominating everything.
Deference masquerading as tolerance, and unquestioning deference to our holy men can only lead to good things, right?
What could possibly go wrong, ahjayziz? And who could foresee it happening? Nothing and no one, that’s for damn sure!
But the real question is if they were in a mosque (not a Catholic church) saying Muslim or Jewish prayers, would you be screaming about secularism then? I don’t think you would, for fear of being branded a racist or anti-semite. Hypocrisy.
That’s the real question is it?
wow – some leap of illogic there
you’re a brain impaired – just out for the day are wel?
So no response then?
Tom, keep up pet.
I’d have as much if not more of a problem with Islamic or Jewish prayers. Prayers of one faith opening a session of a parliament meant to represent all of the people are wrong.
I mean, obviously, if I’ve a problem with a state religion dominating there’s even less argument for less representative state superstitions.
That isn’t the ‘real’ question at all. That is a strawman.
Tom, I’m talking about the Dáil prayer, which, as I understand it, takes place in the Dáil, not in a Catholic church. So if you’re arguing to keep the Catholic/Christian prayer, are you also arguing for the introduction of prayers of the other religions I listed?
And if that “So no response then?” was directed at me, cool your jets there, Thomas. Some of us are trying to pretend to work.
So getting back to the main issue – it seems that many secularists are anti-christian. If many TDs were Jewish or Muslim, and were saying Jewish/Muslim prayers in the Dail chamber, I do not think that the secularists would be actively denouncing this. I think they feel me comfortable bashing Christianity but not other religions.
Your completely made-up counterpoint is certainly conclusive.
That’s a fairly impressive persecution complex you have there, Thomas. You a catholic by any chance?
Yeah, that’s not the main point at all so much as it’s the point you’ve sandwiched in there to detract from the fact that you missed my original point.
It’s not anti-Christian to want to see prayer removed from the Dáil and kept to the appropriate arenas. In fact, is it not more anti-democracy to insist that your brand of religion and your alone is the one that should feature in the house of the government in a country?
You still haven’t mentioned if you’d be in favour of adding prayer of other religions into the start of Dáil proceedings, so apologies if I’ve making assumptions here.
Am not Catholic and would agree to allowing all the different prayers being said. But I’m wondering how loud the secularists would be then?
*yours
*I’m
Confound it!
I think no prayers at all would be preferable, except for personal observances.
Well that’s a bit of an unnecessary thought experiment then, isn’t it?
But for most of the secularists I know, they advocate for the removal of all prayer as they don’t deem it appropriate to modern Ireland. The only reason they’ve focused on Catholic prayer is because, really, there’s no other prayer to object to.
The really long history of Church influence on the state and legal proceedings against criminals within the Church may cause some to be louder in their opposition, but I think that history strengthens their argument rather than negates it. Do you not agree?
Well I’m not going to weigh into the Church’s disastrous reputation in this country and elsewhere. The secularists are in some ways justified in their shouting. But I am still of the belief that they would not be hollering so loudly if there were prayers of other religions being said. If half the cabinet was Muslim, I don’t think there would be the same fierce opposition to prayers five times per day, simply for fear of racial bigotry. This to me seems contradictory.
So you take more issue with an extremely unlikely “what if?” scenario than one that’s playing out right now? It seems a bit unfair to criticise secularists for what their reaction *might* be in a different scenario. How does that detract from their real and viable objections in actual reality?
It reads like you oppose secularism and secularists just on principle.
Tom, grab a fupping dictionary. Secularism is for separation of church, mosque, synagogue and state. In Ireland it is catholicism’s unofficial establishment that’s at issue so it makes sense that catholicism is mentioned more, doesn’t it?
When I argue for the disestablishment of catholicism I’m not arguing FOR the establishment of Scientology.
I am in fair of some detachment of church and state, particularly in relation to social issues and the admissions of places in schools. But I think some presence of the church and Christianity should still be encouraged, particularly the teaching of Christian beliefs in schools.
Why? What’s so special about your fairy story?
Well, my particular fairy story (Christianity, and not specifically catholicism) promotes peace. Strip that away, and what will happen? Are you one of these scientology folk who believes humans have some kind of ‘innate’ ability not to ravage each other?
Yes, the world needs more religion to be a peaceful place. No christian, muslim or jew has ever harmed anybody.
Morality and ethics and good citizenship exist independently of religion, which only divides people. Sectarianism has damaged enough lives in Ireland, let’s stop dividing our five year olds up based on the superstitions of their parents.
Good religious people are good people because they’re good people, bad religious people are bad people because they’re bad people, same goes for people with no religion. Which brand of god you have in the morning doesn’t come into it.
The person who teaches your child that earthquakes happen as a result of tectonic collisions as facts backed with evidence should NOT be the person who teaches them that a middle-eastern carpenter was the son of the creator of the universe as fact with no evidence.
Well said.
Amen.
Tom, Bonobo monkey’s don’t kill each other, Chimps do, both are our closest biological relatives, we’re halfway between them on the visciousness scales.
People who are taught empathy, compassion and decency as children grow up into empathetic, compassionate and decent adults.
To reduce it all to people being good becuase they fear divine punishment is pretty gross. I’ve never had belief in the supernatural, nor have my parents, I was raised atheist, and I treat people as I’d like them to treat me. Have some ‘faith’ in yourself.
A load of hear-say. Justice system derives from Christianity. No evidence that morality and ethics exist independently of religion. You were raised in a society the evolved on Judoe Christian foundations.
What utter, utter, brainwashed rubbish.
If our justice system derived from Christianity, a confession would elicit a full pardon.
Please cite your sources here. Building regulations, which I deal with, originated with Hammurabi for fupps sake. Much comes down to us from Rome in fact, especially on the continent. Was Pagan Rome in 300AD any more violent or immoral than Christian Rome in 1300AD?
Civilization existed for thousands of years before the death cult that became Christianity stepped out of it’s cave and cobbled together a bunch of plagiarised foundation myths, all scientific progress in the last thousand years has been in spite of it, not because of it. And advancement in rights for women, children, gays, have been opposed by it. It has been no friend to democracy or democratic movements. It preaches against settled scientific fact to this day. Our society exists as free, open and compassionate as it is in spite of Christianity’s deathly pull backward.
Any education system that teaches either truths with no evidential basis or that truths are unknowable and that daddy and mammy’s god is the one true god is child abuse.
“Well, my particular fairy story (Christianity, and not specifically catholicism) promotes peace. Strip that away, and what will happen?”
ha.
Without the prayer, how would our TDs behave in the Dail?
The digs and the sneering at each other would be worse without the prayer?
Actually the real question is what if Santa Claus came in a helicopter, not a traditional sleigh cart?
Where would your god be then?
If the Dail was in a mosque or a synagogue? What, on a day trip?
Forgive me (no pun intended) I thought they were in some Dail onsite church.
Will they get ice creams after? Because I’m not comfortable with my taxes going to pay for 99s for politicians. They can have a plain cone, no flake, and that’s my final offer on it.
Ah, now THAT would be an ecumenical matter.
They each get a pack of Holy Rolos.
*stands up and applauds Nigel*
I tip my hat to you, sir. My taxes can buy you a 99 any time. And two packets of Holy Rolos.
Holy Polos, shurely?
Most catholics braying for religious tolerance mean tolerance for their religion only. Freedom of religion also means freedom from religion and freedom from invoking invisible sky fairies to guide everyone in their day.
perfect summary. thank you.
“Does this personally affect you?” – it does indeed. 8th amendment is implicitly based on God injecting soul on event of human egg fertilization, rendering pregnant women ‘untermensch’. If ‘mensch’ at all.
But if you’re male, than your amazement at “why people get so worked up about” is totally understandable, because males are given choice of not declaring or caring about association with a pregnancy they trigger. Totally up to you. You were granted a pro-choice option and women got no-choice option.
Religions belong to temples, sunday schools and private homes. And I have no problem modestly contributing to sunday schools of all religious flavors through taxation. Just keep it contained to interested groups.
The only thing a pretendy catholic really believes is that anyone with a problem with pretendy catholicism is abnormal and just looking for attention.
Reading Frilly’s prose is like trying to marshal a swarm of bees into a straight line.
since you like your bitta’ masochism Mani I’m going to take that as a compliment
Don’t.
oh
but I will
again
and again
.. with your eyeballs.
There’s a ‘Dáil Mass’???
That’s nuts.
Surely the government is a non-domination institution?
Course it is yeah. There’s also a mass for barristers to mark the start of the law term. They at least have the option of a Church of Ireland service – due to demand no doubt.
I’ve always enjoyed the convergence of the C of I St Michan’s and RC St Michan’s congregations for the start of term booze-up at the Inns. I recon they race through the services so as not to be last to the free drink afterwards. It’s like the Dave Allen sketch about two funerals heading to the same churchyard.
Ha. Loved that sketch. If only Irish weddings would speed up a bit. Thirsty oul work.
It’s a mutli-faith thing, with a token humanist.
In a Catholic church.
I think id prefer to see a LJG post than this utter rubbish
To the extent I can read this self-indulgent faux person of the people rant, I fully agree.
+1
Good point, horribly made.
+1,000,000
Could do without the colloquial text though. Takes away from the valid points being made.
…the thing that struck me about the clip shown by Vinb of TDs standing for the Dail prayer was how reverential Gerry Adams was…head bowed and arm clasped against his chest…wtf
Nornies are all like that.
Wouldn’t hurt a fly!
Or any other being with 10 offspring… Oops.
The first 5 words of the much lauded proclamation are “In the name of God ”
and again near the bottom of the page:
“We place the cause of the Irish Republic under the protection of the Most High God, Whose blessing we invoke upon our arms,”
there is no god, and not much of a republic either
Ollie, in fairness to the proclamation it is just a fairly vague ‘god’ – so any/all religious can get behind it and substitute their own god in. it may be an issue for some atheists.
The Dáil prayer specifically mentions “Christ” so is definitely only for the Christians – it explicitly excludes lots of people.
This is honest criticism…have a look at Stephen Pinker’s book ‘A Sense of Style’. It can really help your writing and let you communicate your ideas clearly. Without it, your – no doubt interesting – ideas will be lost, remain incomprehensible and lack any sense of conviction. Perhaps you’re going for a Bertie Ahernesque ‘man of the people’ way of communicating, but it didn’t work for him and it’s not working for you. good luck.
…talking about books…James Joyce uses regional accents and idiom throughout Finnegans Wake…honestly
Yes, true. He also lacks punctuation at the end of Ulysses and it doesn’t make it particularly easy to read. Joyce wrote modernist fiction and plays with literature and its forms expertly. Frilly’s piece, however, is very different and attempts to make an argument about church and state (I think). Political commentary that incorporated the formal strategies of modernist fiction would be interesting, but I don’t think that’s what is happening here.
I think it’s fairly uniformly accepted that James Joyce had talent…
I think its fairy uniformly accepted that James Joyce wrote fiction
I’m just a bloggard
I’m not looking for prizes
or tax relief
n’stuff like that
stop comparing us ffs
in fact it worked very well for Bertie Ahern – he was elected as Taoiseach 3 times
what the hell are you on about?
Yes, I thought about that after I posted. But then I suspect that Frilly may not have been happy with a direct connection to Bertie and his approach to public speaking (I could be wrong). I suppose Frilly and Bertie’s approach differs in terms of the commitment to speaking/writing like that. I could understand Bertie (even with all those umms and ahhs), but I can’t understand Frilly, for the most part.
With all due respect Farquart
your comment, and I appreciate your advice btw, and I know you mean well, but your comment suggests I do this for a living
I don’t get remunerated
I’m not relying on Friday Frill Bit to get me on telly or the wireless or into the press
or to get me elected
or to get me some academic promotion
or to host images of myself or grow my professional practice
this isn’t my livelihood nor does my livelihood depend on it
And I can write in plain speak. It just happens that when I’m dossing about here, ON MY OWN TIME, this is the language that it comes in.
I’m not sitting in a College funded Office or Union building or in a Leinster House facility to contribute here
Nor am I on an employers time. So whether it works for me or not is neither here or there. Because when I get tired of the Frilly Keane stuff or get hobbled in an unfortunate way. I’ll just come back with another handle. I’ve plenty of them.
Fair enough. As I said, it’s honest criticism and comes from a genuine desire to understand what you are arguing. You obviously have an opinion about these matters but if you write in an opaque manner, that opinion gets lost. It’s like an actor muttering on stage, it could be the greatest performance on earth but if you can’t hear them, who would know or care? Don’t get me wrong, Merceille (I can’t remember the spelling off hand) writes very clearly, but I can’t stand his stuff, but at least I get far enough to form a response (not that my response really matters).
“but at least I get far enough to form a response”
You do? Jaysus, fair play to ya. Frilly is probably the only writer who could make Merceille seem coherent.
“I’m not relying on Friday Frill Bit to get me on telly or the wireless or into the press
or to get me elected or to get me some academic promotion…I’m not sitting in a College funded Office or Union building or in a Leinster House facility to contribute here”
N’awful bang of d’aul jealousy there. Using BS to get them elected huh? Who did it elect? Anyone? Anyone at all like?
You don’t know peoples’ motivations for writing on here. Could be the same as yours.
Getting back to the post the other day where you gave Anne-Marie a bit of a going-over, only prompted by some other woman bit first by the way , who advised her on banking assets/liabilities..for someone like yourself who’s claimed to have some sort of financial knowledge on that post, I’d love to see you give that a go on here some Friday.. or any kind of ‘hard news’ piece for that matter.
I could only imagine… ‘ day’cent I sez to da CFO, day’cent shtuff our dat’.
The financial wizz kids on here would leave you alone though, as they wouldn’t understand it anyway.
Just checking what you actually wrote again..
I work in the Financial World
And what you have just posted there is exactly why I have to be ten times better and work ten times harder than the lads
There are as many lads, if not more, as “little lady” gobsh1tes that cant interpret Financial Statements
I don’t get to use the Ladies Tee box in my game
I don’t get Ladies rates for Professional Indemnity
You should be ashamed of what you just posted there.
I’m that p1ssed off with you Anne Marie
I’m úçking beside meself
You sound like some sort of financial expert..why haven’t you been writing about this stuff?
I wouldn’t go that far. My guess is:
– Studied commerce in UCD (approx 20 years ago, when in fairness it was still a reasonable degree)
– Gets a big chip on her shoulder when the girls and boys from Dublin are better than her
– Got a job as an accountant in some low tier accountancy firm (a Mazars, BDO or Grant Thornton, at best)
– Left after qualifying
– Now works in finance department of civil service or bank
– Will not progress to C level
So not a financial expert.
ok psychic sally
Just off the top of my head Anne, like.
Make no mistake, Anne Marie’s motivation for writing on here was to get elected, full stop.
In fairness to Frilly, she really doesn’t seem to have any ulterior motive other than just writing (or ego stroking possibly but Dr J has the market cornered there)
“Anne Marie’s motivation for writing on here was to get elected, full stop.”
You’re another psychic sally, you know everyone’s motivation, including Broadsheet admins when only an exact transcript is put up..full stop.
In case you missed it, she didn’t get elected and she’s still around, putting up with the likes of you, you pest.
You really have a talent for telling people what they already know Anne.
I’m just surprised you didn’t provide relevant links and BS articles to illustrate the fact she didn’t get elected.
isn’t Doctor Rory Hearn looking for your trinity vote Rotide
and he gets on the telly
Thats it
I’m going on strike
or a work to rule
which ever gets me a seat in The Restaurant.
hey d’ye think Marco would do a Pudding Interview
any smart arses out there able to help with that?
“You really have a talent for telling people what they already know Anne.”
Says your man who has to ask, what’s wrong with tons of money hidden away.. why is it our business, and what’s wrong with it.
You’d be surprised what people don’t know sometimes Rotsey.
Careful, rotide or you’ll get Annesplained
the grip of the catholic ‘church’ is loosening thank god .. the amount of control they have has been whittled down from almost completely controlling the country, to being an annoyance. no one takes them seriously anymore apart from some of the older generation, and even a lot of them have trimmed down their dedication. as for milenials and generation x’ers, of whom almost none beleive, and even less let religion lead their lives. as each generation comes and goes, that disgusting institution of control loses more followers. the government only keep up this charade to keep onside with people who are still religious, and to show family values or whatever, but even that “he’s religions he must be good’ stand point is dwindling as more n more controversaries come out. we still have laws in place which are directly related to catholocism (good friday pubs close etc.) which is crazy, theres no taking into account for non-religious or people of other religions, its a catholic thing, written into law, its completely crazy. but their grip is loosening, and within 2 generations they will have no political influence. just wish i could be alive to see it. i abhor the chuch. its literally a man-made cult devised to control people and profiteer from them, along with a litany of other nasty stuff.
“Please don’t talk about Blasphemy laws in yere comments and comebacks lads. ”
Because it would distract from such a clear, calm and neatly presented, non-rambling thesis?
I’m pretty chill about the whole prayer thing. As I suspect most people are.
What incredible fortitude you show to tolerate your own professed faith. Novenas and chill?
Rosary beads and self-flagellation daily
I know. But I’d tolerate not having the prayer too. Tolerance is a good thing.
What about if they just had a quick blast of the theme tune of Coronation Street. More popular than going to mass with most Irish people and sure there’s something there for everyone.
Yes it is. Tolerance of those who need abortions would be a great thing
First step to getting rid of this, is to not tick Catholic on the census form.
Arguably, the best first step would be the wide-spread refusal to complete that section of the form. Religious beliefs are not the business of the state, nor should they be monitored or enumerated by the CSO.
Why not? This is important information about the social and cultural make-up of our country, both as a snap-sot of the here and now and as part of the historical record to understand trends and shifts in things like religious observance. There’s nothing sacrosanct, if you will, about religion that calls for its being precluded from the census.
I view it differently. My religious affiliations (or lack thereof) are private to me and are of no more social and cultural significance than my sexuality or my dietary preferences.
Well you can choose not to include that information if you wish, but you could well be doing yourself a disservice, inasmuch as if you are part of an identifiable growing trend in any of those categories you increase the chances of being catered for or acknowledged by public policy.
Earlier I advocated for a wide-spread boycott of the census question. I don’t want to be catered for on the basis of religion, nor do I want public policy to cater to your religious preferences. It should not be a consideration.
Don’t be ridiculous. The religious beliefs or lack thereof are part of the social make-up of our country and public policy makers need accurate information about our society to make decisions and present and future historians will need that information to understand the ways in which our country is changing and has changed. This isn’t abut YOUR religious beliefs, it is about the variety and quantity of religious beliefs present in the whole country Your objection is myopic.
I take a different view to yours, and that makes it ridiculous and myopic?
No, I find the view ridiculous and myopic. Just because it’s a different view doesn’t make it immune from ridiculousness or myopia.
Me: “I take a different view to yours, and that makes it ridiculous and myopic?”
You: “No, I find the view ridiculous and myopic.”
Can’t argue with that.
I know this is yesterday’s argument and all, but can you really and truly not see the difference?
Yes Nigel, I certainly can. I was being particularly contrary yesterday (let’s blame it on the weather). I have every intention of completing the census form in full, as usual. Anyone else thinking of going for pastafarian?
Bless his noodly appendage.
R’amen.
Don’t they need the figures for the provision of religious buildings like churches and temples? Plus to capture what are holy days / prayer days observed by percentages of the population.
That’s actually what I was hoping for
a collective blanking of Q12
They could add ‘practicing’ to the question, but I really do think that this data needs to be captured.
Serious discussion aside, anyone got a transcript of said mass?
I can just see Inda diligently reading out his prayers from the podium;
‘Please Lord let me be a proper Taoiseach again,
Lord Hear Us,
Lord Graciously Hear Us’
‘What the electorate has put together let no man take apart.’
In the secondary school space community/comprehensive schools receive 90% or more of their funding from
government sources. Voluntary sector schools receive less than 70%.
So it’s cheaper for government to maintain the religious control on secondary schools.
Do you have any sources for this? genuinely interested.
What Ahjaysis said, all of it!
Your beat Frilly, you toned it down a bit on the wild spellings and I enjoyed it more, great points! I’m with ya on everything almost
Your “best”
Jaysus that read very differently with one letter out :)
John Gilligan…. ? he would say mass that lad
He’d steal the good cutlery too
He’s actually a very nice priest. Used to be chaplain at DCU years ago and was very much an ecumenist
While I agree with removing the prayers from the dail, if only for the precedent (not like they do any actual real harm), you give yourself away a bit as just having an axe to grind with the RC church with the demand to remove mass from RTE.
RTE provides a public service and as such the live mass is under it’s remit. When the population justifies it , prayers from a mosque would also come into its remit.
I understand that the RC church is basically a sharpening tool for axes, but that point stood out to me a bit.
They’re fair game in fairness. They’re lucky they’re a religious organisation, they’d have been banned and exiled years ago otherwise.
I’m okay with Mass as a programme on RTE though, it’s a legit public service and I’m sure a comfort for people who are either too ill or infirm to make it down the church. I think they rotate between denominations and all.
Do have a problem with the Angelus, its not a programme, it’s a call to (catholic) prayer from our national broadcaster.
Yeah, I get they’re fair game, I just think people should take the legitimate shots and not dilute the argument with stuff like mass on tv.
As for the angelus, It’s so irrelevant at this stage I don’t honestly care about it. There is still a huge proportion of people who are probably fairly positive about it and I never ever ever see it so I just don’t care.
It’s just inappropriate, the main evening news is called the six-one because the first minute, probably super-prime time in terms of viewership, is Archbishop McQuaid’s recording of the call to prayer. It’s not the end of the world, it’s just totally anachronistic and needs to go.
Hah… ‘Jesusland’ just cane on :)
How many other parliaments in the world do this? It would be worth checking out surely?
Frilly, I must admit I’ve only read a couple of your opinion pieces as I don’t frequent Broadsheet as much as I used to, however, I feel you are doing yourself a disservice by writing in the style and colloquial manner you have chosen to use. You have been given a platform by the staff at Broadsheet to express your opinions, and they obviously like what you do, and how you do it; nevertheless, I imagine it must not be very pleasant for you to have to come here and defend yourself regarding how you write – as opposed to what you are writing about.
I’m not advocating *conforming* for the sake of it, as that would be disingenuous – I’m merely suggesting you use the opportunity given to you by an established media outlet to air your views in a way which will be of benefit to you. Internet commenters take no prisoners – and Broadsheet is no different – but now that you’ve put yourself out there [or so to speak], make the most of it. You never know, you could surprise us all… and yourself :)
P.S. That wasn’t meant to come across as patronising as it reads – mea culpa – but the sentiment is genuine.
The whole point is that she was given this format precisely because of her unique style of phrasing
Don’t listen to any of these armchair warriors Frilly
+1
If only Panti had taken the same advice and not wasted the oppurtunity given to him by an established soapbox like the Noble Call by dressing in women’s clothing and being outrageously homosexual. Maybe more people would have listened if he had just worn a business suit or skinny jeans and you know, being manly like he should.
To begin with, my comment was addressed to Frilly, and if she takes umbrage with it, it is her prerogative, but, I think I made it quite clear that there was no malice in it – although I can’t say the same for the subsequent comments.
Secondly, and on a somewhat related note, I don’t like how the Broadsheet comments section has become such an anger-fest for so many, particularly in the past year or so; has cynicism and sarcasm become the new norm? Does it make some people feel better about themselves if they belittle and abuse others, just so their voice can be heard louder – is that what makes some people feel secure and superior? Does no one want to engage, have a laugh, discuss, or make bad puns anymore? I’m not referring to the above comments in particular because it’s an observation I’ve made for a long time now, and, while I know I’ll be told ‘don’t let the door hit you on the way out’, or ‘who gives a fook about you?’, I will not be visiting Broadsheet again; it’s become a nasty, colourless, unimaginative swamp for angry people, and it’s unpleasant for those of us who use it as a way to catch up on the daily news, or who just want to unwind over a coffee for a few minutes, or learn something from LCD.
Goodbye, Broadsheet, and thanks for all the pish :)
Turn that frown upside down!
There are always slivers of wit and interesting tidbits amidst the din…
Heh… you’re back to your old monkey aviator avatar, Del :) Nevertheless, my points still stand; Broadsheet has become like the journal, and it’s not worth visiting any more because the abuse and levels of narcissism/ ego/ anger/ sarcasm/ cynical pride, aren’t worth it. I started reading and commenting in 2010, shortly after Broadsheet was set up, and it was a real alternative when it came to having a quick fix for news and satire, and as a site for the bewildered; and, while you may say, ‘There are always slivers of wit and interesting tidbits amidst the din…’, IMO, there seems to be more ‘din’ than interesting titbits or wit, nowadays.
I would like Broadsheet to do well, and I want them to succeed because they have published and taken strong stances on some issues which otherwise might have been ignored, however, I think they’re like a puppy which is still growing in to its paws. Broadsheet needs to create its own identity; personally, I’d like it to pursue serious investigative journalism – although, I realise there’s no money in that – hence, the click bait content – although, with that said, I have no idea how they’re going to encourage decent and respectful behaviour from some commenters.
+1
That just about sums it up, Mr Z.
The (often self-confessed) trolls and angry people constantly spoiling for a fight seem to drive the comments now. And they’re given free reign. Unless they swear, of course. Because that would just be the *worst*.
You’d miss a bit of Cabra West.
Bring back the PUNS!
I hear ya Zedzer.
I tried to engage with you now and rather than address my point you went on a moanfest about how no one wants to engage and everyone is nasty.
Physician heal thyself
Zarathustra, I can recall some of your comments being sexist, nasty and derogatory towards women.
The simpletons like to categorise people as Nice or Nasty… they’re on Santy’s nice list according to themselves.
“Goodbye, Broadsheet, and thanks for all the pish :)”
This is it so? You’re leaving us.. like forever?…. again? So soon after the last goodbye?
I can’t believe this..
?
“… you’re back to your old monkey aviator avatar…”
I only post under this name/avatar… well the name evolved, certainly, but I was careful that each iteration related to the last so there would be no confusion…
How desperate and lonely would you have to be to use multiple log-ins to harrass people?
I’m only aware of one here constantly, although there is a handful of others doing it occasionally for sport or from a sense of superiority… sad and counterproductive in my view.
As I understand it (from my reading of a previous Friday column) Frilly champions the trolling approach and delights in outrage and confrontation. Others want to rant and spew and swear when they cannot understand or counter particular points or arguments.
Personally, I have read many thoughtful, respectful and coherent comments here but people aren’t going to engage unless it is to argue or debate or simply offer counterpoints or, occasionally, to post actual information relevant to the discussion. Tempering the emotion that spurred you to start typing is the tricky bit.
The laughable thing is how there are an army of posters here who classify themselves as liberal, for the small man, minorities etc but as soon as someone starts to engage with them they can only resort to arguments from intimidation, sarcasm, and belittling.
These posters were already in the ascendancy long ago because online commentary thrives on these sorts of people. I laugh when people say it is just like the journal. That’s the whole point!
What’s laughable is how you think a few annoying posters are an “army” and that you classify them as “liberals”.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_socialism
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_socialism
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhist_socialism
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism_in_India
https://www.quora.com/Science-and-Religion-Why-are-more-atheists-and-agnostics-inclined-towards-socialism-when-in-economics-free-markets-seems-more-scientific-and-rational
For instance, I’m a rationalist ultimately, not a socialist per se, which is not an easy position to maintain in the face of particular vitriol and general complacency.
I don’t classify them as liberals but my observation is that in their own minds they are. Thanks for the sermon all the same.
Hahahahahahahaha
Your observation in your own mind of several people you don’t agree with.
You are actually battling your own strawmen. Have fun.
Are you making a point?
Yes, socialism and liberalism are not the same thing.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_socialism
As I say, an army of strawmen.
Still not really following your runaway train of thought there Deluded
I didn’t speak to socialist ideas or any particular political ideology. I f what you’re saying is that anarchists and socialists are often illiberal and indeed predisposed to using state power to suppress dissent from their ideology well .. duh
I speak to the intolerance I routinely see here from people who advocate for or profess tolerance in particular for social issues, issues affecting minorities etc that are of concern to THEM.
Ok, I don’t think that it is an army, no more than I think there is an army of Opus Dei here either.
We do agree though that some people say they espouse or promote liberal values but are remarkably inconsistent, even ignorant, in every sense of the word.
I try to filter them all out and have tried to encourage others to do the same, to engage with people who seem reasonable or interesting instead of beating their heads against trolls…
I’m rubbish at the chit-chat though.
… I do enjoy watching the tortuous mental gymnastics of supremacists though, I am not without a sense of humour.
https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=2942
“…the fundamental idea of Socialism is absolutely erroneous, and contradictory to Catholic teaching…”