|
Post by Alaisdir Ua Séaghdha on Mar 26, 2019 8:58:20 GMT
I wonder Was he serious when he wrote it. There would be many challenges involved in a united Ireland. But as for the union flag over Leinster House, a united Ireland outside the Union would mean the pre - 1801 flag would be restored. Though the SNP have their own ideas about that. I'm not going to make political predictions here, but the post-Brexit world may be very interesting. Just remember that's a curse in China :may you live in interesting times.
|
|
|
Post by assisi on Mar 27, 2019 9:14:23 GMT
I wonder Was he serious when he wrote it. There would be many challenges involved in a united Ireland. But as for the union flag over Leinster House, a united Ireland outside the Union would mean the pre - 1801 flag would be restored. Though the SNP have their own ideas about that. I'm not going to make political predictions here, but the post-Brexit world may be very interesting. Just remember that's a curse in China :may you live in interesting times. By their anti-abortion stance the DUP are effectively saving and preserving Irish lives of all persuasions. Sinn Fein, by celebrating abortion, are killing more Irish. Let that sink in for a moment.
|
|
|
Post by maolsheachlann on Mar 27, 2019 11:32:02 GMT
I wonder Was he serious when he wrote it. There would be many challenges involved in a united Ireland. But as for the union flag over Leinster House, a united Ireland outside the Union would mean the pre - 1801 flag would be restored. Though the SNP have their own ideas about that. I'm not going to make political predictions here, but the post-Brexit world may be very interesting. Just remember that's a curse in China :may you live in interesting times. By their anti-abortion stance the DUP are effectively saving and preserving Irish lives of all persuasions. Sinn Fein, by celebrating abortion, are killing more Irish. Let that sink in for a moment. I'm personally in no hurry to see a united Ireland. I would rather a Gaelic-Irish 26-county Ireland than a globalist 32-county Ireland. The article is obviously exaggerated, but I think it's true that a united Ireland might be an opportunity for civic nationalists to try to water down the Irishness of our institutions even more. Personally I would be all in favour of some local arrangement whereby Ulster unionists had their own culture recognised in national institutions, alonside Irish nationalist culture. I am not amongst those who sneer at Ulster Scots signage. And personally I would be all for the Queen's Speech being broadcast on RTE. I think a united Ireland is often supported by people who are anti-borders in general-- a united Ireland is simply one step on the road to world government for such people. Against this I would fight with the Unionists to the end! Another Irish Revival is far more important than a united Ireland, in my view.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Apr 1, 2019 21:01:27 GMT
I wonder Was he serious when he wrote it. There would be many challenges involved in a united Ireland. But as for the union flag over Leinster House, a united Ireland outside the Union would mean the pre - 1801 flag would be restored. Though the SNP have their own ideas about that. I'm not going to make political predictions here, but the post-Brexit world may be very interesting. Just remember that's a curse in China :may you live in interesting times. By their anti-abortion stance the DUP are effectively saving and preserving Irish lives of all persuasions. Sinn Fein, by celebrating abortion, are killing more Irish. Let that sink in for a moment. Whatever about the DUP, who in my opinion mostly can't be trusted very far (though on this issue we have to take what we can get), killing Irish people is business as usual for Sinn Fein. It is very noteworthy that certain politically correct journalists and politicians - read the IRISH TIMES for a week or so and you will encounter some prime specimens - are proclaiming that we must bring about an united Ireland by appealing to Northern yoof to share the glories of abortion and same-sex unions.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Apr 26, 2019 21:15:50 GMT
The current issue of an Irish-based Catholic publication has an article criticising the recent decision to allow Sikh and Muslim members of the Gardai to wear the the turban and the hijab respectively, on the following grounds: (1) These are not really obligations of the Sikh and Islamic religions since not all Sikhs and Muslims wear them. This logic, I would point out, is exactly the same as a certain type of secularist liberal who argues that all the bits of Christianity they find awkward can be suppressed without it being a breach of freedom of religion, since the fact that Rev Sapphira Snippets of the First Congregation of Laodicea and Bishop Ananias McHerod of the Church of St Simon Magus have rejected said awkward bits show that not all Christians regard them as obligatory.
(2) This constitutes discrimination against Catholicism since Gardai are forbidden to wear visible religious badges. There is something in this, but let me ask a counter-question: is a state which enforces universal secularism any likelier to be friendly to Catholicism than one which allows certain religious emblems? John Smeaton in Britain and Jonathan van Maren in Canada have been co-operating with Muslims and other religious minorities on matters of common concern (such as the attempts of schools to impose certain types of RSE on children against parents' wishes). This has its own dangers, given that some forms of Islamic sexual ethics are genuinely repugnant and there are some Islamic groups with whom it is dangerous to co-operate, but overall I think it is better to work with such communities rather than ignoring their existence. thebridgehead.ca/2016/08/26/a-final-word-on-banning-muslim-burkinis-and-nun-habits/
|
|
|
Post by maolsheachlann on Apr 26, 2019 22:43:28 GMT
The current issue of an Irish-based Catholic publication has an article criticising the recent decision to allow Sikh and Muslim members of the Gardai to wear the the turban and the hijab respectively, on the following grounds: (1) These are not really obligations of the Sikh and Islamic religions since not all Sikhs and Muslims wear them. This logic, I would point out, is exactly the same as a certain type of secularist liberal who argues that all the bits of Christianity they find awkward can be suppressed without it being a breach of freedom of religion, since the fact that Rev Sapphira Snippets of the First Congregation of Laodicea and Bishop Ananias McHerod of the Church of St Simon Magus have rejected said awkward bits show that not all Christians regard them as obligatory.
(2) This constitutes discrimination against Catholicism since Gardai are forbidden to wear visible religious badges. There is something in this, but let me ask a counter-question: is a state which enforces universal secularism any likelier to be friendly to Catholicism than one which allows certain religious emblems? John Smeaton in Britain and Jonathan van Maren in Canada have been co-operating with Muslims and other religious minorities on matters of common concern (such as the attempts of schools to impose certain types of RSE on children against parents' wishes). This has its own dangers, given that some forms of Islamic sexual ethics are genuinely repugnant and there are some Islamic groups with whom it is dangerous to co-operate, but overall I think it is better to work with such communities rather than ignoring their existence. thebridgehead.ca/2016/08/26/a-final-word-on-banning-muslim-burkinis-and-nun-habits/ I think Sikh and Muslim gardai should be allowed to wear the turban and hijab.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on May 5, 2019 16:52:25 GMT
I've been looking through some recent newspapers and I find that the SUNDAY BUSINESS POST of 7 April declares apropos of the Sultan of Brunei's recent declaration of sharia law that "For the record, adultery, gay sex and abortion are not crimes and no country where they are illegal is entitled to call itself civilised." Leaving aside the first two, the POST's view on abortion reminds me of the story about the two shipwrecked sailors being swept ashore on a tropical island and worrying whether it may be inhabited by cannibals. As they get closer they see that a crowd has assembled to witness a hanging and they cry out: "We're saved - it's a civilised country!" So the BUSINESS POST has now committed itself to the proposition that a year ago we weren't a civilised country. This attitude comes as no surprise given some of the dreck the SBP has published recently, but it's a far cry from its early days when it tried to appeal to social conservatives who felt excluded from the other papers.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on May 16, 2019 21:57:03 GMT
In last Monday's Belfast NEWSLETTER the liberal Unionist commentator Alex Kane suggests the DUP is preparing to sideline its remaining fundamentalists and move towards social liberalism. Worth bearing in mind for anyone inclined to get starry-eyed about the DUP. www.newsletter.co.uk/news/opinion/alex-kane-dup-seems-to-be-preparing-to-face-down-the-free-presbyterians-1-8923797Meanwhile SF are explicitly demanding the legalisation of abortion and same-sex marriage in NI as part of the "equality agenda" they want to secure as a trade-off for reconstituting an Executive. Comment is superfluous.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on May 27, 2019 23:55:34 GMT
A columnist in the current issue of the SPECTATOR records that an Oxford mediaeval studies magazine has published an article declaring that since Notre Dame was built by followers of a religion given to conquering non-Christian societies and cutting down their sacred trees, and its builders killed fur-bearing animals and hunted fish for their own use, the cathedral should be left in ruins as a symbol of the ecological damage western civilisation has done to the planet. So pagans didn't cut down trees, wear furs or eat fish? This person doesn't even have a sense of the sacrificial bargain found in archaic paganism (i.e. the worshipper kills the animals to meet their own necessities, but ceremonially acknowledges and honours them as benefactors). I mentioned this to a mediaevalist of my acquaintance, who remarked that this mindset was utterly alien to any agrarian or hunter-gatherer society, and could only exist in the plenty and safety of urbanised (or suburbanised) modernity. Quite.
|
|
|
Post by Alaisdir Ua Séaghdha on Jun 14, 2019 13:50:30 GMT
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Jun 17, 2019 22:33:07 GMT
Today's IRISH TIMES reports Ruth Coppinger TD campaigning for a ban on fur farms in Ireland, and denouncing the sufferings of animals in these farms. All well and good. This, however, would be the same Ruth Coppinger who has been campaigning for abortion on demand without restrictions, both before and after the referendum, which she complains didn't go far enough. You may speculate on the peculiar workings of Deputy Coppinger's moral sensibility. I find it too disorienting to explore Bizarro World for any length of time. www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/government-pressed-to-ban-three-remaining-fur-farms-1.3927652
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Jun 17, 2019 22:45:23 GMT
Last Sunday's SUNDAY BUSINESS POST has an article on Irish alt-right computer types and focusses on a YouTube interview between the blogger Gran Torino and Hermann Kelly (who was accompanied by Jim Dowson, who drifts between pro-life, pro-family and far-right groups - he ran the BNP web operations at one stage before whistleblowing them to journalists; I would describe his guiding principle as Dowson First). At one point during this interview it describes Kelly as claiming that the legalisation of abortion was due to some sort of population replacement conspiracy, which wishes to kill off Irish children while inviting the world in to take their place. Bear in mind that the SUNDAY BUSINESS POST, which once gave space to social conservative views, has been going all-in on the liberal agenda for some time and its commentators can be very slanted. (Marion McKeone on American politics comes to mind.) Nonetheless, I will assume for the sake of argument that this report is correct. This is a very dangerous approach - for one thing, the pro-aborts are equally willing to encourage immigrant women to have abortions - but the central point is that abortion is not about race or immigration. It's wrong whether the victim is black, white, Irish, Filipino,Jewish, Islamic, Nigerian, Polish, whatever. Pro-lifers should beware of this sort of racial dogwhistle, even if they don't recognise it for what it is (which I hope is the case with Mr Kelly).
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Jun 18, 2019 22:09:35 GMT
This development is very worrying. What this report doesn't say (but other reports make clear) is that Br Forde gave a list of sins which turn you into zombies, homosexual acts being only one. Furthermore, the reference to killing zombies fairly clearly refers to fighting sin within oneself (what Muslims call the greater jihad) rather than the use of violence against sinners - though in this instance Br Forde should use his language more carefully. The way in which the Capuchins and the Bishop of Ossory threw Br Forde under the bus (this is a well-known metaphor and not meant literally) is depressing, but the involvement of the gardai comes close to implying that traditional Christian teaching on sexuality is to be equated with incitement to violence (the latter should of course be prohibited, whoever it might target). www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/garda-investigating-comments-by-religious-brother-during-mass-calling-gay-people-zombies-38230379.htmlGarvan Hill offers some thoughts: garvan.co/2019/06/14/storm-in-the-ancient-city-of-kilkenny/I don't think BTW that the idea of the abolition of the concept of sexual sin is simply Marxist as he suggests. It also has roots in some forms of psychotherapy and in types of C19 liberalism (for example, John Stuart Mill's ON LIBERTY).
|
|
|
Post by Young Ireland on Aug 24, 2019 22:53:05 GMT
It seems that Moloch's Herald has now gone the whole hog and is now openly singing the praises of the Moloch-worshippers - literally. One of their film critics has published an atrocity - which I'd rather not link to - essentially praising satanists as the "good" guys against Donald Trump, and worse still, she doesn't appear to have any problems with it. This is part of a worrying tendency that I am seeing in which some social liberals are now openly co=operating with satanists in order the advance their abortion agenda on the basis of my enemy's enemy is my friend. I think that the personality cult surrounding Trump is very harmful and could blow up in the face of American conservatives, but arguing that even satanism is preferable to Trumpism would be laughable if the consequences were not so serious. Hibernicus once pointed out that Daniel O'Connell claimed that he would examine his conscience if one of the English dailies praised him (I forget which one), and such an examen is certainly overdue for many liberals.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Aug 27, 2019 20:58:26 GMT
This is actually a review of a documentary called HAIL, SATAN! The satanists in question are atheists who claim that they do not believe in a real Satan but are invoking him as a symbol of freedom against Christian oppression. There is actually quite a history of this sort of "romantic satanism" going back to Shelley and Carducci. I might add that some members have resigned recently complaining that certain leader(s) are taking the whole thing much too seriously and starting to develop the sort of egoism found in cult leaders. Two ways in which this is sinister: (1) Part of what these people are up to is an attempt to nullify religious liberty protections by claiming their own exemptions in the name of Satan, the not-so-hidden subtext being that all religious beliefs are irrational an oppressive and should receive no acknowledgment at all. (2) In one of the Screwtape Letters CS Lewis has his senior devil explain that a major objective is to create "materialist magicians" who will actually worship the devil without realising that this is what they are doing. A couple of Christian commentators on this documentary have cited this quotation, and they're bang on the button.
|
|