|
bladup wrote: fucking cathlics!!! its always to do with them,
Who do you mean by "fucking cathlics"? The pope and his best mates? Every member of the clergy? Every church-goer? Everyone who answers "Catholic" on a census form? Everyone raised Catholic? Try to be a little more specific when you're hurling the insults.
And what precisely is "always to do with them"?
See I'm not sure whether you actually want to discuss this issue, or are just another troll wasting your, my and everyone else's time. I try to give people the benefit of the doubt and naïvely assume that their presence on a discussion forum indicates that they are (a) interested in, and (b) capable of, intelligent discussion. Sadly there are plenty of exceptions; strange individuals who get a thrill out of writing insulting text messages to people they don't know. If you're one of them, then the sooner I find out the sooner I can stop opening your posts.
If you're not one them, then try to be a little less obscure with your messages as I can't really see the point in what you've written (beyond a general statement of dislike towards Catholics).
bladup wrote: and it does sound like you are defending the law
Well, then either I've been unclear or you haven't comprehended my position. If it's the former, then I apologise. Let me restate my position here:
Put simply, it concerns me that many of the accusations levelled at this legislation are inaccurate. There are very good coherent arguments against blasphemy laws (and I've supported, indeed expressed, some of those arguments in the past) but vacuously wailing "fucking cathlics" followed by a string of exclamation points simply detracts from those arguments. It's the adoption of an inaccurate and ill-informed dogma which -- presumably -- is one of the things you dislike about Catholicism in the first place?
The word "catholic" does not merely refer to a particularly guilt-infested Christian sect. It also means "universal". It's an absolutist position, one that denies nuance, subtlety or complexity. Any such philosophy tends to get my hackles up.
Indeed, the number of social policy issues which can be divided in a clearcut Good Vs. Evil is very small. Generally the world tends to be a little more complex than that.
So this new law, by offering protection to all religions, is by definition actively uncatholic in the sense that it removes the universality from the Irish statute books. It accepts a multiplicity of belief systems and is surely a first step towards a more tolerant, more subtle, Irish society.
I have serious misgivings about any form of blasphemy legislation and don't see this law as "A Good Thing". But to argue against something from a position of bad faith is paradoxically to argue in favour of it (through the discrediting of your stated position). Catholicism has nothing whatsoever to do with this new law. To claim that it does is either ignorance or a lie. Instead this legislation is designed to give our newly arrived minorities precisely the same protection under the law as they already receive under the Constitution.
Or do you have evidence to the contrary? I'd be interested to hear if so. Simple anti-Catholic bogotry does not qualify as "evidence" incidentally.
I personally believe that we should be working towards a society where -- collectively speaking -- we don't insult the beliefs and cultures of others for no other reason than to cause offence and pain. We have a word for people who do things primarily to cause pain. "Sadists".
And frankly, I had enough of sadists when I was at school with the Christian Brothers. I had enough of denying the Grey Areas. Enough empty wailing of "fucking protestants" or "fucking cathlics!!!" or whatever the dogma demands. It strikes me that apeing that universalist dogmatic worldview seems like a pretty dreadful way of defying it.
Over the past few months I've noticed two pieces of Islamophobic graffiti here in Dublin. And that worries me. It doesn't justify a blasphemy law but it does hint at the rise of a new shadow on the Irish soul... one perhaps just as hateful as Catholicism ever was. One that needs to be nipped in the bud.
The law certainly should not prevent people expressing concerns about a religion like Islam that contradicts much of the values of the liberal West (or at least those values we aspire to) but nor should we sit idly by while a bunch of racists use that as an excuse to victimise a minority.
This law is a cack-handed attempt to offer Irish minorities the same protection as the majority already enjoys. Criticise it for it's cack-handedness certainly, but don't just yell "fucking cathlics". It's ignorant and counter-productive.
bladup wrote: grufty by name!
"Grufty" is an archaic word meaning "bearded, as like a goat". I'm assuming though, that your line was an attempt at a barbed insult based upon a belief that "grufty" meant the same thing as "gruff"? Yes? Well, a word of advice; using a self-applied nickname is rarely a good way to insult a person.
|
