Varadkar doesn't know enough about Scientology to comment on it.

che schifo

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 29, 2014
Messages
5,639
No. Freedom of religion does not include the right to break the law. Just like priests who sexually abuse kids or embezzle parish funds, or Islamic terrorists, etc, etc, etc.
The problem of Islamic terrorism may have been solved on another thread. A few brave posters are going to step up, pork swords in hand, ready to defend our island. They haven't specified if they'll be brandishing their own pork swords or each other's but they'll have a firm grip either way..,
 


statsman

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 25, 2011
Messages
55,055
The problem of Islamic terrorism may have been solved on another thread. A few brave posters are going to step up, pork swords in hand, ready to defend our island. They haven't specified if they'll be brandishing their own pork swords or each other's but they'll have a firm grip either way..,
Are they forming a circle?
 

Lumpy Talbot

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 30, 2015
Messages
28,523
Twitter
No
Such a dangerous phrase in a constitution that- 'contrary to public order and morality'. It implies that there is a common understanding of both public order and morality in a large group of people and that is a hell of an assumption.

Many people in Ireland would assume that there is a constitutional right to free assembly and freedom of speech because such concepts are mentioned in the constitution but what they don't realise is that both principles can be suspended in the judgement of the Minister for Justice of the day.

Which means they are effectively in the gift of a come-day go-day politician at any given time.

If the phrase in the constitution instead of 'public order and decency' read 'subject to the laws of the state' then we'd be in a better place but then the reason that such vague and subjective terms as 'public order and decency' are in there is because one cult was allowed to decide in the past largely what those terms meant and they would never have subjected themselves to Irish law willingly.
 

statsman

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 25, 2011
Messages
55,055
Such a dangerous phrase in a constitution that- 'contrary to public order and morality'. It implies that there is a common understanding of both public order and morality in a large group of people and that is a hell of an assumption.

Many people in Ireland would assume that there is a constitutional right to free assembly and freedom of speech because such concepts are mentioned in the constitution but what they don't realise is that both principles can be suspended in the judgement of the Minister for Justice of the day.

Which means they are effectively in the gift of a come-day go-day politician at any given time.

If the phrase in the constitution instead of 'public order and decency' read 'subject to the laws of the state' then we'd be in a better place but then the reason that such vague and subjective terms as 'public order and decency' are in there is because one cult was allowed to decide in the past largely what those terms meant and they would never have subjected themselves to Irish law willingly.
Bunreacht needs a complete overhaul.
 

Niall996

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 5, 2011
Messages
11,823
Bunreacht is anything but vague:


So, unless Scientology (which I abhor, BTW) can be demonstrated to be contrary to 'public order and morality', people are free to practice it. And it's not the job of an individual politician to decide what constitutes 'public order and morality'.
Well there you go. Completely vague. And it shows the madness of a religion infused constitution. Where in the Bun Racked does it define public morality.
 

IvoShandor

Well-known member
Joined
May 18, 2009
Messages
7,267
Twitter
yes
Until the moment comes to speak one's mind and one has the facts at one's fingertips , it's no harm for politicians to follow the maxim ""Never lose the opportunity to keep your mouth shut"
 

Lumpy Talbot

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 30, 2015
Messages
28,523
Twitter
No
Bunreacht needs a complete overhaul.
Long overdue in a number of areas I'd suggest. Then again there is a common misunderstanding about the constitution in the population- that it is some kind of immovable object and that it should operate as a kind of barrier against change. This is absolutely incorrect and those who framed the constitution in Ireland actually pointed out that it should properly move with the nation.

However going back to the subject of this thread it isn't the job of the Taoiseach to tackle religious cults whether they be xtian or formed by Hollywood or wherever they come from.

I would suggest any concerns about cults should be dealt with in law via the expression of what loyalties are expected of civil and public servants, politicians and those in roles of civil authority being only to the law without fear or favour and I would agree with a law that spelled out adherence to ANY organisation or movement whether spiritual or social which brings any of the above officers into conflict with their expected loyalties should be declared. Any act or deliberate inaction undeclared on behalf of any such group in conflict with duties to the state should result in sanctions which include dismissal, recall, or imprisonment.
 

automaticforthepeople

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 22, 2012
Messages
4,671
Scientology fleeces financially the victims who are wealthy enough that it lets join. If a political opponent proposed to raise taxes and empty out a citizens pockets, the same Dr Leo would be jumping up and down about protecting those who get up early in the morning.
 

Eoin Coir

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 16, 2012
Messages
16,494
Leo has to be careful. In the 1950s a group of Clare RC Thugs physically attacked Jehovah Witnesses in Kilrush- result the latter were convicted in court of riotous behaviour (not the Clare louts)and the Taoiseach of the day JAC defended the court decision. Its akin to Fethard on Sea episode.
 
Last edited:

automaticforthepeople

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 22, 2012
Messages
4,671
Leo has to be careful. In the 1950s a group of Clare RC Thugs attached Jehovah Witnesses in Kilrush- result the latter were convicted in court of riotous behaviour (not the Clare louts)and the Taoiseach of the day JAC defended the court decision. Its akin to Fethard on Sea episode.
No it's not. Fethard on Sea was a boycott based on religious sectarianism within a community. Scientology is based on fleecing vulnerable punters as anyone who every took the famous personality test will tell you. Where was Scientology in the last few years when it came to providing for homeless and those in debt in this country?
 

Jezza15

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 5, 2015
Messages
1,142
Has an 'E-meter' test ever produced the conclusion that the subject is just fine, not infested by 'Thetans' and doesn't need Scientology?

Them e-meters are funny. They must have looked well sci-fi in the 1950's. Today? Seriously they can't even come up with a contactless digital read-out model? I suspect they're caught on the 'L.Ron was perfect and anything he said or did cannot be improved upon' spike.
 

Prester Jim

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 3, 2009
Messages
9,978
Varadkar and PO'D are Dickensian style laissez faire idealists, they believe religiously in letting the market decide and allowing people to fall when they fall.
We are fair game in LV's eyes. FG haven't done a thing if they can avoid it to protect the Irish people, consumers etc from dodgy builders, land hoarders, cartels and monopolistic robber barons, corporations and banks foreign and domestic.
FG work for the people they should be protecting us from while accepting the pay and conditions we provide. Just because no foreign state is involved (most of the time) doesn't mean it isn't a form of treason.
 

automaticforthepeople

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 22, 2012
Messages
4,671
Leo's spending on spin must be up there alongside Scientology's own splash on spin. Dr Leo served as a Health Minister once.
Surely he'd have a view on some of Scientology's claims to cure illnesses by thought rather than by treatment, regardless of whether he does or doesn't think it could be a cult. A medical doctor ignoring this sort of guff is appalling simply because he wants to seem right on.
 

Lumpy Talbot

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 30, 2015
Messages
28,523
Twitter
No
No politician can safely agitate to legislate against one cult over another in Ireland. The attempt would be doomed to be written off as a 'religious bias' or sectarianism at best.

You either have to write specific laws addressing all cult behaviours or none.
 

firefly123

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 8, 2009
Messages
28,368
Leo has to be careful. In the 1950s a group of Clare RC Thugs attached Jehovah Witnesses in Kilrush- result the latter were convicted in court of riotous behaviour (not the Clare louts)and the Taoiseach of the day JAC defended the court decision. Its akin to Fethard on Sea episode.
Attached them to what?

Each other? Creating a mega Jehovah witness?!

Sweet lord just think of the damage it could do!
If there was anything to wreak in 1950s kilrush of course
 

gleeful

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 7, 2016
Messages
7,520
Leo's spending on spin must be up there alongside Scientology's own splash on spin. Dr Leo served as a Health Minister once.
Surely he'd have a view on some of Scientology's claims to cure illnesses by thought rather than by treatment, regardless of whether he does or doesn't think it could be a cult. A medical doctor ignoring this sort of guff is appalling simply because he wants to seem right on.
All religions claim to cure sickness. Johovas witnesses are worse than Scientologists on this front.
 

Eoin Coir

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 16, 2012
Messages
16,494
No it's not. Fethard on Sea was a boycott based on religious sectarianism within a community. Scientology is based on fleecing vulnerable punters as anyone who every took the famous personality test will tell you. Where was Scientology in the last few years when it came to providing for homeless and those in debt in this country?
I notice you avoided Kilrush episode like the plague ? other religions take a lot of money of their flocks, not lke RC where theres no obligation & you get all the services.
 

firefly123

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 8, 2009
Messages
28,368
I notice you avoided Kilrush episode like the plague ? other religions take a lot of money of their flocks, not lke RC where theres no obligation & you get all the services.
If it weren't on the way too loop head I would too
 

Eoin Coir

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 16, 2012
Messages
16,494
Attached them to what?

Each other? Creating a mega Jehovah witness?!

Sweet lord just think of the damage it could do!
If there was anything to wreak in 1950s kilrush of course
attacked in the operative word, I am sure you have read up on it,or have you ?
 

RasherHash

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 16, 2013
Messages
25,069
Does Varadkar believe in the magic elephant? :)

 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top