Islam in Ireland

[Leper]

1. Points based entry system to ensure those jobs/industries that are short of professionals, can get them
2. We're not talking about Irish emigrating- you start a new thread for that, but it's a red herring in a debate like this
3. No, not any kind of work is good, i.e. Immigrants opening restaurants to serve their own community and then bringing in kitchen and waiting staff to work there (at min wage at best) is not good employment.
4. What needs to be done outside of normal day to day life to integrate. Kids mix together in schools and creches as mine have done. Adults work together with each other. Sports clubs seem very accommodating, though it seems they need to change their ways to suit the Dr.
Did you get a marching band or something every day you left the house?

1. When I emigrated to the UK (in the days when air travel was expensively out of the question) I did so on a "forever" basis and not two years break. It was fortunate for me to have a letter offering me a low level civil service job waiting for me on my 2nd Christmas returning home. There was no points system for me when I went to the UK. I was accepted with open arms.
2. If we talk about people immigrating we must talk of Irish emigration too.
3. We have laws about exploitation of foreign workers in the hospitality industry. If these laws are not enforced we have a problem with the enforcers.
4. Integration is necessary. I found this in plentiful supply in the UK both from myself and the Brits.

Your marching band comment is unnecessary and a poncy whim from somebody who probably sailed through a relatively costless 3rd level education system here not aware that back in the sixties we had to pay for even 2nd level education and 3rd Level was but n unreachable dream for most. Not only that we lived with constant recession which makes our current financial state look like a doddle.

I asked questions, most of which you failed to answer. Incidentally, how Irish are the Irish nowadays? Everywhere I look they are apeing what is happening in the UK, following Premiership soccer, unable to speak Irish, ignorant of Irish history, glued to foreign soaps, etc. I can see the Muslims gathering for their evening meal discussing subjects like when will the Irish act like Irish people.

 

[Purple]

With respect that is a load of baloney, and offensive baloney at that.

Just because the alleged precedence of Canon Law has been cited as a phoney excuse by some churchmen for their own inexcusable inactions in dealing with child abuse allegations and worse doesn't for a second mean that such excuses hold any water whatsoever.

If you think that an Oath of Allegiance to the State is really going to eliminate such bogus excuses, you should perhaps consider that the Canon Law precedence nonsense first surfaced in the context of child abuse cases in the USA, which already has an Oath of Allegiance.

Cardinal Castrillion Hoyos told the Irish Bishops Conference in Sligo in 1998 that child sex abuse allegations should be reported to the Vatican and not to the civil authorities. Some Bishops were furious, with shouting, banging of tables and threats to resign but in the end they all bent under the yoke of Cannon Law. This was reported by many media sources. It was sedition by a foreign power; an evil, callous and cowardly act and an utter betrayal of the Catholic Church in Ireland and it’s clergy and laity.
The slim-ball that ran the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (formerly known as The Inquisition) for over a decade, Cardinal Ratzinger, was the man behind the cover-up. He knew more about the detail and scale of clerical sex abuse than anyone else in the world as every report from every country went across his desk while he was in that office. He then became Pope and lied through his teeth about what he knew and didn’t know. He was the man behind the cover-ups, the half truths, the half apologies and the hostile treatment of abuse survivors. He was also the Head of State of the Vatican. How was it not a hostile power?
Clergy take an oath to obey their superiors. That oath should not be taken if it conflicts with their duties as a citizen or even a resident of this state.
They same applies to anyone who lives here.
People seeking to live here (or anywhere in the EU) should have to affirm that they hold no laws above the civil laws within the EU.

 

[Delboy]

I cannot see why when we talk about a subject such as Muslim immigration and integration to Ireland, that we then have to start talking about the 'Irish having gone to every country in the world'.
To me, thats an argument thats used to shut down the already very limited debate we have in this country on immigration. I don't care if millions of Irish left here 150 years ago to settle in largely 'empty' countries/continents- it's not relevant to this debate.

You didn't deal with the substantive point I made about immigrants coming in to work for other immigrants- the minimum wage point was not what I was trying to point out. It's the fact that when a Pakistani, for example, restaurant opens up, that several immigrants must then be brought into work in these places doing non-skilled jobs. That to me is pointless and adds nothing to this country except more pressure on housing and services.

You talk about how you were welcomed into the UK and found lots of integration over there from the locals! But what does that mean? Your just generalising.
How does that tie in with what immigrants are finding here, especially Muslim's which is the topic of this thread.
Have we shut them out of the school system? Have we confined them to live in a certain area of the country? Have GAA clubs said no foreigners allowed? Have we stopped them from receiving welfare or going for jobs?
So what did you find over in the UK that was so special that we haven't done here.

And while talking about the UK- they have made a total mess of immigration over there. Multiculturalism has failed some leading figures on all sides have said. The Labour party has admitted to having let too many immigrants in during their last stint in office.

 

[T McGibney]

Cardinal Castrillion Hoyos told the Irish Bishops Conference in Sligo in 1998 that child sex abuse allegations should be reported to the Vatican and not to the civil authorities. Some Bishops were furious, with shouting, banging of tables and threats to resign but in the end they all bent under the yoke of Cannon Law. This was reported by many media sources. It was sedition by a foreign power; an evil, callous and cowardly act and an utter betrayal of the Catholic Church in Ireland and it’s clergy and laity.

Have you a source for this wild accusation?

It's totally at odds with the following:

In this regard, the then Prefect of the Congregation, Cardinal Darío Castrillón Hoyos, in his meeting with the Irish Bishops at Rosses Point, County Sligo (Ireland), on 12 November 1998 unequivocally stated: “I also wish to say with great clarity that the Church, especially through its Pastors (Bishops), should not in any way put an obstacle in the legitimate path of civil justice, when such is initiated by those who have such rights, while at the same time, she should move forward with her own canonical procedures, in truth, justice and charity towards all.”

Source: http://www.vatican.va/resources/resources_sintesi-risposta-gilmore_20110903_en.html

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

Have you a source for this wild accusation?

It's totally at odds with the following:



Source: http://www.vatican.va/resources/resources_sintesi-risposta-gilmore_20110903_en.html

Those sound like weasel words to me. The key qualifier is "when initiated by those that have such rights". This is clearly code for telling the bishops that they have no such rights but must restrict their initiatives to the canon law route.

 

[T McGibney]

Those sound like weasel words to me. The key qualifier is "when initiated by those that have such rights". This is clearly code for telling the bishops that they have no such rights but must restrict their initiatives to the canon law route.

That's hardly the case (otherwise, why would the Vatican have left themselves open to attack by including it so prominently in their response to Eamonn Gilmore over the Cloyne Report?) , but in any event it's a long way away from the lurid account of the Rosses Point meeting given by Purple.

The folllowing paragraph in the Vatican's response, immediately succeeding the piece I quoted earlier, clarifies further:

It should be noted that, at the time, not only the Church but also the Irish State was engaged in efforts to improve its own legislation on child sexual abuse. To this end, the Irish Government organized an extensive consultation on mandatory reporting in 1996 and, after taking into account the reservations expressed by various professional groups and individuals in civil society – views broadly in line with those expressed by the Congregation – it decided not to introduce mandatory reporting into the Irish legal system. Given that the Irish Government of the day decided not to legislate on the matter, it is difficult to see how Archbishop Storero’s letter to the Irish Bishops, which was issued subsequently, could possibly be construed as having somehow subverted Irish law or undermined the Irish State in its efforts to deal with the problem in question.

 

[Purple]

Have you a source for this wild accusation?

Sure, [broken link removed] from a Church website referencing the text of an RTE documentary.
Here's some background from Colm O'Gorman on what a nice honest fellow Cardinal Dario Castrillon Hoyos is and how he supported a French monk who went to prison for not reporting child abuse, commending his for supporting his fellow priest.

 

[T McGibney]

Did you read the first line of the first link you cited?

Claims made in an RTÉ documentary, suggesting that a letter sent by Rome to the Irish bishops in 1997 instructed them not to report priests accused of abuse to the civil authorities, have been rejected by the Vatican.

I'm prepared to take at face value Colm O'Gorman's hatchet job on Castrillon Hoyos, but in the context of justifying your earlier, erroneous, account of the Sligo meeting, the term ad hominem comes to mind.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

That's hardly the case (otherwise, why would the Vatican have left themselves open to attack by including it so prominently in their response to Eamonn Gilmore over the Cloyne Report?)

That's the whole point about weasel words, they are capable of double or multiple meanings. Gone a bit off topic, I think.

 

[T McGibney]

My points stand. It is off topic, but it was Purple's wild & unjustified accusations that brought it so.

 

[Purple]

t it was Purple's wild & unjustified accusations that brought it so.

We'll have to agree to differ on that topic. I stand by what I said and judge the evidence and the track record of those involved sufficient to support my views.

My point was made in the context that any group or ideology, be it religious or otherwise, that puts their dogma ahead of the laws of the land is subversive, is undesirable and should be treated with caution.

 

[T McGibney]

My point was made in the context that any group or ideology, be it religious or otherwise, that puts their dogma ahead of the laws of the land is subversive, is undesirable and should be treated with caution.

That in itself remains a perfectly valid point, but its hardly particular to Islam, or indeed Catholicism. After all we have people in our parliament who are or were members of a secret private army which claimed to have governance rights over this island, and others who opening refuse to observe the law of the land in relation to property taxes and water charges.

 

[Purple]

That in itself remains a perfectly valid point, but its hardly particular to Islam, or indeed Catholicism. After all we have people in our parliament who are or were members of a secret private army which claimed to have governance rights over this island, and others who opening refuse to observe the law of the land in relation to property taxes and water charges.

I agree and the IRA, along with the RC Church under Ratzinger, are good examples of subversive organisations that sought to undermine the rule of law in this country. I'm not for a moment saying that their actions were comparable in scope or scale.

 

[T McGibney]

I agree and the IRA, along with the RC Church under Ratzinger, are good examples of subversive organisations that sought to undermine the rule of law in this country. I'm not for a moment saying that their actions were comparable in scope or scale.

Let's get back to Islam, as this RC bashing is going nowhere, and doesn't belong in this thread in the first instance.

 

[cremeegg]

The question for me is what is the outlook of the ordinary Muslim in Ireland.

I assume that they have an outlook broadly compatible with broader Irish society. That the are as horrified by IsIs as I am.

When I came across this article in the IT by Ali Selim I was taken aback. Are his anti women views reflective of Muslims in Ireland generally, because I think his views must be opposed.

Recognition of the equal rights and responsibilities of women in public life is the major achievements of the 20th century and we should not allow it to be undermined in Ireland for anyone. Including the children of Muslim immigrants

 

[Purple]

The question for me is what is the outlook of the ordinary Muslim in Ireland.

I assume that they have an outlook broadly compatible with broader Irish society. That the are as horrified by IsIs as I am.

When I came across this article in the IT by Ali Selim I was taken aback. Are his anti women views reflective of Muslims in Ireland generally, because I think his views must be opposed.

Recognition of the equal rights and responsibilities of women in public life is the major achievements of the 20th century and we should not allow it to be undermined in Ireland for anyone. Including the children of Muslim immigrants

I agree completely.
The problem with these discussions is that they identify the wrong issue. The problem is fundamentalism. It doesn't matter what its manifestation is; fundamentalist Islam, Christianity, National Socialism, Communism etc. they are all just different facets of the same thing. They seek to impose an ideology on everyone, an ideology that is incompatible with democracy and the values of a modern society.

 

[Purple]

Did you read the first line of the first link you cited?

Did you read it?
The comments of Bishop Michael Smith of Meath are frank and quite courageous. Sorry for the long quote but it's very pertinent;

Bishop Michael Smith of Meath confirmed in the programme that one Irish archbishop, whom the programme could not name for legal reasons, threatened to resign when a church tribunal’s recommendation that an abusive priest be removed from ministry was overturned by the Vatican on appeal.

The Irish bishops ad limina meeting with the Prefect of the Congregation for Clergy, Cardinal Castrillón Hoyos in 1999 is reported to have ended in “uproar” as Castrillón Hoyos told the Irish bishops to be “fathers to your priests, not policemen.”

In Bishop Smith’s opinion, the Colombian Cardinal and the officials in his Congregation didn’t seem to take on board the fact that “there was criminality involved. They still continued to see it to some extent as a moral issue for the individual priest and his relationship with his bishop, rather than seeing it as a criminal activity that had a widespread impact, not just on the child but obviously on the whole family and the whole context in which the child lived.”

Speaking of the pervasive culture of clericalism that emphasised the bishops’ fatherly relationship towards his priests and the problems this mindset was causing for those seeking to tackle the crimes of abusive priests, Bishop Smith said those advocating this approach, such as Cardinal Castrillón Hoyos, “forgot about their accountability to the people that suffered and I think that has been a major scar on the life of the Church.”

In 2001, the then Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the future Pope Benedict, convinced Pope John Paul II that his department should from then on deal with all cases of clerical sexual abuse in order to bring about a co-ordinated response to the problem.

While the programme underlined that as Pope Benedict’s papacy continues “he is doing more than anyone to change the culture in the Vatican” on the issue of clerical sexual abuse, the programme also raised concerns over whether the Pope as Prefect of the CDF and Secretary of State, Cardinal Bertone, as the two top officials in the CDF, followed the established norms of canon law and placed the reputation of the Church and the avoidance of scandal above concerns for the victims in the cases of Fr Stephen Kiesle of California and Fr Lawrence Murphy in Milwaukee, as well as Fr Marcial Maciel, founder of the Legionaries of Christ.

Last March in his pastoral letter to the Irish faithful, Pope Benedict criticised the Irish bishops for their misplaced concern for the reputation of the Church and the avoidance of scandal as part of the reason for their failure to apply the established norms of canon law in relation to child sexual abuse by priests.

The RTÉ documentary believes the Vatican has questions to answer over whether it can stand over its own record on abuse cases.

According to Dr Marie Keenan, a psychiatrist who has worked with the Irish hierarchy to establish best practice in its guidelines on child protection and has worked with abuse victims and abusers, “Until Rome accepts that the Vatican has a role in this, I do not think we can even begin to talk about renewal.”

 

[delgirl]

Jeez lads, mention Christianity again and the Catholic Church in this 'Islam in Ireland' thread and I'll have to get out my Mutawa sticks and beat the living daylights out of ye.

 

[Leper]

. . . . and get your marching band to play rebel songs while you're at it . . . Enough on the subject of Muslims in Ireland, I think.

 

[johnwilliams]

does Sunni and Shia both have the same views on this