Sunday, May 31, 2015

Tagged under: ,

World Upside-Down

Helen McClafferty gives her view on the dangers of the modern world. Helen McClafferty is a US advocate of Irish republicanism.

Trying to understand and cope in a world today where what used to be wrong is now right and what used to be right is now wrong is very challenging, especially for those of us who grew up in an era where most things were simple and of a happier time. You knew right from wrong and you acted accordingly. An era where respect and manners were a must. Where a child was raised in a two parent home and family values mattered. 

Where boundaries were respected and not crossed.

Today it seems like everything is spinning out of control and anything goes. We live in a world of chaos where hatred surpasses love. A society plunging further into moral decay where modesty is unfortunately considered old fashioned, promiscuity is considered cool, and where one’s belief in God is openly scoffed at.

We have more and more children being preyed upon by pedophiles to the point they are no longer safe at times in their own homes and schools. Where rape is no longer taken seriously and where drug dealers and gang-bangers control and terrorize neighborhoods. Where 11 year olds are killed in the streets as a result of drive by shoot outs; where criminals and corrupt politicians are lauded and decent law enforcement condemned. Where underage girls having babies is on the increase and abortion is acceptable even when the mother’s life is not in danger. 

Times change and nothing stands still. I get it. However, the boundaries of nature and decency are being significantly crossed and where self-discipline, responsibility, integrity and accountability are sorely lacking in overall society. 

If we could all take a moment out of our busy day and seriously look at what’s going on around us, can we honestly say we are progressing or evolving into a society we can honestly be proud of today? In appears in spite of our advanced intellect, sophistication and modern technology, we are in reality moving backwards into the dark ages again. Scenes from Mad Max are playing out all over the world where rampant lawlessness, lack of accountability, greed, corruption, hatred, anger, promiscuity, perversion and war are all becoming the norm. We are a society where it appears immediate self-gratification and where anything goes is the number one priority without concern to the possible negative ramifications they may have down the road, not only to those who indulge in those priorities, but to those who share the space with them in society.

If this is the future we are building for our children and grandchildren I think we better get a grip. It is no longer healthy for society to be too far left or too far right. We need to get our footing back on solid middle ground. It is important for children to be safe and secure at all times and for them to know what is morally right from wrong. 

Always trying to please the masses or going with what is considered popular doesn’t necessarily cut it anymore or make it right. We need to clean up the mess we have made of the world today and build a better life going forward for the children we leave behind.

  • Are right and wrong convertible terms, dependent upon popular opinion? ~William Lloyd Garrison 
  • The world has achieved brilliance without conscience ~Omar Bradley
  • It is perfectly easy to be original by violating the laws of decency and the canons of good taste ~Oliver Wendell Holmes, Over the Teacups, 1891

57 comments :

larry hughes said...

The 'liberal-alliance' and PR cheerleaders don't believe in barriers or boundaries. I can't help wonder if all rules, norms and social mores are removed will we be back to the right to bear arms mentality just to keep ass-holes at bay? There is a relentless assault upon 'society' by groups wedged full of obviously damaged people with axes to grind with the wider community they live in. Noisy minorities like a squeaky wheel wanting more and more attention. Wait long enough and David Norris will campaign for the age of consent to be brought into line with Holland at 13 and his letter to an Israeli court will no longer hinder a Presidential campaign for him. After he does flower girl at Panti-Bliss' wedding no doubt. Priorities must be got in order.

marty said...

Helen I am of an age that remembers when men in the street tugged their forelocks to priests, I oft heard my mother tell tales of priests walking down lanes in Co Cavan with blackthorn sticks and beating any courting couple that they came across,I also remember the big black motor cars of the RUC visiting two houses in my street re separate child abuse,resulting in one family leaving the other family seen the father locked up and dying in the Crum,the cunning brts realised with the repeal of the penal code and the gifting of Maynooth the catholic church would only to willing to be part of the state, they spent the next 150 years or so administering their flock by the writ of the brit,(Sounds like something familiar)they used and abused their power to such an extent they managed to have that power enshrined onto bunreacht na heireann,look how that all ended systematic abuse has been going on for as long as those who had power had a hard on,and the dickey dodgers were at it also, so please hon we really dont want to to back to those days, how equality handed to a few minorities can offend anyone after all is that not really what the civil rights was all about, ie, the beginning of people empowerment,the scaremongering and disgusting remarks with the old demonising anyone who opposes their beliefs coming from "christians" makes me proud to be an atheist,the "old values" were a myth ,what we are witnessing these days is the people saying enough is enough we need more equality more change not less of it , holy catholic Ireland my fucking arse .

DaithiD said...

I think secularism is a great gift to Christianity/Catholicism. Liberating it from governing, which was never Jesus message (render unto Ceasar...., the kingdom of God is within you,...etc). With the advent of technology, there is little need to proselytize aggressively to 'save' people. I believe the atheists on here when they say they cant tell the difference between being saved or enslaved.My world is essentially unchanged, what others do is up to them.

tiarna said...

I go with Marty here. The world of Catholics was turned upside down the day law enforcement authorities took clerical child abuse seriously and did something about it. The horror stories that have emerged, and still are, reveal that religious leaders indulged in the most sickening perversions and depravities against the most vulnerable. What consenting adults do is no-ones business. What the physcho-religious have done remains Ireland's shame because people were fool enough to listen to the same catholic moral panic you are spewing.

I believe children should get proper balanced religious education at school -not a rose tainted one -but reality of what being a member of any religious sect means -for catholic girls it means immediate lifelong inequality -other religion -it means male/female genital mutilation, forced marriages and even inhuman brutal death in honour killings, apostasy, homosexuality, infidelity, and for living.

There have been more perversions, massacres and atrocities committed in the name of one religion or another that shows the evil of religion throughout the history of mankind.

AM said...

I am glad Helen expressed her views here. They capture a modern angst toward change and remind me of the old Chinese Proverb that we should wish for our enemies life in a time of change. But change happens and those that change with it manage best. Religion is scoffed at much the same way in which atheism was scoffed at by the religious. I think it was Bush senior who said atheists should not be allowed to hold down public office. And if people choose to hold beliefs that others consider ridiculous scoffing is a natural follow on. The difference is the bishop can't have us burned or our tongues pulled out for scoffing. That seems to me to be a most beneficial change.

Marty, I tend not to see it in terms of being proud to be an atheist. It is just something I am. In my view religion as a belief system is utter rubbish and I am relieved I do not have to buy into it more than I am proud of not buying into it. I think there is something serene about an individual privately contemplating whatever god they believe in. It is when they think their belief allows them to inflict it on the rest of us that I put up the stop sign. I am thinking of things like the Caleb crowd trying to insist on a right to have the blblical view of the world's formation put on an equal plane with scientific explanations, as if they were somehow of equal validity. In that circumstance I should be able to say that Bill Shankly created the world in December 1959, two years after I was born, regardless of what the evidence to the contrary is, and that too should feature at the Giants Causeway Interpretive Centre.

A religious belief has no more status than a sporting belief, and membership of a Church is on a par with membership of a snooker club. People are free to join them but they should not come around telling us that we must play soccer by the rules of snooker.

DaithiD said...

A religious belief has no more status than a sporting belief, and membership of a Church is on a par with membership of a snooker club.

By what measure are they of equal status? And who is doing the measuring? Nobody of faith would equate the two, you wouldnt be imposing your beliefs onto us theists would you AM?

Peter said...

AM
Just out of curiosity, are you an anti-deist atheist or are you agnostic on a "creator"? I think we both agree that all religion is man made but do you accept the possibility that human consciousness and/or the big bang may have been created by a "superior being"?

Larry
WTF did you just write? Can't make head nor tail of it. The liberal alliance don't believe in boundaries? Priorities must be got in order? Explain please.

AM said...

Peter,

wholly atheistic. I don't accept the possibility of a god of the gaps, a god pushed back behind the big bang or any form of intelligent designer. Nothing

Henry JoY said...

Indeed Helen our consumerist society does appear to adhere too closely to 'out with the old and in with the new' behaviours and policies. Rather disconcerting for those of us already old or soon to be considered old!

Change is like the weather here today - unpredictable and uncomfortable. But as a gardener I know too that things grow much better if sometimes there's rain and sometimes there isn't.

A life that's very predictable invariably becomes boring and provides less opportunities for learning and growth. Our individual resilience and strengths are only forged in challenges and adversities. Likewise the diet of social development and health must include a reasonable amount of 'roughage'.

Periods of frequent or rapid change can indeed be initially disconcerting but they can equally provide a fertile breeding ground for learning and growth ... just as a street-child cast adrift in the world can learn faster and deeper than pampered children we can embrace harsh learning opportunities too and observe ourselves adapting and changing and celebrate that success.

Ultimately we have to take and make of life what we can.

AM said...

DaithiD,

the measurement of membership of a private club that affords by virtue of membership no extra rights within society than membership of another club would afford. A believer in the powers of the unicorn may well feel that their views on unicornology have more status than the member of a snooker club, but there is no reason for society to see it that way. Just as a man can think his wife more beautiful than other wives and his kids smarter (a Mencken witticism) than others, the status attached to such a view is as much as should be attached to his view of his snooker club. And while we may say that both snooker clubs and religions are all balls, the advantage for the snooker club is that their balls can be shown to exist. So while I merely outline what seems axiomatic, rather than impose my views on the believers, the argument can be made that the status of belonging a snooker club is higher than belonging to a church.

DaithiD said...

AM,Not everything you believe can be shown to exist, take your reference of the Big Bang, which the LHC may show to be a false theory, and one which is just as imperceptible to you in real terms as a Christian God. What you posit is actually likely to be proven untrue at some stage, we could therefore reasonably assign that a status of lesser than religion? Science draws its own faces in the sand too AM.

AM said...

DaithiD,

science is not without its limitations or its biases but as a system of knowledge that explains our world and its origins I think it is safe to say it should be afforded much more weight than what the bible offers. I think anybody who tries to assign the body of science an explanatory status lesser than that of religion should seriously consider worshipping the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Planes fly witches don't.

DaithiD said...

LOL AM, I studied Theoretical Physics for a degree, I know not all Science is bunkum.Its just people used to beat Creationists (of which im not one) over the head with a Big Bang shaped stick.They wont blush if its proven untrue. Miracles are explained on computers rather than people wearing dog collars these days, and can turn out to be just as illusory. As was said elsewhere, sometimes things need to change just to stay the same.

AM said...

DaithiD,

Intelligent Design is a science that is bunkum because it is religion rather than a science. As a science Behe said it was on a par with astrology and he was one of its proponents.

Creationism is a joke, yet they want it taught in schools as if it were a serious subject. I never believed you were a creationist: very few in the scientific community are and that includes those scientists who believe in god.

The point about the Big Bang is that it is entirely consistent with religious belief: Hans Kung is a great proponent of it. The point about its relation to knowledge is that given human understanding it probably was the best theory of how the universe started. And science has to be open to having its conclusions usurped by more evidence. But the debate is not being driven by any religious mindset: rather that is probably more marginal to the discussion than ever.

But I prefer not to have my time taken up by unicornology and such like. I don't want to spend my day listening to somebody with great physiological knowledge and explain in intricate detail the bone structure of the unicorn. What is the point?

larry hughes said...

Peter

Did something catch your eye? lol For PC cheerleaders freaks and geeks the word 'normal' is taboo. All boundaries must be erased and all and every weirdo must be accepted as equal. 'Priorities' regarding David Norris would be him doing flower girl at a wedding, as he stated on live RTE Vatican tv.

Marty has expressed an anger at clerical abusers who hid behind their authority and deference to commit buggery and sodomy. But why fix that problem to legalise sodomy and buggery for all through PC bullying? Is it not sounding like sour grapes that clerics were getting what others wanted?

AM said...

Larry,

the No camp is hardly averse to its own bullying or smearing. I have found the bulk of it coming from that quarter over the years (not talking referendum here). In this debate your comments seem more bullish than anyone else contributing to the debate. Besides anal intercourse is hardly exclusively gay given the amount of heterosexual couples that engage in it. I think Marty's point is something called rape not anal intercourse. A rapist is a rapist whether gay or straight, priest or atheist. Ultimately, the comparison you draw between clerical rapists and gays engaging in consensual sex has no standing. But moreover, it again begs the question of what it is you are really opposed to. Is it the possibility they might adopt? Or is it just that they are gay? Going by the latest comment it seems to be the latter. You seem to shift your focus of opposition from one target to the other, leaving your readers uncertain as to what it actually is.

As for those with fears of gay couples adopting kids, a guy said to me today the way to ally that fear is make it compulsory for gay couples to adopt four children each: that will soon put the notion out of their heads!

larry hughes said...

AM

boundaries, mores morality, you PC cheerleaders are devoid of them. You will not improve society merely make it more seedy and rotten. Anti-religion is merely a cover of convenience for deviants to loiter within. Shouting about clerical abuse is old hat and a distraction for the gay rainbow agenda. David Norris bleating about being flower girl on tv with Panti-Bliss is hardly an improvement on clerical abuse. SHAME on you all .. SHAME. Do you think had TDs been honest that it was the 200 billion gay sex tourism they were eyeing up and not equality for a tiny minority who already had civil marriage rights, the referendum would have been as successful? HARDLY.

AM said...

Larry,

don't know what PC cheerleaders you imagine. I don't like PC, finding it censorious an bullying. It seems a dubious proposition that Norris wanting to be a flower girl is on a par with a cleric raping a child. I see no comparison in term of harm caused or malign intent.

larry hughes said...

Mackers

Norris has his own history and had to 'pull-out' of the presidential race for well documented reasons. I cannot see that clerical abuses is a reason for opening society up to all manner of deviance and OTT promiscuity simply to be seen as liberal and secualar. Gay rights absolutely! Fair play. But not the way our disgraceful TDs conspired to bring it in. They had ulterior motives. A very seedy maneuverer as is their MO. Boundaries barriers and mores are required in civilisation, it is what builds communities and society. Going from hidden criminality of some clergy to the extreme of a no holds barred society is a reactionary move that will ultimately create more problems than rights granted. And by the way, I actually like Norris and would have voted for either him or Mickey D (who got my vote) but think in the joy of the moment he let himself down. It is not a society I would like to see, hidden criminal priest activity replaced with Panti-Bliss types all over the 'camp'. I'm not anti gay, anti English or racist...I'm anti in my face with your sexual preferences and activities regardless of gender race and nationality. Decorum please.

AM said...

Norris came back into the race did he not? What was his crime? Writing a letter to a court in Israel if I remember on behalf of a former lover and whose behaviour he did not condone. At least, I think that is what it was. Hardly a crime at all.

Deviancy is a matter of taste. It makes no sense to label a gay person a deviant. Why is difference deviant? Nor is there any justification for a gay person labelling a straight person deviant because they veer away from gay sex.

There may be ulterior motives just as I am sure business motives played a part in white support for desegregation in the US. It might make their motives questionable but not desegregation.

Who should have the power to define these boundaries, more and morals? Where do they originate?

Where is the no holds barred society we are going to? The same arguments were all put against extending the franchise.

If you are not anti0gay then we would not expect to hear comments about freaks and sodomites, making you sound like some Belfast bigot who wants to save Ulster from Sodomy. You know my view on that - save sodomy from Ulster.

What is wrong with Panti Bliss types? There are Hari Chrishna types running about the middle of town. Exotic looking like him and seemingly as harmless. Nuns wear strange outfits and I saw Muslims in town wearing the full veil. I have tattoos and others have purple hair. So what?

Michael Craig said...

'Anti-religion is merely a cover of convenience for deviants to loiter within.'

The World really is upside down, considering the history of religion. Atheists didn't go around the World for centuries demanding obedience to an invisible being on pain of death. Murdering enslaving , subjugating and oppressing whole peoples in the name of an imaginary creator.

I find the sexual practices of gays abhorrent, but I will defend their right to keep practicing, with other consenting adults, in private. I also agree that their cries of inequality show hypocrisy since many of them do not care about economic and social equality for the enslaved precariat.
But... none of this has anything to do with religion.

larry hughes said...

Mackers

You are floundering about there trying on yer tranny gear, I'll 'toss' you a lifebelt here, YER BARRED lol

larry hughes said...

MC

Religion, all faiths, Christian values and education have contributed immeasurably to civilisation. As a non practicing (born into) RC I would be reluctant to throw all the good out in the bath water with the deviant sexual predators who infested the RC Church ranks.

American imperialism has deliberately kept the globe at war for profit since WW2. GB has only had one year since 1945 without being engaged in conflict somewhere, 1968. For war industries people are like cattle into an abattoir, the big mincer, but at least cattle provide food, human wastage merely provides profit for a few who don't even need it.

It has nothing to do with religion indeed.

AM said...

Larry,

I find this description much more compelling:

"You find as you look round the world that every single bit of progress in humane feeling, every improvement in the criminal law, every step towards the diminution of war, every step towards better treatment of the colored races, or every mitigation of slavery, every moral progress that there has been in the world, has been consistently opposed by the organized Churches of the world..." - Bertrand Russell

AM said...

And if you look at that thing they call god the way Stephen Fry does in a very serious presentation, why worship something so evil? Must be trepidation. It could hardly be love

Michael Craig said...

Larry,

You will find that those who control the US and UK military machines claim to be Christians.

larry hughes said...

Mackers

Can't believe you are quoting Russell Brand now! lol

Most nations frontiers and 'advancement' was at the hands of adventurers and non conformists. That is true. Are we now giving homosexuality credit for it all?

Why are you fixated with religion?

larry hughes said...

MC

they are not going on advertised crusades although Muslims may with some justification beg to differ. Oil and profit rather than religion I would argue are motivating factors for the USA/UK global menace.

AM said...

Larry,

I am quoting him because he gives a much more accurate summation of religious input to society than you.

You argument is all over the place. Nowhere that I have seen has anyone given homosexuality the credit for human progress. Some have denied the Church the credit which is something different entirely.

Am I fixated with religion or are you fixated with gays?

The readers can probably provide a better answer than either of us.

Niall said...

I like lesbians......only good looking ones though....the girlie ones, you know, not the manly looking ones....they're very scary.

larry hughes said...

Nial

haha... you are NOT permitted to express yourself in such a manner these days.

Mackers

With civil marriage more popular than church weddings today and homosexuals having access to it, it was unnecessary to redefine marriage for 4 per cent of the population. END OF.

AM said...

it was what the people wanted so it was unnecessary to hold out against the wishes of such a large body of people. We make equality more inclusive by including the excluded four per cent whether they be travellers, blacks, Jews, Muslims, Protestants, whatever. All the same genre of arguments you made were made before to stop Catholics getting the vote, women getting it blacks getting it. We could always have argued to maintain the death penalty rather than change it to cater for the one or two a year who might be executed. Shouting End Of might mean the end of your own logic but not my own.

larry hughes said...

They were being denied nothing. Your argument is false. End Of in my opinion they were equal under the law of the land already. Redefinition of marriage changed the law for everyone. Your 'logic' is nothing but PC propaganda run rampant.

AM said...

But that is what they think of your argument - false and flawed. The people who came out to vote for them thought they were being denied the right to marry. Accusing all those who test your logic to the point that you are all over the place as PC says more about the paucity of your argument than it does about anything else.

larry hughes said...

Mackers

the homosexual case was 'over-baked' and backed by cynical TDs for short sighted financial opportunism. Otherwise they would never have gotten such backing and coverage disproportionate to their social number. They were as protected as anyone else. They could get a civil marriage. Small minority bullying all and sundry, not I.

AM said...

Presuming it is true if the argument is made as clumsily as you manage to make it how are people to be persuaded of it?

Aine said...

Bertrand Russell and Russell Brand ---- big freaking difference there ;)

Henry JoY said...

AM asks of Larry "Am I fixated with religion or are you fixated with gays?"

To this reader at least, Anthony doesn't seem to be ecclesiaphobic. He takes an intellectual position and offers reasoned and measured commentary in support of his position.
Larry on the other-hand, whilst assuring us of his tolerance of freedom of sexual expression between consenting adults in a private context, resorts to scaremongering, uses emotive language about gay sexual preferences and seeks to deny open and equal celebration of sexual diversity; maybe he believes and can rationalise all that as not homophobic ... In my opinion it reflects typically defensive and dressed-up homophobic thinking.

larry hughes said...

Aine

Hardly expected you to grasp my stab at humour. You'll get there eventually, maybe.

Henry Joy

I would be in agreement with Michael Craig. What they do in private is their business. I don't have to agree to find it attractive 'gay' and 'rainbow' in complexion, how abhorrent. As I said, out of peoples faces please. Tootsie off and have lots of Tootsie kiddies for all I care.

If I'm a homophobe for being in the 96 per cent of sexually oriented people then I'M homophobe AND PROUD.

Mackers

Don't be doing too much ra ra cheerleading, your back wont take it.

Henry JoY said...

Larry you are entitled to your opinions and your sexual preferences ... as are others entitled to theirs.

All sexual behaviour in the final analysis is a stimulation of nerve endings and individual sexual personal preferences are a matter of choice. I'm for freedom of choice. What right has another citizen to attempt to curtail preferences even if we consider them peccadilloes?

You're a bit of an aunt Aggie to be taking umbrage at public expressions of Gay culture. The public space is contingent to law and rightfully open and available to all. Anyone who'd advocate curtailment of such freedoms is mistaken in their attitudes.

larry hughes said...

Henry Joy

FFS get a room wud ye!!

mcclafferty32 said...

The views expressed in my article never mentioned the word “Catholic” or “Catholic Church” or any religion for that matter. I simply mentioned the word God and that set off a frenzy of anti-Catholic and anti-religious statements. Okay. Some of your points well taken.

However, while I totally agree the Catholic Church has a lot to answer for, as well as other religions, one cannot totally blame all the ills of the world solely on religion. Since the beginning of time man has engaged in despicable crimes against humanity and not just in the name of religion. While religion, or just a belief in God or a Supreme Being, has failed some, it has been a blessing for others.

Whether religion plays a significant part in anyone’s life is up to them and what one does sexually behind closed doors between two consenting adults is their business, but I still believe it does not serve society well morally or politically to be too far left or too far right of center anymore, especially when it comes to children and their well being.


Larry:

I’m more in line with your opinion on the gay marriage issue as it pertains to adoption and surrogacy.


Tiarna:

“Same Catholic moral panic you’re spewing”

It’s not “Catholic moral panic” Tiarna. It’s moral and political decay regardless of whether people want to acknowledge it or not.


Daithi:

“proselytize aggressively to 'save' people”

Isn’t everyone guilty of that in some form or shape?

tiarna said...

"It’s moral and political decay regardless of whether people want to acknowledge it or not."

Says who -a devout catholic? For tactical reasons you avoided mention of the catholic church but your moral compass originates there? "the Catholic Church has a lot to answer for" but lets skim past that and attack the morals (and politics?) of others.

You avoided the question I was posing -the morals of gay people combined does not have the same devastating and catastrophic impact on mankind than what almost any one religion has had. So why not take on the bigger threat undermining 'morals and polics of mankind -RELIGION and its fanatics.

larry hughes said...

Don't think sexual predators in the clergy is an excuse to turn Ireland into Sodom and Begorragh

DaithiD said...

Helen, others may do it, but I only care about the Catholic Church,religion is such an intensely personal experience, it cannot be prescribed for all.Too much uneccesary evil is done under the guise of 'saving' people.

AM said...

DaithiD,

I prefer Liverpool but they are not too hot these days

DaithiD said...

AM, Poor old Brendan Rodgers, the total shite he speaks would sound more authentic if he had a say a Portuguse twang to his voice.

AM said...

Or even a Dutch one. I think for next year's title bid I have two options - I can pray or sacrifice a goat. What do you think is most likely to entice divine intervention? !!

DaithiD said...

AM, maybe you can 'collude' with old Lucifer? ISIS will knock down the wrong tomb in ancient Babylon and awaken something terrible, so he might be on the look out for minions such as yourself.

AM said...

I'm safe. The Unicorn protects me in all circumstances. Satanists and Christians are just not my thing.

DaithiD said...

Does the unicorn approve of same sex marriage by any chance?

AM said...

Of course - where do you think the horn goes?

DaithiD said...

Haha, you need some identifiable gesture, some geometry of worship, like making the sign on the Cross for Catholics to mark you out. What about 'pulling' the horn shape from the center of your forehead back and forth repeatedly?

AM said...

I might get selected for the England soccer team if I do that

Seán Ó Maoilearca said...

Back on the Rum tonight again AM?
God's good to yee! (Lol)

AM said...

Not a drop of it last night: watched an episode of Game of Thrones on DVD with my daughter and went to bed

DaithiD said...

AM, if you have broadband you might like this : https://popcorntime.io/


In the TV section it has every episode of every tv show you can imagine.Totally user friendly interface.Its free too.