Oh honey, do you think he means me?
Give it a rest, Vincent. You're embarrassing me. Of course the sight of something like this terrifies children. It's the naked body of a murdered man, nailed to wood and stuck to the wall, for crying out loud. And the better it is, like this great job by Brunelleschi, the more frighteningly realistic it is.
Letters to the Editor, The Times,
Saturday, 14th November 2009
Culture and the Crucifix (2)
Vincent Agius, secretary, Istitut Soċjo Kulturali San Pawl, St Paul’s Bay
As a cultural institute we have the duty to voice our views on what is being written, not only in the print media but in blogs that are read by members of the public, both adults as well as minors. We are referring specifically to the issue concerning the Italian female citizen who requested the European Court of Human Rights to order the removal of the Crucifix from the school her children attended. The ECHR acceded to her request and if its ruling is not reversed by a higher court, it may be binding on all EU member states besides Italy, including Malta.
What is worse, we have noticed that certain local individuals who run electronic means of communication, are publicly expressing agreement with the judgment by stating that they do not accept the image of the Crucifix because it terrifies children! In other words, they are blatantly giving offence to the Catholic religion that is protected by the Maltese Constitution. The Maltese Constitution declares that the religion of Malta is the Catholic religion whose central and dearest symbol is the Holy Crucifix. Up until now the police have taken no measures to ensure that this offence to the Constitution is dealt with as it should.
Moreover, these same individuals are propagating material written for adults on the same electronic means which, as they are bragging, is read by thousands of people, including minors.
In other words, they are disseminating material that is dangerous to minors without carrying the relative warning that the same material is meant for adults and not for those under legal age. In this case too, the police have failed to investigate these same persons who are openly defying them to see whether they have the courage to sue them. The words used by these persons to this effect cannot be reproduced here on account of their base, foul and crude nature.
The authorities have already affirmed their intention to oppose the ECHR’s ruling. How will they carry out this intention when they seem to be unable to check those local individuals who apparently agree with that ruling? Will they order them to cease and desist or do they intend to let them carry on due to the protection they apparently enjoy?
Yes, you sad bastard, you’re right. I do enjoy protection. But it’s not the protection you think it is. It’s protection from people who think as you do. From time to time, the police turn up at my gate to make sure that my house isn’t being set alight – for the third time – by people who can’t stomach the fact that Malta is a free country at last.
If I were you, I’d start living now – because you’re likely to be the one getting a nasty surprise when you finally pop your clogs and discover that you might as well have had some fun because guess what? The party in the sky is full of people who did. And that’s assuming there’s a party in the sky at all.
130 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
This Vincent Galea is a bit of a mad hatter. You are letting him rile you. We enjoy religious freedom and this guy thinks he can force himself on others by quoting the constitution. Yes, he is probably sad, old and lonely. Let him be.
I can’t say I agree with the judgement, or with Daphne’s view of how bad the crucifix looks or what it does to children, but I will defend your right to say it.
nisthajlek martin luther l germanja fir reformazzjoni daphne lesta bies tmur il knisja tihdilom il kalci u tkisser u tahraq kullma ssib ghandek rabja ghal knisja. yes the church needs to reform itself…but atheists will doom europe into an islamic state in the future if they don’t realize we need a solidifying religion now. Believe me certain religions deprive you (as a woman) of much more rights than scribbling a few obscenities…to be fair I am not a devout catholic neither but would prefer christianity/catholics in all their failures from islam any day of the week. An atheist was used in this case so that there would not be a backlash to muslim society…one can’t detect an athiest from what he wears unlike muslims. Maybe you should go the the council of Europe daphne and tell them to remove the crucifix. oops I guess you’de go against your party now becuase they are using this incident for publicity once again lol. And please…it’s not about bloody christ haha or the blood and gore portrayed …it’s the religious symbol that is ordered to be removed..a cross signifies the resurretion of christ according to some protestants (alas he is missing from the cross haha)..however that symbol would also be removed being a religious symbol..not just the crucifix…I hope you get this point. I will be presenting my argument on Xarabank haha…If this is truly a democratic society without censoring…and if they really want to know the truth why scores of immigrants are heading our shores and now the crucifix issue..later schoolbooks rewritten to show islam in a non violent way. I will be presenting the same resolution your goverment was part of and did not object to. In the other post I gave you the link of their own site..coe.
You will get to see me and my real name daphne now…I’m disappointed you haven’t yet noticed who I am from my grammar and syntax errors as you said before haha. or from my xenophobia racism islamophobic attitude…you can call it what you want..I call it my opinion. Of which I’m entitled and which value you defend only when it suits you..against the church policies of censoring.
Mark
Sure enough you are entitled to your opinion, it is only in Malta that we feel the need to repeat this statement after every other sentence that we write. However your opinions define you. You can be believe the earth is flat if you want, but that defines you as a backward sort of chap and nobody would really take you seriously would they. Similarly you can be xenophobic, islamophobic and think that blacks and gays are inferior to you (as you wrote elsewhere) but that would define you as a backward, ignorant, narrow-minded bigot, who has never ventured out ‘mir-rahal’.
tut tut . . . shame on you, Daphne . . ! Did you also support that mad bloke who wanted to stage that blasphemous play which features people going on the internet to download porn?
Shame, shame, shame!!!!!!!!! (I added the exclamations marks because certain people have an affinity with them).
“…the issue concerning the Italian ‘female’ citizen who requested…” Why does this guy insist on informing us that it was a female citizen?
Ridiculous. The Constitution of Malta also declares the President to be the head of state. I hereby state this to be true: that Agatha Barbara terrifies children (and adults). There, I have “given offence” to the Constitution.
Agatha Barbara is dead!
There is a misconception that The European Court of Human Rights will bind EU member states. This is an institution of the Council of Europe which embraces 47 member states to safeguard democracy and human rights in these states.
So there is confusion on the part of Vincent Agius.
However, Daphne, let’s not exaggerate that crucifixes terrify children. I have yet to meet anyone, who as a child was afraid to enter a classroom because of a crucifix. Terrified of some nun or priest, definitely.
Whether the Maltese are practising Catholics, believers or not, the vast majority of Maltese do turn to God and prayer when in difficulty. Yes, we could be a bunch of hypocrites, but in moments of trial, the great majority of Maltese find some inner peace in God.
The symbolism and tradition of the crucifix for us Maltese is important, and should not be lost.
Deus Caritas Est?
I was never terrified of the cross and have never heard anyone who was terrified. The ECHR judgement did not mention this point either. So the question is whether we follow the secular ideology which, like all dictatorships, is intolerant to religion or else we respect the beliefs of those persons, the majority in Malta, who have the cross as a sign of their religion.
We seem to be moving to a secular dictatorship. The cross is a sign of hope and salvation and not of fear!
[Daphne – It all depends on how you look at it. There are those of us who, on the other hand, see the crucifix as being sad confirmation of the pointless vagaries and random cruelties of life. The way we see it is that if even the man who was claimed by others to be the son of God wasn’t safe, then what hope can there be for anyone else? You would be surprised to find that this thought is actually more calming than the ‘symbolism’ of suffering and salvation.]
Look at it this way, Daphne: My god is BUFF. He’s got fantastic abs. He’s telling you go out there and GET RIPPED.
The term “secular dictatorship” is an oxymoron. The whole purpose of secularism is to be all-inclusive, hence anti-dictatorial. Secularism does not impose on anyone not to practice their faith, as long as that practice does not infringe on others.
It’s no oxymoron. Dictatorships do not just impose. They also prohibit.
Daphne the crucifix terrifies you. And so it should. You have much to answer for.
[Daphne – Ooooooh, nasty! It doesn’t terrify me, my dear. It disgusts me, like all scenes of torture do. I’m not nine years old any more. “You have much to answer for”. Well, thank God for that.]
Cheer up. At least you were not referred to as “a Maltese female citizen”.
I have taken a look at our constitution for the first time in my life. Chapter 1(2) makes for a chilling read. How, exactly, does that make us a secular country? I am surprised the bishop isn’t head of state.
Now read the Malta/Vatican agreement that is annexed to the Education Act and you will be even more shocked.
Relax. It is obvious from the Constitution itself which is the more important and which should prevail if there is a conflict between the declaration of state religion and the chapter on fundamental rights: the latter is entrenched, the former isn’t.
Who cares what the constitution say? Mintoff wrote all that bloody nonsense.
It says we should not be aligned to any country, but we are in the EU thank God. Nobody gives a damn about it anymore.
Daphne, I am not about to criticize your right of expressing your views, especially on your own blog, but chiding someone else who has different views than yours, is a bit mean.
You are right that if you stick a Crucifix in front of a child’s nose, may be terrifying especially if the child has not been taught about the significance of the image on the wooden cross.
After 2000 years, we now find that by continuing to display the Crucifix, which we have for all this time, in the Christian world including our country, offends a certain minority.
In a democratic country, the wishes of the majority wins although the views of the minority should be respected. If another faith wishes to display their crescent (as an example) in their own Mosque or Islamic school, no Catholic objects, so why are the rest of faiths attacking a Christian symbol? Why are they using whatever means to deprive the majority of their culture, beliefs and religious symbols?
Yes, the ‘Man’ hanging on the wooden cross is terrifying. Just imagine how much more terrifying it was for Christ to suffer the beatings, the insults and the ultimate punishment for committing the unpardonable crime of preaching love?
Like I said in the beginning, you are entitled to your views, but I hope that your next article will be about another controversial subject other than a sarcastic attack on believers of an indisputable fact the Crucifixion was, two millennia ago.
[Daphne – You know, Jomar, children should be taught what I had to wait until adulthood to find out: that crucifixion was not a special punishment devised for the king of the Jews, but the run-of-the-mill, completely ordinary and humdrum way of getting rid of common criminals and rebels, and that many thousands of men died this way and went through exactly the same thing he did. But even as a child I found it quite extraordinary that he should be singled out for his suffering when, as even our martyrs books told us, thousands of others died horrible deaths (fire, boiled alive, and so on) because of their faith. Maybe it’s a little odd of me to believe in democracy and equality where religion is concerned, but because I have a better perspective on history and cruelty over the last 2000 years, I really don’t think that what Christ went through was anything special – certainly not compared to what some of the early Christians in Rome went through, one example of which was being slathered head to foot in tar and set alight to form a human torch as amusing entertainment at garden parties. So sorry, no, I’m not at all impressed. People have been ghastly to each other for centuries, and finally now we’re sort of civilised. That’s about it. Christianity had nothing to do with the development of our civilised attitude towards others and our respect for their life and dignity. That came almost 2,000 years later, with the Enlightenment. It matters not a jot to me whether some are offended by my views. I only hope it helps them think, which is invariably a really uncomfortable process of coming to terms with things one would perhaps rather ignore.]
@ Daphne: didn’t you realise that Jesus was crucified along with two non-“king of the Jews”.
[Daphne – It’s irrelevant whether there were another two that day, when there were thousands before and thousands afterward. But then again, perhaps it’s worth reminding those who think of Christ’s death as exceptional that yes, another two ‘criminals’ – by the definition of the day – were executed alongside him. It was a group execution, and for all we know they were flogged up the hill and made to carry their own cross too, but nobody bothered to tell us about it.]
In the context of “I had to wait until adulthood to find out: that crucifixion was not a special punishment devised for the king of the Jews” it isn’t irrelevant. Why did you take so long to put two and two together?
[Daphne – I’m not into the Maltese thing of putting two and two together, Jonathan. I prefer to go on information. That information wasn’t available to me, for one reason or another, until after I left school and found a book about the subject.We may wish to remember that teenagers in the early 1980s had no access to information that we now take for granted: no television documentaries, no internet, books in very short supply, and indoctrination a substitute for education. It’s a wonder that any of us found out anything at all. And I actually remember being told when I pointed out that there were others crucified with Christ so what was the big deal – and I’m quite sure that others here remember being told the exact same thing – that the others were robbers (and look, miskin, he was crucified with common robbers – as though reporters were around at the time to work out why those others were crucified) and anyway they were tied to the cross with rope and didn’t have nails pushed through their hands and feet so Christ was singled out for special treatment. And I remember thinking, really, tied to the cross – what were they planning to do, starve them to death?]
Hear Hear, Daphne the catholic expert reading us a lecture on Jesus Christ. How funny! I prefer she lectures us on her hatred of the catholic religion which she is quite capable of doing.
[Daphne – I don’t hate it, Johnny B, no more than I hate Islam or Buddhism. We’re all free to believe what we want to believe – it’s a human right, remember? I hate imposition. So very many Maltese are Talibanesque in their thinking. It’s quite revolting – and so very boring.]
I find Johnny B. and the myriad others of his ilk so incredibly irritating. If you express an opinion against what they believe in then you are ‘intolerant’ and full of ‘hatred’ – funny since they usually drip both themselves.
” I’m not into the Maltese thing of putting two and two together,I prefer to go on information.”
“But even as a child I found it quite extraordinary that he should be singled out for his suffering when, as even our martyrs books told us, thousands of others died horrible deaths (fire, boiled alive, and so on) because of their faith.”
Did no one inform you why he was “singled out” ?
You are too funny.
[Daphne – The singling out came afterward. He wasn’t singled out for punishment.]
Talibanesque Vince.
No we have a taliban daphne not vince.
Are you referring to Vince Farrugia?
Creepy! The letter’s tone (ironically ‘individual’ seems to be an important word) reminds me of the East German party functionary’s terminology, when they tried to ‘protect’ the East Germans via TV sermons from the West German devil’s handiwork-in other words: the Western life style including freedom of expression.
Qed nismaghhom lil ulied il-poplu jwerzqu u jibku minhabba dix-xbieha realistikament wahxija! Qed narahom it-tfal zghar jirtoghdu quddiem kull salib li jinzertaw ma’ kull erba’ passi li taghmel! Qed narahom u nismaghom lil ulied il-poplu mbikkijin u mwerwrin u trawmatizzati u gejjin u sejrin ghand il-psikologi mal-genituri taghhom minhabba l-Iben t’Alla maqtul fuq is-salib ghal dnubietna. Hemm bzonn izjed hwienet tal-gazazi. Hemm bzonn izjed gugu. Hemm bzonn tqum iktar kuxjenza fost il-genituri biex ma jibqghux isoddu widnejhom quddiem dil-banda kollha! Il-genituri ghandhom wicc jibqghu jiehdu t-tfal il-quddies meta the sight of something like this terrifies children?
Besided the issue of “power” can someone explain to me:
– what will happen if there was no crucifix in the classroom?
– will the church accept that someone is allowed to choose to be a Catholic or not?
As such the cross is a symbol and the people making the big fuss should know what the Bible tells us (them) , Jesus Christ himself said:
“Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cumin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone……….”
Now if we follow his teachings, we should not have double standards…..
It’s hard to argue against the fact that there are today so many people who are hypocrites of the Catholic faith. When this happens, it means that people do not really believe in what the Catholic Church says but follow it out of tradition. Now this is a threat, because traditions slowly erode and unless the church gets real and updates itself to 2009 this is what is going to happen. And is maybe already happening or maybe there are just a lot of black sheep nowadays.
One last thing, since nowadays computers are in every classroom, can we instead have a crucifix on the desktop of those who decide they want it?
Crucifix screen saver anyone?
‘Terrify children’? Come on…
I can think of more things that can terrify a child and cause psychological damage more than an image of a crucifix.
How about bullying? Believe me, bullying can cause irreparable psychological damage to a vulnerable child… crucifixes are nothing in comparison! And what about sexual abuse?!
I think we are underestimating our children, and we are protecting them too much. I’m not sure they will be grateful for that in the future – after all, when they grow up and they will have to face the world, they will find all sorts of things. The question is, will they be able to survive all the criticism, and all the mud that will invariable be thrown at them? This issue began because this person (okay… this ‘female citizen’) was concerned about the psychological damage that can be done to her children when they see the Crucifix. But I bet she didn’t even ask her children about it.
This matter has been blown too much. The crucifixes should stay there – not because they represent the religion of the majority or anything like that. But simply because they have been placed there for ages and to many people they signify something. Other people who don’t believe have other things that have a significance to them, and no one is asking them to remove these things that have a special meaning to them.
The issue has nothing to do with Muslims either – I don’t know how they entered the equation, but as they are there, it’s the same issue for them with the burka. In France, I think they want to ban it. That is as wrong as wanting to remove the crucifix from public places. The burka has a meaning to these women, which we cannot fully understand, same as the crucifix has a meaning to those who believe, and to those who don’t but were raised in a Catholic country nonetheless.
“How about bullying? Believe me, bullying can cause irreparable psychological damage to a vulnerable child… crucifixes are nothing in comparison! And what about sexual abuse?!”
So, why don’t we allow theft, as rape and murder is much worse?
Pat, what has theft got to do with terrifying children (the main point in my discussion?!)
Please explain.
You defended the display of crucifixes with the point that it’s not as bad as bullying (paraphrasing). I’m defending theft with the point that it’s not as bad as murder and rape.
I did actually quote the part I responded to, didn’t know I was being so obscure.
You were obscure because you went completely off the point. Bil-Malti, qed thallat il-hass mall-….
The classroom crucifixes don’t hurt people. They are too small for the children to see the gory details when they have Christ depicted; the ones made of wooden beams only should not even enter the equation here. In short, the psychological effect, if any, they have on children is minimal compared with the effect bullying and sexual abuse have on these children.
Theft is another thing completely. It has nothing to do with psychological damage (the problem highlighted here), thus your comparison is intended only to confuse and steer the discussion away from the point I wanted to make.
If my point was not clear enough, let me rephrase:this matter has been blown too much. It should never have been brought up in the first place by this woman, because what she alleged, i.e. that she didn’t want her children to be exposed to these religious symbols, is stupid in itself.
When these children grow up, they will encounter things they don’t like, things they don’t agree with. They should learn to cohabit and tolerate those things that they were not brought up to believe in. If everyone goes about removing things which they don’t agree with, we end up with a lot of conflict, as people everywhere find their rights trampled on because some others find their culture ‘offensive’.
People today say they are more tolerant than before, but if these people then force the removal of a religious symbol just for the reason that they don’t believe in that religion, then we are going back to the time of the Crusades – when religious intolerance was at its peak.
I compared the effect the crucifixes would have on children with bullying and sexual abuse because I wanted to emphasize the stupidity of this issue. A lot of fuss has been made on something so trivial, but surprisingly, bullying and sexual abuse on minors, which have been going on for a long time, are left on the shelf and not mentioned as much as they should be. What I mean to say is, that we have our priorities wrong here.
Now, let’s see if I left some loop in my reasoning, which dear Pat will surely find.
[Daphne – Will everybody please stop giving ‘crucifix’ a capital C? I’m editing it out. ‘Crucifix’ is not a proper noun. Thank you.]
Well, for starters I didn’t make the claim that it does, on its own, hurt people, although I have a suspicion it does.
But, again you completely missed the point. What I addressed was you claiming this was no big deal as other things hurt children more, such as bullying. This, as you should have seen by now, is not a defence of your position. My analogy was that by the same reasoning theft can be defended, as it hurts someone less than murder and rape, we should allow it. It was simply to point out that your line of reasoning did not defend the display of crucifixes, it simply tried to say that it was “not that bad”.
That is the big hole in your reasoning.
Also, to claim that bullying and sexual abuse has been left on the shelf is absurd to the highest degree. Both are problems which children are still faced with, but they are both being addressed. Are you trying to claim that people accept those things? You keep digging the same hole. Just because something else is worse, doesn’t mean we can’t fight it.
No one is claiming that it should be removed because we don’t believe it. We are claiming it should be removed to provide children in state schools the benefit of being educated in a secular environment.
Vincent Agius is a chilling reminder that we are living in a Taliban country. The quicker we delete any reference to religion in our constitution the quicker we can clip the wings of such intolerance and hatred by such people as Vincent Agius . Let us see if the police will now take action against him in the same way they took action against Norman Lowell for inciting such hatred and intolerance . The pope’s visit next April may be an opportunity for some of us to demonstrate that religious leaders are not welcome to our island.
@Lino Cert: Pope Benedict would be given a great welcome , whether you like it or not.
Mintoff used to prohibit people from setting foot on this island, we learnt what’ Persona non grata ‘ meant in his time.
The thing is that you and your ilk prove to be more intolerant than this Vincent Agius.
And Daphne, I can imagine what it means when your property is damaged maliciously by unknown cowards or when your life is put in danger, but surely it is not this kind of person who commits this kind of violence.
[Daphne – No, it is another sort of related person who believes in the sanctity of tradition.]
Keepers of parochial religious tradition like Joe Debono Grech’s Soċjetà Lucrezia oops sorry I meant Dun Filippu Borgia.
I am still in favour of crucifixes in public places.
Tradition is great! Malta’s all about tradition… can’t see that ever changing.
How I wish we are living in a taliban country. You will be dead within seconds from uttering stupidites and obscenities. You will be publicly flogged in the palace square for being arrogant and anti taliban (whatever that means)
Johnny B.– Good.
@John Schembri
“The thing is that you and your ilk prove to be more intolerant than this Vincent Agius.”
Yes I agree, I am very intolerant of such people as Norman Lowell and Vincent Agius. And proud of it. It was tolerance that allowed the likes of Hitler and Saddam Hussein to get away with murder for so long. As head of the Church the Pope should take responsibility for any crimes committed by his church, and as a secular country Malta should play no role in welcoming the head of any church to our country. The laqqizmu being shown by our prime minister and president towards the Pope is both nauseating and also provocative to some maltese who look at the Pope as a leader of an oppressive movement, does the President not represent all maltese or not?
@the Pope
if you read this , please note you are not welcome in Malta, please stay away. Go visit the Philippines instead. You will be welcome there for sure.
“…and as a secular country Malta should play no role in welcoming the head of any church to our country.”
There is an obvious problem with that as the pope is not just head of a church, but head of a state as well.
That’s because Lino Cert is incorrect. The President welcomes the Pope as a head of state. The rest of the trip, as the head of a church, and the bumfluffery that goes with it, is hosted by the archbishop. And let’s calibrate our scale of indignation. “Nauseating”? How, then, would you describe any visit by a delegation from China? Or Syria? Or Libya? Or Turkey for that matter. You risk running out of adjectives.
In that case he should receive the same treatment as any other head of state as per protocol, no more and no less.
But he does, Lino. The hysterical screaming nuns aren’t part of the government’s welcome delegation.
@Lino Cert,
I’m sure the pope will take note of your message. Well whether you like it or not we all know that he will be given a great welcome, which he should be, if for no other reason then as a popular (in Malta at least) head of state!
As to being intolerant of Lowell, as much as I hate him the right to be wrong is the mainstay of any democracy. Otherwise you are no better then he is!
Greetings from Paris to all by the way!
Personally, I would not ban any cross from classrooms but simply allow one symbol from any student’s religion of that class.
Otherwise enforcing no symbol is enforcing the “Atheist Religion” – Yes, Atheism has become a religion hell bent (excuse the pun) on forcing their beliefs down other people’s throats.
I KNOW a lot of non-believers aren’t like that and couldn’t be bothered, like Pat I believe, but some, like I believe Lino Cert, have converted atheism to a religion!
@David Buttigieg
And so? What’s your point? Should all atheists put up or shut up? I don’t think so. I have more respect for a Catholic who defends his faith, than for an atheist who knows something is wrong but keeps quiet and allows injustice to carry on, or even worse those who cop out completely by calling themselves agnostic or humanists. I don’t consider this tolerance, rather I would call it cowardice.
Lino, nobody can verify the existence or non-existence of a God-and that is not relevant anyway (= agnosticism).
Oh, can’t let this go…. Humanist and atheist is not the same thing. Humanism is a moral system, devoid of supernatural influence. Although secularism is a corner stone of humanism, you can still be a raving evangelical and a humanist (although not very probable) at the same time. I’m definitely a humanist, as well as an atheist.
Just don’t see why you think that’s a cop-out.
Hi Daphne, I really meant ‘ignosticism’.
http://en.allexperts.com/e/i/ig/ignosticism.htm
(the explanation is a bit better than mine)
@Pat
“Just don’t see why you think that’s a cop-out.”
Because you’re contradicting yourself, that’s why. You cannot be a humanist and an atheist at the same time because they are conflicting beliefs. What you are, in my opinion, is a theist in denial who is still looking for a reason for being in vain.
@Lino Cert
“Should all atheists put up or shut up?”
Put up with what? Someone believing something different then you (in your case your belief is there is no god)? You seem to have a real obsession with convincing people that no god exists – how does that make you any different to an evangelical etc?
Yes for me these AGNOSTICS or ATHEISTS, should be put behind bars and even shot.
What do you want to shoot the ‘unbelievers’ for, Johnny B? For fundamental thinking?
“Because you’re contradicting yourself, that’s why. You cannot be a humanist and an atheist at the same time because they are conflicting beliefs. What you are, in my opinion, is a theist in denial who is still looking for a reason for being in vain.”
How is humanism and atheism conflicting? Humanism is a moral system, atheism is the rejection of a god.
I think you are mixing something up my friend.
Johnny B:
lol
@Pat
“Humanism is a moral system, atheism is the rejection of a god.”
OK I think know your type Pat. So you’re rejecting the presence of a god, but you want most of the paraphernalia and perks that come with theism, i.e. the morals, the yoga, the candles etc. In other words you’ve created a customised religion without a god. A pure atheist believes in nothing of the sort. It is people like you who give atheism a bad name. In the name of the church of pure atheists I excommunicate you and condemn you to burn in hell with all your humanist friends.
“OK I think know your type Pat. So you’re rejecting the presence of a god, but you want most of the paraphernalia and perks that come with theism, i.e. the morals, the yoga, the candles etc.”
Don’t care a bit about the yoga or the candles, but morality, as you should know by now, is not patented by religion. That is the major claim of humanism, that a moral system can be completely devoid of religious influence and further is improved by that very fact.
“In other words you’ve created a customised religion without a god.”
Then what makes it a religion? It is a moral system which have nothing to do with religion.
“A pure atheist believes in nothing of the sort.”
So, are you claiming that a “pure atheist” can have no moral system?
“It is people like you who give atheism a bad name.”
Because I have a moral system?
@Pat
“That is the major claim of humanism, that a moral system can be completely devoid of religious influence and further is improved by that very fact.”
Hogwash, humanism is a religion, or call it a “life stance” if you will, but it is religionesque at the very least.
It is people like yourself, and other more famous bogus self-proclaimed atheists such as Richard Dawkins who give us genuine atheists such a bad name, mixing up their disbelief in God with bizarre irrational stances on morality, arts and literature, all non-existent except in your deluded minds. These stances are confusing people and handing powerful ammunition to the theists, by which they can then attack the very heart of genuine atheism. Real atheists have inhabited this island for many thousands of years, and we don’t need shipwrecking and cross-wielding Catholics or moralistic humanists such as yourself to come invade our island, and stuff your Catholicism and morals down our throat. Go back to your own countries and take your crosses and moralities with you!
[Daphne – This correspondence is now closed. Change the subject.]
“Yes, Atheism has become a religion hell bent (excuse the pun) on forcing their beliefs down other people’s throats”
Utter rubbish.
I rest my case!
And this coming from someone who thinks Agatha Barbara was one of our best presidents!
I’m sorry to say, but the claim that atheism is a religion is such a thorn in my side. Is not collecting stamps a hobby? Is bald a hair colour?
Trying to engage believers and point out where you think they are wrong does not equate to forcing your belief down their throat. We (as in people likeminded to me) simply truly believe there is a better way of life than theism, which we find archaic, mind numbing and in many ways cruel and evil. To claim this makes it a religion is non sensical. Besides, I don’t think its the proselytising part of many religions that actually makes them religion. That would turn political parties, charity organisations and teaching into religions as well.
Are there political symbols in the classroom? Should there be? Is the fact that there are no symbols of the main two political parties a political stance against these two parties? No, of course it isn’t. Same thing goes with religious symbols. Atheism, I have to insist, is a default position. It is the lack of a belief. It’s not a negative, it’s a non-positive. Satanism is a negative to Christianity and Islam. Atheism is neither.
Daphne, if I remember correct, calls herself an agnostic. To me the term is not very useful as once you are agnostic you do lack a belief in God, hence I can’t see in which sense you are not an atheist. Being an atheist, in every practical sense of the word, means you are rejecting all claims made to you by theism and until you are convinced otherwise, the logical conclusion is that there is no God. The default position of existance is non-existance. I’m not agnostic when it comes to yetis, fairies, Nessie or Santa Claus. I don’t believe in them. This does not mean I know for certain they don’t exist, it simply means I have no reason to believe they do.
[Daphne – No, I don’t consider myself agnostic. I consider myself nothing in particular. I’m about as inclined to join a religion as I am to join a club- which means not at all. I’m not hell bent on pigeonholing people and things into compartments, and quite frankly, it’s all irrelevant what one believes or doesn’t believe. It’s what one does and doesn’t do that counts – only. I must be peculiar, but I feel no need to ‘search’ or ‘to believe in something’, and never have.]
Fair enough. Sorry about the misrepresentation, Daphne.
“Atheism, I have to insist, is a default position. It is the lack of a belief”
Well actually the opposite is true – atheism is a very recent phenomenon, until recently the “default position” in Europe was Christianity. Should it still be? Not necessarily, but you are still insisting we follow your “beliefs” – you believe there is no god, WHY should that be the default? Can you prove there is no god any more then I can prove there is?
Perhaps religion is the wrong word but atheism is still a “belief”
Because, as I further explained, the default position of any claim should be a rejection of that claim. If I claim there is a Santa Claus, the default position is to reject that claim until sufficient evidence is presented to the contrary – which has never been done. If I claim there is a continent called Australia the default position is to reject this until sufficient evidence is presented to the contrary – which has been done.
Atheism a recent phenomenon? It is even tackled in the bible, although dates back far before that.
I don’t insist you following my way of thinking. I have never claimed anyone have to give up their belief in a God. What I do claim is that children should be taught truth, not dogma and reason, not faith.
If you want to call it a belief, feel free.
@Daphne,
Maybe a soft agnostic.
@Pat
“Because, as I further explained, the default position of any claim should be a rejection of that claim”
Using that that argument one should reject the claim “there is no God” One will never be able to prove the existence or not of God unlike that of a continent like Australia, so it will remain a matter of faith.
Yes, Atheism IS a recent phenomenon. Yes there have always been atheists as we know them today, but until recently these were considered crazy if not criminals (something I find abominable by the way), and were very few in number. Also the atheism referred to in the Bible refers to people who did not believe in the Christian God, just like today many moslems consider christians and hindus atheists and vice versa.
“What I do claim is that children should be taught truth, not dogma and reason, not faith.”
“What I do claim is that children should be taught truth, not dogma and reason, not faith.”
To many believers their religion is truth and reason so what do you tell them? Don;t teach your children your beliefs?
Final point – we ain’t going to agree I’m sure so have a beer on me and lets agree to disagree!
Vive le difference!
“Using that that argument one should reject the claim ‘there is no God'”
I agree hundred percent. If I, or someone else, makes the claim ‘there is no God’, I think you should reject it. If, on the other hand, I say that all arguments I’ve seen in favour of a God is unconvincing and take into consideration that a negative can’t be proven, then the claim ‘there is no God’ is as rational as ‘there is no fairies’ or ‘there is no Santa Claus’.
Most atheists don’t hold the claim ‘there is no God’ as an absolute truth. What we claim is that as there is no decent evidence in favour of God, it is a more rational approach to reject that claim. Further, as believers have a nagging tendency to impose their views on everything and everyone and unfortunately can have a strongly negative effect (from our point of view) on society as a whole, we do try to engage the issues and arguments at hand.
“Yes, Atheism IS a recent phenomenon. Yes there have always been atheists as we know them today, but until recently these were considered crazy if not criminals (something I find abominable by the way), and were very few in number.”
Atheism is documented, just as an example, in ancient Greece. Perhaps their atheism was slightly different to that of today as they tended to include spirits and other supernatural aspects, but considering the knowledge of the time that made sense. More interestingly, they were early secularists and humanists. Lucretius wrote De rerum natura about a century before Christ, popularising an Epicurian worldview, void of supernatural influence.
“Also the atheism referred to in the Bible refers to people who did not believe in the Christian God, just like today many moslems consider christians and hindus atheists and vice versa.”
The fool has said in his heart there is no God.
“To many believers their religion is truth and reason so what do you tell them? Don;t teach your children your beliefs?”
As a parent I would not impose such a thing, but the underlying problem is that this is done in a classroom.
Can’t agree to disagree. If I did we would miss out on all this lovely discussion.
Morality comes from within not from God – your values represents your morality – God has nothing to do with it.
Daphne, the more you try to justify your position, the weaker your arguments become!
Thousands were crucified, yes, and maybe thousands were fed to the lions but none was the Son of God (that is, if you believe).
The thousands crucified as you yourself claimed, were common criminals and suffered maybe just as much, but of what crime can you accuse Christ?
[Daphne – Of what crime can you accuse the many millions who were killed because of their religion? The definition of ‘common criminal’ is the then contemporary one, not mine, as is the definition of rebel. It is not one we share in the present day. Christ was crucified not because he was the son of God (he wasn’t thought to be the son of God, not even he thought of himself that way – that was a later projection), but because he was defined as a common criminal, rebel or nuisance, possibly all three. Again, that is not my definition. He was those things by the definition of the times.]
Those fed to the lions or burned or had their head detached from their neck because they were found to be Christians, are recognized as martyrs and therefore saints in the view of the Church.
[Daphne – If everybody who was tortured and killed because of his or her Christian faith were to be recognised as a saint, the hagiographers would be in serious trouble. Countless thousands, if not millions, were killed for that reason over the centuries. And then we have to consider the millions who were murdered because they were not Christian, including within living memory by the Nazis. Was their sacrifice and suffering any less? I hardly think so.]
So, should we remove crucifixes just so we forget the past? Or, so as to make sure we do not offend the nonbelievers? I hope that you do not agree with the two above suggestions because if you do, then you have to erase every bit you wrote regarding the MLP’s past, that is if you want to be credible.
After all what is good for the goose is good for the gander, no?
[Daphne – You are confusing issues. Only today a university lecturer told me what problems he has with the absolute dearth of logical thinking among students even in the fourth year. He wondered what he could do. I said ‘nothing’ because at that stage it’s way too late. The damage is done in childhood. You can’t teach children logical thought for use in maths and chemistry and geography and then boss them into irrational thinking for religion. They pick up on the message that if irrational thinking is OK for religion, then it should be OK for everything else – and hey presto, we have a nation of irrational thinkers of all ages, from nine to 90. Children find it is easier and more acceptable to apply irrational thinking to all subjects outside religion than to apply logical thinking to religion, for which they are chastised more severely than they are in the application of irrational thinking to biology. It’s not the religion that bothers me, but the way it messes with children’s ability to develop clear-thinking skills. Clear thinking is to me way more important and useful than religion.]
I have to comment on the logical thinking bit, as I see this all the time. I’m not in a position to say this is due to religious teaching in Malta, but it’s about time that people wake up and see what a problem it has become.
Personally I head the web department in our company and to find decent staff is becoming impossible. If you are a university graduate from any Northern European country no one would think twice about hiring you. It would mean you have passed extensive training in programming, in which common logic is an absolute necessity. In Malta, I wouldn’t even consider someone who hasn’t had further experience, as I know the vast majority of graduates simply don’t have the proper thinking to solve problems. Please note that I’m generalising and I have seen some brilliant exceptions. But a three- to four-year university course in development should produce a top worker. The fact that it doesn’t is a real shame.
My seven-year-old daughter yesterday told her father, who had tried to get her to say grace before lunch, that he had better thank Mummy instead, because she’s the one who made the food.
She doesn’t see the logic in the prayer because she is aware that there are children her age who are have to beg/scavenge for food, if they are lucky enough to get any at all, so it would be an odd sort of God that gives to some but not to others.
O thy Lord forgive us, because sometimes we don’t know what we are saying.
[Daphne – Count me out. I always know what I’m saying and if I ever live to regret it and feel I have to ask forgiveness, it will be from the person I have upset and not from God, who has more important things to be getting on with.]
@ daphne: “Count me out. I always know what I’m saying…”
and just a comment ahead we find
“Christ was crucified not because he was the son of God … but because he was defined as a common criminal, rebel or nuisance, possibly all three.”
Possibly? are you sure?
[Daphne – How can anyone be sure that he even existed? I’m not saying he didn’t. I’m just reminding you that it’s a matter of faith.]
Who is asking whether he existed? Your comment is not said in that context.
Daphne, there were records of Jesus from other sources other than the Bible showing that Jesus truly existed whether He was the Son of God or not is for you to believe. But there are historical records which have been verified that do confirm the existence of Jesus.
[Daphne – No doubt. Just as present-day records will demonstrate, 2000 years hence, the existence of somebody called John.]
Yanika:
Only from second or third hand accounts.
Personally I don’t have much doubt that he did exist, but to claim that the historical records proves it is going too far.
‘Personally I don’t have much doubt that he did exist, but to claim that the historical records proves it is going too far.’
Pat, so you believe something which has not been proven scientifically?! – you said you don’t have much doubt that he existed, but then in the same breath say that to claim that historical records prove it is going too far. Well, then you believe things you were told – which for you, is quite contradictory (given the comments you added here).
There were in fact records, written by people who were not Christians (or followers of Christ) who did document the existence of Christ, and if those are not historical records, then I don’t know what is. Check this out: http://www.cfmin.com/wp1/?p=577
By the way Pat, do you just contradict what I say because you don’t agree with my beliefs?!
@Daphne… yes, but every John is different, and may have something that distinguishes him, otherwise it would be a real tricky business to locate this John, whoever he is. Let’s say Jesus was a bit of a shock for his time… he would have stood out, and thus, his actions documented. I’m sure that 2000 years from now on, Obama (for example) will not be a complete non-entity, so historical records might still exist to confirm his existence.
[Daphne – And then somebody might claim he’s the son of God and turn him into a religion.]
Yanika:
I stand by what I said. Looking at the historical records it is very likely he existed, but they in no way prove it. Even the link you provided clearly shows that there are no documented first hand accounts of his existence.
Also, I don’t expect it to be shown scientifically; I expect it to be shown historically. Of course I can choose to believe things I’m told. An argument from authority should be questioned, but is in no way faulty by default. I don’t disagree with you because we have different beliefs, but because I think you were wrong.
its funny how the mother decided for the child and the child’s opinion is never mentioned…a mother like yourself perhaps who hates the church and wants to bring it down…nothing to be proud of I can assure you..I still remember ..nghidu talba ta filodu fil bitha…ovvjament nistghu ninsuha dik…l innu malta..? li jitlob l Alla biex iharisna ..nehhewh ukoll? if you are an atheist then the cross for you is just a piece of wood so why should it bother you? or maybe you want to decide for others…my final say is ..if it bothers you fair enough..but their are other parents other kids..if it bothers a majority then it will be removed…the teacher and students should decide..neither me nor you. And about your logical thinking…there is no rational explanation for life neither from science..so science cant explain how something can start from nothing either.
[Daphne – I don’t hate ‘the church’, Mark (which church, by the way?). It’s just not my choice, that’s all. Others are free to espouse any religion they please, and I am free to espouse none at all. ‘The mother decides for the child and the child’s opinion is never mentioned’ – yes, it’s awful, isn’t it, all those thousands of Maltese children being brought up in a religion most of them will grow up to ditch when they get a chance (even if they still call themselves Catholics). ‘Science can’t explain how something can start from nothing’ – none of us start from nothing, Mark. Take some biology lessons.]
“And about your logical thinking…there is no rational explanation for life neither from science..so science cant explain how something can start from nothing either.”
That statement is completely useless until you can show that there ever was a state of nothingness. As Victor Stenger had pointed out, a state of nothingness is unstable and cannot keep existing, so if there ever was such a state it would not, or rather could not, remain that way.
There are rational explanations for life. Scientists studying abiogenesis have come quite far on the subject, especially in comparison to the goat herders and bronze age ignoramuses that wrote the bible. If you think it’s more rational to stick to smoeone claiming to have all the answers without backing it up, rather to someone who openly admits there is a great deal we do not know but are working on, then that’s your prerogative.
The cross is a religious symbol, whether you are a Christian or not. If there were crescent moons, pentagrams, stars of David, or noodle bowls placed all over the classrooms I’m sure you would take heed, despite not believing in those deities. Or, perhaps you wouldn’t, but you should.
Pat I hope youre joking…
why don’t you ask turkey to remove their crescent…their islamic towers, which are very imposing …their shouting of allah u akbar in the early morning…in public areas…their public executions ..oh maybe that’s good for the kids…daphne I don’t need any biology lessons…ok so maybe the bible is just wishful thinking..maybe you’re right….still science doesn’t begin to answer any of the questions either..where does the universe end and how? a brick wall perhaps..or is it endless? haha ..who or what created the universe , life…was it just a conicidence? an explosion a big bang theory that started with microbes/bacteria and we come from these same bacteria, and million of years later(evolution)from monkeys ? hehe never liked that thought …what’s unacceptable for me is that we are appeasing them by becoming secular..while in their countries apostates are slaughtered. A one sided deal. Let’s finally recognize that this whole immigration/secularism/removing crucifix combatting islamophobia ideas were shady deals (between Zapatero and Turkey who co sponsored it. What about our side of the bargain..what about westernophobia, christianophobia, catholicophobia hahaha..what about the human rights of people slaughtered in stadiums in their countries…young girls buried in sand and stoned to death because of adultery. honor killing rape genitalia mutilation, the list is endless. A deal should be benficial for both sides..not just one sided..It seems there are other factors at hand..maybe turkey’s rising influence and the new gas pipeline passing thru turkey avoiding russia to europe. Maybe becuase in countries like spain and france muslim communities (obviously from immigration) will soon half the population in these countries…is it the same for malta? fortunately no..daphne one question and please be honest..would you honestly want this country to have half its population muslims as in france spain in some years germany sweden denmark etc…the only thing that spared us from being islamized already is that the immigrants are coming from africa and not turkey…i pity african immigrants nowadays because I’m realizing they are being used as pawns and do not care about religions much ..they care about their well being and so should we (ajdlu johrogom mil gageg l gonzi kif tridom jintegraw titrattahom t annimali)..finally I’d prefer this country to be without religions that 2 competing religions that is certain. And that first they should stop the wars in middle east before talking about integrating..becuase war is creating terrorism and terrorism creates racism.
thanks
Mark
Mark:
For goodness sake, learn to write a sentence. It’s not exactly a difficult task to start a sentence with a capital letter and end with ONE (not three) full stop.
“Pat I hope youre joking…”
Not at the moment, no.
“why don’t you ask turkey to remove their crescent…their islamic towers, which are very imposing …their shouting of allah u akbar in the early morning…in public areas”
What makes you think I wouldn’t want those removed? Turkey is technically a secular state, although they breach in many ways, just as Malta does. Saying that, this discussion wasn’t about Turkey, so what’s your point?
Also, as far as I know Turkey does not practice public executions.
“daphne I don’t need any biology lessons…ok so maybe the bible is just wishful thinking..maybe you’re right….still science doesn’t begin to answer any of the questions either..where does the universe end and how? a brick wall perhaps..or is it endless? haha ..who or what created the universe , life…was it just a conicidence? an explosion a big bang theory that started with microbes/bacteria and we come from these same bacteria, and million of years later(evolution)from monkeys ? hehe never liked that thought”
Oh for goodness sake, you start by claiming you don’t need a biology lesson and then continue to prove a complete ignorance to even the most basic biology. Science does not have all answers, something no one ever claimed. But what on earth makes you think religion does? Religion claims to, but in reality it’s just guesswork.
“hat’s unacceptable for me is that we are appeasing them by becoming secular..
…
honor killing rape genitalia mutilation, the list is endless.”
As this whole case was by a Finnish woman, with no known ties to Islam I’m going to publicly declare you a complete moron.
“[Islamophobic rubbish]
…
And that first they should stop the wars in middle east before talking about integrating..becuase war is creating terrorism and terrorism creates racism.”
You speak about Turkey, which is currently not involved in any war. You speak about the immigrants to Malta, the majority of which are not from the middle east.
“thanks
Mark”
You’re welcome.
Pat, it’s useless attempting to converse with Markie. The aliens forgot to remove his anal probe.
Markie, Don’t you realize that there are enough people to hate in the world without you putting in so much effort?
As you rightly pointed out, crucifixion was the standard mode of execution under Roman rule. Christ was one of many rebels and trouble stirrers who were dealt with in the normal way. Had he simply claimed that he was the son of god, he would have been laughed at and dismissed as a lunatic.
Another point concerns Christ’s suffering which has been glorified as if he was the only one who suffered. His suffering lasted less than 24 hours, and it was over, if it happened at all and if we are to believe the gospels written from memory with a political slant several years after the events. Over the millennia, up to this very day, there were/are millions of people throughout the world who are enduring far worse and interminable suffering than Christ ever did.
As for the Malta Constitution, it is a typical contradiction. It states that it protects freedom of thought but in the same breath imposes the Roman Catholic religion on all citizens, arguably giving rights to the authorities to take legal action against dissenters, as has been suggested by Vincent Agius. Is this Malta or Afghanistan?
Er, the constitution imposes no religion on any citizen, and does not give the authorities the right to prosecute dissenters. I suggest you all calm down. Afghanistan indeed. I’ve yet to see adulterers being stoned at the National Stadium. Talk about a storm in a teacup.
The constitution does in fact impose the Catholic religion. Just read it. No constitution should have reference to any religion. Such mentality belongs to the Dark Ages, not to the 21st century. All European countries that made progress in leaps and bounds ditched religion and became secular. Religion is a private matter, not a state matter. Religion is a state matter in countries like Afghanistan and Iran. But Malta has to be odd ball. No wonder we lag so far behind.
The constitution does not oblige any Maltese citizen to be a Roman Catholic. Therefore it does not “impose” anything.
Daphne, your (part) quote, “…but because he was defined as a common criminal, rebel or nuisance, possibly all three”.
It is also written that Pontius Pilate “washed his hands” and proclaimed that ‘he could not find fault’ with Jesus and handed him over to the mob! Now, who do we believe, you, or what has been recorded and undisputed over 2000 years?
[Daphne – Undisputed? Hardly. Taken as a matter of faith is more likely, with the faith of others respected similarly, which is why I never discuss these things usually because any such discussion only serves to upset others and is ultimately boring and pointless. You can’t have a discussion where one person comes from a rational standpoint and the other from a position of faith. It’s impossible. I’m not trying to disprove anything, because I honestly don’t care what you believe in and truly, it is irrelevant to my life and to the lives of millions who really don’t care either way. I merely find it mildly interesting in an academic sort of way, but when people start getting hysterical and defensive about their faith, I switch off.]
With regards to “Countless thousands, if not millions, were killed for that reason (being Christian) over the centuries”, whether officially recognized (by name) by the Church or not, they are still regarded as saints, hence the annual celebration of ‘All Saints’ Day’.
Being of a strong opinion, and on this subject against may others’ does not demonstrate ‘clear thinking’ and referring to your discussion with a university professor on something completely extraneous to the subject, does not back you up at all. And you accused me of confusing issues?
[Daphne – What university professor? I said ‘somebody who lectures at the university’. Yes, the two are linked: Maltese children are actually trained to think irrationally, or at least to regard irrational thinking as acceptable. This is because religious indoctrination makes up a crucial part of their education (through Muzew, not the school system), and it is rooted in irrational thinking. Children are encouraged to think irrationally, and they are actively or even forcefully discouraged from thinking rationally. It is becoming a problem even in ordinary RE lessons in schools. My eldest son, a rational thinker from birth, told me at the age of 12 that he wanted to drop RE classes permanently and would I please write to the headmaster to give my permission because he couldn’t stand it anymore. I did. The other two are fiercely rational thinkers too, but their approach to the situation was different: instead of getting into arguments with their teacher, they would go along with it and write the ‘correct’ answers in examination papers, rather than what they really thought. Their reasoning was that they might as well get another O-level out of it. The point is, you can’t expect children who are rational, who think rationally, to suddenly suspend rational thinking for the purpose of RE or duttrina.]
I know you are too busy to consult the Holy Bible which, by the way contains accounts of the same events, by four different authors at different times and who cannot possibly be accused of being all wrong or in collusion.
But then, maybe, you will some day get a copy of the Bible and treat it as you would any other piece of fiction. Maybe, at some point, you will change your mind!
[Daphne – The assumption that only Catholics read the Bible, when it is usually Catholics who don’t because they were discouraged from doing so and encouraged to rely on interpretation by an intermediary, is really quite condescending. The Bible is not documentary evidence, nor is it a piece of fiction. It is a mish-mash of many things and I’m not going into them here. I am not emotional about the subject and won’t discuss it with anyone who is. To understand the Bible, the background you need is not purely religious. You also need a sound understanding of the history, prehistory, customs and beliefs of Syro-Palestine and what is today known as the Middle East.]
Daphne …your children’s ‘rationality’ comes only becuase they copied you..just like any kid…they copy their parents…just like the kid who’s father watched and admired hitler…children of catholics or vegetarians end up mostly as catholics or vegeterians…bla bla etc…children emulate..they copy their parents..if you swear ..they will end up swearing ..etc…doesn’t mean they are more rational ..or intelligent than other kids. And by claiming that your way of thinking is the only rational thinking…well I guess that proves you are in fact irrational.
[Daphne – Oh baby, I’d so much rather they turned out like you.]
Daphne. Markie is a perfect example of why some animals eat their children.
Funny how democracy works: one citizen asks for the removal of a crucifix from the classroom of her child and all the classrooms of Europe will soon be asked to oblige.
Let me explain it to you… Democracy does not operate by the will of the majority, as is commonly thought, but on principles and rights. The right to vote in your government is but one democratic principle. The right of all citizens to have their beliefs and thoughts respected and recognised is another. In this case it’s a question of secularism. It can surely be argued whether secularism is a necessity to form a democracy, although I think the argument against have so far failed.
Pat , I don’t know whether you knew this before you came here, but Malta is NOT a secular state.
John:
I’m very aware of that fact, which is why I think that should change.
Pat, it would be useless to declare this or that in a constitution, if the people do not accept what is being ordered from ‘above’ the opposite of the desired effect will happen.
Just look at what happened after Franco’s ‘religious’ dictatorship in Spain. On a smaller scale: in Malta the feast of St Paul Shipwrecked which is held in Valletta was dying a natural death in Mintoff’s time. Then old Dom removed this feast from a public holiday together with those of Imnarja, Saint Joseph, Independence Day and Immaculate Conception. No need telling you that these dying feasts got a big boost in their popularity in no time.
Pat, it would be useless to declare this or that in a constitution, if the people do not accept what is being ordered from ‘above’ the opposite of the desired effect will happen. Just look at what happened after Franco’s ‘religious’ dictatorship in Spain.
On an even smaller scale, just take a look at the change of name of Rabat to Victoria in Gozo. After more than a century people still refer to Gozo’s ‘capital’ as Ir-Rabat just as they still refer to Independence Square as It-Tokk.
Any imposed unpopular measures will be counterproductive and will only serve to antagonise the people from their leaders.
[Daphne – That’s because Rabat isn’t a name but a descriptive noun which means the suburb outside the citadel. People say ‘ir-Rabat’ in the same way they say ‘il-Belt’. I don’t see anyone calling Mdina Notabile, though the change of name must have been unpopular with some.]
Daphne, you are wrong on this one, many villages in Gozo have an article: In-Nadur, Ix-Xewkija, il-Qala, Iz-Zebbug, L-Imgarr, Ir-Rabat.
[Daphne – Who mentioned the definite article? I didn’t. I remarked that the reason why people resisted the name change is because it wasn’t a name to start with, and so is ’embedded’ in the language. Il-Belt isn’t Maltese for Valletta, but have you ever heard anyone say ‘Jien se mmur sa’ Valletta illum’? It’s just an idea.]
Yes, Ir-Rabat means the suburb: the place ‘tied’ to the city. No one in modern Malta would think of this place name as ‘the suburb’ as no one would think of ‘In-Nadur’ as the ‘highest place’, or Ix-Xewkija as ‘the thorny place’.
The crucifix not only instills fear – it was designed to do exactly that. The whole Catholic faith is based on fear: fear of hell, fear of divine judgement, fear of punishment, fear (in the Maltese environment) of being the odd one out.
This fear is what made control possible for so long – control by the prelates of the rest of society. Our Catholic forefathers have a lot to answer in instilling mindsets such as Vincent Agius’s. He is so very afraid and fearful of a secular society because if he joins a secular society all his fear and hope and redemption would have been for naught and he is scared of going to hell and being punished for his thoughts.
This is exactly what Orwell described in “1984”. No child is going to tell their parents/carers/priests of their fear of the crucifix – for fear of being punished and going to hell. A child brought up in such an environment keeps that emotion to himself but by dint of that environment would be strongly encouraged to avoid thinking about such things and to suppress related emotions – thus creating a complete denial of the very emotion that clearly exists.
This is why there are so many who claim that children are not terrified by the crucifix. Those who believe that the crucifix does not instill fear in children are either in complete denial, are fearful of the consequences of accepting/believing this (punishment in hell), or have elephant hides.
The only thing I used to fear as a child was the dentist and I still do to this very day. And yet, it didn’t keep away from the bags of jelly-tots and the mountains of kit-kat bars.
Seriously though, once you open the floodgates, where do you draw the line ? It wouldn’t surprise me that some atheist will now start taking offence at the mere mention of the word God. The reference to God is intrinsic to Western societies so much so that even national anthems such as the Maltese and the British make explicit mention of the Creator.
Ironically, the European anthem comes from the theistic works of a Roman Catholic composer who used to claim that “God is closer to me than others of my art”.
The European Court of Human Rights should have dismissed the case , and replied as the Australian Prime Minister feels on such issues…
[Daphne – David, the case wasn’t brought by a Muslim. It was brought by somebody who doesn’t espouse any religion at all. She is a Finnish woman, an EU citizen, and far from having the right to leave Italy, she had the right to treat it as her own home. Europe has no borders to its citizens, remember? Hardly the same as Australia. It wouldn’t be much of a European Union if we began telling people, listen if you don’t like it, go back where you came from.]
Prime Minister Kevin Rudd – Australia
Muslims who want to live under Islamic Sharia law were told on Wednesday to get out of Australia , as the government targeted radicals in a bid to head off potential terror attacks..
Separately, Rudd angered some Australian Muslims on Wednesday by saying he supported spy agencies monitoring the nation’s mosques. Quote:
‘IMMIGRANTS, NOT AUSTRALIANS, MUST ADAPT. Take It Or Leave It. I am tired of this nation worrying about whether we are offending some individual or their culture. Since the terrorist attacks on Bali , we have experienced a surge in patriotism by the majority of Australians. ‘
‘This culture has been developed over two centuries of struggles, trials and victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom’
‘We speak mainly ENGLISH, not Spanish, Lebanese, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other language. Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society . Learn the language!’
‘Most Australians believe in God. This is not some Christian, right wing, political push, but a fact, because Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools. If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home, because God is part of our culture..’
‘We will accept your beliefs, and will not question why. All we ask is that you accept ours, and live in harmony and peaceful enjoyment with us.’
‘This is OUR COUNTRY, OUR LAND, and OUR LIFESTYLE, and we will allow you every opportunity to enjoy all this. But once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about Our Flag, Our Pledge, Our Christian beliefs, or Our Way of Life, I highly encourage you take advantage of one other great Australian freedom, ‘THE RIGHT TO LEAVE’.’
‘If you aren’t happy here then LEAVE. We didn’t force you to come here. You asked to be here. So accept the country YOU accepted.’
!
Prime Minister Kevin Rudd – Australia
Muslims who want to live under Islamic Sharia law were told on Wednesday to get out of Australia , as the government targeted radicals in a bid to head off potential terror attacks..
Separately, Rudd angered some Australian Muslims on Wednesday by saying he supported spy agencies monitoring the nation’s mosques. Quote:
‘IMMIGRANTS, NOT AUSTRALIANS, MUST ADAPT. Take It Or Leave It. I am tired of this nation worrying about whether we are offending some individual or their culture. Since the terrorist attacks on Bali , we have experienced a surge in patriotism by the majority of Australians. ‘
‘This culture has been developed over two centuries of struggles, trials and victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom’
‘We speak mainly ENGLISH, not Spanish, Lebanese, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other language. Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society . Learn the language!’
‘Most Australians believe in God. This is not some Christian, right wing, political push, but a fact, because Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools. If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home, because God is part of our culture..’
‘We will accept your beliefs, and will not question why. All we ask is that you accept ours, and live in harmony and peaceful enjoyment with us.’
‘This is OUR COUNTRY, OUR LAND, and OUR LIFESTYLE, and we will allow you every opportunity to enjoy all this. But once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about Our Flag, Our Pledge, Our Christian beliefs, or Our Way of Life, I highly encourage you take advantage of one other great Australian freedom, ‘THE RIGHT TO LEAVE’.’
‘If you aren’t happy here then LEAVE. We didn’t force you to come here. You asked to be here. So accept the country YOU accepted.’
what a perfect speech…why should we end up in sharia law daphne and bend over to please them…tollerance is one thing…so a burglar comes into your house (illegal immigrant) the local priest tells you listen..feed him and house him becuase out here he will be abused and persecuted…so you feed him ..dress him…then he will order you to change your lifestyle your traditions etc.in your own house. I dont agree that he has as much right as me in my country…My grandparents etc worked in this land and gave to this country taxes etc…what did they give this country..nothing zilch nada. haha daphne why don’t you want your kids to turn out like me haha..becuase I’m anti immigrant?
[Daphne – No. Because you are quite clearly an arsehole of limited intelligence, who can’t even put a sentence together.]
jahasra what about dyslexic kids you hate them also hehe they can’t put words together.quhquh
Erm . . . here it says that the above speech is a hoax:
http://www.reconciliationtalk.com/2009/02/beware-the-hoax-muslims-out-of-australia-speech.html
http://www.hoax-slayer.com/howard-muslim-speech.shtml
Daphne, the point is that each EU country has its own particular traditions and culture. If the Finnish woman was unhappy with crucifixes in Italian classrooms she could have gone back to Finland and enjoy her saunas. What if there is no Finnish sauna in her adopted Italian town, would she again take it up with the ECHR? The reality is that this “political correctness ” and pseudo human rights has really gone too far.
According to Gaddafi, it wasn’t him…
read fourth paragraph from the bottom:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/nov/16/gaddafi-women-islam-rome
Daphne,
I assumed that ”somebody who lectures at the university’, was a professor since you always boast of going right to the top when you (rarely) need clarification on some issue. My apologies for being wrong.
Various accounts of a singular event even if spread over 33 years which stood the test of two thousand years is more than an assumption, hearsay or just fertile imagination.
We live in a Catholic country so I do not find it strange at all that our children are educated about the religion their parents were brought up in, just as much as Jewish children are taught about their Jewish faith and rightly so. Many religions have fundamentalist groups such as the Moslems have sects which encourage martyrdom through suicide bombing, so do we condemn the teaching of Islam outright?
Catholics were discouraged from reading the Bible in an era when few knew how to read Maltese, let alone Latin and later, just as few who could read English and properly translate into Maltese. Misinterpreting words contained in the Bible was more dangerous than not reading it at all!
If atheists have no belief at all about godly matters why does a crucifix bother them, let alone trying to impose their non-belief on others? They should live and let live! Surely one cannot assume that a crucifix hanging on a wall is either imposing on or trying to persuade others to convert to Catholicism. You must encounter a crucifix at just about every corner of every street in Malta however they have hardly changed your views about practising the form of religion as the majority does.
Heaven forbid you were the least bit emotional about the subject!
[Daphne – Actually, Jomar, the majority doesn’t practise. It only preaches.]
I suggest a referendum on the issue…if atheists plus other minorities get 51% for its removal then they should be removed..no questions asked….isn’t that the way our voting system works..the way democracy works..we will never all agree on any single issue…so it goes down to voting..1 person cannot impose his views on 10 people…that seems logical. and yes 10 people can impose on that 1 person..without infringeing his basic rights..but then one might claim they are infringeing his rights..being a minority..so it’s tricky.
I usually agree with most of what Daphne writes but cannot accept what she says about the crucifix. I have been amongst atheists, Muslims, Jews during the desert war almost 70 years ago praying – yes praying – before a single crucifix – held up by our military non-Catholic padre at a service which always took place before we went into action. It did not save many of them from death but at least they felt, like I did, that if the worst came about we would be going to a better life. We were afraid, yes, but it was a comfort to have faith.
Mr. Clews, there are no atheists in foxholes.
That is what believers like to think.
No Twanny, that is what people who are scared shitless think.
Probably true – people who are “scared shitless” don’t think straight. They clutch at any staw (or fantasy) to relieve the fear.
One takes on the religion of the family/country he is born into. It is a rare occurrence that one changes his religion when grown up. Choice of religion is chance as much as the lotto is. As for the New Testament, it was written at least 160 years after the claimed facts. Considering that two thousand years ago the average life span was below 50 it is obvious that it is all hearsay, from grandparents to parents to grandchildren. After which all that survived up to the year 325 was butchered at the Council of Nicaea to suit the power-mongers of the period. Later those that were/are called the ‘santi padri’ came along and claimed that they and they alone had the authority to interpret what was left. Now please somebody recount the story of the man who was swallowed by a whale and spat on another shore after three days.
This debate shows what a powerful hold symbology has and will continue to have on most members of society. It has nothing to do with practice and respect of any faith or religion, but about the ownership and power projection of my symbol over yours. It is as old as the hills.
why are elephant hides better than crocodile skins? and why is designed in italics. Its not how I wrote it.
[Daphne – Because the expression is ‘you’ve got to have the hide of an elephant’, and not ‘you’ve got to have the skin of a crocodile’.]
@ David S
I had received the email you refer to supposedly attributed to John Howard who was Australian prime minister at the time. At the time I had seen it strange that the head of state of any country would utter such inflammatory words. So I googled “John Howard fake email”, sure enough it turns out to be a fake. See http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/rudds-spicy-spam-hit/story-e6frgdk6-1225772043170 or http://www.hoax-slayer.com/howard-muslim-speech.shtml
Today this same fake email was quoted in an opinion column on The Times. Good to see that these said columnists conduct in depth scientific research. What next quoting Beano and Dandy?
@Kikku
John’s speech may well be a fabrication but it still portrays the stark reality of the Australian continent nevertheless –
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsiKVc028I0
Have you seen the latest on the famous cemetery photo shoot? Do you really think that people are offended?
[Daphne – No. And what’s more, the Broadcasting Authority didn’t canvas public opinion and claims to speak for the public.]
Sometimes I think people just enjoy complaining and protesting and don’t miss the chance when they see what could be a valid excuse for doing so.
I mean really… jew ghax condoms, jew ghax kliem vulgari, jew ghax ic cimiterju . ….. Ma nafx jien, since i’ve been there last, the Angelik vision must have illuminated everyone or something.
Soon we’ll be the “Vatikan f’nofs il Mediterran”.
Vera anjuranti.
“Soon we’ll be the “Vatikan f’nofs il Mediterran”
We have always been.
I’m with those who feel that a crucifix in the classroom is no big deal as far as children are concerned. I would have my doubts whether there were any crucifixes at all if I didn’t know this for a fact. But there are other things. When I was a small boy, my parents took me with them to the cinema to see Spartacus. Someday I have to ask them whether they did this as a treat, as a deterrent or simply because they couldn’t find someone to look after me – we were living in England at the time – but anyway, that scene towards the end with all those real men crucified and dying did impress and scare me.
Fast forward a couple of years and it was Christian doctrine lessons at tal-M.U.S.E.U.M. Here we were a bunch of kids being shown movies of prisoners going through a horrible time in a Nazi concentration camp and a priest who offers himself to be killed by starvation in place of another. Then there was this French girl who ends up getting burnt alive by the English. I’m not belittling what these persons did, but is this the stuff you show to nine year-olds?
Then there were these two framed pictures at some relatives; one showed a dying man who had lived a good life surrounded by smiling angels and the other a wicked man being dragged off his bed by ugly devils. Now that one did scare the sh*t out of me. If you’re going to have any Christian images in a classroom, put up a picture of a smiling Jesus playing with children, and try and move away from a faith that’s based on fear.
Right on topic:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-WJO0YQLOs
Thellmu hafna nies. Issa irriflettu ftit. Araw x’tahseb Omm dak ta’ fuq il-kurcifiss.
Messaġġ tal-25 ta’ Novembru, 2009. Borġ in-Nadur
Għeżież uliedi u wliedi ta’ qalbi! Dan il-messaġġ għal Fr Hayden biex jgħaddih lin-nies.
Bħalissa, uliedi, fuq l-Ewropa għaddejja mewġa kbira. Ix-xitan qed jirbaħ fuq l-Ewropa – il-mewġa favur l-abort, favur id-divorzju, favur is-separazzjonijiet, kontra l-kurċifiss. Għaddejjin ħafna affarijiet, uliedi. Qegħdin jiltaqgħu f’ħafna laqgħat f’pajjiżi differenti biex jippruvaw jirranġaw jew itejbu s-sitwazzjonijiet li mingħalihom jagħmluhom tajbin. Jiddiskutu f’laqgħa kontra laqgħa u jagħmlu liġijiet ġodda. Jivvutaw bejniethom biex jaraw fejn hi l-maġġoranza.
Uliedi, pero dak li huwa essenzjali qatt ma ħaduh magħhom: l-Evanġelju, uliedi! Li kellhom jimxu biss fuq l-Evanġelju ta’ Ibni Ġesù, biżżejjed. Hu jurikom id-dawl, il-ħajja u l-fidi. Imma, le, dawn mhux hekk. Dawn mingħalihom kapaċi jimxu mingħajr Alla fil-ħajja tagħhom. Dejjem mingħalihom li se jagħmlu triqat fil-baħar mingħajr problemi ta’ xejn.
Laqgħa kontra laqgħa u dejjem fl-istess nasba jerġgħu jaqgħu. Fl-Ewropa hemm bżonn li terġgħu ddaħħlu lil Ibni Ġesù. Ġie mwarrab. Qed jiġi mwarrab. Igħidulek: “Dak kien żmien li għadda. Illum żmien ieħor.”
Uliedi, kunu eżempju intom għall-Ewropa. Agħtu x-xhieda tagħkom u dejjem ibqgħu sodi fit-twemmin tagħkom.
Mr. Scicluna, this is what the Maltese (Kattolici ferventi) wanted when they voted YES for EU.
The EU has no borders. Our country doesn’t belong only to us. Malta has become also someone else’s homeland. We have to accept what we voted for. “Trid tispicca l-mentalita’ ta’ min ma joghgbux jitlaq minn fejn gie”.
In our Catholic Malta there is no abortion and divorce. Maltese woman abort in Sicily, just 30 minutes flight away from Malta, and separated couples who are starting another family outside their marriage have become the order of the day.
We all knew what could happen before we voted YES.
[Daphne – And we all know it has nothing to do with EU membership. Maltese women have been aborting in London and Catania ever since London and Catania have had abortion clinics. Indeed, several of the (illegal) abortion clinics were run by Maltese in London, who needed the serve to sort out their ‘girls’ who got into trouble. In the novel I’m currently reading (Tony Parsons, The Family Way, a retired actress reminisces about how all the girls used to get ‘fixed’ by a Maltese man. And you don’t break up your marriage and start another family thanks to your EU passport.]
Uff xi dwejjaq!!! But why do certain religious images look so scary and sad? Iconography is a clear example.
Unless you believe that He is the Son of God you will never understand the cross nor why believers find gratitude and consolation in their reverence to it. May you one day use your freedom to accept this gift of faith.