'It's Personal' - TV show

Commentary on and links to religion or atheism in the media
Post Reply
Feardorcha
Atheist Ireland Member
Atheist Ireland Member
Posts: 1266
Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 4:28 pm

'It's Personal' - TV show

Post by Feardorcha » Tue Nov 15, 2011 4:39 pm

Tonight at 10.15 on RTE 1 there is a programme about Muslims in Ireland in which Ian O'Doherty (described by the Sunday Times as a 'self-proclaimed atheist') spends a week with some Muslims (presumably self-proclaimed Muslims).
The Sunday Times, a self-proclaimed newspaper, tells me it is the second of two parts. Might be worth a look.
dugges
Atheist Ireland Member
Atheist Ireland Member
Posts: 577
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 10:34 pm
Location: Baile átha Cliath

Re: 'It's Personal' - TV show

Post by dugges » Tue Nov 15, 2011 8:09 pm

He's on the bigot side of things, rather than intellectual critisims of Islam. MPAC (sniff) were a hobby horse of his.

He's not on the pro secular and atheist advocy side either, he spoke at one of the 1st AI meetings, but for some reason wanted to distance himself from the organisation as we're "boring"
BET SHE'S A BARREL OF LAUGHS

After speaking at a previous meeting for Atheist Ireland, I decided that I would never have anything to do with atheists ever again.

Don't get me wrong, some of them are grand and good company but my Jesus -- as it were -- some of them are so dour and earnest that it's just not worth the effort.

So I steered well clear of the recent Atheist Conference held in Dublin on the grounds that it would be mind-numbingly dull and full of self-righteous bores.

And it looks like I may have made the right call.

One of the attendees was feminist activist of 'Skepchick' Rebecca Watson, who had a rather terrifying experience -- a guy hit on her in the lift.

This freaked our feminist heroine so much that she blogged: "It makes me uncomfortable when men sexualise me in that manner."

And what did this sex pest do? Did he touch her inappropriately? Stand uncomfortably close to her? Make lewd remarks?

Um, not quite -- he said he found some of what she said fascinating and asked would she like to join him for a coffee.

The absolute monster, he should be ashamed of himself.
http://www.independent.ie/opinion/colum ... 18516.html
"Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?"
Douglas Adams
paolovf
Atheist Ireland Member
Atheist Ireland Member
Posts: 257
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 3:58 pm

Re: 'It's Personal' - TV show

Post by paolovf » Wed Nov 16, 2011 11:33 am

For those who missed it, the episode is on RTE Player http://www.rte.ie/player/#!v=1121916
Cato
Posts: 28
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 9:32 am
Location: Galway

Re: 'It's Personal' - TV show

Post by Cato » Wed Nov 16, 2011 12:19 pm

It was pretty appalling. IO'D came across quite poorly - boorish and rude. Having said that, some of the Muslims were pretty insane. Proudly stating that you would whip someone simply for expressing a point of view is a little nuts.
'However one defines Man, the same definition applies to all.' Cicero, Laws 1.29-30
Feardorcha
Atheist Ireland Member
Atheist Ireland Member
Posts: 1266
Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 4:28 pm

Re: 'It's Personal' - TV show

Post by Feardorcha » Wed Nov 16, 2011 3:11 pm

O'Doherty came across as a sulky teenager but we did get a peek at Muslim life - and it wasn't pretty: the guy who would happily whip people who insult his favourite book; the segregation of the sexes; the guy who cuts the throats of sheep and lets them bleed to death.
I discerned an overall tone of menace and not just from Krazy Khalid Kelly but also the Reverend gentleman who wouldn't condemn the 9/11 attacks and others.
In countries where Islam has the power, it wields it with a barbaric cruelty towards those who don't conform and in Ireland, and Europe generally, it employs a threat of violence towards its critics. And like all religions, it wants power.
It is anti-woman, anti-gay and it is anti-Irish. By this I mean it opposes our social behaviour, our pubs, our restaurants, our clubs. It opposes our dress and the co-education of boys and girls (in fact, the education of women at all). It keeps itself separate as do most cults, the better to control its members.
If it ever gets stronger in Ireland it will also target another of its hates - atheists.
paolovf
Atheist Ireland Member
Atheist Ireland Member
Posts: 257
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 3:58 pm

Re: 'It's Personal' - TV show

Post by paolovf » Wed Nov 16, 2011 11:58 pm

I can't believe that was 50mins long, it was very drawn out with very little engaging conversation. He's no Louis Theroux, that's for sure. Too much personal opinion and not enough investigation for my liking.

There are more Muslims in Ireland than I thought. I'm surprised how much they've preserved their culture here in Ireland, even after four generations.

I don't like their attitude to homosexuals, halal killing or the full burkas and I think both should be banned in Ireland.
DaithiDublin
Posts: 188
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2011 6:15 pm
Location: Bray, Co. Wicklow
Contact:

Re: 'It's Personal' - TV show

Post by DaithiDublin » Thu Nov 17, 2011 10:34 pm

paolovf wrote:I don't like their attitude to homosexuals, halal killing or the full burkas and I think both should be banned in Ireland.
I've just been checking the ISPCA's website. The link to a PDF covering the regulations governing animal treatment, care, slaughter etc.
Part of the organisation's stated goals is to campaign "Against live cattle exports to Middle East". It only specifies the Middle East here. I can only guess that is because of halal & kosher slaughtering practices. Yet in Ireland it seems that this method is OK.:
Q.6 Are there any exemptions from the Section 15 restrictions on the use of equipment?
Yes, where the animal is being slaughtered for consumption by Jews or Mohammedans there is an exception to
Section 15. There is also an additional exception where the animals are being slaughtered by order of the Minister
for Agriculture in the course of an inquiry, investigation or experiment.
Note: Section 15(4) has been repealed by the 1988 Act, Section 3 and Schedule 1.
I wondered what had been repealed, so checked the original Act: (The emphasis is mine)
Slaughter of Animals, Act, 1935

Section 15.—
(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, no person shall in a slaughter-house, slaughter or render unconscious for the purpose of slaughter an animal of any particular kind by any means or in any manner otherwise than by means of an instrument which is an approved instrument in relation to animals of that particular kind and is in good working order and is used in the approved manner.

(2) Nothing in this section shall apply to or render unlawful

(a) the slaughter of any animal for consumption as food by Jews, where such slaughter is carried out according to the Jewish method by a Jew who is for the time being approved in that behalf by the Chief Rabbi of the Irish Free State for the time being or in his absence by the Board of Shechita of the Jewish Community of Dublin,
or
(b) the slaughter of any animal for consumption as food by Mahommedans, where such slaughter is carried out according to the Mahommedan method by a Mahommedan, or


(c) the slaughter of any animal by any means in the course of an inquiry, investigation, or experiment made by direction of the Minister for Agriculture under this Part of this Act.
(3) Every person who slaughters or renders unconscious any animal in contravention of this section shall be guilty of an offence under this section and shall be liable on summary conviction thereof, in the case of a first such offence, to a fine not exceeding ten pounds, and in the case of a second or any subsequent such offence, to a fine not exceeding twenty-five pounds.

(4) Where a person is charged with having committed an offence under this section and the act alleged to constitute such offence consisted of the slaughtering or rendering unconscious for the purpose of slaughter of an animal otherwise than by means of an approved instrument, it shall be a good defence to such charge for such person to show—
(a) that an approved instrument which would normally have been available for such slaughter or rendering unconscious of such animal had ceased (without any neglect or default on the part of such person or, where such person is not the owner of such instrument, such owner or of any servant or agent of such person or such owner) to be in good order and repair, and
(b) that immediately upon the defective condition of such instrument being detected by or brought to the notice of such person or such owner (as the case may be), he took all proper steps to have such instrument put into good working order or to obtain a new approved instrument in lieu thereof, and
(c) that no other approved instrument was reasonably obtainable for the purpose of the said slaughter or rendering unconscious of such animal, and
(d) that all reasonable steps were taken in the said slaughter or rendering unconscious to avoid causing unnecessary pain or suffering to such animal.

I'm not anything close to a legal expert, and the language of these things squeezes my brain till it hurts. But I think the underlined section is the part that was repealed, and the bold sections still stand. The part that was repealed seemed more of a loophole than anything else, I'm not surprised it was repealed. What I haven't found yet is if there was any additional legislation added. If anyone knows more on this, or can direct me, I'd like to find out more.

Why the ISPCA would object to Irish cattle being exported live to Middle Eastern countries where they are ritually butchered, yet not seek to address the same treatment in our own country is beyond me.
As yet I have not found a single case of a terrestrial animal which fertilises itself.

- Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species
(he obviously never went to Bray)
Post Reply