300 years of state-sponsored discrimination

  • Thread starter Thread starter dosdog
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Not forgetting that it was only the arrival of the Industrial Revolution that avoided a catastrophe for the English peasantry who were rapidly being thrown off their land by the Enclosure Movement.
 
reggieM said:
It’s more for the health of England to repair the damage done.
Click to expand...
In what way?
But I think most people view it as you do – they’ve viewed it that way for a long time. The oppression of the Irish by the English which lasted for centuries was “the fault of the Irish” and they “only have themselves to blame”.
Click to expand...
My response was to a particular argument about missing oppression in Ireland, currently.
That’s a pretty standard view, actually – and it says a lot about the problem.
Click to expand...
In what way do the current inhabitants of Ireland of the ‘tiger economy’ view themselves as victims? Not the descendants of the people who emigrated to the USA, but the current inhabitants of the country.

Meanwhile, of course, huge numbers of Irish people emigrated to England - are they going to have to contribute to reparations too? Are people whose ancestors lived in Germany and Italy at the time, going to have to contribute?
 
I do understand that and, indeed, my sympathies during ‘The Troubles’ during my lifetime have been with the Catholic inhabitants of the Six Counties (while also understanding why the Protestants wouldn’t want to live in the Republic without the Republic changing quite a bit).

On the other hand, it seems/seemed to me that Ireland has changed a lot since I first visited it (when our parents took us there on holiday) and had joined the late 20th and early 21st centuries.
Also, I think the peasantry did get a crisis in England via the industrial revolution. But the Great Hunger has left such a mark in Irish minds that for outsiders to understand it is somewhat like trying to understand the Holocaust and not been Jewish or one of the othe groups affected by it.
Click to expand...
I understand that too, I certainly do, I’ve known a quite a lot of Irish people (some as close friends) and understand the social and cultural devastation that it created but there comes a point where it has to stop for those people who were not immediately concerned. My immediate family got out of Germany in time and I grew up with the story and what happened afterwards. I’ve never been able to meet Germans who were of those generations involved in the war without ‘wondering’ but Germans of my generation, my children’s generation?

Personally, I think what is important is ‘Never Again’, to understand what happened and do one’s best to stop anything like that occurring again - one of the reasons why I get so involved in ‘Muslim ate my hamster’ threads - but sometime a line has to be drawn with the ‘anger’ or you can’t move on.
 
reggieM said:
Along with getting rid of the anti-Catholic language in the Bill of Rights and other public documents, I would think that a more enlightened British government and people would make some reparation for the Irish Potato famine and other hostilities and bigotry to the Irish people over the centuries.

I would think that the political liberals & progressives would support such things. But they turn their gaze to oppression in Africa or other distant lands and not with their next-door neighbors.

Such is human nature – but we’re called to rise above that.
Click to expand...
Kaninchen said:
If you look at the post I was replying to, it stated:

I would think that the political liberals & progressives would support such things. But they turn their gaze to oppression in Africa or other distant lands and not with their next-door neighbors.So, what British oppression are the people of the Republic currently suffering?
Click to expand...
I was responding to the entire post up above, which did mention the famine.

You only partially quoted reggie M which causes misunderstandings.

If there’s any oppression in the Republic now it’s self inflicted, this is what happens when you become a tool of Brussels, money for old rope and they’re still not happy.
 
We go further than that. The Prime Minister achieved Catholic support in his run-up to being elected by MP’s as the successor to Rt Hon Tony Blair by promising Catholics that when he becomes PM one of the first things he will do is to challenge the Act of Settlement which discriminates against Catholics

However, once he achieved premiership, he rescinded on his word pointing out that actually it was vastly more complex than he had at the outset first believed and that there were powers above him over which he had absolutely no control.

This leads me to ask: who then runs the country? Obviously it is not the democratically elected Government! :eek:

It is said: ‘even the Queen must do as she is told!’ Who then gives the orders and who is at the top pulling the strings? Obviously someone/group who stand to gain by keeping active discrimination against Catholics on the Statute Book! 😦
 
dosdog said:
Map of the Papal States; the reddish area was annexed to the Kingdom of Italy in 1860,

Give us back The Papal States
answers.com/topic/papal-states
Click to expand...

How are they relevant to the thread 🙂 ?​

And, since you mention them: why have them back ? They would only lead to endless trouble - & the Kingdom of Christ is not of this world, but of the other; a papacy degraded into one of “the kingdoms of this world” (Rev. 11.15) is something the Church can do without. When Cardinal Consalvi regained them for the Papacy at the Congress of Vienna in 1814, he unwittingly lumbered the Church with a burden it could well have done without.

When the Pope is crucified as Christ was, it will be appropriate to argue for a Papal state that is more than the Papacy needs for its indepedence & political freedom (which is what the Popes have now); if a Pope wants to be a King because Christ was a King, his kingship must be the same in kind as that of Christ: IOW, it must be a crucified kingship; not a kingship founded on earthly prosperity & strength.
 
Kaninchen said:
While I think the monarch should be a member of whatever religion they, themselves, wish – or none at all for that matter, apart from the architecture of where they’re married and buried, what on earth difference would it make in a country where most people have very little interest in religion?

Apart from Irish people and Americans, would anybody else be bothered?
Click to expand...

Well, some of us are:​

  • British
  • Unionist
  • monarchist
  • strongly in favour of the status quo
    🙂
 
Kaninchen said:
So, the actions of multinational corporations are all the fault of the Brits?
Click to expand...

Didn’t you know 😃 ? The British - more exactly, the English - are to blame for EVERYTHING. 🙂​

Including but not limited to:
  • The mess in Rhodesia - sorry, Zimbabwe
  • The partition of India & Pakistan
  • The problems of Tibet
  • The death of William Wallace
  • The “Rough Wooing” of 1544
  • The 1845-50 Famine
  • The friction between Israelis & Palestinians
  • Everything about Ireland
  • Protestantism in the USA
  • The USA
  • Everything bad about the USA
  • The problems of the Maoris
  • Slavery
  • Anything else
 
Lilyflower said:
We go further than that. The Prime Minister achieved Catholic support in his run-up to being elected by MP’s as the successor to Rt Hon Tony Blair by promising Catholics that when he becomes PM one of the first things he will do is to challenge the Act of Settlement which discriminates against Catholics

However, once he achieved premiership, he rescinded on his word pointing out that actually it was vastly more complex than he had at the outset first believed and that there were powers above him over which he had absolutely no control.

This leads me to ask: who then runs the country? Obviously it is not the democratically elected Government! :eek:

It is said: ‘even the Queen must do as she is told!’ Who then gives the orders and who is at the top pulling the strings? Obviously someone/group who stand to gain by keeping active discrimination against Catholics on the Statute Book! 😦
Click to expand...

That is the sort of thing that has won him the name Bliar.​

This country is controlled by the EU (may it be destroyed). :eek:
 
Gottle_of_Geer said:

How are they relevant to the thread 🙂 ?​

Click to expand...
Originally Posted by Contarini

The fact is that in England there has been and continues to be a state Church (there is one in Scotland as well,

Contarini you support discrimination and taking land by force as long as it is against the Catholic Church ?

Map of the Papal States; the reddish area was annexed to the Kingdom of Italy in 1860,

Give us back The Papal States
answers.com/topic/papal-states

On September 10, 1870 Italy declared war on the Papal States, and the Italian Army, commanded by General Raffaele Cadorna, crossed the papal frontier on 11 September

Pius IX ordered it to put up at least a token resistance to emphasize that Italy was acquiring Rome by force and not consent. The city was captured on September 20 1870

The English Reformation under Henry VIII abolished the monasteries, confiscated lands, and established a Protestant “Church of Ireland” (1537).

Here is a solution - Reinstate The Republic of Cromwell

then we can do away with both the Monarchy & COE rule

Cromwell believed in religious toleration for some, tolerated Jews and non-Anglican Protestants

Charles a execution January 30th, 1649. England now had no monarchy

Anybody ever take a History class?
 
Gottle_of_Geer said:

Didn’t you know 😃 ? The British - more exactly, the English - are to blame for EVERYTHING. 🙂​

Including but not limited to:
  • The mess in Rhodesia - sorry, Zimbabwe
  • The partition of India & Pakistan
  • The problems of Tibet
  • The death of William Wallace
  • The “Rough Wooing” of 1544
  • The 1845-50 Famine
  • The friction between Israelis & Palestinians
  • Everything about Ireland
  • Protestantism in the USA
  • The USA
  • Everything bad about the USA
  • The problems of the Maoris
  • Slavery
  • Anything else
Click to expand...
There weren’t, by any chance, any Angle or Saxon tourists wandering around the Arabian deserts around about 600 AD telling tales to innocent arabs? I could imagine that it might explain a lot to not a few posters here!
 
dosdog said:
Anybody ever take a History class?
Click to expand...
I have not only taken them, I have taught them. And I do not encourage the mindless citation of Internet links, either as part of a class or as part of an online conversation such as this one!

I continue to await an actual argument from you to which I may respond.

Edwin
 
Actually I don’t dispute that there is anti-Catholic prejudice in Britain. I remember meeting an English businessman in Germany who told me that the Catholic Church was the most evil institution in human history, or something of that sort.

Nor do I disagree that it is dreadful to single Catholics out.

The only thing I’m defending here is the legitimacy of linking one particular church to national identity. This is not something that I think Catholics should be attacking. If all those 19th-century Papal polemics against secular democracy meant anything, they surely meant that a link between church and society isn’t entirely bad.

Edwin
 
The_Pillar said:
why are jews hated by so many other people in this world?
Click to expand...
Because they are the chosen race. Almighty God in His infinite wisdom chose the Jews. We as Christians know that the powers of this world are working against Christians. So too His chosen. 🙂

I for one do not hate Jews. I respect them as our rightful ancestors. May Almighty God bless Israel and grant it His protection and peace now and always

Blessings and peace
 
Contarini said:
I have not only taken them, I have taught them. And I do not encourage the mindless citation of Internet links, either as part of a class or as part of an online conversation such as this one!

I continue to await an actual argument from you to which I may respond.

Edwin
Click to expand...
The Wars of the Three Kingdoms

The wars were the outcome of tensions between king and subjects over religious and civil issues. Religious disputes centered on whether religion was to be dictated by the monarch or the choice of the subject,

victory of the English Parliament — ultimately under Oliver Cromwell — over the King, the Irish and the Scots helped to determine the future of Great Britain as a constitutional monarchy with political power centred on London.

Here is a solution - Reinstate The Republic of Cromwell

then we can do away with both the Monarchy & COE rule

Cromwell believed in religious toleration for some, tolerated Jews and non-Anglican Protestants

Charles a execution January 30th, 1649. England now had no monarchy

Anybody ever take a History class?
historybookshop.com/articles/commentary/civil-wars-of-three-kingdoms-ht.asp
 
Lilyflower said:
Cromwell was a thug [gangster] 😦
Click to expand...
I agree
Cromwell and the Act Of Settlement 1652
From the Celts to the Famine
By the time the struggle was over, almost two years on, one-quarter of the Catholic population was dead and those found wandering the country orphaned or dispossessed were sold into slavery in the West Indies.

The Act of Settlement drawn up in 1652 confiscated land from the native Irish on a mas*sive scale. All “transplantable persons” were ordered to move west of the River Shannon by May 1, 1654, on pain of death; in the notorious phrase, it was a matter of indifference whether they went “to Hell or to Connacht”.

The mass exodus continued for months, with many of the old and sick dying on the journey. Cromwell’s soldiers were paid off with gifts of appropriated land, and, remaining as settlers, constituted a permanent reminder of English injustice

The penal laws to the Act of Union
In 1641, 59 percent of the land in Ireland was owned by Catholics. In 1688, the figure was 22 percent, and by 1703 it was fourteen percent.The Protestant population, about one-tenth of the total

Not only were Catholics forbidden to vote or join the army or navy, but it became illegal to educate a child in the Catholic faith; they could not teach, open their own schools or send their children to be educated abroad. Catholics could neither buy land nor inherit it, other than by the equal division of estates between all sons. There were vast rewards for turning Protes*tant; a male convert was entitled to all his brothers’ inheritance, a female to her husband’s property. Irish language, music and literature were banned, as was the saying of the Mass.
gymmuenchenstein.ch/stalder/tables%20and%20charts/wke12/history_1.htm

1st Do this Britian

Only Scottish independence can solve the ‘English Question’
Scots for Independence
The Campaign for Scottish Independence
Campaign for an English Parliament — You thought England already had a parliament? They seek one separate from Scotland, Wales, Ulster, etc
telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2007/03/20/do2001.xml

2nd Drop this Britian
and Ireland, and the dominions thereunto belonging, or any part of the same,

The act of settlement, 1701
And it was thereby further enacted, that all and every person and persons that then were, or afterwards should be reconciled to, or shall hold communion with the see or Church of Rome, or should profess the popish religion, or marry a papist, should be excluded, and are by that Act made for ever incapable to inherit, possess, or enjoy the Crown and government of this realm, guardian.co.uk/uk/2000/dec/06/monarchy

3rd Change the name so people know how offensive it really is:

Here are a few sugestions

The Swastika Act of 1701
The KKK Act of 1701
The Neo-Nazi Act of 1701
The burn a cross on your lawn Act of 1701

When that s done get back to me then we will work on the hard stuff
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top