https___adfam.ie_2018_09_18_test__lang_ga_1.xml
1.1 2.1 2.2 3.1 4.1 5.1 6.1 7.1 8.1 9.1 10.1 11.1 13.1 14.1 14.2 14.3 14.4 14.5 14.6 15.1 16.1 17.1 18.1 19.1 20.1 21.1 22.1 23.1 23.2 24.1 24.2 24.3 24.4 24.5 24.6 24.7 24.8 25.1 25.2 25.3 25.4 26.1 26.2 26.3 26.4 26.5 26.6 27.1 27.2 27.3 27.4 27.5 27.6 27.7 27.8 27.9 28.1 28.2 28.3 28.4 28.5 28.6 28.7 29.1 29.2 29.3 29.4 29.5 29.6 29.7 30.1 31.1 32.1 33.1
ADFAM –– Alliance for the Defence of the Family and Marriage Business Name Reg. No. 593257; Business Name Owner, Séamas de Barra. Dear All, ADFAM, the Alliance for the Defence of the Family and Marriage, are urging our supporters to contact their TDs and Senators to urge them to vote NO to the Blasphemy Referendum Bill. Our reasons for that are set out in the appended sample e-mail. Yours sincerely, Séamas de Barra, Treasurer/Secretary, ADFAM, Unit 104, 35 Upper Rathmines Road, Dublin 6. Sunday, September 16, 2018. info@adfam.ie Dear Deputies and Seanators, It is proposed that the Dáil are to gallop through ALL STAGES of the Thirty–Seventh Amendment of the Constitution (Repeal of offence of publication or utterance of blasphemous matter) Bill 2018, on Tuesday, September 18, 2018, at 18.05. When, or if, ALL STAGES are passed in the Dáil on Tuesday, the Dáil are to discuss a ‘Motion re Statement for the Information of Voters’ in relation to the same. On Thursday, September 20, 2018, at 15.00, it is proposed that the Seanad pass ALL STAGES of the same Bill. It is planned that the Amendment Bill is to be voted on, on the same day as the Presidential Election, Friday, October 26, 2018. As you’ll know from the Draft Leaflet I have sent you on the matter already, the article the Government propose to be amended is Article 40.6.1ºi of Bunreacht na hÉireann/ Constitution of Ireland. The relevant part reads as follows: the publication or utterance of blasphemous, seditious, or indecent matter is an offence which shall be punishable in accordance with law. The Government are proposing that the word ‘blasphemous’ be deleted from that part. I set out for you in the appended my reasons for urging you to vote NO to this Amendment Bill. Yours sincerely, Séamas de Barra, Sunday, September 16, 2018. info@adfam.ie Why Vote NO to the Deletion of the word ‘blasphemous’ from Article 40.6.1ºi 1) The proposal is poorly thought out, like the other proposal to remove recognition of ‘woman’s life in the home’, Article 41.2.1º, a proposal that the Government have had to postpone for the time being. The Government are insulting the intelligence of the voters. 2) There is no guarantee that, by deleting the word ‘blasphemous’ from Article 40.6.1ºi, the offence of ‘publication or utterance of blasphemous matter’ will be abolished. The Government are engaged in what has become known as ‘virtue signalling’ –– utterly pointless in this case. What is the logic of having a Referendum on Article 40.6.1ºi, and leaving Article 44.1 untouched? The latter Article reads: ‘The State acknowledges that the homage of public worship is due to Almighty God. It shall hold His Name in reverence, and shall respect and honour religion.’ The use of ‘shall’, and not ‘will’, implies something that is a legal requirement. If the Constitution said ‘will’, that part of the Article would be purely aspirational. The only God referred to in the Constitution is the Trinitarian God of Christianity –– see the Preamble. 3) Speaking of which, as long as the Preamble to Bunreacht na hÉireann/Constitution of Ireland remains, and the word ‘seditious’ remains in Article 40.6.1ºi, it will be open to judges to convict persons of the equivalent of ‘publication or utterance of blasphemous matter’. The Preamble acknowledges that ‘all authority is from the Most Holy Trinity,’ ‘to Whom all actions of both men and States must be referred’. The Preamble goes on to say that ‘We, the people of Éire’ humbly acknowledge ‘all our obligations to our Divine Lord, Jesus Christ.’ In that context, how could ‘the publication or utterance of blasphemous matter’ be other than seditious? 4) What is the point of the Government’s proposing the deletion of the word ‘blasphemous’ from Article 40.6.1ºi? They would appear to be aiming at making the Preamble redundant. If that is the case, why not straightforwardly propose the deletion of the Preamble instead? Is it not because they realize that most of the Republic’s voters, even today, would reject that as a barefaced attempt at demoting Christianity in public life here? There would be a similar reaction, if the Government attempted to have Article 44.1 removed also. It would appear that we have not yet got beyond the ‘culture’ of our ‘charming Irish mania for the indirect approach’. 5) It may be argued that it is incongruous in the type of Republic we have today, with divorce, abortion, and the attempted redefinition of marriage, to be bothered with such an offence as the ‘publication or utterance of blasphemous matter’. But people sometimes actually learn from their really bad decisions. The English journalist and commentator, Peter Hitchens, is a revert to Anglicanism from Trotskyism, and a brother of the late Christopher Hitchens, who was a prominent New Atheist. Peter says that the concept of marriage in England is legally dead because of their divorce law there [Peter Hitchens, ‘Marriage Debate | Peter Hitchens | Opposition’, OxfordUnion, February 10, 2012, YouTube.com]. The People’s Republic of China are actively discouraging divorce. They are also set to reverse their abortion policy [Alexandra Ma, ‘China is so desperate to prevent divorce that it’s making couples take an exam before they can break up’, uk.businessinsider.com]. Approximately a quarter of the world’s population lives in the People’s Republic. Pope Emeritus, Benedict XVI, holds that ultimately, the idea of human rights retains its solidity [and its justification] only if it is anchored to faith in God the Creator [‘If God does not Exist, Human Rights Collapse’, letter to Marcello Pera, September 29, 2014]. Liberal Calvinist, John Lennox, a native of Armagh, and Professor of Mathematics at Oxford, points out that, without such a final reckoning, most people who ever lived will never experience justice [‘Professor John Lennox | God DOES exist’, OxfordUnion, published December 21, 2012, YouTube.com]. 6) Admittedly, many Irish people, hold, because of the sexual abuse scandals, and the treatment of unmarried mothers and their children in the past, and all the accompanying cover–ups, that Christianity, and specifically Catholicism, have failed them. None of those scandals, or of that mistreatment, are to be tolerated or explained away. That said, the 20th century was the most violent century in human history. Communism and Nazism were political philosophies that denied God, and tried to control or kill off Christianity. Communism managed to kill off hundreds of millions worldwide, and Nazism, scores of millions. The death toll attributable to them in one century is much much more than all the deaths attributable to those claiming to be Christian in the 2000 year history of Christianity. History has proved that without Christianity, we do an awful lot worse. 7) Whether we are believers or unbelievers, we are ill-served by denying reality. Part of that reality is that our Western Civilization is based on the assimilation by the Judaeo–Christian religion of the Graeco–Roman civilization. That civilization has spread all around the world, and if it goes entirely, we are in for a return to barbarism. The Canadian clinical psychologist, Jordan B. Peterson, author of Maps of Meaning (Routledge 1999) and 12 Rules for Life (Penguin Allen Lane 2018), makes the valid point that there are very few genuine atheists, because most self–declared atheists actually work from principles derived from Christianity [“Jordan B. Peterson vs atheist Susan Blackmore: Most people who claim to be atheist aren’t,” ‘Unbelievable’, Premier Christian Radio, YouTube.com]. The much–vaunted ‘liberal’ tenet of separation of Church and State was first taught actually by Christ himself: ‘Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s’ [Mark 12: 17]. Our Western Civilization is part of our culture, part of our history [Christopher Dawson, Religion and the Rise of Western Culture (London 1950)]. We have a right to it. Published by ADFAM –– Alliance for the Defence of the Family and Marriage ADFAM, Unit 104, 35 Upper Rathmines Road, Dublin 6. www.adfam.ie, info@adfam.ie Printed by:
1.1 2.1 2.2 2.3 3.1 4.1 5.1 6.1 7.1 8.1 10.1 11.1 12.1 13.1 13.2 13.3 13.4 13.5 13.6 14.1 15.1 16.1 17.1 18.1 19.1 20.1 21.1 22.1 23.1 24.1 24.2 25.1 25.2 25.3 25.4 25.5 25.6 25.7 26.1 26.2 26.3 27.1 27.2 27.3 27.4 27.5 27.6 28.1 28.2 28.3 28.4 28.5 28.6 28.7 28.8 28.9 28.10 29.1 29.2 29.3 29.4 29.5 29.6 29.7 30.1 30.2 30.3 30.4 30.5 30.6 30.7 30.8 30.9 31.1 32.1 33.1 34.1
A Chairde, Táimidne, ADFAM –– Comhghuaillíocht Cosanta an Teaghlaigh agus an Phósta á mholadh dár lucht leanúna vótáil NÍL sa Reifreann ar an Diamhasla. Tá ríomhphost samplach déanta amach againn d’fhonn cuidiú lenár lucht leanúna teagmháil a bheith acu le TD agus le Seanadóirí, mar go bhfuil súil ag an Rialtas an Bille um Leasú a bheith rite acu faoi dheireadh na seachtaine seo sa Dáil agus sa Seanad. Feicigí libh ina dhiaidh seo an ríomhphost samplach. Bhur gCara, Séamas de Barra, Cisteoir/Rúnaí, ADFAM –– Comhghuaillíocht Cosanta an Teaghlaigh agus an Phósta. Dé Domhnaigh, Meán Fómhair 16, 2018. info@adfam.ie ADFAM –– Comhghuaillíocht Cosanta an Teaghlaigh agus an Phósta Cláruimhir an Ainm Gnó, 593257; Úinéir an Ainm Gnó A Chairde, Dé Máirt, Meán Fómhair 18, 2018, ar 18.05, tá sé i gceist go mbrostódh an Dáil le GACH UILE CHÉIM den Bhille um an Seachtú Leasú is Tríocha ar an mBunreacht (Cion a aisghairm arb éard é ní diamhaslach a fhoilsiú nó a aithris), 2018. Nuair a rithfidh, nó má ritheann an Dáil, GACH UILE CHÉIM Dé Máirt, tá an Dáil chun déileáil le ‘Tairiscint i dtaobh Ráitis mar Eolas do na Vótálaithe’ maidir leis an mBille um Leasú. Déardaoin, Meán Fómhair 20, 2018, ar 15.00, tá sé i gceist go rithfeadh an Seanad GACH UILE CHÉIM den Bhille céanna. Tá sé beartaithe an Bille seo um Leasú a chur ar Reifreann, an lá céanna le Toghchán na hUachtaránachta, Dé hAoine, Deireadh Fómhair 26, 2018. Mar atá a fhios agaibh ón dréachtbhileog Bhéarla ar an ábhar seo atá curtha agamsa chugaibhse, is é an tAirteagal a bhfuil sé beartaithe ag an Rialtas é a leasú Airteagal 40.6.1ºi de Bhunreacht na hÉireann. Is í seo an chuid den Airteagal sin a bhaineann le hábhar: Aon ní diamhaslach nó ceannairceach nó graosta a fhoilsiú nó a aithris is cion inphionóis é de réir dlí. Is amhlaidh atá an Rialtas á mholadh go mbainfí amach an focal ‘diamhaslach’ as an gcuid sin. Bhur gCara, Séamas de Barra, Cisteoir/Rúnaí, ADFAM, Unit 104, 35 Bóthar Ráth Maonais Uachtarach, Baile Átha Cliath 6. Dé Domhnaigh, Meán Fómhair 16, 2018. info@adfam.ie Ríomhphost Samplach Cad Chuige Vótáil NÍL leis an bhFocal ‘diamhaslach’ a Bhaint Amach as Airteagal 40.6.1ºi 1) Níl an togra oibrithe amach i gceart, ach a oiread leis an togra acu chun aitheantas a dhiúltú don bhean as ‘a saol sa teaghlach’, Airteagal 41.2.1º, togra ar chaith an Rialtas é a tharraingt siar, go bhfeicfimis linn. Meas amadán atá ag an Rialtas ar na vótálaithe. 2) Níl cinnteacht ar bith ann, ach an focal ‘diamhaslach’ a bhaint amach as Airteagal 40.6.1ºi, nach coir a bheidh a thuilleadh ann ‘aon ní diamhaslach … a fhoilsiú nó a aithris’. Níl ar bun ag an Rialtas ach ag cur chuma na tuisceana orthu féin –– is fánach an mhaise dóibh sa chás seo é. Cén loighic atá ag baint le Reifreann a thionól ar Airteagal 40.6.1ºi, ach gan baint d’Airteagal 44.1? Mar seo a ghabhann Airteagal 44.1: ‘Admhaíonn an Stát go bhfuil ag dul do Dhia na nUilechumhacht é a adhradh le hómós go poiblí. Beidh urraim ag an Stát dá ainm, agus bhéarfaidh oirmhidin agus onóir do Chreideamh.’Ordú atáthar a chur in iúl le ‘Beidh’ san abairt sin. Ní súilíocht atá i gceist, ach riachtanas ó thaobh dlí de. Ní luaitear ach aon Dia amháin sa Bhunreacht, agus is é sin Tríonóid Ró–Naofa na Críostaíochta –– feicigí libh an Brollach. 3) Ag caint air sin, fad a fhanfaidh ‘Brollach’ an Bhunreachta sa Bhunreacht, agus fad a fhanfaidh an focal ‘ceannairceach’ in Airteagal 40.6.1ºi, beidh cead ag breithiúna daoine a chiontú i gcoir is ionann is ‘aon ní diamhaslach … a fhoilsiú nó a aithris’. Admhaíonn an Brollach gurb í ‘an Tríonóid Ró–Naofa is tobar don uile údarás’ agus gur chuici ‘is dírithe ní amháin gníomhartha daoine ach gníomhartha Stát.’ Leanann an Brollach air: ‘Ar mbeith dúinne, muintir na hÉireann, ag admháil go huiríseal a mhéid atáimid faoi chomaoin ag Íosa Críost, ár dTiarna Dia’. Maidir le ‘aon ní diamhaslach a fhoilsiú nó a aithris’ sa chás sin, conas nach mbeadh sé ceannairceach? 4) Cad chuige togra an Rialtais an focal ‘diamhaslach’ a bhaint as Airteagal 40.6.1ºi? Tá a chuma air gur ag iarraidh an bonn a bhaint ó Bhrollach an Bhunreachta atá siad. Más mar sin atá, cad ina thaobh nach molfaidís glan amach an Brollach a bhaint amach as an mBunreacht? An amhlaidh a thuigeann siad go ndiúltódh formhór vótálaithe na Poblachta, inniu féin, dó sin, mar gur iarracht neamhnáireach ba ea é sin ar an gCríostaíocht a bhaint anuas céim i saol poiblí na tíre? Dhéanfadh na vótálaithe speach ina gcoinne chomh maith dá dtriailfeadh an Rialtas Airteagal 44.1 a bhaint amach. Dhealródh sé nach bhfuil éirithe go dtí seo leo na dromanna dubha a chur leis ‘an sean–nós Gaelach’, an cur chuige neamhdhíreach. 5) Tá daoine a d’áiteodh, i gcomhthéacs an chineáil Poblachta atá inniu againn, mar a gceadaítear an colscaradh agus an ginmhilleadh, Poblacht ina bhfuil iarracht déanta ar mhíniú nua a thabhairt ar an bpósadh, gur mithid dúinn éirí as a bheith ag tabhairt ‘coir’ ar ‘aon ní diamhaslach … a fhoilsiú ná a aithris’. Ach tarlaíonn uaireanta go múineann a gcuid fíor-dhroch–chinntí ceachtanna do dhaoine. Ó Shasana is ea Peter Hitchens, iriseoir agus tráchtaire, deartháir do Christopher Hitchens, trócaire air, duine de cheannródaithe na Nua–Aindiachaithe. Trotscaíoch ba ea Peter, ach tá sé casta ar chreideamh a óige, an tAnglacánachas. Áitíonn Peter go bhfuil deireadh le coincheap an phósta i Sasana, agus é sin de dheasca dhlí an cholscartha ansiúd [Peter Hitchens, ‘Marriage Debate | Peter Hitchens | Opposition’, OxfordUnion, Feabhra 10, 2012, YouTube.com]. Is amhlaidh atá Daon–Phoblacht na Síne ar a ndícheall ag iarraidh tabhairt ar lánúineacha diúltú don cholscaradh. Ní hé sin amháin é ach go bhfuil siad ar phointí a mbeartas ar an nginmhilleadh a thabhairt suas [Alexandra Ma, ‘China is so desperate to prevent divorce that it’s making couples take an exam before they can break up’, uk.businessinsider.com]. Timpeall leis an gceathrú cuid de líon daoine an Domhain, is i nDaon–Phoblacht na Síne atá cónaí orthu. An Pápa Emeritus, Beinidict XVI, áitíonn sé nach bhfuil bun diongbháilte le cearta an duine, ná níl siad le cosaint, mura mbíonn creideamh i nDia an Cruthaitheoir mar ancaire acu [‘Murab ann do Dhia, Titeann Cearta an Duine as a Chéile’, litir go dtí Marcello Pera, Samhain 29, 2014]. Ó Ard Mhacha is ea John Lennox go bunúsach, Airminiach, is é sin, Cailvíneach Liobrálach, agus Ollamh le Matamaitic ar Ollscoil Oxford, agus cuireann sé seo i bhfáth orainn, mura mbeidh Lá an Chuntais ann, nach dtabharfar Cothrom na Féinne go deo d’fhormhór na ndaoine dá raibh riamh ar an saol [‘Professor John Lennox | God DOES exist’, OxfordUnion, Nollaig 21, 2012 dáta a fhoilsithe, YouTube.com]. 6) Is fíor go dtuigtear dá lán de mhuintir na hÉireann go bhfuil teipthe orthu ag an gCríostaíocht, agus ag an gCreideamh Caitliceach go háirithe, agus é sin mar gheall ar an droch–íde chollaí go léir, an droch–cheann a caitheadh le máithreacha gan phósadh, agus lena gcuid seo leanaí san am a caitheadh, agus an cheilt a rinneadh ar an méid sin i gcaitheamh na mblianta. Ní raibh sé ceart cur suas le cuid ar bith de na hainghníomhartha sin, leis an droch–cheann, ná níl siad inleithscéil. Á rá sin, ba é an 20ú céad an céad bliain ba mhó foréigean i stair an chine daoine. Fealsúnachtaí polaitíochta ba ea an Cumannachas agus an Naitseachas a dhiúltaigh do Dhia, agus a thriail an Chríostaíocht a smachtú nó a mharú. D’éirigh leis an gCumannachas na céadta milliún ar fud an domhain a mharú, agus bhí an Naitseachas ciontach leis sna scórtha milliún a mharú. Is mó i bhfad i bhfad an méid a d’éirigh leo siúd a mharú san 20ú céad, ná a d’éirigh le Críostaithe bréige a mharú i 2000 bliain den Chríostaíocht. Tá cruthaithe ag an stair gur measa i bhfad a dhéanann an cine daoine nuair a bhíonn siad beag beann ar an gCríostaíocht. 7) Creideamh againn nó uainn, déanann sé an–díobháil dúinn an fhírinne a cheilt. Cuid den fhírinne sin is ea é gurbh amhlaidh a d’fhás Sibhialtacht Iarthair Domhain againn féin as an gCreideamh Giúdach Críostaí leas a bhaint as Sibhialtacht na Gréige is na Róimhe. Tá an tsibhialtacht sin leata ar fud an domhain, agus má theipeann ar fad uirthi, beidh ré nua bharbarthachta ann. Síceolaí cliniciúil ó Cheanada é Jordan B. Peterson, údar Maps of Meaning (Routledge 1999), agus 12 Rules for Life (Penguin Allen Lane 2018) agus tá an ceart aigesean nuair a deir sé gur beag ar fad an méid aindiachaithe atá ar an saol dáiríre, mar gurb iad prionsabail na Críostaíochta atá ag a bhformhór [“Jordan B. Peterson vs atheist Susan Blackmore: Most people who claim to be atheist aren’t,” ‘Unbelievable’, Premier Christian Radio, YouTube.com] . Is teagasc mór ag na Liobrálaithe ar Clé is ea an Eaglais agus an Stát a scaradh ó chéile, ach is ó Íosa Críost féin ó thús an teagasc sin: ‘Íocaigí le Céasar na nithe is le Céasar, agus le Dia na nithe is le Dia’ [Marcas 12: 17]. Is cuid den tsaíocht agus den stair seo againne is ea Sibhialtacht Iarthair Domhain [Christopher Dawson, Religion and the Rise of Western Culture (London 1950)]. Tá ceart againn uirthi. ADFAM a d’fhoilsigh –– Comhghuaillíocht Cosanta an Teaghlaigh agus an Phósta ADFAM, Unit 104, 35 Bóthar Ráth Maonais Uachtarach, Baile Átha Cliath 6. www.adfam.ie, info@adfam.ie An Clódóir: